Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Investigations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Election Board approves contract roster of licensed private investigators, deadlocks on separate data‑research contract
Summary
The board voted 2–1 to let the executive director develop and begin implementing a "virtual" statewide roster of contracted licensed private investigators using FY26 surplus funds; a related motion to authorize a separate expert data‑researcher contract failed on a 2–2 tie. Members pressed for written budgets and legal review before large encumbrances.
The Georgia State Election Board on May 14 approved a plan to create a statewide roster of licensed private investigators the agency can call on for complaint investigations, while rejecting a separate motion to immediately authorize a contract for technical data‑research support.
Executive Director James Mills said the "virtual" investigator program would establish vetted, contracted investigators in multiple counties (he cited an initial roster covering roughly 10–12 counties) under per‑hour contracts. Mills estimated an implementation cost in the range of $250,000 if the roster is fully engaged and would use encumbered FY26 surplus funds to avoid losing year‑end money. "These people are going to have to be vetted, background checks, etc.," Mills said, describing vendor and background‑check requirements.
Board members supported the concept but pressed for a written plan, a firm budget and independent legal review before major spending. Member Grubs repeatedly said she would need a detailed budget and legal analysis before endorsing encumbrances, noting the agency faces a $300,000 cut next fiscal year and that funds must be prioritized.
A separate motion to authorize the executive director to engage expert data researchers or a temp agency to provide technical analysis of large datasets (SLOG files, voting logs, and other digital artifacts) was moved and seconded. Mills estimated a one‑year program might cost about $50,000. After debate over the program's scope and whether the data work should be integrated with the PI roster, the motion failed on a 2–2 vote.
During the meeting Mills also reported two part‑time investigators have accepted offers and will begin orientation next week; a data‑entry specialist is under an offer and is scheduled to start June 1. Several members said investigators and data experts should work together — the investigators to gather evidence and the technical analysts to interpret complex log or voting dataset questions.
The board directed Mills to proceed with developing the PI roster and to report monthly on progress; members said any encumbrance of funds should be accompanied by a written plan and budget for board review. The defeated data‑specialist motion can be revisited when staff produce a more detailed proposal and costs.
