Foundation Maps here. Keep clicking on the tabs. The layers tell the horrid story. https://maps.foundationcenter.org/#/list/?subjects=all&popgroups=all&years=all&location=6252001&excludeLocation=0&geoScale=ADM0&layer=recip&boundingBox=-188.7890625,-66.65297740055277,189.140625,76.10079606754579&gmOrgs=all&recipOrgs=all&tags=all&keywords=&pathwaysOrg=&pathwaysType=&acct=democracy&typesOfSupport=all&transactionTypes=all&amtRanges=all&minGrantAmt=0&maxGrantAmt=0&gmTypes=all&minAssetsAmt=0&maxAssetsAmt=0&minGivingAmt=0&maxGivingAmt=0&andOr=0&includeGov=1&custom=all&customArea=all&indicator=&dataSource=oecd&chartType=bars&multiSubject=1&listType=gm&windRoseAnd=undefined&zoom=0 •Charts: Compare funding for different activities by selecting from the subject areas drop-down or scrolling to view all categories. Click on a bar or number to view a grants list. •Map: Visualize funding flows by recipient location (purple bubbles) or foundation location (orange bubbles). Select a bubble for a summary view. Select foundations, recipients, or grants for more information. •List: View and sort foundation, recipients, and grants data in table form. Select details for more information. •Advanced Search: Type in a particular location or subject area to see funding in a region and/or for specific fields of interest. •Constellations: Generate a hub-and-spokes view of a universe of funders and recipients. Refine your search by selecting from the criteria in the top navigation.

Announcing Adoption of the House Proposed Committee Substitute (PCS) to Senate Bill 747 (Omnibus Elections Bill) This evening (August 16th) the House passed its proposed committee substitute (PCS) to Senate Bill 747 with two minor amendments that were run from the House floor. The bill now moves back to the Senate for consideration and adoption, as is, or for conference to work out the differences in the two chamber versions. NCEIT believes this bill is reasonably sound to support because it enacts several important changes to NC election law. However, two important deficiencies persist in the bill and merit the atttention of legislators: Section 17 of the PCS bill was a last minute addition that permanently opens up all primary elections to Unaffiliated voters. This robs the political parties of the option of closing their primaries. It is a power grab by the legislature to prevent republicans from exclusively choosing their republican candidates for each general election. The measure does not measurably contribute to election integrity. NCEIT vigorously opposes this addition to the Elections Bill and seeks to have it sticken from the bill prior to its final passage. Senate Bill 747 fails to address public access to Cast Vote Records (CVRs), a vitally important artifact from tabulation machines. In 28 of the 50 states, CVRs are publicly available electronic files that are used to validate election tallies after each election. In North Carolina, the CVRs are available from machines, but are not accessible to the public as an election record. Language authorizing access ot CVRs as public records was contained in House BIll 770, which is not likely to pass out of the House. NCEIT believes it appropriate to add the H770 language, authorizing public access to CVRs, to S747 so it can become law this session. Please call or email your respective legislators to inform them you support passage of the House PCS to S747 with the above two changes. Find your rep here https://ncleg.gov/Members/MemberList/H About the Bill as Adopted: What Election Law Improvements are in the House PCS to Senate Bill 747? *Prohibition of private, non-governmental funding (including in-kind donations) of election activities (Sections 2, 4-5) *Retention of election records for 22 months to comply with the NVRA (Sections 2 and 4); *Provides some clarifications to authority and restrictions for poll observers (Section 7.b) *Same Day Registrant addresses are checked and returned mailings will trigger retrieval of voted regular ballots (Section 10.a); *Extends Absentee Ballot Challenge Period to five days after election day (Section 15); *Allows for Chief Judges and Judges at Early Voting Sites (other than Board of Election sites), although it lacks parity requirements for judges (Section 27) *Polls will close at 7:30PM on election day and all absentee/mail-in ballots must be received by that time (Section 35) *Makes it a misdemeanor crime for anyone other than a Board of Elections to affix a tracking code to absentee ballot request forms (Section 37.a) *Provides a new process for removing non-citizens from voter lists (Section 44). *Implements a pilot test for signature verification on mail-in ballot envelopes (Section 48). What are the Deficiencies in the House PCS to Senate Bill 747? *Section 17 of the PCS eliminates the state party’s authority to open or close its primaries to unaffiliated voters, permanently opening the partisan primaries to unaffiliated voters *Still lacks clarification for some Poll Observer permitted activities in performing their duties as prescribed by law (NCGS 163-45)- Freedom to move about the facility; Ability to freely inspect ATVs; Ability to closely monitor tabulation machines; Ability to speak with other election officials than Chief Judge *No requirement for local Boards of Elections to accept citizen affidavits or other evidence to investigate and correct known deficiencies on county voter lists *No partisan parity required among numbers of Chief Judges and Judges working at voting sites *Does not require that all voters using same day registration and voting be issued a provisional ballot to allow optimal time for address verification and to make it easier to retrieve the ballot *Does not provide a means for observers or citizens to inspect container return envelopes or to reasonably challenge voters who do not live in their counties (or the state) prior to canvass *The bill fails to specify that machine Cast Vote Records (CVRs) are publicly releasable immediately after election day as they are in 28 other states *Section 35 of the bill allows for “curing” of mail-in ballot envelopes for acceptance after poll closure on election day- no curing should occur after the polls close and the votes are being tallied. NCEIT | PO Box 146, Sanford, NC 27331, Sanford, NC 27330

