2222 West Braker Lane Austin, Texas 78758 MAIN OFFICE 512.454.4816 TOLL-FREE 800.315.3876 FAX 512.323.0902 U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Right Division ADA Title II Complaint Date: September 3, 2020 Complainant:Disability Rights Texas and REV UP Respondents: Archer County, Texas Borden County, Texas Bowie County, Texas Brazoria County, Texas Brooks County, Texas Burnet County, Texas Camp County, Texas Carson County, Texas Castro County, Texas Cherokee County, Texas Cochran County, Texas Coke County, Texas Coleman County, Texas Colorado County, Texas Hale County, Texas Hall County, Texas Hamilton County, Texas Hansford County, Texas Hardeman County, Texas Hardin County, Texas Hartley County, Texas Hidalgo County, Texas Hudspeth County, Texas Hutchinson County, Texas Jasper County, Texas Jeff Davis County, Texas Jim Hogg County, Texas Jones County, Texas RE: Kaufman County, Texas Kenedy County, Texas Kimble County, Texas Kinney County, Texas Kleberg County, Texas Knox County, Texas La Salle County, Texas Lamar County, Texas Lamb County, Texas Lampasas County, Texas Leon County, Texas Lynn County, Texas Mason County, Texas McCulloch County, Texas McMullen County, Texas Medina County, Texas Midland County, Texas Milam County, Texas Mills County, Texas Montague County, Texas Morris County, Texas Motley County, Texas Navarro County, Texas Nolan County, Texas Ochiltree County, Texas Panola County, Texas Parker County, Texas Presidio County, Texas Rains County, Texas Reagan County, Texas Refugio County, Texas Rockwall County, Texas Runnels County, Texas Sabine County, Texas San Patricio County, Texas Scurry County, Texas Shackelford County, Texas Shelby County, Texas Sherman County, Texas Smith County, Texas Stephens County, Texas Sutton County, Texas Swisher County, Texas Taylor County, Texas Terrell County, Texas Throckmorton County, Texas Tom Green County, Texas Upshur County, Texas Upton County, Texas Van Zandt County, Texas Washington County, Texas Webb County, Texas Wheeler County, Texas Wilbarger County, Texas Wilson County, Texas Failure to provide accessible county election websites in violation of Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Systemic Complaint Summary This systemic complaint is being filed against several Texas counties who have failed to provide an accessible county election website in violation of Title II of the Americans with Protecting and Advocating the rights of Texans with disabilities – because all people have dignity and worth DisabilityRightsTx.org September 3, 2020 Page 2 of 9 Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“Section 504”). Despite Disability Rights Texas (“DRTx”) contacting these 83 counties and informing them of their website’s barriers to accessibility, asking them to develop a plan to address the accessibility problems, and offering to provide guidance on how to do this, these counties remain unresponsive. Since these counties have a currently inaccessible election website and also failed to respond to a request to provide a plan to address the inaccessibility problems, DRTx and REV UP file this Title II Department of Justice Complaint. DRTx is the federally-mandated protection and advocacy organization for people with disabilities in Texas. Its purpose is to protect and advocate for the legal and human rights of individuals with disabilities, and it is authorized to do so under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. §§ 15041, et seq.; Protection and Advocacy for Mentally Ill Individuals Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 10801, et seq.; and Protection and Advocacy for Individual Rights Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794e. In accordance with its federal mandate, DRTx has the authority, among other things, to pursue administrative, legal and other appropriate remedies to ensure the protection of rights of persons with disabilities. 29 U.S.C. § 794e (f)(3); 42 U.S.C. § 10805(a)(1)(B). REV UP is a non-partisan, statewide, collaborative organization that empowers, educates, and provides outreach to the disability community and its allies (family members, supporters, professionals, the public, and policy makers). These efforts focus upon accessibility of polling sites; the rights of people with disabilities in the voting process; inclusive voter registration; education on disability issues; and mobilization of the disability vote. Respondent and Contact Information The respondents are 83 Texas counties who ranked as “poor performing” in terms of website accessibility in DRTx’s website accessibility survey conducted between January 2019 and January 2020. The results of the survey were reported in a white paper report “Web Failures: How County Voting Websites Leave Voters with Disabilities in the Dark” published on July 9, 2020. The report is included with this complaint and is marked as Exhibit A. The following is the list of counties along with available contact information: Archer County Courthouse 100 S Center St. Archer City, TX 76351 Brooks County Courthouse 100 E Miller St Falfurrias, TX 78355 Borden County Courthouse 117 E Wassom Gail, TX 79738 Burnet County Courthouse 220 S. Pierce Street Burnet, TX 78611 Bowie County Courthouse 710 James Bowie Drive New Boston, TX 77515 Camp County Courthouse 126 Church Street, Room 303 Pittsburg, TX 75686 Brazoria County Courthouse 111 E Locust St # 102A Angleton, TX 77515 Carson County Courthouse 501 Main Street Panhandle, TX 79086 September 3, 2020 Page 3 of 9 Castro County Courthouse 100 E. Bedford, Room 111 Dimmitt, TX 79027 Hardin County Courthouse 300 W Monroe Street Kountze, TX 77625 Cherokee County Courthouse 135 S Main St 3rd floor Rusk, TX 75785 Hartley County Courthouse 900 Main St Channing, TX 79018 Cochran County Courthouse 100 N Main St #105 Morton, TX 79346 Hidalgo County Courthouse 100 E Cano St 2nd floor Edinburg, TX 78539 Coke County Courthouse 13 East 7th Robert Lee, TX 76945 Hudspeth County Courthouse PO Box 68 Sierra Blanca, TX 79851 Coleman County Courthouse 102 W Live Oak St. Coleman, TX 76834 Hutchinson County Courthouse 500 N Main St #214 Stinnett, TX 79083 Colorado County Courthouse 400 Spring St # 113 Columbus, TX 78934 Jasper County Courthouse 121 N. Austin, Rm 106 Jasper, TX 75951 Hale County Courthouse 500 Broadway, Room 200 Plainview, TX 79072 Jeff Davis County Courthouse P.O. Box 836, 100 Court Avenue Fort Davis, TX 79734 Hall County Courthouse 512 W Main St #4 Memphis, TX 79245 Jim Hogg County Courthouse 102 E Tilley St Hebbronville, TX 78361 Hamilton County Courthouse 102 N Rice Hamilton, TX 76531 Jones County Courthouse PO Box 148 Anson, TX 79501 Hansford County Courthouse 16 Northwest Court Spearman, TX 79081 Kaufman County Courthouse 100 W. Mulberry Kaufman, TX 75142 Hardeman County Courthouse P. O. Box 30 Quanah, TX 79252 Kenedy County Courthouse 151 N. Mallory Sarita, TX 78385 September 3, 2020 Page 4 of 9 Kimble County Courthouse 501 Main St Junction, TX 76849 McCulloch County Courthouse 199 Courthouse Square Brady, TX 76825 Kinney County Courthouse 501 S. Ann Street Bracketville, TX 78832 McMullen County Courthouse P.O. Box 237 Tilden, TX 78072 Kleberg County Courthouse 700 E Kleberg Ave Kingsville, TX 78363 Medina County Courthouse 1502 Avenue K, Rm. 201 Hondo, TX 78861 Knox County Courthouse P.O. Box 77 Benjamin, TX 79505 Midland County Courthouse 500 N. Loraine St., 11th Floor Midland, TX 79701 La Salle