Luzerne County District Attorney Sam Sanguedolce and his staff have completed an investigation of complaints from last year’s May 18 primary election.
The investigation did not uncover evidence of criminal intent or activity, it said. His report went beyond the norm in providing details of the facts and circumstances in case the county election bureau or citizen election board want to address them, it said.
“As the Office of the District Attorney addresses only the investigation and prosecution of criminal activity, we refer any further issues uncovered throughout this investigation back to the administration for evaluation,” it said.
County officials had been inundated with complaints on varying issues that Election Day and during the following months, it said.
Then-county chief solicitor Romilda Crocamo catalogued complaints and transmitted them to the DA’s Office. There were nearly 50 complaints in all with emails and other independent reports factored in, although many were duplications or “clearly did not implicate criminal activity,” it said.
Sanguedolce briefed county council on the report last week in a closed-door executive session.
Among the matters investigated, according to the report signed by Sanguedolce and multiple DA’s Office staff:
• Ballot header
A ballot header error on the voting machines caused all ballots to be labeled as Democratic throughout the county, including Republican ballots.
Despite the mislabeling, Republican candidates were on the subsequent selection pages.
The county relied on an outside contractor for proofreading instead of performing that task in-house as strongly suggested by the Pennsylvania Department of State’s directive on logic and accuracy testing, it said.
County officials have said in-house proofing was implemented in response.
• Swoyersville
A constable candidate confirmed he was incorrectly on the ballot in Ward 1 instead of Ward 2, prompting him to conduct a successful write-in campaign to secure a seat in Ward 2.
The candidate told investigators he had discussed the issue and forwarded registered correspondence to the election bureau without a satisfactory resolution.
“Luzerne County was or should have been aware of the issue, but failed to correct the issue prior to Election Day,” the report said.
• Wilkes-Barre Township
Mail ballots incorrectly directed voters to select one Wilkes-Barre Township council nominee although two seats were open. The county informed investigators the error was reported after 215 ballots had been issued. In response, the county sent a letter and new corrected ballot to voters.
County officials acknowledged the error should have been discovered during proofreading.
• Swoyersville
An incorrect name in the mayoral race was published in an election bureau media release, but the county said the correct name appeared on ballots.
This error also should have been discovered during proofreading, it said.
• Pittston city
Accusations were made asserting the judge of elections inappropriately advised voters to write in his name on the ballot for two selected city offices. The investigation did not reveal further evidence supporting the allegations.
DA’s Office investigators interviewed both the complainant and accused and noted that minimal training had been provided to poll workers regarding protocols on behavior and reporting suspected violations.
• Ballots in machines
During a post-election inspection at the voting system warehouse, detectives found ballots in 70 scanners/tabulators that should have been removed by poll workers on election night. The ballots already had been scanned and counted but must be retained and kept with all ballots, which was the point of a system that leaves a paper trail, the report said.
“Failure to remove the paper ballots appears to be a training issue which should be corrected for future elections,” it said.
• Hazleton/Hazle Township
A citizen reported that two voters were using a vacant lot in Hazleton as their registered address. The investigation revealed the two voters had submitted their correct address in neighboring Hazle Township, which means there was no malfeasance or error on their part. A bureau employee had entered an incorrect address during processing, causing both voters to be directed to an incorrect polling location, the report said.
• Wyoming
A county council member in October 2021 outlined potential residence issues involving 14 voters in the borough.
Investigators said it appears the subjects completed driver’s license address changes, which triggered address changes through the state voter database. During processing, the county election bureau attempted to correct address errors by unknowingly changing the post office box number to a residential dwelling unit number at the U.P.S. store address, it said.
The DA’s Office did not receive a report of any voters encountering an issue at a polling location stemming from the address changes and found no record of the impacted voters attempting to vote since the address changes.
As a side note, the report said the state voter registration application preserves a homeless individual’s right to vote by not requiring a street address. The application allows voters to draw on a map the location where he/she “spends the most of (his or her) time,” it said.
• Warehouse keys
Last September, then-acting manager Crocamo learned that numerous employees from several departments possessed keys allowing access to the voting machine storage facility in Wilkes-Barre. She immediately directed the county sheriff’s department to change the facility locks and collect all previously issued keys. Investigators determined officials had no record of key distribution, making “identification on personnel with access impossible.”
No tampering was found when the machines were inspected, it said.
“All devices are secured with tags that would reveal evidence of any attempted entry into the secure parts of the devices,” it said.
• Voting system
As part of the investigation, DA’s Office representatives requested and received a demonstration of the Dominion Voting Systems Inc. equipment used in the primary.
With this system, voters at the polls must make selections on an electronic ballot marking device and then print out the ballot. After reviewing the printout and determining all selections are the ones they picked, voters must then feed their printout into the scanner/tabulator to cast their vote.
During the demonstration, a test ballot was placed through the scanner three more times, and the votes were counted each time, it said. The polling place scanners do not appear to have the ability to reject a ballot already counted and alert officials, it said.
The report stressed the DA’s Office was not aware of any allegation that anyone tried to resubmit printed ballots to a scanner.
County Election Board Chairwoman Denise Williams said Monday she has not received the DA’s report but agreed to address the scanning issue in the interest of public understanding.
Williams said the ballots that voters feed into the machines automatically drop into a locked storage enclosure beneath the scanner/tabulator.
A poll worker would risk detection attempting to unlock the enclosure and scan in ballots in front of other poll workers, particularly when only voters are supposed to be feeding ballots into the devices, she said.
There are also checks and balances through detailed reports on ballot counts that must be compiled by poll workers on election night and subsequent post-election audits, Williams said.