(NC is on the list!) https://capitalresearch.org/article/report-how-charities-secretly-help-win-elections/ Capital Research Center. Parker Thayer This investigation reveals the shocking true story of the Everybody Votes campaign—the largest and most corrupt “charitable” voter registration effort in American history—that may have decided the 2020 presidential election and could decide 2024. Commissioned by Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, funded by the Democratic Party’s biggest donors, and coordinated with cutthroat Democratic consultants, the Everybody Votes campaign used the guise of civic-minded charity to selectively register millions of “non-white” swing-state voters in the hopes of getting out the Democratic vote for a 2020 presidential win. It worked. The Voter Registration Project Our exclusive research reveals how a little-known organization called the Voter Registration Project (VRP) leveraged connections with billionaire private foundations, Sam Bankman-Fried’s mother, and foreign billionaires with a history of breaking U.S. election law to raise $190 million for the Everybody Votes campaign and register 5.1 million people. Using data from leaked copies of the campaign’s secret plans, as well as 2020 exit polls, our researchers have discovered that the VRP’s 5.1 million new registrations provided Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden with somewhere between 1 million to 2.7 million votes across eight specially chosen swing states during the 2020 election. If the state-by-state projections of the campaign’s Democratic consultants held true into 2020, the Everybody Votes campaign’s “massive registration surge” would have provided Democrats more votes than the total margins of victory in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. Biden ultimately won each of these states in 2020, netting him 53 electoral college votes. Misusing Tax-Exempt Money Our investigation proves, once and for all, that Democrats used truckloads of money from private foundations and public charities to give their donors enormous tax breaks and pad their electoral margins in 2020, even though charities and foundations are strictly forbidden by law to operate with the effect, much less the intent, of benefiting a political party. The investigation also proves that the campaign’s supposed concerns for the “civic participation” of “underrepresented communities” were nothing more than a convenient lie. Unearthed drafts of the Everybody Votes campaign’s original partisan schematics prove that the campaign was designed to win elections first and worry about “civic participation” later. Changing the electorate’s racial composition was only ever a secondary concern. If the Everybody Votes campaign was a political action committee (PAC) or a 501(c)(4) “dark money” group and if the organizers had just admitted they cared more about electoral results than inequality, then there would be no scandal. But it wasn’t, and they didn’t, and the result is an enormous scandal entangling some of the Left’s biggest political donors and many of its most powerful nonprofit activist groups. What’s Next It’s not just a scandal of the past either. The operation was so successful in 2020 that the Everybody Votes campaign has announced it will continue on through 2024, registering millions more. New job listings suggest that this cycle’s operations will target Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin—each a must-win presidential swing state. Only time will tell if the campaign is a repeat success. Read the full report here.Tags: Corridor Partners, election integrity, Everybody Votes, John Podesta, nonprofit, voter registration, Voter Registration Project Parker Thayer Parker Thayer is a Investigative Researcher at Capital Research Center. A native of Election Integrity

NORTH CAROLINA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE MEETING NOTICE AND BILL SPONSOR NOTIFICATION 2023-2024 SESSION You are hereby notified that the House Committee on Election Law and Campaign Finance Reform will meet as follows: DAY & DATE: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 TIME: 2:30 PM LOCATION: 1228/1327 LB PRESIDING: Representative Grey Mills, Chair COMMENTS: Pursuant to House Rule 28.2, a WebEx link will be provided to Committee Members and staff the day of the meeting. A link to the Audio/Video livestream will be posted on the NCGA Legislative Calendar: https://www.ncleg.gov/LegislativeCalendar. Amendment Requests are due to Erika Churchill in Legislative Analysis Division by Monday 8/14/2023 at 3:00 PM. In order for Amendment Requests to be considered, please copy Representative Mills on all requests. The following bills will be considered: BILL NO. SHORT TITLE SPONSORS SB 747 Elections Law Changes. PCS – To Be Considered Senator Hise Senator P. Newton Senator Daniel Respectfully, Representative Grey Mills, Chair For questions, please contact Mason Barefoot (Committee Assistant) at mason.barefoot@ncleg.gov.

Today, Tuesday, August 8th, 2023 at 6PM, Ned Jones of the Election Integrity Network will be having his weekly Citizen Research Project national Zoom call. He will be reviewing the information on the FOIA requests for the leftist organizations that we need to expose at our local BOEs. Please try to make the call. I will put together a blurb for each one in the next few days as requested on our Tuesday call. Thanks. This is the link. You have to register to get into the call. Tuesday, August 8th, 2023 weekly call. * 6 p.m. | EIN: Citizen's Research Project | https://virginiainstitute-org.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZwuf--rrD8sHdzRTe66AgWBqCiijOrfc6S0#/registration We'll be discussing the Six Left-wing initiatives that we're researching. 1. The US Alliance for Election Excellence (USAEE) 2. The Committee For Safe and Secure Elections (CSSE) 3. The Center for Internet Security (CIS) 4. The ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge (and partners) 5. The High School Registration/Lower The Voting Age Groups 6. The Center for Voter Information/The Voter Participation Center These are links to info about the above n nefarious organizations. Center for Voter Information/Voter Participation Center https://www.restorationofamerica.com/uncategorized/inside-democrats-best-kept-secret-mass-nonprofit-voter-registration-pt-1/ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2023/03/09/activists_are_screwing_up_wisconsins_elections_its_time_to_stop_them_148960.html https://www.wizmnews.com/2023/03/07/wisconsin-voters-warned-about-misleading-mailers-with-false-absentee-ballot-info/ https://www.npr.org/2008/05/01/90114863/group-with-clinton-ties-behind-dubious-robocalls Kansas Lawsuit with Center for Voter Information https://watchdoglab.substack.com/p/does-freedom-of-speech-allow-interference?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=998138&post_id=131216404&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1680588/how-simpson-thacher-beat-kansas-vote-by-mail-restrictions Call To Action: We need to submit FOIA/Public Records Requests to every local Election Office and every state Election Department to get their communications with the Center for Voter Information/Voter Participation Center. The Center for Internet Security (CIS) See Attached Manual https://www.cisecurity.org/ https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/dhs-funded-nonprofit-censoring-election-info-also-provides-cybersecurity Documents from Virginia. https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=kZwBuPVZ042YCFbOJ2BR8nIcIf8zI57Gq1x7 Press release from ES&S and Albert Sensors https://www.essvote.com/blog/our-technology/partnerships-to-further-election-security/ Link to list of CIS Locations. https://web.archive.org/web/20220122215430/https://www.cisecurity.org/ei-isac/partners-ei-isac/ Here's a link to an interesting report about possible censorship using the CIS, EI-ISAC network. https://report.foundationforfreedomonline.com/11-9-22.htm These subpoenas, one for CISA, were issued this week. https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/chairman-jordan-subpoenas-cdc-cisa-and-gec-documents-and-communications The Center for Internet Security to develop a testing system for non-voting equipment. https://www.heraldstandard.com/elections_ap/national-push-to-bolster-security-of-key-election-technology/article_fbaf666d-7c2b-5974-bac0-1296d64f0cf5.html CISA response to questions from Representative Cloud. See attached document Lawsuit filed on behalf of Jim Hoft and Jill Hines seeking information about the Government Censorship Program with Social Media in elections. https://aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Doc-1-Complaint.pdf America First Legal (AFL) DHS FOIA Documents https://aflegal.org/case/2022-npfo-00105/ DHS Cyber Agency, CISA, Labels Our Thoughts 'Critical Infrastructure' to Justify Censoring Us https://thefederalist.com/2023/06/02/dhs-cybersecurity-agency-labels-your-private-thoughts-critical-infrastructure-to-justify-censoring-you/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=dhs-cybersecurity-agency-labels-your-private-thoughts-critical-infrastructure-to-justify-censoring-you&utm_term=2023-06-03 Center for Internet Security connection to the Democracy Fund https://dailycaller.com/2023/06/09/left-wing-billionaires-nonprofit-funded-dhs-linked-portal-used-to-censor-social-media-platforms/ Center for Internet Security Report on 2020 Election MDM - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23834944/cis-2020-report.pdf Center for Internet Security https://www.judicialwatch.org/hunter-biden-sham-plea-deal/ Center for Internet Security - Letter from Congress https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/free-speech/catherine-salgado/2023/06/23/gop-reps-issue-blistering-letter-2020-election Congressional Staff Report on CISA https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf Judgement in Government Censorship case. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23867004-08917380420?responsive=1&title=1 Judge denies government appeal. Doughty-denies-DOJ-censorship-motion.pdf (justthenews.com) Censorship Injunction https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/14/tech/election-disinformation-chilling-effect-injunction/index.html Call To Action: We need to submit FOIA/Public Records Requests to every local Election Office and every state Election Department to get their communications with the Center for Internet Security, particularly, their Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with CIS."Alliance " partners. The Committee For Safe and Secure Elections - See the report that I sent out on 2/22/23. Here are links to CSSE (It doesn't always work), Fusion Centers and the longer version of the "Staged" R Street video that was played at the conference. https://safeelections.org/members https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMYF8V5t-L4 Link to the Elections Assistance Commission Webinar - "Committee for Safe and Secure Elections" on March 2, 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVpnCzMB878 https://www.eac.gov/Election-Official-Security-discussion-with-CSSE Two articles about The Committee for Safe and Secure Elections and the Left's false narrative about threats to Election Workers. https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/behind-curtain-policies-could-intimidate-citizens-election-worker-threat https://pjmedia.com/uncategorized/lincolnbrown/2023/04/18/monitoring-an-election-could-get-you-into-trouble-n1688127 New articles about the Left-wing false narrative about threats to Election Workers. https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/24/corrupt-media-fight-election-accountability-with-democrat-manufactured-lies/ https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/securing-2024-election CEIR (David Becker) Summit https://www.summit.electioninnovation.org/live-stream Klobuchar/Durbin Threats to Election Officials Legislation https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/4/klobuchar-durbin-colleagues-reintroduce-comprehensive-legislation-to-address-threats-targeting-election-workers Hayden's article on the Committee for Safe and Secure Elections https://thefederalist.com/2023/05/09/democrats-far-reaching-reforms-are-the-real-threat-to-election-security-not-violent-conservatives/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=democrats-far-reaching-reforms-are-the-real-threat-to-election-security-not-violent-conservatives&utm_term=2023-05-09 "The Trust Project" / New Venture Fund https://gazette.com/news/wex/democratic-tied-dark-money-kingmaker-behind-nonpartisan-group-fighting-misinformation/article_5c9149fb-9f0d-5721-ae3d-7d1697e04f63.html Becker/Gates in Arizona https://www.azmirror.com/2023/06/15/preparing-for-the-fight-against-2024-election-misinformation/ Call to Action: Meet with your local election official, or file a FOIA/Open Records Request, if necessary, to learn as much as you can about any communications with CSSE, Fusion Centers, and DHS. Every state has an association of election officials, and they all have an annual convention. Another call to action is to find out if CSSE and EAC made, or are making, a presentation at the annual convention in your state. The US Alliance for Election Excellence - "Push Back" against The "Alliance" in Brunswick County, NC https://portcitydaily.com/local-news/2023/03/25/brunswick-commissioners-spurn-private-money-running-boe-cite-zuckerburg-and-tech-billionaires-influence/

From Jim Womack,NCEIT Coordinator, July 27, 2023 I received an email this weekend that was forwarded from one of the more prominent election directors in NC- Sara LaVere from Brunswick County. I am curious about whether she has actual knowledge of a planned PCS to H772. If so, I am surprised she was provided this PCS to circulate when the general public and other advocacy groups are completely unaware of its existence or that any such proposal was being made. I pray our conscientious House Elections and Rules Committee members will reject any moves to alter what was a superb piece of legislation (House Bill 772) by watering it down and making it ineffective in fulfilling the spirit and intent of the existing general statutes. Frankly, none of the proposed changes in the attached PCS would improve H772 or amplify the spirit and intent of the existing language in NCGS 163-45. Here is the text of Mrs. LaVere's email (in Black) sent to all election directors, statewide. My comments on behalf of thousands of trained poll observers across the state are annotated in red: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Good morning, all. This is a proposed committee substitute for H772 that is likely to be introduced when this bill is heard again in committee (not currently scheduled). (See below.) I believe we can all recognize that observers need clearer guidance than the present law provides - and that clarity would also help voters and election officials. (I could not agree more with this one statement. That is precisely why H772 was so important- 2700 precincts and 2700 different interpretations of standards for poll watching.) This alternative (bill) still gives observers rights to look closely at voting operations - BUT it set clear limits. Here are some key ways this alternative differs from the current iteration of H772: * Political parties can still recruit observers countywide and statewide, but instead of allowing up to 3 observers per party per site at any one time, as in H-772, the alternative sets