[0:10] Uh Chris, anytime you'd like to start the meeting, you can call that to order.

[0:21] Is he on you? >> Yes. He's muted.

[0:24] » This CHIO's

[0:28] » I'm muted. >> My fault. I'm sorry, Ms. Chicot.

[0:33] All right. I'd like to call the Erie County Board of Elections special

[0:36] meeting on July 30th to order. Uh can you call roll call, please, Ms.

[0:42] Chicot? >> Mr. Bal.

[0:44] » Here. >> Mr. Copeland.

[0:49] Mr. Drexel. >> Here. Sorry.

[0:54] I'm here. >> Uh Ms. Sharman. Here.

[0:59] Mr. Scutella. >> Here.

[1:02] » Mr. Wertz. >> Here.

[1:05] » Mr. Winarski. >> Here.

[1:09] » All right. Uh is there anybody

[1:13] uh who would like to speak I don't see anybody, right? Is anybody

[1:16] like to speak for the public? Anyone from the public? Is anyone from the

[1:19] public?

[1:22] Seeing none. All right. Uh this is new business, possible

[1:26] authorization of county funds to pay return postage on in absentee ballots.

[1:34] Ms. Chicot.

[1:37] » Well, it's that time of year where our vendor is preparing the envelopes for

[1:41] the mail ballots, and in order to do that, they need to know if we are going

[1:46] to be paying as a county the return postage for those ballots to be returned

[1:50] to the county. Uh we pay for the postage going out, uh

[1:55] and that's covered by the election integrity grant, but in order for us to

[1:59] have that paid for by the voters, we bring that to a vote before the Board of

[2:03] Elections. So, we're at that time and the vendor is ready to start printing

[2:07] for the envelopes.

[2:12] » Mr. Chair, if >> All right.

[2:15] » Um Ms. Chilcott, it it it's true that um

[2:19] this postage that we've paid for the return trip, we have end-to-end tracking

[2:24] on when that voter put that in the mailbox

[2:28] to getting to us, delivery confirmation. >> Yes.

[2:33] » And and not paying for postage would uh not allow us to provide that end-to-end

[2:38] tracking. You know, I'm thinking of 2024 when we had so many issues with uh

[2:43] obviously different issue with the mail vendor

[2:48] but, you know, if we might anticipate some issues uh with things being lost in

[2:53] the mail, etc., etc., that in order to have any kind of intelligence to

[2:57] understand if the ballots are coming back to us in a timely manner, we would

[3:01] have to pay for that postage, correct? >> I don't know that there would be a

[3:05] difference. I know that the previous vendor did not

[3:09] um provide the tracking information, and

[3:12] that was a problem. And also, some of those ballots did not have barcodes as

[3:15] they were expected to have. The new vendor has been compliant with all of

[3:19] that, and the tracking system is very efficient. Uh this is

[3:24] this is just a a question that we normally bring. I don't know that there

[3:27] would be a difference in the service. >> I'm just saying that if we if we're not

[3:31] providing that return postage, we wouldn't have that tracking to know when

[3:36] when that mail was received by the post office and and a delivery confirmation

[3:40] from USPS.

[3:44] » W- Why does the postage affect How does postage affect that?

[3:48] I mean, whether a person puts a stamp on it or the stamp is provided on cuz that

[3:53] cuz that change anything? >> It shouldn't it I don't know I don't see

[3:56] that that would change any of the service because it's still using the

[3:59] same barcode information. It's still uh trackable as long as it's in the USPS

[4:06] system. Uh well

[4:08] » I guess that's the thing is without if you were not that customer paying for

[4:14] tracking uh of an item. When you ship things with

[4:17] a simple postage stamp it doesn't come complete with any kind

[4:21] of tracking that you can go online. >> It does if it has a barcode on the

[4:26] envelope. >> Okay.

[4:28] » So the previous vendor was not providing um some of the barcodes on some of the

[4:33] batches and they were not tracking the ballots.

[4:36] And uh in order to track those ballots we had

[4:39] USPS create addresses as images and went through an entire system through the

[4:45] United States to track ballots because it's using a barcode technology not the

[4:50] stamp itself that's being tracked. It's the barcode on the envelope. So people

[4:55] if you if we would approve the postage to be paid

[4:59] voters can certainly elect to put a stamp on that as well. And that's one

[5:04] less one that the county would be paying for. But conversely if voters uh if we

[5:11] don't pay for it and voters don't put postage on it it's still official

[5:15] election mail and it'd still be returned to us and we would have to pay for their

[5:19] postage either way. So uh this is something that that makes it

[5:24] easier people don't have to think about if you look at it that way but at the

[5:27] same time we still we have the same options. The county would still be

[5:31] responsible if someone fails to put postage on it. Uh we would be paying

[5:35] that or voters can put their stamp on it and save the county money.

[5:40] » I I appreciate I wasn't sure how that process worked on the tracking. So thank

[5:43] you.

[5:46] » Just out of curiosity what it cost the last few years with this?

[5:52] » Uh I don't have it in front of me, but I think it's varied around 11,000, 15,000,

[5:57] maybe uh 16 or 17,000.

[6:01] Depending on the election.

[6:07] » And this can't use integrity grant funds?

[6:10] » No. >> Okay.

[6:14] » Just uh from from my perspective, uh we've been doing this for some time.

[6:19] Uh I don't like to introduce changes. The original reasoning for

[6:25] wanting to provide postage still stands that I don't want to create barriers to

[6:29] people returning their ballot. Uh I've likened it to

[6:33] uh a poll tax, and I know a stamp doesn't

[6:36] cost that much, but it still requires the effort. I don't have a single stamp

[6:39] in my house. I'd have to go out to the post office, go out and purchase a

[6:43] stamp, uh and in some ways that's more

[6:47] laborous than even going just to the polling place on election day. Um I

[6:51] think it's a small cost and and a um a convenience to the electorate,

[6:56] helps expand access to the ballot, and I think that we should continue doing it.

[7:01] But also, I'd like to get away from continuing to

[7:06] approve this election by election, uh cuz I I don't think it would be a

[7:10] good idea for us to shift uh back and forth uh year to year, uh and I would

[7:16] suggest that if we approve this that it's a motion to approve as official

[7:22] policy of the election office.

[7:30] » Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, sir.

[7:34] » I agree that it's a a small cost, but I just

[7:38] you know, think that like with a lot of things in life that you know, everybody

[7:41] should have skin in the game. I mean, is it impede me from getting to the the

[7:47] polls that I have to put gas in my car, pay for the insurance, the registration,

[7:51] or anybody else that goes? I mean, there's costs that are incurred just to

[7:55] get that. And to me, the the small

[7:59] as said by Councilman Coke, on the small cost of a stamp, I just I think that

[8:04] we've gone out of our way. We've made elections more than accessible. I think

[8:10] that, you know, people have the ability to come in here,

[8:14] vote in person. If they don't want to take care of that, there's ample ways to

[8:18] get in here. I just I think it's one more cost that we're passing on to the

[8:23] taxpayers that not everybody is going to Other people are going to have to incur

[8:28] costs in order to go vote. Or we're going to force everybody to

[8:32] say, "I'm not going to go to the polls because I'm just going to mail it in

[8:36] with the free stamp from the county." So,

[8:40] just my point of view.

[8:44] » [clears throat] >> Thank you.

[8:45] » Yep. >> Mr. Chair?

[8:49] » Yes. >> I still go back to my original way of

[8:53] thinking. When we first started with the mail-in ballots, we did not pay postage

[8:57] on them, and we just started to within the last few years.

[9:02] And it's almost

[9:06] we're giving something to some people and nothing to other people. We don't

[9:11] give people money for their gas or

[9:15] an exact amount for their getting up, going out, and going to the polls and

[9:21] vote, but yet we're giving something to somebody

[9:25] that it only requires a stamp. So, I voted the same way the last several

[9:31] years, and I'll vote the same way today.

[9:35] » Thank you. Anyone else?

[9:39] » Mr. Chair, if I can. We we

[9:43] » Yes. >> we personally

[9:45] sit and adjudicate uh defective ballots for missing

[9:51] signatures, for bad dates, for highly unusual arrangements of

[9:57] privacy envelope not in there, in there but signed and we we've seen any manner

[10:03] of ballots being returned to us. Um and

[10:09] And I I really think you have a scenario where people might not even realize that

[10:15] the policy has changed and still thought that return postage was paid and just

[10:19] dropped these things in mailboxes. I mean, the number one thing that we can

[10:23] do to establish a voter um

[10:28] uh

[10:31] voter opinion that our elections are safe and secure is that they're also

[10:35] stable. And and aren't radically changing from

[10:39] year to year, that people are very familiar with the processes. It's been,

[10:43] I believe, 3 years that we've had this in place.

[10:46] Uh and I just don't think it's a good idea to just shift radically and decide

[10:52] based off of whatever makeup is on the Board of Elections on the given year

[10:56] determines our processes. That

[11:00] I understand that there's a partisan tinge to some of this conversation.

[11:04] Uh but I mean, just for the sake of stability in our elections that we

[11:09] should try to adhere to the same processes.

[11:14] » Mr. Chairman >> Mr. Copeland.

[11:17] Yes.

