[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

# Re: Precinct IDs for Colorado

- To: <rcr@dieboldes.com>
- Subject: Re: Precinct IDs for Colorado
- From: "Talbot Iredale" <tiredale@dieboldes.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 10:26:04 -0700
- References: <OKEBJILPEGPGGFGBGOOMAEPGCDAA.fkglobal@earthlink.net>

    This issue has been raised again.

    Questions:

        1) Can we not just store this 10 digit precinct id as the precinct name?

        2) If not then where does this information need to be displayed and
    reported? We would like to use the TAG field for this an so would need to
    modify any place that needs to display/report this to include the TAG field.

    Tab

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Frank Kaplan" <fkglobal@earthlink.net>
    To: <rcr@dieboldes.com>
    Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:39 AM
    Subject: RE: Precinct IDs for Colorado

    > 1st digit to be Congressional District
    > 2nd and 3rd digits to be State Senate District (zero before #, if
    > applicable)
    > 4th and 5th digits to be State Rep District (again, zero, if applicable)
    > 6th and 7th digits to be County Code numbers from SOS
    > Last 3 digits to be precinct number (zeros, if applicable)
    > Any precinct split could be after a period in pct number.
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: owner-rcr@dieboldes.com [mailto:owner-rcr@dieboldes.com]On Behalf Of Jeffrey
    > W. Dean
    > Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 11:21 AM
    > To: 'rcr@dieboldes.com'
    > Subject: Precinct IDs for Colorado
    >
    >
    > The State of Colorado has amended their statues to require 10 digit
    precinct
    > identifiers.  This will cause an overflow of the current long integer data
    > type associated with PrecinctID and probably some report formatting
    > implications.  It must be ready before July 1, 2002.  The Colorado
    customers
    > use AVOS, AVTS and GEMS. Any FEC certification issues should be researched
    > by Larry Dix, e.g. is incremental by notice OK as opposed to functional
    > retest?  In addition to the development effort, sales should review
    existing
    > software maintenance agreeements with the Colorado customers and in the
    > absence of such, establish a price for this change (upgrade).  The
    Vancouver
    > development group has been faxed an explanation sheet for this new
    > requirement.
    >
    > Jeff Dean

- Prev by Date: Re: External Smart Card Reader Substitute Approval
- Next by Date: Replace scroll bar in the REVIEW BALLOT screen with NEXT and PREV buttons.
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread