Collin County court approves new voter-registration system after public questions about signatures and timeline

Collin County Commissioners Court voted 5-0 to approve two related elections purchases — a new voter registration (VR) system and poll books and ballot-on-demand equipment — after public commenters pressed the court to preserve wet-signature verification and elections staff described a compressed deployment timeline arising from vendor instability.

The approvals follow public comments objecting to what speakers characterized as about $2 million in “unnecessary technology.” Election Administrator Cable Breaux told the court the county’s prior vendor, VOTEC, had threatened to close and that the county needed a certified poll-book solution that communicates with the state. Breaux said the vendor the county is recommending, VR Systems, offers an integrated voter-registration and certified poll-book product and that the equipment can be configured to produce a printed label bearing a wet (ink) signature for the county’s records.

Why it matters: Collin County is moving quickly because of an unexpected vendor failure and a statutory requirement for electronic poll books when a county operates countywide vote centers. Commissioners said they wanted to preserve signature redundancy and voter-verification steps while avoiding last-minute disruption to upcoming elections.

Elections administrator’s update and timeline Cable Breaux, Collin County elections administrator, told the court that three weeks earlier the county had been warned by the state elections office that the county’s then-vendor, VOTEC, had sought an emergency surcharge and might stop servicing customers. Breaux said county staff began contacting replacement vendors and selected VR Systems because its voter registration and poll-book products are certified to communicate with the Texas system.

Breaux described an aggressive implementation schedule if the court approved the contracts: a data freeze to begin Aug. 28, vendor data conversion immediately after the freeze, training Sept. 8–12 and an expected operational “go-live” date of Sept. 12. He said the recommended hardware is tablet-based for check-in but confirmed the vendor can instead print a label containing the voter’s signature (a wet-ink label that can be attached to the voter’s combination form) rather than relying solely on a tablet-captured image. "In order for us to be a countywide county, we are statutorily required to have electronic poll books. 43.07 of the Texas Election Code," Breaux said, adding that the label option is available "at no extra charge."

Public concerns and responses Two public commenters urged the court to reject the purchases or to delay them. Debbie Lindstrom, a local voter who identified herself during the public comment period, opposed spending “just under $2,000,000 on unnecessary technology” and asked whether the system would replace wet signatures with electronic ones, saying electronic scribbles often do not resemble a person’s real signature and could cause verification problems.

Lee Moore, a second commenter, said he "concur[red]" with Lindstrom and urged the court to consider future changes such as precinct-level, hard-copy check-in that could make large electronic expenditures obsolete. Both asked whether the county could keep the poll-book purchase but delay digital check-in.

Breaux responded he understood the concerns and said the current proposal preserves the ability to produce a printed roster with captured signatures after election day and that the vendor can be set to print the wet-signature label rather than store only a tablet image. He also said the county’s current poll-book vendor had been “struggling” and that the county had severed any direct vendor access to in‑county data.

Costs, savings and procurement choices Breaux said the county expects some recurring savings with the new system: a roughly $40,000 annual savings on maintenance and a substantial reduction in data-plan costs because the new configuration would allow one MiFi per polling location rather than an individual data card per polling laptop; the county estimated about an 80% savings on data plans. Public comments characterized the total package as “about $2,000,000.” The court did not record a precise contract dollar amount in the public discussion captured in the transcript; the court approved the procurement as presented and directed staff to finalize contract terms.

Legal and operational limits Breaux and other staff emphasized that the poll-book prompts and certain check-in steps are governed by state certification and by processes required for countywide voting. Breaux said the county, as an “offline” county in the state’s architecture, still must exchange files with the Secretary of State and that a single vendor for VR and poll books reduces the risk of two vendors blaming each other during a problem.

Court action and next steps After hearing public comment and receiving the administrator’s update, Commissioners moved and seconded approval of both agenda items related to the VR system and poll books and the ballot-on-demand equipment. The court approved the items 5-0. Commissioners also asked staff to confirm in the contract language that the county can require and print an ink signature label for public verification; Breaux reported the vendor confirmed that capability without additional charge.

Officials said implementation steps, training and a data freeze would be coordinated with IT and the vendor to minimize risk. The county will finalize contract terms and proceed with the data conversion and training on the timeline described by elections staff, subject to final procurement paperwork.

Ending: The court’s vote resolves the immediate vendor gap created by VOTEC’s instability, but several commissioners and public speakers asked staff to preserve multiple verification steps and to monitor the new system’s configuration and operational security as the county moves to the planned September go‑live.