[11:20] » On what Mr. Copeland is saying, I totally agree with

[11:24] him. Standard way

[11:28] without confusing the voter out there every time we have

[11:32] an election. >> Mr. Chairman,

[11:35] uh in response to that, I would like to make a suggestion that we vote on this

[11:39] today so that we can let the vendor know to proceed with postage paid or not.

[11:44] Um and we could draft a resolution for the next Board of Elections meeting so

[11:48] this could be prepared in a policy format and let the board vote

[11:54] um to uh renew that as a policy or not. But

[11:58] let's do a standalone vote today and have a resolution prepared so that we

[12:02] can adopt that as a formal resolution or not at the next meeting.

[12:08] » Mr. Chucar, uh you took the words right out of my mouth. I feel strongly with

[12:13] Mr. Copeland on the consistency level here. I'm definitely not in favor of

[12:17] changing anything in the middle of an election year. We just had a primary, we

[12:22] did it one way, we're going into the general, it should be consistent.

[12:27] Um I would also appreciate you um putting together

[12:32] um you know, so that we can have this be

[12:34] policy and the next Board of Elections we can vote on that so we don't have to

[12:40] continue to keep coming back and and voting on this. Like the

[12:46] the integrity of the election is greatly affected by the consistency.

[12:51] We don't want to be changing rules on people. So

[12:54] and that's that's sort of how I feel about this.

[12:58] We could put that this question to a vote now for the

[13:02] postage uh to be approved for this general

[13:06] election for the vendor. If nobody else has any

[13:10] anything to add to the conversation.

[13:17] » Yeah. Mr. Chairman, I guess I'll just I'm confused in how

[13:21] the stamp keeps the integrity of our elections,

[13:25] especially when we're talking about a ballot that's filled out

[13:29] in a person's residence with no witness, no anything. So, we're

[13:35] relying on a person's personal integrity. So, I failed to draw the the

[13:39] con- the line between the the stamp and and

[13:43] having integrity in a a mail-in ballot. That's all.

[13:47] » Well, it I I can appreciate that point, but consistency definitely does

[13:53] matter here. And we're in the middle of you know, an election year. We're not

[14:00] I mean, unless we vote otherwise, I don't think we should be changing that.

[14:06] » Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to approve.

[14:10] » Second.

[14:14] » Call for the question, Mr. Chilcott.

[14:18] » Mr. Copeland. >> Yes.

[14:21] » Mr. Drexel. >> Yes.

[14:24] » Mr. Sherman. >> No.

[14:26] » Mr. Scutella. >> Yes.

[14:28] » Mr. Wertz. >> Yes.

[14:30] » Mr. Merski. >> No.

[14:33] » Mr. Bayle. >> No.

[14:35] » And

[14:38] motion carries 4 to 3.

[14:44] » Anything further?

[14:48] » Uh as a separate matter, uh I just wanted

[14:51] to let everyone know that Secretary of State Al Schmidt will be in Erie next

[14:56] week, and he will be >> [clears throat]

[14:59] » uh presenting an award to the Benedictine Sisters of Erie on Monday,

[15:04] and will be uh speaking at our election conference that starts at Bayfront on

[15:09] Tuesday. So, I just wanted to make that

[15:11] announcement. We're happy to welcome Secretary of State. And we also have uh

[15:16] a citation here for our members to sign so that can be presented at the the time

[15:21] on Monday. >> Karen, if you wouldn't mind affixing my

[15:25] stamp, I would appreciate it. >> All right.

[15:30] I I have one thing. Karen, um did you get a hold of Janice Morris, uh Godfrey

[15:36] Glenn? >> Uh we have been reviewing we have some

[15:40] potential polling location changes and uh we're still looking into all of those

[15:45] options. And I forwarded those, we discussed those at our last staff

[15:49] meeting, and he and his staff members have gone out to explore those

[15:52] locations. >> But that was not on the list.

[15:55] » Yes. >> All right. I might If I see them, I

[15:58] might give them a heads-up. >> Okay.

[16:00] » They might get a phone call if that's okay.

[16:02] » Okay, sure. >> Okay.

[16:06] » We're looking at having um a Board of Elections meeting, if not before, on

[16:11] September 15th to approve the ballot. That gives us the longest amount of time

[16:16] between uh time of approval and getting mail

[16:20] ballots out. Uh we just were able to determine that

[16:23] date this morning, so wanted to communicate that to the board as well.

[16:29] » Thank you.

[16:32] If nothing else, um do I have a motion

[16:36] to adjourn? >> So moved.

[16:43] » All right, thank you everyone.

7-30-26 Special Meeting of the Board of Elections

Agenda

Transcript