the limit at 2 observers per party per site at any one time. (The provision for up to 3 partisan observers extends from interpretation of language in the current statute. While 3 observers from one party rarely occurs, there are occasions when it may be necessary for short periods, namely when an election violation is occurring and witnesses are needed. Also, at shift change incoming and outgoing poll observers may require a brief overlap for orientation purposes.) * The observer can move around, but not into the voting booth area as allowed in H-772. (H772 does not allow the poll observer to venture into the actual voting booth, or any closer than five feet from any voter. However, the language in this PCS could be used to prohibit the poll observer from observing activity in the voting booth area from an entrance way or remote area. Poll Observers must be able to watch for violations in the voting booth area at all sites. We have had numerous reports of violations in the voting booth area at polling sites and those violations need to be observed and reported.) * Subject to the physical limitation of the voting enclosure, the observer can observe the check-in process from 8 feet away, rather than 5 feet away as in H-772. (Clearly, this was written to prohibit poll observers from effective monitoring of the check in process. Eight feet separation is NEVER adequate. Current statutes allow the observer to hear the name and address of the voter, and eight feet is far too distant to perform that duty in the vast majority of polling places. The proposed five foot rule in H772 was derived from thousands of poll observer reports indicating the maximum distance at which observers could actually watch and listen for election violations without intimidating voters or viewing their ballot markings.) * The observer can observe tabulating machines, opening & closing poll tapes, emergency repairs, etc., but not with a camera as in H-772. (The present statute does not prohibit the use of cameras nor should cameras be prohibited. H772 has superb language addressing the proper and improper use of cameras- no voter or ballot may be photographed, but cameras should be allowed to capture violations of election site set-up, improper electioneering, and other violations at polling sites. Barring cameras from use prevents the gathering of evidence of elction malfeasance and damages voter confidence in election outcomes.) * The observer can report an election worker's alleged violation to the county board of elections for appropriate action, but it's not a criminal offense as in H-772. (This proposed change contradicts federal law. 18 US Code 245 clearly prohibits interference with poll watchers. Thus, this citation ought to be made known in NC statutes as well, as it is in H772. It is imperative that election officials are aware of the criminal nature of their interference with statutorily allowed poll observation activities.) * The observer can use an electronic device to take notes, but not for filming or audio recordings inside the poll, unlike H-772. (Again, poll observers must be free to record audio instructions or admonitions they are being given by election officials. Denial of that right allows an election official to abuse his authority over the polling site with impunity. This abuse is reported at dozens of sites in each election. State law allows the recording of conversations so long as one of the two parties is congizant the recording is being made.) * The election official can remove an observer for misconduct but needs to give them a warning first, as in H-772, unless the misconduct endangers voters' safety (like brandishing a gun) or security of the voting process (like tampering with machines) - these safety/security exceptions are not in H-772. (This is a misconstrued provision. The local Sheriff, Police Chief or other law enforcement official has the authority to respond to a report of dangerous or disruptive behavior at the polls. The Chief Judge has the authority to contact law enforcement and arrange for the removal. Election officials have no authority or right to order the removal of anyone without a warning until or unless law enforcement arrives. H772 merely establishes the need for warnings before ordering a poll observer from the site. The PCS language is superfluous.) * The law becomes effective Jan. 1, 2024, instead of immediately when it passes as in H-772. (The provisions of this law are easily taught and enforced within days of its passage. No reason to delay its implementation until the 2024 election cycle, as the provisions of H772 are already inferred in NCGS 163-45 already, just not as explicitly as in H772.) IN ADDITION, the State Board will turn these restrictions and rights into an online training video and a form that observers sign to indicate they understand; they present the signed form to the election official when they begin service. (Note- the North Carolina Election Integrity Team (NCEIT) teaches poll observers their duties in accordance with the entirety of NCGS 163. In fact, our organization trains and educates many election officials around the state. Feedback from election officials indicates NCEIT training is far more detailed and generally superior to what local boards of elections and