County Courthouse 101 Courthouse Square #315 Cotulla, TX 78014 Milam County Courthouse, 1st Floor 102 S Fannin Ave Cameron, TX 76520 Lamar County Courthouse 119 North Main Paris, TX 75460 Mills County Courthouse P.O. Box 483 Goldthwaite, TX 76844 Lamb County Courthouse 100 6th Drive, Rm 101 Littlefield, TX 79339 Montague County Courthouse P.O. Box 475 Montague, TX 76251 Lampasas County Courthouse 501 E 4th St, Suite 103 Lampasas, TX 76550 Morris County Courthouse 500 Broadnax, Suite B Daingerfield, TX 75638 Leon County Courthouse 130 E. St. Mary, P. O. Box 429 Centerville, TX 75833 Motley County Courthouse 701 Dundee, P.O. Box 719 Matador, TX 79244 Lynn County Courthouse 1501 S 1st St Tahoka, TX 79373 Navarro County Courthouse 300 W. 3rd Ave. Suite 102 Corsicana, TX 75110 Mason County Courthouse 201 Fort McKavett St Mason, TX 76856 Nolan County Courthouse 100 East Third, Suite 105 Sweetwater, TX 79556 September 3, 2020 Page 5 of 9 Ochiltree County Courthouse 511 S. Main Perryton, TX 79070 San Patricio County Courthouse 400 West Sinton Street #109 Sinton, TX 78387 Panola County Courthouse 110 S. Sycamore St., Room 216-A Carthage, TX 75663 Scurry County Courthouse 1806 25th Street Snyder, TX 79549 Parker County Courthouse 1 Courthouse Square Weatherford, TX 76086 Shackelford County Courthouse PO Box 2797 Albany, TX 76430 Polk County Courthouse 101 W. Church St., Ste. 300 Livingston, TX 77351 Shelby County Courthouse 200 San Augustine Box 6 Center, TX 75935 Presidio County Courthouse P.O. Box 606 Marfa, TX 79843 Sherman County Courthouse P.O. Box 165 Stratford, TX 79084 Rains County Courthouse 167 E. Quitman Street Ste. 102 Emory, TX 75440 Smith County Courthouse 200 E. Ferguson St., Suite 100 Tyler, TX 75702 Reagan County Courthouse P.O. Box 100 Big Lake, TX 76932 Stephens County Courthouse 200 West Walker Breckenridge, TX 76424 Refugio County Courthouse 808 Commerce Street, Room 104 Refugio, TX 78377 Sutton County Courthouse P.O. Box 1212 Sonora, TX 76950 Rockwall County Courthouse 101 E. Rusk St., Ste 201 Rockwall, TX 75087 Swisher County Courthouse 119 South Maxwell Tulia, TX 79088 Runnels County Courthouse 613 Hutchings Ave., Room 103 Ballinger, TX 76821 Taylor County Courthouse 300 Oak St., Ste. 200 Abilene, TX 79602 Sabine County Courthouse 201 Main Street - PO Box 716 Hemphill, TX 75948 Terrell County Courthouse 105 East Hackberry Sanderson, TX 79848 September 3, 2020 Page 6 of 9 Throckmorton County Courthouse 105 N. Minter Throckmorton, TX 76483 Washington County Courthouse 100 E. Main, Ste. 104 Brenham, TX 77833 Tom Green County Courthouse 113 W Beauregard San Angelo, TX 76901 Webb County Courthouse 1000 Houston, 3rd Floor Laredo, TX 78040 Upshur County Courthouse, 3rd Floor PO Box 730 Gilmer, TX 75644 Wheeler County Courthouse 401 S Main St Wheeler, TX 79096 Upton County Courthouse P.O. Box 482 Rankin, TX 79778 Wilbarger County Courthouse 1700 Wilbarger Street Room 12 Vernon, TX 76384 Van Zandt County Courthouse 121 E. Dallas St., Suite 206 Canton, TX 75103 Wilson County Courthouse 1420 3rd St. Ste. 101 Floresville, TX 78114 Systemic Complaint Facts Between January 2019 and January 2020, DRTx surveyed the county voting websites of all Texas counties to determine the accessibility of the website to people with visual impairments who use screen reading software. At the conclusion of the review, DRTx compiled a report about the accessibility of Texas county voting websites. The survey and report had four primary goals: 1. Explain the critical importance of website accessibility to voters with disabilities in Texas; 2. Explain the counties’ legal obligation to provide accessible websites; 3. Determine the current state of county election website accessibility; and 4. Direct counties to improve the accessibility of their election websites to voters with disabilities. The survey looked at several key elements of website accessibility, guided by Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). WCAG provides guidelines for how to achieve website accessibility. According to WCAG, website content must be: A. Perceivable - This relates to helping people to see and hear web content whether in a browser or using a screen reader or other assistive technologies; B. Operable - Providing web users with disabilities the ability to interact with website content using a keyboard, mouse or other helping device; C. Understandable - Meaning the content is clear; and D. Robust - Meaning the web content can be accessed by a wide range of technologies. September 3, 2020 Page 7 of 9 These guidelines are issued by the Web Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium. Using WCAG as a guide, DRTx developed its own tool to gauge website accessibility for people who have visual impairments and use screen reading software. Our survey revealed that the named county voting websites lack both critical voting information and accessible features, which results in people with disabilities failing to receive the same voting information that people without disabilities receive. As our report explains, websites must be designed in a way to make sure people with disabilities, including visual impairments, can access them. Many people with visual impairments use screen-reading technology to access web content and websites must be designed in a way to be accessible to those voters who use screen-readers. County voting websites contain critical information for voters, including polling locations and hours. In light of COVID-19 and changing voter information, it is now especially important that all voters have equal access to voting information on county voting websites. But the named counties’ voting websites are not designed in a way to be accessible to blind users. This means blind website users do not have equal access to the website or the voting information. This is a violation of Title II of the ADA and Section 504. DRTx contacted the county judge of each named county regarding our survey and report. We provided a copy of the report and the county’s individualized results from our website assessment. We told the county that the website was not accessible and requested that they respond. We provided a deadline for a response. For the response, we simply asked that the county provide us with acknowledgment of the letter and let us know the steps the county was going to take to ensure future appropriate and compliant website information, including when these improvements would be completed. The deadline to provide a response was August 7, 2020. DRTx has not received any form of communication from the named counties. Given that these counties’ election websites are currently inaccessible to blind users and the counties have no apparent plan to improve their websites, DRTx and REV UP are seeking enforcement through the Department of Justice’s ADA complaint process. Specific County Examples Although this systemic complaint is against all 83 counties in Texas without an accessible election website, here are a few particularly egregious examples of ADA Title II and Section 504 accessibility violations: 1. Webb County has been on the radar of voting rights groups for many years. This office has a sullied history of dealing with lawsuits; has recently begun to publicize their ‘new’ institution of curbside voting, and recently caught our attention due to a lack of website inaccessibility. On January 21, 2020 inspection, DRTx staff found a large