Luzerne County Courthouse

Luzerne County Courthouse

Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

After nearly two hours of public comment from 47 citizens Tuesday, a Luzerne County Council majority voted against an ordinance that would have stopped the use of county staff and resources to deliver mail ballot drop boxes to sites approved by the county’s independent citizen election board.

Councilman Stephen J. Urban, who proposed the ordinance, had contemplated asking his colleagues to remove the ordinance from the voting agenda so he could tweak the wording. However, he did not make that motion. It does not appear he would have had majority support to delay a decision.

Urban said before the meeting he wanted to add wording preventing election board members from holding the county liable if they delivered the boxes on their own. He had said board movement of the mailbox-style boxes would have been allowable because the board ultimately has authority over deciding whether boxes are used.

The six council members voting against the ordinance: Vice Chairman John Lombardo, LeeAnn McDermott, Tim McGinley, Matthew Mitchell, Chris Perry and Chairwoman Kendra Radle. Those in support: Carl Bienias III, Kevin Lescavage, Brian Thornton, Urban and Gregory Wolovich Jr.

Lombardo said he is vehemently opposed to drop boxes and is working on his own time to support state-level candidates who would repeal state legislation that allowed no-excuse mail ballots.

However, Lombardo said the proposed ordinance would not ban the boxes and would only change one “tiny” step in how the drop boxes are moved to board-approved locations.

The sheriff’s department would still have to retrieve and deliver the ballots placed inside the boxes if election board members took charge of transporting the machines to sites, he said.

Lombardo said the time spent dwelling on drop boxes could have been invested in other county matters, including fixing roads and addressing staff recruitment and funding challenges. He said diversions outside council’s purview cast council in an embarrassing light.

“We need to do better,” Lombardo said.

McDermott reiterated she opposes drop boxes but said council does not have authority to remove them.

Subjecting the county to expected litigation over the ordinance is not fiscally responsible, McDermott said.

She also noted the county can use grant funding to install its own security system for the drop boxes — something the administration is pursuing to address a frequent criticism that the county must rely on recordings from the drop box site hosts — the Pittston Memorial Library, Hazleton City Hall, the Wright Township Volunteer Fire Department and Misericordia University in the Back Mountain. The county also has a box inside the county-owned Penn Place Building in Wilkes-Barre.

Mitchell said he has considered the matter objectively and concluded money the county would have to spend on resulting litigation could be spent on infrastructure or other needs.

Decisions about mail ballots and the drop boxes rest with the state and election board, he said. Mitchell also expressed concerns about the liability if election board members must deliver the boxes to sites.

“As much as I would like to make a symbolic vote against the use of drop boxes, I feel that would be irresponsible to the taxpayers,” Mitchell said.

McGinley said the ordinance would “infringe” on the authority of the county manager and election board. The county ended up spending more than $130,000 on litigation over the placement of the county district attorney’s race on the ballot last year and ended up with no legal resolution, in part because the county would have had to spend more money on legal fees to advance the matter through adjudication, he said.

Radle asked county Manager Randy Robertson and Chief Solicitor Harry W. Skene if they wanted to weigh in before council voted.

Skene said he does not have anything to add. Robertson said he has concerns the ordinance would be an “overreach” by council and said he has every confidence the county will be sued. The ordinance also would make it “cloudy” for the administration on how to proceed and does not fix council’s disagreement about drop boxes, he said.

Bienias said he was supporting the ordinance solely on his belief that drop boxes make some voters less confident in elections. He also said he believes the majority of residents don’t want drop boxes.

Thornton said he cannot support using county resources on a “political football” that is discretionary.

He acknowledged there are other issues council must address but said he believes drop boxes are a top concern of residents throughout the county.

“All of the county is watching this issue tonight,” Thornton said.

Of the 47 residents weighing in during Tuesday’s public hearing, 39 were against the ordinance. Thornton said no conclusions can be drawn from this response because he has received numerous communications in support of the ordinance.

Urban said his intent was to make it more difficult to get the boxes out although he stressed the ordinance was not an outright ban. He complained the drop boxes are not uniform because they are not provided in every county or in every municipality within the county.

Even though the ordinance failed, Urban said he believes the many hours spent on public comment and council debate were worthwhile.

In other business Tuesday, a council majority supported a motion from Lescavage to discuss a proposed mail ballot processing machine at the work session instead of voting.

The mail ballot sorting machine would be funded by a state grant and significantly streamline Election Day operations and speed up reporting of unofficial election results. Council may hold a special meeting to vote on the purchase because waiting could jeopardize the election bureau’s ability to secure the machine for the Nov. 8 general election.

Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes.