Speakers counter paper ballot claims

By Phil Major
publisher@wood.cm
Posted 12/31/69

Wood County commissioners got an entirely different story last Tuesday concerning the recent constitutional amendment election, compared to the comments made at the Nov. 28 meeting.

Four …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Speakers counter paper ballot claims

Posted

Wood County commissioners got an entirely different story last Tuesday concerning the recent constitutional amendment election, compared to the comments made at the Nov. 28 meeting.

Four speakers recounted their experience during the Nov. 7 election and the preceding early voting period.

Madeline Gibson had the harshest criticisms, saying the so-called overwhelming data in support of paper ballots was presented on Nov. 28 by speakers who had an agenda and misled, manipulated and influenced voters.

She said their agenda is based on a conspiracy that the 2020 election was stolen.

In one precinct, the available voting machine was tucked into a corner and only paper ballots were presented to voters, she said.

At the Alba precinct, she said the majority of voters favored voting machines.

“Voters want and trust machines,” she concluded.

Pat Durst assisted with early voting, where 1,122 voters requested paper ballots and 1,145 voted on the handicap accessible machines that were available to all voters.

There were two ADA devices during early voting, and two more were added to accommodate, she said.

“They loved the new machines,” she said. They were better than the old ones.

The November election was the first held in the county since the former voting machines were taken out of commission as no longer serviceable.

Voters should be allowed to choose which method they prefer, she said, adding the county could use more voting machines and ballot scanners.

Brenda Hunter was the alternate judge in Precinct 1-1 and said there were two machines which led to some wait times for voters.

On election day, many older voters requested the machines, she said, which was a surprise.

She countered claims of a lack of training as unbelievable and reviewed the number of training sessions offered.

She also refuted a claim about incorrect times on the machines saying the election workers were briefed on how to set that.

Stephanie McCormick, the alternate judge at Precinct 4-2, said there was concern that the print on the paper ballots was too small. Transportation of the equipment was a concern and should be budgeted for, she said. And it was not fair for poll workers to be deducted one hour’s pay for lunch when they were not able to take that much time.

She said a code system for the machines similar to the old system could help speed up the voting process.