number of accessibility barriers and noted that “this county website provides no voting information other than notices and sample ballots in PDF format”. The website had nine different links to inaccessible PDF documents, and some of these documents included critical information on polling site locations, which means blind voters were unable to access the most critical information. Another outstanding barrier was the lack of alternative text or captioning for a video and two pictures on the main webpage. This website did not meet any of the WCAG guidelines found in Perceivable, Keyboard Accessible, Understandable, and Robust sections. September 3, 2020 Page 8 of 9 2. Another county that has a history with the Department of Justice and has failed to provide website accessibility to its citizens is Nueces County. DRTx has a history of working with the Nueces County elections office to assist them with fixing ADA non-compliant polling sites. The office, however, has been generally non-responsive to our follow up contacts in regards to fixing reported barriers. On October 29, 2019 our staff reviewed the Nueces County elections website and found the website as “providing notices and sample ballots in PDF, and redirecting users to votetx.gov for all other information. Additionally, the heading style of the page and lack of viable navigation makes it a difficult page to navigate” with screen reader technology. Upon further inspection, it was noted that there were close to 222 errors; 219 of those errors were empty headings. This website did not meet any of the WCAG guidelines found in Perceivable, Keyboard Accessible, Understandable, and Robust sections. 3. Hardin County is in southeast Texas and has a population of 57, 602. Of that population close to 39,000 individuals are registered to vote. On September 11, 2019, DRTx staff surveyed the Hardin County elections website and summarized their findings as “provides a single page information, providing only polling place locations in a badly formatted list with headings for each item and contact information.” There appears to be eleven total accessibility errors (three images missing alternative text, eight empty headings) and ten PDF links. This website did not meet any of the WCAG guidelines found in Perceivable, Keyboard Accessible, Understandable, and Robust selections. ADA Title II and Section 504 Claims The ADA (42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq.) is a comprehensive civil rights law enacted to provide “a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination” against individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(1). Individuals who are blind and cannot access the websites their county election office are being discriminated on the basis of disability and are missing out on critical voter information that is offered to sighted individuals. Title II of the ADA applies to any “public entity,” 42 U.S.C. § 12132, which is defined to include any state or local government, and any of their departments, agencies, or instrumentalities. 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1). County election offices fall under the public entity provision of the ADA. Title II also provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132. As a program or activity of a state or local entity, county election websites are covered by Title II of the ADA and thus, cannot exclude people with disabilities. The ADA prohibits state and local governments from discriminating against people with disabilities. Counties may not “deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service” and may not “afford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from an aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others.” C.F.R. 28 § 35.130(b)(ii) and (iii). Further, Title II of the ADA requires public entities to take appropriate steps to ensure that communication with people with disabilities is as effective as communication with others.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a)(1). These provisions require making county websites accessible so that individuals with disabilities can access them in the same manner as individuals without disabilities. September 3, 2020 Page 9 of 9 Courts have ordered accessible voting websites in various ADA litigation. See Hindel v. Husted, No. 2:15-CV-3061, 2017 WL 432839 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 1, 2017); Eason v. New York State Board of Elections, No. 16-CV-4292 (KBF), 2017 WL 6514837 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2017). Likewise, Section 504 requires that entities receiving federal funding (including counties and state governments) ensure equal access to their programs and activities. 29 U.S.C. § 794, et seq. This provision also requires county voting websites be accessible to users with disabilities. Conclusion We respectfully request that the Department of Justice investigate this case of disability discrimination and denial of reasonable accommodation claim. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any further questions or need any further information regarding this complaint, please contact me at 512-407-2762 or ldavis@drtx.org. Respectfully, /s/ Lia S. Davis Lia S. Davis Senior Attorney Disability Rights Texas 2222 West Braker Lane Austin, Texas 78758 512-407-2763, direct 512-454-3999, fax ldavis@drtx.org Exhibit A Web Failures: How County Voting Websites Leave Voters with Disabilities in the Dark An Accessibility Review of Texas County Election Websites by Disability Rights Texas July 10, 2020 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1 About Disability Rights Texas and the PAVA Program.............................1 Voting Access for People with Disabilities ................................................2 Purposes of Our Review ..........................................................................2 WHAT IS WEBSITE ACCESSIBLITY? .......................................................3 Importance of Website Accessibility to People with Disabilities................4 Importance of Accessible County Voting Websites ..................................5 Guidelines for Website Accessibility.........................................................7 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR WEBSITE ACCESSIBLITY.......................9 Requirements under the ADA ..................................................................9 Requirements under Section 508...........................................................10 Requirements under Texas Election Code .............................................10 ACCESSIBILITY EVALUATIONS—METHODS AND RESULTS ..............11 CESAR Survey Tool...............................................................................11 Reviewers Included People with Disabilities...........................................12 Summary of Survey Results...................................................................12 RESULTS .................................................................................................13 Top Counties:.........................................................................................13 Mid-Range Counties: .............................................................................14 Most Counties Failed to Achieve a Score Above 50%............................14 RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................15 Survey