125939251_web1_125939251-602ea21302a74faf8e8a36715ed7bb8c

Lots of voters, few big glitches as Pennsylvanians hit polls

Seeking inclusion, Grammys change name of a music category

While many Luzerne County voters reported smooth sailing on Election Day, other than the expected need to wait in line, some issues surfaced.
				Hanover Township resident Catherine Sunday warned fellow voters at her Ward 5 polling place to check their electronic voting system printout before feeding it in a tabulator to be counted, saying the initial one handed to her by a poll worker was wrong.
				Sunday said a poll worker assisted her by retrieving her printout, but the paper did not reflect her selection of Donald Trump for president.
				&ldquo;Thank God I looked at it,&rdquo; Sunday said. &ldquo;To think I almost voted for the wrong man. Oh my God. That has me traumatized at this point.&rdquo;
				When Sunday informed him the selections were not hers, she said the worker reached down to the printer and retrieved another sheet that was accurate. According to her, the worker said, &ldquo;This keeps happening.&rdquo;
				County Assistant Solicitor Michael Butera said he spoke to Sunday, verified her account with the judge of elections and learned from the judge of elections that there were three instances Tuesday of a voting machine inexplicably generating two printouts &mdash; one accurate and one not.
				The county election bureau dispatched a technician to address the problem, Butera said. The county&rsquo;s voting system supplier, Dominion Voting Systems Inc., said it had never received a report of double printouts anywhere its machines are used, he said.
				In all three cases, voters flagged the incorrect printout and inserted the correct one into the tabulator, Butera said. Two of the inaccurate printouts were voided/spoiled, he said. Sunday said she took her inaccurate one home with her to keep as evidence.
				County officials had reminded voters of the need to review their printouts to verify they were accurate. That extra layer of review was one of the reasons for switching to a &ldquo;paper trail&rdquo; system, Butera said.
				Butera said he only received one other Election Day report of a voter receiving a printout that did not contain accurate selections. The other case was in another polling place, and that voter was instructed to cast a provisional ballot after the inaccurate machine printout was spoiled, he said.
				Polling place delays
				Several polling places did not open at 7 a.m.
				Candidates or state Democratic or Republican party representatives had the option to petition the court to keep some polling places open past 8 p.m. because they opened late, but none exercised that option, Butera said.
				Machine vote denial
				Wilkes-Barre Township resident Heidi Roccograndi said she was forced to vote by provisional ballot at her polling place Tuesday, even though she should have been permitted to cast her ballot on the electronic voting system.
				&ldquo;It&rsquo;s just very frustrating because they should know the basics at the polling place,&rdquo; Roccograndi said.
				Under a change that took effect with Tuesday&rsquo;s general election, voters who received but did not return mail ballots were permitted to vote on the electronic ballot marking devices at the polls if they brought in their never-returned mail ballot, secrecy envelope and outer mailing envelope to be voided/spoiled.
				Roccograndi said she brought the ballot and both envelopes as required but was informed at the Ward 2 polling place she still could not vote on a machine.
				County Election Director Shelby Watchilla said she does not know why Roccograndi was denied access to machine voting because all poll workers received training on the change.
				The county election bureau also provided supplemental information reminding poll workers of the new requirement along with a form that must be filled out for voters who submit their mail ballot and both envelopes to be spoiled, Watchilla said.
				After leaving the polling place, Roccograndi said she contacted the election bureau to report her experience and was informed she should have been provided access to the electronic machine.
				Provisional ballots are marked by hand and reviewed last so the county can verify a mail ballot was not also received from that voter.
				While she still voted, Roccograndi said her mood of excitement was deflated by the denial to join others in voting on the machines.
				&ldquo;I can&rsquo;t believe something like this is making me feel this way. I&rsquo;m upset,&rdquo; Roccograndi said.
				She had requested a mail ballot for the June 2 primary and was surprised when she received one for the general. Roccograndi said she was informed she had likely checked a box on her application requesting continued placement on the mail ballot list, but Roccograndi said she does not believe she checked that box.
				Watchilla said she was personally unaware of Roccograndi&rsquo;s situation and had not received any other reports of voters denied voting on the machines after presenting a mail ballot and both envelopes.
				Leaving with ballots
				County voters who mistakenly left polling places with their ballot printouts were informed they could return before 8 p.m. to feed them into tabulators so their votes are counted, county Administrative Services Division Head David Parsnik said Tuesday.
				While reports of take-home ballots circulated on social media, Parsnik said he had not personally received any inquiries about specific cases.
				Most county voters were using the electronic ballot marking devices for the first time because the machines were reserved for the disabled in the June 2 primary.
				On the new touchscreen machines, voters made selections as they did with the old devices. But instead of touching a screen box to lock in their votes, they received a paper printout to verify their selections before they fed the paper into a tabulator to be read and saved in compliance with a state paper-trail mandate.
				Residents who cast paper ballots at polling places in the primary already used part of this new system when they placed their ballots into the tabulators to be read.
				The tabulator step is essential because that&rsquo;s when votes are cast.
				Polling place confusion
				Ellen Hunter said she went to the same polling place she has in the past, the Fellowship Evangelical Church in Dallas Township, getting in line at 6:45 a.m. It&rsquo;s where both the Dallas Township and the Luzerne County Election Bureau websites say a voter from District 5 were supposed to go this year.
				Yet after waiting well over an hour in line, when she reached the poll worker they told her she couldn&rsquo;t vote there. She had to vote at the district 3 site, at the township&rsquo;s municipal garage. That was odd enough, she said, but the poll worker added a twist that made her downright angry.
				&ldquo;She said &lsquo;I don&rsquo;t have you here, but I have Kevin Hunter&rsquo;.&rdquo; The problem? Kevin is one of two sons registered to vote who live with Ellen in the same house. So one son was supposed to vote in District 5 at the church while she and another son were to vote in district three at the garage.
				The kerfuffle didn&rsquo;t impact Kevin because he voted by mail, and Daniel was voting later in the day, Ellen said. But for her, the inexplicable mix-up meant heading to the garage and waiting in line there. Despite arriving at the church before the polls even opened, she ended up waiting until around 10 a.m. to cast her ballot at the garage.
				&ldquo;I&rsquo;m not as angry as I was this morning,&rdquo; she said as she recounted the experience later in the afternoon.
				Times Leader staff writer Mark Guydish contributed to this report.

Election Day brought some issues in Luzerne County