Luzerne County Courthouse
                                 File photo

Luzerne County Council advances possible charter amendment ballot question

A proposed Luzerne County home rule charter amendment ballot question reconstituting the five-citizen election board passed its first hurdle Tuesday.

Eight of nine county council members voted to introduce the ordinance. A public hearing and majority passage are necessary at a subsequent meeting for the question to be placed on the Nov. 7 general election ballot for voters to decide.

Under the charter, the election board has four council-appointed citizens — two Republicans and two Democrats. Those four then choose a fifth member of any or no affiliation to serve for four years and act as board chair.

Drafted by county Councilman Gregory S. Wolovich Jr., the proposed question would ask voters if they want council to appoint all five members.

The board structure — two Democrats, two Republicans and a fifth of any affiliation — would remain the same. However, the fifth member of any affiliation would be appointed by council every two years instead of serving a four-year term. The election board members would then choose which of the five members serves as chair and vice chair through a reorganization vote every two years, the proposal says.

The current election board would be vacated if the ballot question passed in the Nov. 7 general election because the reconstituted structure would take effect in January, although Wolovich has said he encourages current members to reapply along with other interested citizens, particularly third-party voters and those with no affiliation.

Several citizens submitted public email comments criticizing the potential change that were read before council’s vote.

“This would make our current nonpartisan election board totally partisan and under the whims of county council,” wrote citizen Travis Culver. “The independent citizens board which created our charter specifically established the parameters and structure of the Board of Elections so this would not happen.”

Butler Township resident Carole Shearer questioned the “timing and transparency” because council is “now overwhelmingly composed of one political party and not at all representative of the overall political make-up of Luzerne County.”

West Wyoming resident and Wilkes-Barre business owner Jay Notartomaso challenged the “continued meddling by the Luzerne County Council into the Board of Elections.”

Fairview Township resident Lisa Napersky said the proposed question is “just another attempt by council to grab power away from our independent Board of Elections.”

Attending remotely, Salem Township resident Claudia Glennan also described the proposal as a “blatant power grab by county council” and predicted it would make the election board “extremely partisan when it should stay nonpartisan.” Reducing the fifth seat to two-year terms also could cause a loss of knowledge on the board, she said.

In response, Wolovich said the elected majority and minority commissioners serve as the election board in most other Pennsylvania counties, and the ballot question is intended to provide council members with more input on which members serve on the board since council members are elected by county residents.

Wolovich said he was motivated by a desire to improve the charter, not a power grab.

He prefers allowing the five election board members to choose their chair every two years, saying they should not be locked into one chair for four years. He believes the move will encourage more “free thinking” on the board.

Voters should research the pros and cons and can vote accordingly if the question is on the ballot, he said, emphasizing he is only trying to propose an idea.

Council Chairwoman Kendra Vough said there’s no way to completely avoid partisanship on the election board because citizens who apply are typically interested in politics if they are willing to volunteer extensive time to carry out the board’s responsibilities and subject themselves to public criticism.

Eight of the nine council members in attendance Tuesday supported the ballot question ordinance introduction. Council members LeeAnn McDermott and John Lombardo were absent.

Councilman Tim McGinley was the lone council member to vote against the introduction. He said he doesn’t like the proposed two-year term for the fifth member but commended Wolovich for coming up with a ballot question and crafting the proposal.

Councilman Stephen J. Urban also asserted the two-year term for the fifth member may rise to the level of a charter structural change that could not be made without formation of a new government study commission.

Councilman Brian Thornton said the proposed question does not prevent the fifth member from being reappointed for additional two-year terms.

County Controller Walter Griffith advised council to ensure the ballot question wording provides enough detail about the proposed change, maintaining a question that is too vague could be legally challenged. He also pointed out the value of institutional knowledge on the board, saying he has been monitoring the primary election adjudication and observed the five board members working tirelessly to process flagged ballots and write-in votes.

In another election matter, Hunlock Township resident David R. Stettler complained the election bureau failed to provide his polling place with enough paper ballots in last week’s primary. He said more than four hours passed from the time the judge of elections reported the shortage and additional ballots were delivered.

The election bureau emphasized no voters were disenfranchised because they were instructed to cast ballots on the electronic ballot marking device set up for those with disabilities.