Review .......................................................................................16 Website Audit.........................................................................................16 Website Accessibility Plan and Policies .................................................16 Policies and Procedures ........................................................................17 Redesign with Accessibility in Mind........................................................17 Staff Training..........................................................................................17 Periodic User Testing.............................................................................17 Online Notice .........................................................................................18 Color and Font Settings .........................................................................18 Audio Descriptions and Captions ...........................................................18 Forms and Tables ..................................................................................18 PDF Documents.....................................................................................19 Alternative Ways to Access Information .................................................19 CONCLUSION..........................................................................................19 APPENDIX ...............................................................................................20 County Election Website Accessibility Scores Overview ........................20 Accessibility Resources .........................................................................21 County Website Scores..........................................................................23 Web Failures: How County Voting Websites Leave Voters with Disabilities in the Dark INTRODUCTION About Disability Rights Texas and the PAVA Program Disability Rights Texas (DRTx) is Texas’ designated Protection and Advocacy agency. We provide a wide range of services for people with disabilities, including training, education, and direct legal advocacy. One of the programs administered by DRTx is the Protection and Advocacy for Voting Access (PAVA) program 1. The PAVA program is funded under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) grant which was established following the 2000 Presidential election and signed into law in October 2002. HAVA mandates that persons with disabilities be given full access to the polls and to private ballots. The goal of PAVA is to ensure full participation in all aspects of the voting process for people with disabilities, including registering to vote, casting ballots, and accessing polling places. Separately, DRTx litigates cases against entities for failing to provide equal access to individuals with disabilities, including litigating cases against state and county governments that fail to provide equal access to voting. 1 42 USC §15461-62, P.L. 107-252 1 Voting Access for People with Disabilities Access to the voting process is a fundamental right. However, voters with disabilities experience greater barriers to voting than the rest of the population. People with disabilities experience challenges with voting because of barriers in transportation, communication, physical access, or registration. Counties must ease some of these barriers by maximizing voter information online. Counties need to ensure their voting websites are both accessible and contain appropriate voter information. Between January 2019 and January 2020, DRTx conducted an extensive review of county election websites to evaluate them for content and accessibility. We wanted to measure how effectively counties are ensuring equal participation in the voting process to their voters with disabilities. We learned that while some Texas counties were performing well, the great majority of them were failing to provide equal access to voters with disabilities, effectively shutting them out of civic participation. Purposes of Our Review This website review was conducted from January 2019 through January 2020. The primary purposes of the review were: 1. Explain the critical importance of website accessibility to voters with disabilities in Texas; 2. Explain the counties’ legal obligation to provide accessible websites; 3. Determine the current state of county election website accessibility; and 4. Direct counties to improve the accessibility of their election websites to voters with disabilities. 2 In March 2020, there were 16,211,198 registered voters in Texas. An estimated 1.2 million of these voters have a disability. Voters with disabilities, just like voters without disabilities, often have questions about election information (e.g. where to vote, who the candidates are, how to register, etc.). Given the ease and efficiency of using the internet, many voters turn to county election websites to research information about voting and elections. According to the U.S. Census, nearly 80% of Texas homes (approximately 8.7 million) have an internet subscription. 2 Disability Rights Texas receives numerous inquiries from state and county election officials as well as private citizens regarding the accessibility status of voting websites. We have received complaints against counties that have generally inaccessible websites; complaints that PDF sample ballots and other documents are not readable; complaints that some county websites are not using person first language; whether there are any screen readers that will read banners; if a particular icon would be accessible for screen readers; and what is the most disability-friendly/comprehensive language to use on a website. These questions illustrate that there is both a deficit of accessible websites and guidance on how to resolve the inaccessibility issues. These barriers need to be addressed so that the disability community of Texas may exercise their right to access voting information and participate in civic engagement. WHAT IS WEBSITE ACCESSIBLITY? Website accessibility refers to the websites, tools, and technologies designed and developed so people with disabilities can use them. These tools allow people to US Census webpage, percentages of homes with internet URL: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/TX,US/DIS010218 2 3 understand, navigate, perceive, contribute, and interact with the web and encompasses all disabilities that affect access to the web (i.e., cognitive, auditory, visual, physical, speech, and neurological). 