ATTY Clifton M. Patty, Jr. + R: Christopher M. Harris ++ email: skippatylavfirm@gnail.com OU N CG ‘email: chrisharris@pattylaw.com C. Chad Young ++ chadyoung@pattylaw.com ATTORNEYS AT LAW December 22, 2020 VIA E-MAIL ONLY rickey.kittle@vahoo.com Catoosa County Board of Elections and Registration Attn: Rickey Kittle, Chairman VIA E-MAIL ONLY tonya.moore@eatoo Tonya Moore Catoosa County Elections Director RE: Elector Challenge Filed by A. Denise Pierce Burns dated December 21, 2020 Dear Rickey and Tonya: 1 am in receipt of the Elector Challenge information packet received from Ms. Bums, Although the Elector Challenge which was submitted is dated December 17, 2020, it was not formally filed until it was transmitted and submitted via e-mail addressed to “Election Official for CATOOSA. County” and which is dated December 21, 2020, at 12:05 PM. Based upon my review of the Elector Challenge and documentation submitted with the Elector Challenge, as well as applicable statutes, it is my legal opinion that there is not sufficient probable ‘cause to sustain the Elector Challenge and that the Elector Challenge should be denied. The basis of my legal opinion is set forth in the analysis below. The Elector Challenge is brought pursuant to 0.C.G.A. § 21-2-230(a) which provides, in pertinent part, that “[any elector of the county or municipality may challenge the right of any other elector of the county or municipality, whose name appears on the list of electors, to vote in an election.” The Elector Challenge received meets the requirements of O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230(a) since it was made in writing and it specifies the distinct grounds of the challenge. Since the Elector Challenge ‘meets initial filing requirements of O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230(a), the County Board of Elections and Registration is required pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230(b) immediately convene to determine whether probable cause exists to sustain the challenge. This determination will be made by the Board of Elections and Registration at a special called meeting to be held at 4:30 PM on December 22, 2020. 7731 Nashville Street * P.O. Box 727 ¢ Ringgold, GA 30736 ‘Telephone: 706.935.9100 * Fax 706.935.6022 Licensed in Georgia and Tennessoe 11 Licensed in Georgia Only +Catoosa County Board of Elections and Registration Attn: Rickey Kittle, Chairman Tonya Moore, Catoosa County Elections Director December 22, 2020 Page Two O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230(a) contemplates that any individual elector of the County may challenge the right of any other individual County elector to vote in an election, The Elector Challenge submitted contains 249 separate individual names who the individual submitting the Elector Challenge contends should not be permitted to vote in the upcoming U.S. Senate runoff election on January 5,2021. Under the applicable statutory provisions and based on how it was submitted, the Elector Challenge is actually 249 separate, individual challenges to the right of each of the individuals named on the list submitted to vote in the upcoming election. However, the specific and distinet basis of each of the challenges is the same — that the individual electors listed are allegedly no longer permanent residents of Catoosa County and are therefore ineligible to vote in the upcoming election. The underlying factual information relied upon to support the challenge is a list of change of address information purportedly prepared and generated by a private, third party licensee of the United States Postal Service. Utilizing this information, the challenge presented is essentially a request that the Board of Elections and Registration conduct elector list review and maintenance for the 249 individual electors identified in the challenge based on change of address information submitted. At this stage in the election process, this challenge is not legally permissible for the following reasons: 1. Georgia election statutes already have a specific procedure in place for this type of voter/elector list maintenance utilizing change of address information obtained from U.S. Postal Service third party licensees. 0.C.G.A. § 21-2-233 sets forth a detailed procedure that authorizes the Secretary of State, in his or her discretion, to conduct comparisons of address information on voter/elector lists with change of address information from U.S. Postal Service licensees and make any adjustments which are necessary based on findings. 2. The procedure established above requires that if the comparison of address information reveals that an elector has moved outside the County or State, a written confirmation notice under 0.C.G.A. § 21-2-234 must be sent to the elector’s address on record with a request for confirmation as to whether the elector has in fact moved his or her residence out of County or State (See O.C.G.A. § 21-2-233(¢)). The Board of Registration is also authorized (but not required) to send a confirmation notice to the elector’s potential forwarded/new address secking confirmation on whether the elector has or has not moved their residence (See O.C.G.A. § 21-2-233(¢)). 3. Utilizing the statutory process above, an elector is given a period of 30 days from the date of a confirmation notice to respond that they either (i) still reside in the County and State at the address of record, (ii) have moved to a new address which is still within the County, or (iii) have moved to an address outside the County and/or State (See O.C.G.A. § 21-2-234(d),(e)). An elector cannot bbe removed from the list of electors unless they confirm they have re-located their residenceCatoosa County Board of Elections and Registration Attn: Rickey Kittle, Chairman Tonya Moore, Catoosa County Elections Director December 22, 2020 Page Three outside the County and/or State or they fail to respond within 30 days from the date of the confirmation notice (See 0.C.G.A. § 21-2-234()(2)), 4. The Catoosa County Board of Elections and Registration has an established precedent of relying on the Secretary of State, as the Chief Elections Official of the State, for voter/elector list maintenance of the type authorized under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-233 and it does not conduct its own separate voter/elector list maintenance except in specific individual situations as required under the State Elections Code. There is no basis for the County Board of Elections and Registration to deviate from this established precedent and established statutory procedure at this time, especially not two weeks before an election and when early voting has been in process for over a week. 5. State statute requires that before an elector can be removed from the voter/elector list, they must be given a written confirmation notice with 30 days to respond. Even if the Board of Elections and Registration could somehow work through a list of 249 electors, compare addresses and undertake all other work necessary to conduct the necessary initial eligibility review of the electors submitted (all while conducting an actual election with anticipated record turn out for a runoff), there are only 14 days remaining until the runoff election (with only 8 of those being actual working days if only Christmas Day and New Years Day are removed as Holidays). ‘Therefore, there is not sufficient time to provide the statutorily required written confirmation notice to the electors listed in the challenge to afford them the 30 day period within which to respond before removal can be considered. 6. In addition to the other items above, the statutes which established the uniform State-wide process for change of address comparison, sending elector confirmation notices and conducting elector list maintenance provides that “(jist maintenance activities pursuant to [0.C.G.A. § 21-2- 234) and O.C.G.A. § 21-2-233 shall be completed not later than 90 days prior to the general primary or general election for federal offices...” (emphasis supplied). We are obviously well past this statutory deadline with respect to the current runoff election, Any maintenance of voter/elector lists based on address comparison was required to be completed at a minimum of 90 days before the general election in November (since one of the existing Senate races did not have a conventional general primary election). ‘Therefore, the Elector Challenge submitted actually requests that the County Board of Elections and Registration take actions which the Secretary of State, as the State’s Chief Election Official, cannot undertake as a matter of law. In addition to the legal prohibitions referenced above, I understand from a cursory examination of the list submitted with the Elector Challenge that the Elections Office has some concems about the validity of the information submitted. For example, in one instance an individual listed whose right to vote in the election is being challenged is personally known to Elections Staff and is actually a Poll Worker who is a college student that permanently resides in Catoosa County, but chooses to have their mail forwarded to their college address. This is a prime example of whyCatoosa County Board of Elections and Registration Attn: Rickey Kittle, Chairman Tonya Moore, Catoosa County Elections Director December 22, 2020 Page Four O.C.G.A. § 21-2-233 and § 21-2-234 provide for a detailed notification procedure with a 30-day time period to respond before an elector can be removed from the County's voter/elector list. In summary, the Georgia Elections Code already provides a uniform, statutory process and procedure that permits the Secretary of State to conduct exactly the type of address change information comparison which is being requested in the current Elector Challenger before the Board. This statutory process is valid, in force, has not been overtumed by any court and protects both the integrity of the voter/election list as well as the right of individual electors to be notified and have an adequate opportunity for response before their status is altered or changed on a list of electors. The applicable time periods within which this process must be followed or applied in connection with the January 5, 2021, election has long since expired. Therefore, probable cause does not exist to sustain the Elector Challenge currently before the Board and it should be denied. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions. ly, ‘kdb ce: Alicia Vaughn (via e-mail only)im Brown eS From: Kim Brown Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 9:44 AM To: rickey kittle@yahoo.com; Tonya Moore ce: Alicia Vaughn (countymanager@catoosa.com); Chad Young Subject: Elector Challenge Filed by A. Denise Pierce Burns dated December 21, 2020 Attachments: Hector Challenge.Legal Opinion Letter. 12-22-2020.pdf Rickey and Tonya, Please find attached a letter from Chad for your review. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thank you, Kim Kim Brown Paralegal to C. Chad Young Patty & Young Attorneys at Law, LLC 7731 Nashville St. P.O, Box 727 Ringgold, GA 30736 706-935-9100 706-935-0331 Direct kimbrown@pattylaw.com