The five citizens who volunteer their time to oversee voting as Luzerne County Election Board members shared some of their observations and frustrations during Thursday’s election inquiry committee.
Council formed the inquiry committee to review election protocols and procedures and make recommendations.
The role of the board has been clouded since the county’s 2012 switch to a home rule government structure, with mixed opinions on whether it should have more power over the election bureau that is supervised by the appointed county manager and funded by the part-time, elected 11-member council.
This wasn’t an issue before home rule because the three elected county commissioners also served as the election board, and commissioners also controlled the county budget and personnel.
County Chief Solicitor Romilda Crocamo said during the virtual committee meeting her office is extensively reviewing the law and seeking input from state agencies and other experts to prepare a comprehensive opinion on the matter.
Election Board member Keith Gould, a Republican, said the board is “kind of left in the dark” on many election-related decisions and should have more control over the bureau.
“We know how an election should run, and they should let the board direct it,” Gould said.
Gould reiterated his argument that election board members should have been among the select few confidentially alerted when the bureau discovered a temporary worker had discarded nine overseas military ballots. The board learned of the matter through the news, he said.
The board did not have the final say on which new paper-trail voting system was purchased or the decision to send mail ballot applications to all voters in this year’s primary, he said. The administration said the mailing ensured all voters were able to access applications amid the coronavirus pandemic.
But Gould did acknowledge the board did successfully put its foot down before the June 2 primary by voting to continue using the county’s electronic poll books at sign-in instead of temporarily switching to paper ones. The administration also went with the board’s decision to increase the pay for poll workers due to the pandemic.
Board member Joyce Dombroski-Gebhardt, also a Republican, told the committee she has many lingering concerns with how the election was conducted and said some individuals involved in the election have attempted to “intimidate” and “bully” her since she chose not to certify the Nov. 3 general election results.
Audrey Serniak, one of the three remaining Democrats on the board, said she views the board’s main job as overseeing the processing and tabulation of ballots and the subsequent adjudication of ballots with issues.
“It takes a lot of time and energy, and I think the board is very dedicated to make sure those ballots are correct,” Serniak said.
Jeanette Tait, who joined the board as chairwoman after the primary, said the county had an “excellent set-up” of teams processing the influx of mail ballots on Nov. 3, with more added to accelerate tallying of the results.
“It was like a production line. It was well-handled,” Tait said.
She also said anyone with questions and doubts about the adjudication of ballots should have attended and witnessed the process, which was open to the public.
Expecting a perfect election is unrealistic, she said. However, she stressed board members already have discussed plans to push for changes, including more frequent poll worker training, efforts to recruit and lock in poll workers to prevent last-minute vacancies and the creation of election bureau phone lines exclusively for poll workers to make sure they can reach someone for assistance on Election Day.
Board members also want to provide more training on provisional ballots and require table stations for voters to complete paperwork in polling places, Tait said.
Peter Ouellette, board vice chairman, said he agrees with Gould that the bureau and county administration should consult with the board more before making decisions about election procedures.
Ouellette said he’s served on the board for a little over four years and welcomes inquiry committee clarity on the board’s role.
“It’s been a perennial question since I’ve been on the board,” Ouellette said.
Adjudication of ballot issues previously took 45 minutes to a little over the hour in the past, he told the committee. With the new paper-trail system and popularity of no-excuse mail voting, the board spent about 76 hours on adjudication, he said.
Committee member Harry Haas, a Republican county councilman, said he does not believe the county had any intentional fraud. Instead, he believes the policies and procedures and changes mandated by the state resulted in problems that caused some voters to be disenfranchised.