3 Importance of Website Accessibility to People with Disabilities In short, website accessibility means making the internet accessible to people with disabilities. The internet has the capacity to serve as an equalizer, giving everyone access to the same information at the same time. But in order for the internet to be this type of equalizer, websites must be accessible to all users, including those with disabilities. The internet is a critical resource in our society for education, employment, health care, commerce and recreation. If a website is not accessible, it excludes individuals with disabilities from accessing the same opportunities as others. Just as physical access is required for people to have equal access to public and private spaces, web access is required for people with disabilities to access the internet. Furthermore, the internet provides an opportunity for people with disabilities to engage and interact with society in a way that may be more difficult or impossible to do in-person. Websites can provide information to everyone, not just people with disabilities, in a more efficient and clear way. As an example, a county website can provide information about voting, including polling locations, and individuals may access this information from anywhere in the world at any time of day. This is more efficient than posting the information on a bulletin board in a county building which would not Web Accessibility Initiative: Introduction to Website Accessibility URL: https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/ 3 4 only be difficult to access for everyone, it could also be impossible for certain people with disabilities to access at all. Importance of Accessible County Voting Websites The importance of accessible county voting websites has become especially relevant in light of COVID-19. Websites are more important than ever given the everchanging and new information regarding voting under COVID-19. Among these changes, election days have been rescheduled and polling locations have been moved. In addition, accessing information online allows people to practice social distancing. This is especially important for those who are at particular risk of COVID-19. Now more than ever, it is critical that websites be accessible so that everyone can access the most current information about voting in their county. Web accessibility impacts people with all types of disabilities, which is one of the reasons why it is so critical that counties ensure their websites are accessible. These disabilities include: visual, cognitive, reading comprehension, auditory, physical, and speech. Examples of the way in which users with various disabilities may use a website include: • A website user who is blind will typically rely on screen reader software to access the information on a webpage. The screen reader software reads the information on the page aloud so that the user can hear the information provided. When accessing web content, the screen reader outputs information from the web page in an audio format, including headings, links, lists, and tables. This makes the web page easier to navigate. If a website is not designed properly, then the 5 information will not be read aloud and the user will not be able to access it. The user may also get “stuck” on the page if the screen reader has nowhere to move or read as a result of inaccessible web design. • A website user with low vision (limited vision) may use a screen magnification software to enlarge the images and text on the screen. Essentially, the software zooms in on text or images to make it large enough to be readable to the user, but if the website is not properly designed, it can be difficult or impossible to find the content on the page once zoomed in. • A website user with limited use of his or her arms, hands, or fingers will typically require that a website be navigable via the use of keyboard commands instead of a mouse. Web forms should have keyboard equivalents, and content should be able to be skipped or navigated without using too many keyboard commands. • A website user who is deaf will typically require captioned or ASL interpreted audio content. This would allow someone who is deaf to access the same information as a hearing person, just in a different format. • A website user with a cognitive or learning disability may require various web access tools. Website language should be simple and straightforward and the website layout should be consistently organized to aid in navigation. Further, graphics can help make the website easier to navigate for individuals with cognitive, learning, or reading disabilities. In order to make its website accessible, a county must consider web accessibility from the beginning. This means accessibility should be considered as the county is building or making changes to its voting website. Making a website accessible does not 6 have to be costly and should be done when the county is creating the website content. Nevertheless, there are many options to make a website retroactively accessible if it was not initially created with accessibility in mind. Guidelines for Website Accessibility Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) provide guidelines for how to achieve website accessibility. These guidelines are issued by the Web Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium. According to WCAG, web content must be: A. Perceivable - This relates to helping people to see and hear web content whether in a browser or using a screen reader or other assistive technologies; B. Operable - Providing web users with disabilities the ability to interact with website content using a keyboard, mouse or other helping device; C. Understandable - Meaning the content is clear; and D. Robust - Meaning the web content can be accessed by a wide range of technologies. The most current version is WCAG Level 2.1 AAA and provides guidance on website creation. The following guidelines are general best practice guidelines for website accessibility, but also contain more specific guidance taken directly from WCAG Level 2.1 AAA. • Including alternative text to describe non-textual content, such as images, which is required for effective screen reading; 7 • Structuring documents so they can be easily navigated both by keyboard and mouse; • Using the proper markup for tables so that screen readers can understand them • and forms must be properly coded to be read by screen readers; • Making it easy for people to fill out forms and understand them by including the correct labels for all form elements; • Using links that make sense and are descriptive (in other words avoiding links that are only labeled "click here"); • Avoid using spatial descriptions for navigation. For example, do not say, “click to your right” • Structuring pages so users can easily move around the screen; • Avoid posting scanned documents as many scanned documents are impossible to read using a screen reader; • Be cautious with dynamic content (content that changes based on the behavior, preferences, and interests of the web user) as much of it may not be readable by screen readers; • Caption all videos or audio content; • Making sure that the page design does not rely on color for meaning, and use high color contrasts for users with visual impairments; • Keeping content clear and easy to understand and displayed using easy read fonts and appropriate heading styles; and • Using semantic markup to identify different content elements4. Semantic markup: a type of code used to convey the meaning of a webpage, rather than just a description of appearance. This makes it easier to distinguish between different types of data. 4 8 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR WEBSITE ACCESSIBLITY Requirements under the ADA Not only is web accessibility the right thing to do from an inclusivity perspective, it is also required by anti-discrimination laws. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits state and local governments from discriminating against people with disabilities. Counties may not “deny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service” and may not “afford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from an aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others.”5 Further, Title II of the ADA requires public entities to take appropriate steps to ensure that communication with people with disabilities is as effective as communication with others. 6 These provisions require making county websites accessible so that individuals with disabilities can access them in the same manner as individuals without disabilities. 7 Likewise, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“Section 504”) requires that entities receiving federal funding (including counties and state governments) ensure equal access to their programs and activities. 8 This provision also requires county voting websites be accessible to users with disabilities. C.F.R. 28 § 35.130(b)(ii) and (iii) 28 CFR §§ 35.130, 35.160 (a)(1) 7 Courts have ordered accessible voting websites in various ADA litigation. See Hindel v. Husted, No. 2:15-CV-3061, 2017 WL 432839 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 1, 2017); Eason v. New York State Board of Elections, No. 16-CV-4292 (KBF), 2017 WL 6514837 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2017). 8 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq 5 6 9 Requirements under Section 508 Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 508) provides requirements for website accessibility for federal programs. This provision was first developed in 1998 and includes 16 standards for web-based information and applications. Given that Section 508 was introduced at a time when websites were less complex than they are now, Section 508 accessibility is not comprehensive. A website can be Section 508 compliant but still partially inaccessible. Section 508 is currently being updated to reflect the most current accessibility standards. Nevertheless, Section 508 can still be a useful tool for gauging website accessibility which we discuss later in this paper. Requirements under Texas Election Code The Texas Election Code has various statutory requirements regarding the election information counties are required to post. Among other things, counties are required to post on their election website, the locations of each polling site at least 21 days before an election. 9 Our survey included an evaluation of the county’s compliance with this provision of the Texas Election Code. 10 DRTx regularly litigates cases against entities for ADA and Section 504 violations. Failure to provide equal access to individuals with disabilities is illegal, unacceptable and unconscionable, especially since achieving equal access in the Texas Election Code § 4.003(b) For additional information about the adequacy of the general voting information contained on county voting websites, see The League of Women Voters of Texas 2020 Texas Primary County Election Website Review. URL: https://tinyurl.com/LWVT2020WebReview 9 10 10 context of websites is a straightforward task. Counties must take steps to comply with applicable anti-discrimination laws. ACCESSIBILITY EVALUATIONS—METHODS AND RESULTS During the time period of January 2019-January 2020, the Disability Rights Texas PAVA team evaluated all 254 county websites to determine if there is specific elections department information for each county, if that information was accessible (via screen reader), and if any disability-specific information was provided. CESAR Survey Tool The team used a survey tool based upon the WCAG 2.0 and Section 508 guidelines. We surveyed the four sections of web content plus a fifth section focusing on “voter information.” The “voter information” section focused on the website providing information on mail-in-ballots, curbside voting, sample ballots, ability to use an American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter, and what type of accommodation tools were available for the voter. We conducted an evaluation of each county website using an assessment tool we created called the Comprehensive Elections Site Accessibility Rater (CESAR). CESAR assesses key pieces of information on county election websites. It assesses both accessibility of the website’s content and the content itself. We checked the election websites to ensure compliance with WCAG 2.0 and Section 508 web accessibility standards, and also the new Texas Election Code requirements that mandate the election information (including polling location) are provided on the 11 county’s website. CESAR uses a scale between 0 to 67 points, later scaled to a percentage, to grade each site on its accessibility and voting information provided. Reviewers Included People with Disabilities Multiple people with various abilities of vision, dexterity, technical awareness, etc., reviewed the county websites. To assist those with visual impairments, testers used Job Access with Speech (JAWS) 2019. JAWS is a software program that enables a blind or visually impaired user to read the text on the computer screen with a speech synthesizer or braille display. We conducted assessments of each county’s actual election-related website. We did not evaluate the county’s home page, though we often had to navigate from the county’s home page to the county’s election page. Summary of Survey Results Through our evaluations, we found websites of every level of compliance. Some websites met all of the accessibility standards and also provided appropriate amounts of disability related voter information. But the majority of websites failed to achieve any level of accessibility, effectively shutting the door on voters with disabilities seeking the same access as voters without disabilities. Some website links were no longer valid, and instead the county sponsored websites redirected to the Facebook accounts of county election departments. Some of the county websites were simply non-existent. These evaluations revealed that county election websites across Texas are rampantly discriminating against people with disabilities by failing to provide accessible websites. 12 The scoring results ranged from zero to ninety-two. For a full explanation of the scoring schematic, please email a request to our voting rights staff at vote@drtx.org. For a county to score above 90 percent, its website must have included all election related information for voters (sample ballots, 11 curbside voting, 12 ballot-bymail, 13 right to interpreters, 14 and use of voting machine auxiliaries 15) in a fully accessible manner according to our score. Scores of mid-to-high percentages of 80 required meeting satisfaction in all four areas of the survey and including a majority of the voter information section. RESULTS Top Counties: The ten counties that scored highest on the assessment were Cameron (92%), Gray (89%), Harris (84%), Hays (87%), Houston (83%), Lavaca (83%), McLennan (89%), Moore (84%), Orange (83%), Tarrant (86%), and Travis (92%). A closer study of the top ten county websites revealed certain commonalities in the types of information offered and level of website accessibility. With the exception of Sample ballots are sample paper or electronic copies of the ballot the voter will be eligible to cast. A voter with a disability can request curbside voting. Curbside voting is required to be available at each polling location. Each polling site should have a mobile voting station that can be moved outside to allow a voter with a disability to vote curbside from their car or the sidewalk. 13 Ballot-by-mail provides mail-in voting for people with disabilities, people over 65, and people who will be out of the county during voting. 