Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
County board questions Hart invoice after conflicting statements about election machines
Loading...
Summary
A disagreement over a county memo and a Hart clarification prompted several DuPage County Board members to press staff for details about an invoice and whether voting equipment was connected to telephone or remote services; county finance staff said they relayed a verbal conversation with a Hart executive and stood behind the memo.
DuPage County board members pressed county staff on April 28 after a finance memo described a conversation suggesting that Hart (the vendor supporting county election equipment) had indicated telephone service to certain equipment had been turned off. Member Jason Desart (recorded in the transcript as Member Desart) said the language in the memo led some in the public to conclude voting machines were vulnerable because of telephone connectivity concerns.
Desart summarized a published clarification attributed to Hart’s Stephen Sockwell that said, in his words, “Hart equipment is not connected to any telephone or remote service.” Desart told the board that Hart’s clarification directly contradicted the wording in the county memo and asked how the misunderstanding occurred.
Jeff, identified in the meeting as a county finance staffer, responded that county staff had a verbal conversation with a high-ranking Hart executive and included the substance of that conversation in the memo. “Very simply, we received or had a conversation with a high ranking executive at Hart,” Jeff said, and added the office stands behind the memo and the description of what was relayed to staff.
Several board members — including Member Ozog and Member Gajewski — asked for further clarification. Ozog asked whether the machines are connected to general phone lines or the internet; a number of members emphasized that election equipment is not connected to general phone or internet service and asked for a formal follow-up. Member Gajewski raised a related operational concern: at one polling place multiple voters with a particular set of characters in their last names did not appear in the poll book when precinct staff queried the central system, an issue described as a patch that had to be applied.
The board requested follow-up from election staff and finance to reconcile the county memo and Hart’s public clarification and to report back on the poll-book anomaly. No formal disciplinary or procurement action was taken at the meeting; members asked for documentation and a clearer factual record.
Next steps recorded in the transcript included a staff follow-up to investigate the poll-book records and to obtain a written clarification from Hart to reconcile the differing accounts that were published and circulated.
