A Luzerne County Council majority approved the state grant-funded purchase of a mail ballot sorting machine Monday night so it will be ordered and in place for the Nov. 8 general election.
The election bureau requested the machine to speed up election night tallying and reduce staff needed to manually scan at least 18,000 mail ballot outer envelopes to mark them as received.
Based on the envelope weight, the machine also will instantly weed out those missing required inner secrecy envelopes or containing more than the one permissible ballot inside, the administration said.
The administration plans to purchase the machine using a new $1.04 million annual state election integrity grant designed to ensure counties across the state have their mail ballots counted by midnight on election night.
Voting in support of the purchase were Council members John Lombardo, LeeAnn McDermott, Tim McGinley, Matthew Mitchell, Chris Perry and Kendra Radle.
Those in opposition: Carl Bienias III, Kevin Lescavage, Brian Thornton, Stephen J. Urban and Gregory Wolovich Jr.
Before the vote, Lombardo, the vice chairman, asked county Deputy Election Director Beth McBride to respond to some of the questions and criticism about the purchase.
Eighteen citizens spoke or submitted comments against the purchase, with statements questioning the cost, lack of other proposals and need for the system when the state could do away with no-excuse mail ballot voting. There also were threats of litigation over the matter.
Three citizens in support said the machine would make the processing of ballots more efficient.
McBride reiterated the Agilis Mail Ballot Sorting System from Runbeck Election Solutions is the only system that meets the county’s needs.
Two other options had been suggested by some citizens and council members. McBride said one was not considered because the county had a past issue requiring intervention by the county law office. The other vendor has not yet installed a system in any Pennsylvania counties, and McBride said she does not want to be a test case.
She emphasized the Agilis system does not count votes.
Addressing a question of the funding, McBride said the state grant used for the purchase is scheduled to be deposited in the county’s bank account by the end of this week.
Bringing in additional workers instead of the machine, as suggested by some, would not help because the election bureau has only six special computer terminals/scanners connected to the state’s voter tracking system to register the time and date mail ballots are received — work that will now be performed by the machine, McBride said. Sometimes the six scanners do not work, requiring manual data entry, and there is a backlog of requests from other counties for the state to provide additional terminals/scanners, she said.
McBride said Dauphin County highly recommends the Agilis machine based on its use there, and other counties are considering the system.
The $490,500 purchase price includes $315,000 for the system and an annual $35,000 licensing and service agreement for five years.
Without the new machine, returning the grant money to the state would be necessary because it is unlikely the county could meet the midnight tally deadline, McBride said.
Radle, the council chair, asked county Manager Randy Robertson if he agrees with McBride’s grant return statement.
Robertson told council the bureau has made it clear meeting the midnight deadline is dependent on the machine, and he does not want to “drag Luzerne County’s reputational issues even deeper” by failing to meet the conditions of a state grant.
“If we can’t do it and do it right, why would we want to take the money?” Robertson said.
The manager also said the administration did not start publicly discussing the purchase plan sooner because it had an abbreviated period to act on the grant funding due to its recent passage.
Council also has received a legal opinion from the county’s law office on the matter, he said.
Robertson added that council hired him to make recommendations and move the county forward, and he believes council members must consider the masses and not put disproportionate weight on statements from those speaking out at meetings.
McDermott said she spoke with state Sen. Lisa Baker, R-Lehman Township, who had pushed for the election integrity grant because candidates have become increasingly concerned about delays tallying results. She said Baker indicated she supported the county’s purchase of the machine so the county does not end up behind all other counties in reporting results in the November general election.
Councilman Brian Thornton said he does not agree with the arguments for deeming the machine a sole source purchase that does not have to be bid out, describing the situation as a “very risky stretch and a leap.” He portrayed the county legal guidance as “vague and ambiguous” and said he is not going to be “on the wrong end” of litigation he believes will be filed over the matter.
Radle said some level of council due diligence is positive, but she complained some members are now questioning county chief solicitor’s legal opinions and rejecting the county manager’s opinion on what is needed. Radle said she cannot justify rejecting the $1 million grant.
Lombardo said some of the arguments being made “baffle” him.
“We are not in a position to reject $1 million, especially if we don’t want to raise taxes,” Lombardo said.