14 The right to interpreters gives people who are deaf or hard of hearing the right to request sign language interpreters at the polling site if needed for effective communication. 15 Voting machine auxiliaries are any sort of aid or device that assists a voter with a disability to vote using the voting machine. 11 12 13 two to three counties scoring “not applicable” and “supports with exceptions,” all ten counties supported the sections of Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. Regarding the Voter Information section, all ten counties had a text file for their election website; a text file mentioning a sample ballot (even if the sample ballot itself was not fully accessible); and information on Ballot-By-Mail. Eight out of the ten county websites had information about disability exemption of voter ID, and links to the Secretary of State’s website at votetexas.gov/. Seven out of ten county websites mentioned a voter’s right to interpreters, use of headphones, and curbside voting. Six out of the ten counties had information posted about the right to use and availability of an accessible voting machine, or as they are also known, a Digital Recording Device (DRE). Mid-Range Counties: Thirteen counties scored within the 51-75% range and 33 counties scored within the 75-100% range. While these county websites still need a lot of work to achieve improved accessibility, they fared better than the majority of counties in Texas. Most Counties Failed to Achieve a Score Above 50% We found 56 Texas counties that earned a score of zero - meaning there is no website at all. Further breakdown of the accessible website evaluation found that 104 counties scored within a range of 1-25%. 35 counties scored within the 26-50% range. In summary, what our assessment discovered is that close to 200 of Texas’ 254 counties did not meet the standards that are required to achieve equal access and website accessibility. That means nearly 200 counties are denying voters with 14 disabilities an equal chance to learn voting information so that they can exercise their voting rights. Of the 139 counties that scored between 1 and 50 percent, only seven to nine counties registered any form of support for the P1-P4 sections of the assessment. This further shows that only about 130 counties, more than half of all Texas counties, met very little of the accessibility guidelines listed on our check sheet. Given the huge number and such pervasive lack of accessibility, it is nearly impossible to list all of the deficiencies found within all 130 counties. We can report that none of the counties provided information about voting machine accessories (sip-andpuff devices, jellies) and the general accessibility features of the county’s chosen voting machine. For a comprehensive list of the website accessibility scoring schematic, the website information reviewed in our survey, or the itemized results for individual counties, please email our voting rights staff at vote@drtx.org. RECOMMENDATIONS Since 2020 is an election year, we conducted this study to highlight the urgent need for full website accessibility for all voters in Texas, including those with disabilities. The COVID-19 pandemic has made this need even more urgent as Texans with disabilities are relying on web-based information now more than ever. County leadership across Texas must act now to achieve fully accessible online information prior to elections in November. Counties should immediately begin web 15 accessibility improvements by using several free or low-cost online tools to assist with checking a website’s accessibility. 16 Specifically, DRTx strongly urges that counties take the following measures by September 1, 2020 in anticipation of the November 2020 election: Survey Review Counties must immediately review the complete results of the survey of their county website and remove any and all current online barriers to accessibility. Website Audit Counties must complete a thorough audit of existing online content and functionality by an auditor who has the requisite knowledge and experience to audit content and functionality. The audit should identify barriers to access on the existing website for people with disabilities. Website Accessibility Plan and Policies Counties must develop a plan for the improvement and maintenance of accessibility of their websites. This plan should include a designated person or group of people responsible for the accessibility of the website, and policies and procedures ensuring that all newly added or modified online content and functionality will be accessible to people with disabilities. National Council on Independent Living, Achieving Accessibility for Election Websites and Sample Ballots: A Toolkit for Disability Advocates 16 URL: https://ncil.org/votingrights/sample-ballot-toolkit/ 16 Policies and Procedures Counties must adopt policies and procedures to ensure that all newly added or modified online content and functionality will be accessible to people with disabilities. Redesign with Accessibility in Mind Counties planning to undergo a website redesign must do so with accessibility in mind. This includes ensuring that a text-only mode is available. Website redesign often includes planning for responsive design. Having responsive design means that the website will accommodate different website templates, different technologies (including computers, smart phones and tablets), and that content and functions available using one of the technologies are also available on the other types. Staff Training Counties must also incorporate in their planning a means of ensuring that inhouse staff and contractors responsible for web page and content development are properly trained on accessibility requirements. Periodic User Testing Counties should regularly enlist the help of disability groups to test web pages for accessibility compliance and use the feedback they provide to increase the accessibility of their websites. If requested, DRTx will advise counties of the documented errors found on their website(s) during our assessment. 17 Online Notice Counties must provide a way for voters to request information about website content that is currently inaccessible by posting a telephone number or email address on their home page. They should also establish procedures that ensure a quick response to users with disabilities who are trying to obtain information or services in this way. Color and Font Settings A county’s website design should allow the person accessing the website to view it in the color and font sizes the viewer chooses. Voters with low vision must be able to specify the text and background colors as well as the font sizes needed to see webpage content. Audio Descriptions and Captions Videos must incorporate features that make them accessible to everyone. Websites should provide audio descriptions of images (including changes in setting, gestures, and other details) to make videos accessible to people who are blind or have low vision. Text captions should be synchronized with the video images to make videos and audio tracks accessible to people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Forms and Tables If a county website contains online forms and tables, counties must make those elements accessible by labeling each control (including buttons, check boxes, dropdown menus, and text fields) with a descriptive HTML tag. 18 PDF Documents If