Kevin M.

Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

September 19, 2024

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

To the Members of the Georgia State Election Board:

Please support the proposed rules changes pending before the SEB and scheduled for consideration
at your September 20, 2024 meeting. Below are myriad reasons why the rules being proposed – as
well as those previously adopted by this board – are critically important to ensure the integrity and
accuracy of the 2024 general elections in Georgia.

Statement of Reasons and Factual support for the previously adopted and proposed additional rules:

1. Although required by law, Georgia practices no uniform or credible reconciliation or Canvass

process. 1 For example:

i. The hand-count/audit following the 2020 General Election found in excess of 6,000
uncounted ballots across four counties:

a. Fayette County 2,755 2

b. Floyd County 3,060 3
c. Douglas County 293 4
d. Walton County 284 5
While Gabe Sterling would say that the audit “did its job” by finding the uncounted
ballots, that is not the case. Discovery of uncounted ballots establishes that several

1 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-493 (b) The superintendent, before computing the votes cast in any precinct, shall compare the registration figure
with the certificates returned by the poll officers showing the number of persons who voted in each precinct or the number of ballots
cast. If, upon consideration by the superintendent of the returns and certificates before him or her from any precinct, it shall appear
that the total vote returned for any candidate or candidates for the same office or nomination or on any question exceeds the number
of electors in such precinct or exceeds the total number of persons who voted in such precinct or the total number of ballots cast
therein, such excess shall be deemed a discrepancy and palpable error and shall be investigated by the superintendent; and no votes
shall be recorded from such precinct until an investigation shall be had.
.
2
Second Georgia county finds previously uncounted votes | AP News
3
Floyd County Finishes Hand Recount, Adding 3,060 Votes - Coosa Valley News
4
293 votes found during hand recount in Douglas | Local News | douglascountysentinel.com
5
4th Georgia county finds uncounted votes as hand count deadline approaches (news4jax.com)

1|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

counties did not know how many ballots they were supposed to have. This is only
possible in the absence of basic election accounting -or reconciliation.

Gabe Sterling and the Secretary of State have also said, “We counted every single ballot
by hand…”. To that I would say, “Every single ballot- according to what?”.

ii. SEB2021-181 (referred to the SEB by Governor Kemp) found in excess of 6,000 false
ballots and votes added to the hand count totals- that did not exist. This is only possible
in the absence of basic accounting and reconciliation practices.

iii. SEB2023-025 found in excess of 3,125 ballots counted twice. This is only possible in the
absence of basic accounting and reconciliation practices.

iv. SEB2022-109 found that Fulton County recertified the 2022 Primary without knowing the
results.

v. Fulton County, Cobb County, and many others are forced to recertify election results time
and time again because they find memory cards or some other reason. Each time is proof
that no reconciliation was performed and that the initial certification was incorrect.

2. The Secretary of State fails to support, much less enforce that which is required. He has
warned, along with the Democrats, that “certification is ministerial and required”, but has
failed to enforce or explain that before “…shall certify” is “…shall compare [the number of
ballots cast to the number of voters who have cast a ballot]”. What is an Election Board
member to do when they don’t have the records necessary to compare?

3. Perhaps the reason he fails to mention or enforce such a comparison is because the counties
solely rely upon the electronic poll pads to maintain the list of who has checked-in at each
polling location. The counties simply never get the list.

a. The electronic poll pad data- is centrally managed by the SOS.

b. In every election, beginning with the 2020 primary, the counties have not received an
“enumerated voter list” for Advance Voting. Said another way, the counties do not
know who voted at which precinct, or when they voted, in their own county.
c. The enumerated voter list for Election Day voting has been provided, but usually only
a day or two before certification which is too late. It is important to note that While
Election Day voting / polling locations are (comparatively) well managed and
documented, Advance Voting and Absentee Voting are a different story.
d. Consider that in 2020, Fulton County had a total of ~60,000 Election Day voters out
of 528,777 total ballots cast. The remainder was mostly Advance Voting (~315,000)
and Absentee (148,000).

2|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

4. Many- if not most counties, certify elections based on only two reports produced by
Dominion Voting Systems. A Statement of Votes Cast, and a Precinct Summary Report.
Fulton County and Bibb County are two such examples as recent as the 2024 Primary
Election.

5. Since 2020, there has been no counting of the paper ballots at the polling location- for
Advance Voting or Election Day. Like the bank teller counting the cash by hand after it is
counted by machine, or like every cashier in the world- at the end of their shift, their cash
drawer must be counted and reconciled. The same principles apply to elections as the
number or quantity of paper ballots must be counted.

6. The number of voters (from the documented list at each polling location) and the number of
paper ballots (independently counted) are required to reconcile with the number of ballots
cast according to the electronic voting system- and must be performed at the polling
location- every day. This is critical. Not elsewhere- not at some point in the future, but daily
by those responsible for the process.

7. Without such basic accounting /reconciliation, how can election officials (county election
boards) reliably or credibly compare the number of ballots cast to the number of voters (as
statutorily required (shall compare)) before certification? They cannot.

3|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

For example, an Open Records Request was submitted to Fulton County for all Open Records
Requests submitted by Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections members. One
such request was made by Julie Adams for the numbered list of voters for the May 21, 2024
Primary. The response was “There are no responsive documents to your request”

The request was from a Fulton County BRE member- over 2 months after certification, and
she was unable to obtain the records which she would have needed prior to certification in
order to perform her statutorily required duties.

The proposed and adopted rules below are required for county election board officials to perform
their duties:

1. Rule 183-1-12-.02 [Effective 9/4/2024] Definitions

https://rules.sos.ga.gov/GAC/183-1-12
(02) "Certify the results of a primary, election, or runoff," or words to that effect, means to
attest, after reasonable inquiry that the tabulation and canvassing of the election are
complete and accurate and that the results are a true and accurate accounting of all votes
cast in that election

4|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

2. Rule 183-1-12-.12.1 Pre-Certification Reconciliation of Number of Ballots to Number of

Voters
notice_of_proposed_rulemaking_183_1_12_12_1_v2.pdf (ga.gov)

SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-12-.12
Tabulating Results: Reconciliation

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to reconcile tabulator tape ballot counts with scanner
ballot counts to ensure that the voting system is correctly counting ballots and detect
potential errors.

Main Features: The main feature of this rule amendment is that it requires the poll manager
and two witnesses to record the ballot count from the tabulation tape on the recap form.
https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/seb-
notice_of_proposed_rulemaking_183_1_12_.12_reconciliation.pdf

3. SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-12-.12
Tabulating Results: Hand Counting

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to ensure the secure, transparent, and accurate
counting of ballots by requiring a systematic process where ballots are independently hand-
counted by three sworn poll officers. The rule mandates detailed documentation, sealing,
and certification of ballot counts, with provisions for resolving inconsistencies and
communicating any counting that occurs outside the polling location to relevant parties.

Main Features: The main features of the amendments to this rule are that requires the poll
manager and two sworn poll officers to unseal ballot boxes, remove and record the ballots,
and have three poll officers independently count them. Once all three counts match, they
sign a control document. If discrepancies arise between the hand count and recorded

totals, the poll manager must resolve and document the inconsistency. The counted ballots
are sealed in labeled containers, signed to ensure integrity.
https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/seb-
notice_of_proposed_rulemaking_183_1_12_.12a5_hand_count.pdf

4. SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-12-.19
Preparation of the Electors List and Use of Electronic Poll Book: Voter Lists

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to affirm that citizens of Georgia have access to an
essential part of the oversight of the election process and instill confidence in Georgia
elections.

5|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

Main Features: The main features of the amendment to this rule are that it requires each
county in Georgia to post a publicly accessible, time-stamped list of registered electors
before advance voting begins, with the Secretary of State also posting a statewide list.
Counties must also post a supplemental list before advance voting, with the Secretary of
State doing the same for the state. These data files, excluding legally restricted information,
must remain available for download for at least 10 years. Counties without websites must
make the lists available at their election offices for the same period.
https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/seb-
notice_of_proposed_rulemaking_183_1_12_.19_voter_list.pdf

5. SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-12-.21
County Participation and Totals Reporting - Daily Reporting

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to ensure ongoing transparency in elections during the
advance and absentee voting period, and on Election Day. Further, it serves to continuously
keep the public informed on the voting process and election information.

Main Features: This rule requires that, for each primary, general, and runoff election in
Georgia, registrars must establish a daily reporting system to publicly share the total
number of voters who have participated, beginning from the start of advance voting. The
reports must include details on how voters participated (either through advance voting or
absentee by mail), and for primary elections, they must also specify the number of party or
nonpartisan ballots cast. After the canvass and computation of votes, excluding certain
ballots like provisional or UOCAVA ballots, election superintendents must create and post
precinct-level vote totals for all contests. Both the daily voter participation reports and the
final vote totals must be posted on the registrar's or county election superintendent's
website, or in a public place if no website is available. This ensures continuous
transparency and public access to election information.
https://sos.ga.gov/page/proposed-state-election-board-rules-and-rule-amendments

6. SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-14-.02

Advanced Voting: Reconciliation

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to reconcile tabulator tape ballot counts with scanner
ballot counts to ensure that the voting system is correctly counting ballots and detect
potential errors.

Main Features: The main feature of this rule amendment is that it requires election officials
to reconcile the ballot counts from the scanner tabulation tapes, the election counters on
the ballot scanners, the numbered list of absentee electors, and the absentee ballot recap
form. If any discrepancies are found, no further action shall be taken until the issue is
resolved to the satisfaction of the election superintendent.

6|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/seb-
notice_of_proposed_rulemaking_183_1_14_.02_reconciliation.pdf

7. SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-14-
.11.
Mailing and Issuance of Ballots: Chain of Custody

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to maintain the chain of custody of ballots in Georgia by
ensuring that ballots are mailed to the intended recipient and returned to the county
elections office with an auditable trail.

Main Features: The main feature of this rule amendment is that it establishes the United
States Postal Service tracking as a means to track absentee-by-mail ballots. It also
establishes that the USPS tracking records for each ballot mailed to electors should be
maintained by the county board of registrars or the absentee ballot clerk for public
inspection.
https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/seb-notice_of_proposed_rulemaking_183-
1_14_.11_ab_chain_of_custody.pdf

8. SYNOPSIS OF THE PROPOSED RULE OF THE STATE ELECTION BOARD RULE 183-1-14-.02
Advance Voting: Chain of Custody

Purpose: The purpose of the rule is to enhance election accuracy by adding a hand count of
total ballots to Advance Voting periods at each voting location and ensuring that the
electronic system totals match the hand counted totals.

Main Features: As to Rule 183-1-14-.02(8), this rule requires that if a ballot box contains
more than 1,500 ballots at the close of any advance voting day, the ballots must be removed
and independently hand-counted by three sworn poll officers. The officers must agree on
the total count and document it along with other election details. Any discrepancies
between the hand count and electronic records must be investigated and resolved. The
ballots are then securely sealed, documented, and delivered to the election superintendent
for safekeeping until vote tabulation. As to Rule 183-1-12-.02(13), at the end of the advance
voting period, the registrar must record the election counter numbers from each ballot
scanner on a daily recap sheet, then shut down and seal the scanners. The registrar, with
two witnesses, unseals the ballot box, and three sworn poll officers independently count
the ballots, ensuring accuracy by comparing their results. Any discrepancies between the
hand count and electronic records must be resolved and documented. The counted ballots
are then placed in secure containers, sealed, and documented, with a chain of custody
form completed and signed to maintain the integrity of the ballots until they are tabulated.
https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2024-
08/Notice_of_Proposed_Rulemaking_183_1_14_.02_8_13_AB_hand_counting.pdf

7|Pa ge
 Kevin M. Moncla
911 Wilkinson Street
Shreveport, LA 71104
[email protected]

For all of the above reasons and upon a review of the factual records of many Georgia counties over
the past several election cycles, it is clear that the rules promulgated this year are vitally important,
supported by the facts and are consistent with Georgia’s election code. Anyone who opposes the
rules because ‘it is too much work to implement…’ needs to go back and study the Election Code –
because the rules merely implement existing statutory requirements that are being ignored by far too
many Georgia counties’ election officials.

Thank you for your hard work, your diligence, and your commitment to election integrity in Georgia.

Sincerely,

Kevin Moncla

8|Pa ge