Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Luzerne County Election Board member Peter Ouellette is calling for release of the county’s internal investigation of the election director’s vendor-funded trips, saying the document will clear the record.
Ouellette also said Monday he was informed the state ethics commission has issued a subpoena seeking the county report as part of its own investigation because the county denied the commission’s request for a copy, although he did not know the status of that matter or the reason for denial.
“There are lots of rumors and inaccurate information circulating, and the release of this report can end all of that by telling us what’s in there,” said Ouellette, one of five citizens serving on the board. “The public has a right to know.”
The administration had paid Harrisburg firm McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC $47,400 to review election director Marisa Crispell’s participation in two advisory board trips to Las Vegas and Omaha, Nebraska, funded by the company that sold the county its electronic poll books. The report analyzed the conduct of Crispell and other employees to determine if they violated any county policies, rules of regulations, officials said.
County Chief Solicitor Romilda Crocamo has said the report won’t be released because the findings are internal personnel issues. She said Monday that position remains the same, and she cannot comment on any matters involving the state ethics commission.
“An ethics commission inquiry — if there is one — is all confidential,” she said.
Ouellette said he is aware of the state ethics commission investigation because he was among those interviewed. He also was interviewed by the attorney from the McNees firm as part of the county investigation.
He had asked Crocamo for a copy of the McNees report when he learned it was finished, receiving the explanation that it was confidential due to personnel confidentiality.
The county should redact any sensitive personal information and release the report, he said, because many residents are “interested in what went on” and deserve answers, Ouellette said.
While he reserves final judgment until all information is publicly disclosed, if ever, Ouellette said he does not believe Crispell’s advisory board participation rose to criminal activity. Instead, he believes Crispell was “naive” and made a mistake.
Her advisory board role did not impact the outcome because the election board independently reviewed poll book options and unanimously recommended the ones supplied by Election Systems & Software (ES&S), he said.
Crispell has said her involvement with the ES&S advisory board was cleared by Administrative Services Division Head David Parsnik and county assistant solicitor Michael Butera and that she stepped down from the advisory role in fall 2017 before the county sought proposals from electronic poll book suppliers in January 2018.
ES&S, which ended up receiving the $325,000 electronic poll book contract, covered travel, lodging for two nights and meals for the trips that Crispell had valued at $2,493 in a financial interest statement she amended after the issue surfaced here in December. Several county council members have said they should have been informed of Crispell’s advisory board role before they voted on poll books.
The county administration had shared the McNees report with council members during a closed-door executive session earlier this year, with instructions it should not be released.