a county website uses Portable Document Format (PDF), or other image-based formats, the county should also post the document in an alternative text-based format, such as HTML or RTF (Rich Text Format), in addition to PDF. Text-based formats are the most compatible with assistive technologies. Alternative Ways to Access Information Counties must ensure that there are alternative ways for people with disabilities to access the information and services that are provided on its website. Some voters may not have, or be able to use a computer or have access to the internet. CONCLUSION Texas is facing unprecedented challenges during the 2020 election cycle. Providing equal access and opportunity to the voting process is a fundamental right of all citizens, protected by the laws of our country and state. The measures outlined in this report will help ensure that voters with disabilities have access to the same voting information to which all other Texans have access. Voters in Texas with disabilities demand that their vote be counted and need to be heard like any other voter in Texas. Texas county election officials must act urgently and step up on behalf of all voters with disabilities to ensure that their vote and their voice will be heard in 2020 and beyond. 19 APPENDIX Number of Counties in this Range County Election Website Accessibility Scores Overview County Election Website Breakout by Accessibility Score Ranges 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 104 - 43% 59 - 24% 35 - 14% 33 - 14% 13 - 5% 0% 1-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100% Percentage Compliance Score Ranges Data table for preceeding chart: County Election Website Score Percentage 0% 1-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100% Number of Counties Scoring in this Range 59 104 35 13 33 Percentage of Counties in this Score Range 24% 43% 14% 5% 14% 20 Accessibility Resources 1. National Council on Independent Living (NCIL), Achieving Accessibility for Election Websites and Sample Ballots: A Toolkit for Disability Advocates URL: https://ncil.org/votingrights/sample-ballot-toolkit/ 2. National Federation for the Blind, Center of Excellence in Non-Visual Access URL: https://www.nfb.org/programs-services/center-excellencenonvisual-access A concentrated center of expertise, best practices, and resources that enables businesses, government, and educational institutions to more effectively provide accessible information and services to the blind community. 3. WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool URL: https://wave.webaim.org/ A free online tool will evaluate and show the examined web page with access issues flagged and offer information on how to fix those issues. 4. WebAIM (Web Accessibility In Mind) URL: https://webaim.org/ and https://webaim.org/resources/ A non-profit organization based at the Center for Persons with Disabilities at Utah State University that provides comprehensive web accessibility solutions since 1999. Several services and resources are offered through WebAIM. 5. Section 508, Test for Accessibility URL: https://www.section508.gov/test A free tool that allows users to check their website’s compliance to Section 508. 21 6. Texas Secretary of State Elections Website URL: http://www.votetexas.gov/ State website that provides information on various voting related deadlines, links to Ballot-By-Mail applications, guidelines on various voting eligibility requirements. 22 County Website Scores County Anderson Andrews Angelina Aransas Archer Armstrong Atascosa Austin Bailey Bandera Bastrop Baylor Bee Bell Bexar Blanco Borden Bosque Bowie Brazoria Brazos Brewster Briscoe Brooks Brown Burleson Burnet Caldwell Calhoun Callahan Cameron Camp Carson Cass Castro Chambers Total Score 28 24 41 28 12 26 11 2 1 20 33 0 44 35 44 29 14 40 15 13 52 48 37 10 52 34 11 49 41 34 62 10 11 0 1 51 Percent 42% 36% 60% 42% 17% 39% 16% 2% 1% 30% 49% 0% 66% 51% 66% 43% 20% 60% 22% 19% 78% 72% 55% 15% 77% 51% 16% 73% 61% 51% 92% 15% 16% 0% 1% 75% 23 County Cherokee Childress Clay Cochran Coke Coleman Collin Collingsworth Colorado Comal Comanche Concho Cooke Coryell Cottle Crane Crockett Crosby Culberson Dallam Dallas Dawson De Witt Deaf Smith Delta Denton Dickens Dimmit Donley Duval Eastland Ector Edwards El Paso Ellis Erath Falls Fannin Total Score 1 0 1 12 11 13 54 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 53 0 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 52 0 0 0 0 Percent 1% 0% 1% 17% 16% 19% 81% 0% 18% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 77% 79% 0% 0% 0% 0% 81% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 78% 78% 0% 0% 0% 0% 24 County Fayette Fisher Floyd Foard Fort Bend Franklin Freestone Frio Gaines Galveston Garza Gillespie Glasscock Goliad Gonzales Gray Grayson Gregg Grimes Guadalupe Hale Hall Hamilton Hansford Hardeman Hardin Harris Harrison Hartley Haskell Hays Hemphill Henderson Hidalgo Hill Hockley Hood Hopkins Total Score 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 60 52 54 51 54 10 10 13 11 10 11 57 53 11 10 59 21 0 12 1 11 53 11 Percent 0% 0% 0% 0% 78% 0% 0% 75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 81% 89% 78% 80% 76% 80% 15% 15% 19% 16% 15% 16% 84% 78% 16% 15% 87% 31% 0% 17% 1% 16% 79% 16% 25 County Houston Howard Hudspeth Hunt Hutchinson Irion Jack Jackson Jasper Jeff Davis Jefferson Jim Hogg Jim Wells Johnson Jones Karnes Kaufman Kendall Kenedy Kent Kerr Kimble King Kinney Kleberg Knox La Salle Lamar Lamb Lampasas Lavaca Lee Leon Liberty Limestone Lipscomb Live Oak Llano Total Score 56 11 10 1 11 0 0 0 11 10 0 10 11 0 12 51 12 54 11 16 42 11 0 11 12 11 11 14 10 10 56 10 11 11 0 0 0 54 Percent 83% 16% 15% 1% 16% 0% 0% 0% 16% 15% 0% 15% 16% 0% 18% 76% 17% 80% 16% 24% 63% 16% 0% 16% 18% 16% 16% 20% 15% 15% 83% 15% 16% 16% 0% 0% 0% 80% 26 County Loving Lubbock Lynn Madison Marion Martin Mason Matagorda Maverick McCulloch McLennan McMullen Medina Menard Midland Milam Mills Mitchell Montague Montgomery Moore Morris Motley Nacogdoches Navarro Newton Nolan Nueces Ochiltree Oldham Orange Palo Pinto Panola Parker Parmer Pecos Polk Potter Total Score 0 48 10 17 18 19 11 15 0 11 60 10 17 11 15 15 13 1 11 53 56 17 12 53 10 17 17 18 16 18 56 18 11 13 18 18 12 54 Percent 0% 71% 15% 25% 27% 28% 16% 22% 0% 16% 89% 15% 25% 16% 22% 22% 19% 1% 16% 78% 84% 25% 17% 78% 15% 25% 25% 27% 24% 27% 83% 26% 16% 19% 27% 26% 18% 81% 27 County Presidio Rains Randall Reagan Real Red River Reeves Refugio Roberts Robertson Rockwall Runnels Rusk Sabine San Augustine San Jacinto San Patricio San Saba Schleicher Scurry Shackelford Shelby Sherman Smith Somervell Starr Stephens Sterling Stonewall Sutton Swisher Tarrant Taylor Terrell Terry Throckmorton Titus Tom Green Total Score 11 12 0 11 0 18 0 10 0 16 12 12 12 12 17 19 12 18 20 13 16 11 11 13 18 17 10 20 19 10 10 58 13 10 19 10 18 12 Percent 16% 18% 0% 16% 0% 26% 0% 15% 0% 24% 18% 18% 17% 18% 25% 28% 17% 26% 29% 19% 23% 16% 16% 19% 26% 25% 15% 29% 28% 15% 15% 86% 19% 15% 28% 15% 26% 18% 28 County Travis Trinity Tyler Upshur Upton Uvalde Val Verde Van Zandt Victoria Walker Waller Ward Washington Webb Wharton Wheeler Wichita Wilbarger Willacy Williamson Wilson Winkler Wise Wood Yoakum Young Zapata Zavala Total Score 62 19 0 12 13 0 12 15 18 12 20 18 14 13 20 10 10 11 19 10 13 18 25 49 18 19 19 0 Percent 92% 28% 0% 18% 19% 0% 18% 22% 26% 18% 29% 26% 20% 19% 29% 15% 15% 16% 28% 15% 19% 26% 37% 72% 26% 28% 28% 0% 29