Cobb Board of Elections punts on voter registration challenges

MARIETTA — The Cobb County Board of Elections voted Monday to delay a decision on four voter challenges submitted by citizens who claimed that 152 registered Cobb County voters had moved out of state and should be removed from the voter rolls.

In explaining their decision, officials indicated they needed more evidence to evaluate the challenges, and that the sheer number of voters whose registrations were challenged was too many for the board to independently investigate in a timely manner. In previous challenges, the board has been asked to review the registrations of smaller groups, such as five voters.

“The board has 152 of these to consider today,” said Daniel White, the board’s attorney. “It’s very difficult when we’re getting different sets of information from different sources in the same packet … For this board to be asked to, in less than 20 days, or 20 days notice, evaluate all this information and make a decision … This board also has to run elections.”

The board voted 4-1 to table the four challenges until next month’s meeting, with Jennifer Mosbacher opposed. Mosbacher, appointed to the board by Commission Chairwoman Lisa Cupid, declined to comment after the meeting.

The vote came after four citizens had argued in support of their respective challenges, and after a lengthy executive session where the board discussed them in private.

Four people submitted separate challenges listing specific Cobb County voter registrations they believe should be canceled. Kennesaw resident Gary Allen challenged 30 registrations. Karyl Asta challenged 38 registrations and Henri Asta challenged 21 (the Astas are a married couple from north Cobb). Marietta resident Eugene Williams challenged 63.

Allen focused on voters he said had moved to New Jersey, while Williams listed voters who allegedly moved to Florida. Karyl and Henri Asta presented separate challenges listing voters they said moved to a variety of states.

Challengers said they had identified voters who should be removed from the rolls by comparing the U.S. Postal Service’s National Change of Address database to voter rolls in other states, flagging people who were registered both in Cobb and elsewhere.

Data sources

Questioning from board members revealed that the challengers had pulled the out-of-state voter rolls from VoteRef, a site which publishes voter rolls.

Laws concerning access to voter rolls vary state by state, but the data is generally available to the public, and can often be requested from state governments for a fee. Parties and campaigns frequently request voter rolls and use them to contact potential supporters. In April, the Associated Press reported that New Mexico Secretary of State Toulouse Oliver referred VoteRef’s publishing of voter rolls to the state’s attorney general. Oliver told the AP that the website had violated New Mexico law, which limits the use of voter rolls to campaigning or noncommercial government purposes.

Ongoing controversy over VoteRef’s publishing of voter rolls came up in the debate. Mosbacher took issue with the challengers citing third-party data, instead of data that came directly from state governments.

“I know that VoteRef may have a privacy lawsuit going on with some states, but I don’t think anybody’s going after them on the integrity of their data. … I just find that disingenuous … Their data’s good, it comes right from the government agency,” Williams said.

Some board members said that someone filing a change-of-address notice with the USPS was not sufficient evidence to cancel that person’s registration.

“The problem is that many people get new driver’s licenses in new locations, and motor voter laws automatically register them, whether they intend to be registered or not,” said board member Steven Bruning, an appointee of the Cobb County Legislative Delegation. “So at least to me, proof that they have voted in the other state is really the key piece of evidence that we know they don’t intend to vote here.”

Such evidence was not presented for all of the affected voters. According to Elections Director Janine Eveler, with some of the challenges, the voters listed in Cobb and another state did not have an exactly matched birth date. And board member Jessica Brooks, appointed by the Cobb Democratic Party, was bothered that in some cases, an address in the new state was not listed.

Eveler’s staff sent out notices to the Georgia addresses of the voters, and, when provided, the new address in other states. In a handful of cases, voters responded to cancel their Cobb registration. And in a couple cases, voters responded to participate in the meeting.

Roschel Davis, a former Mableton resident, was one of the 152 voters whose registration was challenged. She called in to the meeting and said she had lived in New Jersey for several years, and had changed her registration.

“So I’m not quite sure why I’m being challenged. Because I thought I would have been off of the Cobb County voter list by now, since I legally went through the actions and have voted several times in the state of New Jersey. So I’m just confused as to how this man (Gary Allen) has obtained my information,” Davis said.

Davis still appears on the Cobb County rolls, officials said, because she never canceled her Georgia registration. Davis said she wasn’t aware she needed to.

Eveler told the MDJ that it is not illegal to be registered in two states, but that a voter who votes outside of Georgia forfeits their right to vote in Georgia in the same election.

The Georgia Secretary of State regularly conducts voter roll maintenance, Eveler said. People who have moved out of state are placed on “inactive” status. Then, if the person doesn’t vote in Georgia for two general elections, their registration is canceled.

Inactive voters can still cast a ballot, Eveler said, but “you would be asked to verify your current address and fill out a new voter registration form that has your address information.”

Mosbacher pointed to several registrations being challenged, noting that they were already listed as “inactive.”

The board discussed the challenges in executive session, board Chair Tori Silas said, to “address these matters in connection with pending or prospective litigation.” Officials said that the board does not remove voters from the rolls lightly, and that it is a legally fraught process. Silas is appointed by the Cobb legislative delegation.

“There’s been a lot of litigation about removals,” Eveler said in an interview. “And so, especially the federal cases restrict boards in arbitrarily making these kinds of decisions. And that’s why this board is very careful about when they’re actually going to be canceling somebody’s registration.”

‘We can subpoena that’

Gary Allen, in presenting his challenge, said he had been given his data by fellow challenger Karyl Asta. Mosbacher was concerned that Asta was part of a group coordinating challenges.

At one point, Asta said, in regard to presenting evidence, “we’re trying to figure out what the standard is —” before being cut off by Mosbacher.

“Who’s the ‘we’ Ms. Asta? Can you clarify who your ‘we’ is?” Mosbacher asked.

“The people here that are challenging,” Asta replied.

“I’d like to understand who your organization is,” Mosbacher said.

“We don’t have an organization. We’re a group of concerned citizens that want to make sure that the people —”

“We can subpoena that, correct?” Mosbacher said, addressing the board attorney. “We can do something along those lines? I just want to clarify that it is really important to understand, as the board, because it’s supposed to be an individual challenger, per the code, and I’m concerned that what we’re seeing here is a lot of people coming up here with your (Asta’s) challenges.”

Then, David Baker, a lawyer representing Asta in an appeal of a previous Board of Elections ruling, interrupted. Baker said that he’d like to confer with Asta if the discussion began to “veer off” into matters related to litigation. Mosbacher told Baker he wasn’t asked to speak, and White told him to sit down.

The role of the local board in removing voters from the rolls, as well as the motivations of the challengers, were debated in the public comment period.

“Is that (being registered in two states) permitted? And if it’s not permitted, why has the Board of Elections not identified people on that list of valid voters, who have the right to vote? Why hasn’t the board cleaned up the voter list? I don’t understand that,” Marietta resident Leroy Emkin said during public comment.

Shelley Northrup of Smyrna called into the meeting to argue against the challenges during public comment.

“I strongly ask the Board of Elections to reject baseless challenges made with the purpose of creating chaos in our elections,” Northrup said. “The burden of proof must be on the challenger, not on the Board of Elections or the affected voters. National Change of Address data is not sufficient.”

Before voting to delay action, citing the board’s concerns over data sourcing and having complete evidence, Silas laid out proof the board would like to see in future challenges.

Silas said challenges should include the full name of the voter, the full date of birth, the Georgia address associated with them, the out-of-state address associated with them, and some sort of confirmation from an official state government proving the other registration exists.

“We don’t want the public to feel like the goalposts are being moved,” White added. “We want you to understand, going forward, if you have these things, and they’re properly documented, then the board will feel comfortable with it.”