The Luzerne County Election Board certified some May 18 primary election results Monday but won’t approve final tallies in county and municipal races for another week.
This delay was necessary because the roster of write-in winners was revised after it was originally posted on the county website the night of June 3.
Based on additional information about write-in contenders in three races, the county reexamined write-in votes that had been lumped into a catch-all “scattered” category instead of itemized by individual names. As a result, the county determined some candidates had enough votes to secure nominations.
Updated write-in results were posted the evening of June 4, and officials decided certification Monday would not allow enough time for potential challenges.
The three races with revised returns, according to the county election bureau:
• Northwest Area School District — Leigh Bonczewski and Peter Lanza are tied, with 10 write-in votes each, to appear on the November general election ballot as Democratic contenders in the school board race. A tie-breaker will be scheduled before the results are certified.
• Kingston — Republican borough council candidate Robert Jacobs received enough write-in votes to also appear as a Democratic nominee in the race for four council seats.
• West Wyoming — Paul Orzel garnered enough write-in votes to win both party nominations in the borough council race.
County officials informed the Pennsylvania Department of State that certification will go beyond the June 7 deadline. The five-citizen volunteer election board will meet again at 6 p.m. on June 14.
Monday’s certification covered four statewide ballot questions and races for Supreme Court Justice and judges in the Superior Court, Commonwealth Court and county Court of Common Pleas. Board member Missy Thomas abstained, and the others voted yes.
All unofficial results, including write-in tallies, are posted on the election page at luzernecounty.org.
Two issues raised by citizens dominated Monday’s meeting: use of the write-in scattered category and the process for obtaining recounts.
Scattering
The election board initially started listing every single write-in name after the primary but changed course out of a concern it would not be able to complete the process in a timely manner.
Due to the high number of write-ins — approximately 13,000 — county workers were called in to assist the election board in its processing.
Scattering was reserved for instances when the total number of write-ins was not high enough to secure a nomination in each race, officials said.
But citizen Sean M. Donahue complained of inconsistency, saying names of some candidates with only one write-in vote were listed. He said he wrote in his name, and it did not appear in the record.
Without a uniform policy, certain people “get to be special” with their names listed, leaving others to wonder why they are “so insignificant” that the names they write in do not individually appear, he said.
On the advice of legal counsel, the board did not directly respond to Donahue because he has stated he may file a legal action over the matter.
Wilkes-Barre resident Bob Caruso, who has been monitoring elections for decades and attends the board’s vote tallying and adjudication proceedings, was highly critical of what he described as excessive use of the write-in scattered category.
Caruso said 4,654 votes were scattered instead of listed by individual name. He believes only about 5% of those should have been scattered because they were cartoon characters, protest votes or vulgarities, as opposed to “living people” selected by voters dissatisfied with those running or facing no listed candidates on the ballot.
“Shortness of time and inconvenience are not sufficient reasons to not count every vote,” he said, describing the board’s decision as “disgusting and shameful.” He pointed out he believes the board members themselves are “good people” with insufficient experience in voting processes — an issue he blames on the home rule government’s directive to place citizens on the board instead of elected officials.
Election Board Chairman Denise Williams told Caruso every write-in vote was reviewed.
“Just because they were put in a scattered category does not mean they were not counted,” Williams said.
Write-in votes on paper mail ballots take longer to process because handwriting must be deciphered. Write-in votes cast on the electronic voting machines at polling places are easier to read because they are typed in, but they still must be manually entered into the tallying system because software isn’t approved to make that conversion for security reasons, said county Election Director Bob Morgan.
Recounts
On the topic of recounts, the family member of a Swoyersville council candidate had appeared at the county election bureau after the primary saying she planned to file a petition seeking a fresh count in that race, officials said. Instead of waiting for a request to be filed, the county incorporated that recount in a mandatory post-election audit sample that was in process at that time.
County attorneys said this approach avoided the need to appear in court, and nobody else had communicated plans to seek court approval for a recount in any other races.
However, council candidate Ronald Knapp told the board Monday he was 57 votes away from receiving a nomination in the county council race and believes he also should receive such a “courtesy” recount.
County Councilman Walter Griffith said the county should not have deviated from the requirement for a recount request to be filed in court because it opens the door for others to expect the same.
“You have other candidates now saying, ‘I want a recount.’ I don’t think that’s what you intended, but that’s where it’s going,” Griffith said.
Candidates have until Wednesday to file a recount request in county court.