ATLANTA — The office in charge of overseeing elections in Georgia is now at the center of an audit.
That office confirms to Channel 2 Action News that state auditors are looking into how the Secretary of State’s Office spent state and federal funds.
Key leaders spoke to Channel 2 investigative reporter Mark Winne about the audit Thursday and why it’s crucial for them to be transparent with the public.
With a target on Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger because of the 2020 election, his office said it is important to be transparent to keep voter confidence.
“At the end of the day, a lot of these projects were executed well and under budget and I think the public needs to hear that from us,” said Deputy Secretary of State Jordan Fuchs.
The state audit of 2020 election spending now underway is expected to be critical of how Raffensperger’s office did things.
“We have to do everything we can to make sure that we can restore that faith in the elections,” said Gabriel Sterling with the Secretary of State’s Office.
Officials say auditors have questioned the purchase of COVID-19 personal protective equipment for poll workers and voters, without following normal state procurement processes.
But the Secretary of State’s Office says it followed a state purchasing memo that allowed emergency purchases.
SOS officials say auditors have indicated they will question the reimbursement of business expenses where employees used personal credit cards.
RELATED STORIES:
- Secretary of state says he disagrees with some provisions of new election law, but mostly supportive
- Secretary of State’s office says election security top priority in Tuesday’s election
- Georgia Secretary of State opens investigation into Trump’s attempts to overturn election results
“These were all legitimate business expenses that were reimbursed through the normal approval chain,” Sterling said.
An official told Winne that the auditors are revisiting a controversy involving Sterling, who first went on unsubsidized leave, then resigned for a time so that a company he owned could serve as project manager for the new statewide voting system.
“This was the best way to get it done and frankly no one else would take the job at that point. The risk was too high, the pay was too low for them,” Sterling said.
The Secretary of State’s Office has revealed to Winne that a March 2020 document indicated that the state inspector general had looked into the arrangement and cited circumstances that “gave rise to the appearance of a conflict of interest.” However, the inspection ultimately did not find any fraudulent practices by Sterling or his business.
“We understand and are sympathetic to the short time period with which SOS must implement the voting systems; however we remind SOS that state policies and procedures must always be followed,” the document said.
The then-inspector general thanked SOS for “Their swift implementation of remedial measures.”
“Why couldn’t Sterling do this on his state salary?” Winne asked Fuchs.
“This project required his full attention. So, we went ahead and replaced him with another fella,” Fuchs said.
Secretary of State officials acknowledge the audit did turn up a $50 court reporter expense paid out of federal money when it should’ve been paid out of state money, and a $1,500 expense mistakenly reimbursed twice to Sterling for a “Secure the Vote Georgia” project, which Sterling paid back early in the audit process.
“It was related to a paperwork error,” Fuchs said.
An official with the Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts told Winne that this audit follows a routine request by the House Appropriations Committee.
She said her agency is non-partisan and works according to auditing standards with a focus on accountability, transparency and improving state government.
She told Winne that auditors do not comment on audit details before their work has concluded, and will let the finished product speak for itself.
RELATED NEWS:
This browser does not support the video element.