the NCSBE provide to election workers around the state. There is no need for the NCSBE to specify that poll observers must sign a form attesting to their understanding of the NCSBE 's convenient interpretation of the law. There is no statutory requirement necessitating such a form and the NCSBE ought not burden itself with managing those forms and activity. They have enough to do already in meeting their statutory obligations.) Sara LaVere | Elections Director Brunswick County Board of Elections ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks in advance for your support for H772 in its present form. House Judiciary I provided a favorable report of the bill out of committee, without change, because it is a solid piece of legislation. The attached PCS would not improve it in any way. NCEIT is eager to see the current form of this bill get a vote on the House floor and cross over to the Senate, or for the provisions of H772 to be rolled into the House version of S747 now in the House Elections Committee. We sincerely need passage of these poll observer provisions. Warm Regards/ Jim Womack President, North Carolina Election Integrity Team www.nceit.org Tel. (919) 770-4783

Subject: Fwd: County elections board member send letter to NC legislators, more comments invited We're giving the Left heartburn. From Leftist Activist Bob Hall on meltdown over our Poll Observer bill, H772. He sent this to every BOE elections office in NC. 15 stupid Republicans signed on to this trash. There were 31 signers. Links for the letter and the article from WRAL are below. If these signers are from your county, you need to raise cain with your local GOP or Dem office. This is a breech o their oath to remain non-partisan while serving on the BOE. Their job is to make sure the election laws are enforced. Not to lobby for or against them. (Please note: As individuals, they have a 1st amendment right to their opinion. As BOE members, they have overstepped their bounds. Expose them!) Also signing: The 6 other incumbent EBA-NC executive board members and 25 of the longest serving members of county boards of elections. Rs in red. Ds in black. Alan Carpenter (D-Iredell County), first appointed 1993 Alice Malesky (R-Currituck County), first appointed 2013 Allen Langley (R-Cleveland County), Executive Board Member, Barry Cheney (D-Catawba County), first appointed 2009 d Member, Barry Cheney (D-Catawba County), first appointed 2009 Carlton Hawkins (D-Richmond County), first appointed 2008 Chip Futrell (D-Wilson County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC Courtney Patterson (D-Lenoir County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC David Hood (R-Catawba County), first appointed 1998 Florence Armstrong (D-Edgecombe County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC Hal Culberson (R-Scotland County), first appointed 2008 Inetta Knight (D-Tyrrell County), first appointed 1993 Jeffrey Smith (R-Yadkin County), first appointed 2013 Jonas Buff (D-McDowell County), first appointed 2013 Juanita Colvard (D-Graham County), first appointed 2007 Kelly Shore (D-Nash County), first appointed 2011 Laurie Heise (D-Chatham County), first appointed 2007 Lucinda Minges (R-Lenoir County), first appointed 2013 Luther Potts (R-Davie County), first appointed 2003 Lynn Day (R-Wilkes County), first appointed 2013 Martha Schronce (R-Alexander), first appointed 2013 Michele Aydlett (D-Pasquotank), first appointed 1993 Nancy Sharpe (R-Alexander County), first appointed 2005 Sheena Amos (R-Gaston County), first appointed 2013 Stuart Smith (R-Brunswick County), first appointed 2003 Tim Joines (R-Wilkes County), first appointed 2013 Tommy Pharo (R-Lenoir County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC Vivian Branch (D-Northampton County), first appointed 2012 William Newsome (D-Martin County), first appointed 1988 Yvonne Saul (R-Caswell County), first appointed 2001 Zeda Trice (D-Craven County), first appointed 2010 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Bob Hall Date: Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 8:55 PM Subject: County elections board member send letter to NC legislators, more comments invited To: CBOE members and directors Dear County Elections Board Member, I’m taking the liberty of sharing a couple items with those of you who I can reach via email before your board meeting on July 18. First, you may have heard that 32 long-serving Republican and Democratic county elections board members sent a letter to legislative leaders on Wednesday expressing their concerns about pending legislation in Raleigh. A WRAL-TV news story about the letter is here: https://www.wral.com/story/local-election-officials-say-proposed-nc-election-changes-would-be-disruptive/20954589/ And the letter is here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23875784-eba-nc-2023bills-julyletter#document/p1 Second, the Graham County Board of Elections used that letter as a basis to send their own letter to their local legislative delegation. That letter is attached. At the end of the WRAL news story, legislative leaders say they “welcome feedback from elections officials across the state.” Your county board may want to consider adopting a letter at the meeting on July 18 or discuss other ways to express your concerns about pending legislation. Some of you have already reached out to your legislators and it’s having an impact. It’s vitally important for them to hear the perspective and concerns of elections officials like you. Thank you, Bob Hall

https://www.wtpevents.org/so/26Oc9EA1d?languageTag=en&cid=e74c2a67-0425-4432-9512-0b47c8ed055e The LEGISLATORS have REJECTED most List Maintenance suggestions for this session. Please contact them ASAP! Grey.Mills@ncleg.gov; George.Cleveland@ncleg.gov; Dennis.Riddell@ncleg.gov; Warren.Daniel@ncleg.gov; Ralph.Hise@ncleg.gov; Paul.Newton@ncleg.gov; Tim.Moore@ncleg.gov; Phil.Berger@ncleg.gov URGE the legislators to REQUIRE the State Board of Elections to: IMPROVE their method to locate then correct or remove voters who don't have a valid residential address in the voter registration system. URGE the legislators to CHANGE the Voter Challenge Law: ADD a Challenge Reason to 163-85(c) "Grounds for Challenge": (10) The voter's stated residential address is not a residential address. WHY make these suggestions? There are voters who have ILLEGAL RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES in NC's voter registration system. The Boards of Elections need to determine where these voters, if indeed they're real people, actually reside. VOTER PHOTO ID... OPTIONAL?? Since there's an ID Exception Form for anyone who wants to use it, (which includes A NEW EXCUSE - "HECK, I DIDN'T KNOW I NEEDED TO SHOW A PHOTO ID"), no voters are required to show a Photo ID in North Carolina. Therefore, these invalid registrations can easily be used - or used again - to cast invalid ballots. EMAIL OR CALL: Issue: NCSBE Election System's Unsolved Problem with Mailbox Dwellers

ELECTIONS & PUBLIC INTEGRITY, LIBERTY WRAL Discovers Strange New Beasts Called “Election Observers” Observers Are Already an Established Part of the Election Process https://www.johnlocke.org/wral-discovers-strange-new-beasts-called-election-observers/?fbclid=IwAR0B655_bVcZo85dlLmBvMJLD8U7EyfYkXluE-5_LzKUPIZGPyjt8hRIo_c There have been some complaints about several election reform bills being considered in the General Assembly, including a bill on election observers. A Bill Clarifying What Election Observers Can and Cannot Do I recently noted how a bill in the General Assembly, House Bill 772, would help clarify what election observers can and cannot do in voting locations: Despite the importance of election observers, the law on their appointment and role in elections is overly broad and not always clear. Regulations from the North Carolina State Board of Elections (SBE) add more restrictions on their conduct but do nothing to clarify their rights or role in the election process. A bill moving through the General Assembly would provide that clarity… The bill would refine the space between allowing an observer to “make such observation … as the observer may desire” and ensuring the observer “shall in no manner impede the voting process” in current law. For example, the bill would spell out that observers can “move freely around the voting enclosure” but must remain “5 feet or greater” from registration or ballot tables, tabulation machines during voting, and vehicle compartments during curbside voting. It also would clarify that observers are “authorized to hear conversations between poll workers and voters” but reaffirm that they may not speak with voters… Even if the bill were to pass, there would still be a need for some local application and interpretation. For example, observers would have free reign in some of the larger, more cavernous voting locations, such as gyms and church fellowship halls. In contrast, they would have to work with officials on acceptable procedures for moving about some of the smaller precinct polling places. Does WRAL Know What Election Observers Are? But not everyone is convinced that election observer reform is a good thing or that election observers already exist. A recent opinion piece from WRAL includes this gem: [General Assembly leaders] believe voting sites should be chaotic madhouses where so-called “observers” wander freely to intimidate elections officials and look over their shoulders as voters fill their ballots. “So-called ‘observers?'” Why would the folks at WRAL use “so-called” for observers and put the word “observers” in scare quotes? That was not a one-off thing. They put “observers” in scare quotes again later in the piece. It is as if they believe HB 772 would create some strange new beast by that name. This may come as news to the folks at WRAL, but observers are not “so-called.” They are already enshrined by that name in law (G.S. § 163-45): The chair of each political party in the county shall have the right to designate two observers to attend each voting place at each primary and election… [emphasis added]. Those observers are already authorized to work in voting locations, and election officials are already required to “permit the observer to make such observation and take such notes as the observer may desire” as long as the observer does not “impede the voting process” or interfere with voters. The problem, as I previously noted, is that the details of what observers can and cannot do are only broadly defined in law. The State Board of Elections has been overly restrictive in its interpretation of the law and has even illegally suppressed observers, which is why HB 772 is a good idea. The rest of the WRAL piece is no better informed. About That Letter from Election Officials The supposed impetus for the WRAL piece was a letter from 32 of the state’s 500 county election board members, including the executive committee of the state election board association, to the General Assembly. The requests in the letter can mostly be boiled down to two things: We want power (in this case, to restrict election observers and pick county election staff). We want more money. Of course, election officials, like any other officials or individuals, will usually oppose bills granting them less power to make their own rules without outside interference. That is no different than bankers opposing banking regulations or city counselors opposing limits on the ability of municipalities to commit hostile annexations. It is just them doing their jobs. They will also, naturally, seek more money. That is just them doing their jobs. Legislators should consider input from election officials when passing election reforms, just as they should consider input from bankers when passing banking laws or from sheriffs when passing laws that affect their work. But those inputs must be balanced with the need for reform. HB 772 addresses just such a need for election observer reform. Sign up for our weekly newsletter to stay up to date on the latest h

Update needed on comment period to fix. https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/State_Board_Meeting_Docs/2023-06-27/Photo%20ID%20Exception%20Forms/Draft%20Photo%20ID%20Exception%20Form%20In-Person%2020230623.pdf

This is a comprehensive PRR seeking all public records for CTCL – The Center for Tech and Civil Life. Copy/Paste below into your email. Fill in the blanks with your county information. Copy/Paste into a 'clean' email. Send to your BOE local Director and cc all of the board members. We need an electronic trail. Keep track of it, as your other public records requests, and make sure you get a response. Save the response. We need these for evidence. Send to me, jane.bilello@gmail.com and to Ned Jones, ned@electionintegrity.network. Thanks. Jane ================================================================================== FROM: __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ TO: ______County Board of Elections ATTN: ___________, Director __________________________ __________________________ Date:________________ Pursuant to the North Carolina Freedom of Information Act, releasable under the provisions of NCGS 132-1, Public Records, I am requesting the following information. SUBJECT: Request for _________ County Correspondence with the Center for Tech and Civil Life (1 July 2022 through 31 the Present 2023) 1. This is a public records request seeking a digital copy of all correspondence, received by or transmitted from the ____ County Board of Elections, pertaining to the US Alliance for Election Excellence at the county or state level. This correspondence shall include all records of relevant communications between and among the US Alliance for Election Excellence and its subsidiaries, the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE), and any 501(c)3 organizations advertising or purporting to assist the _____ State or County Board of Elections with protection of election records, systems, or processes. 2. Subject materials of interest pertain to grants, scholarships, training assistance to the _____Board of Elections and the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE). 3. The period of interest for these records is from 1 July 2022 through the Present, 2023. 4. "Public records" shall mean all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data-processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions. 5. For any records found that are deemed non-releasable because of confidentiality or security restrictions, the County BOE’s response shall indicate the existence of those other records that are not releasable and identify all local officials who are authorized to review that documentation. 6. I am requesting this documentation be provided to me at no charge in an electronic format that is commonly machine readable (such as pdf, jpg, etc.) and in a common media form such as a thumb drive or DVD. Thank you. __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ Email: _____________________ Tel. _______________________ North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org

July 20, 2023 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/07/its-official-texas-resigns-democrat-operative-founded-eric/ It’s Official: Texas Resigns from Democrat Operative-founded ERIC Voter Registration System- 9 States Out – Only 23 Remain Today, Texas Director of Elections sent a letter on behalf of the Texas Secretary of State notifying the Electronic Registration Information Center, Inc. know that they were resigning from the ERIC system. In March, The Gateway Pundit reported that Missouri, Florida, and West Virginia also were withdrawing from ERIC joining Ohio, Louisiana, Alabama, Virginia, and Iowa. Read more here.https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/07/its-official-texas-resigns-democrat-operative-founded-eric/