Election results stand barring voter complaint
Posted on Tuesday, April 24, 2007
The certification of the April 10 election will stand unless someone decides to sue over counting the last overseas ballot received.
Washington County Attorney George Butler said his research indicated that counting the ballot which changed the outcome of the election was indeed the correct decision. If a voter disagrees with that opinion, he said, he or she can hire a lawyer and file a complaint in circuit court within 20 days of the certification, which was April 20.
Butler directed the Washington County Election Commission to count the last overseas ballot received even though there was a slight discrepancy in the paperwork filed by the voter, Michael Lea.
Lea cast a ballot against the impact fees for roads. It tied the question, effectively defeating it. The measure - which would have meant tacking on an additional fee to new development to generate an estimated $ 3. 4 million a year for roads - was split with each side getting 2, 015 votes.
Butler said the landmark case about absentee ballots dealt with a different type of problem.
The case ended with more than 500 absentee ballots being thrown out in a municipal judge election, in which 495 votes were tossed because the reason listed for needing to vote absentee was not reported. In this case, Lea listed a different street address on two forms, one listing 1630 and the other 1632.
Multiple zip codes were also offered on Lea's paperwork, which included two applications for absentee ballots in 2004 and 2006. The address on the voter statement received matched the address on file with the Washington County clerk.
While there hasn't been any indication that anyone will sue, it wouldn't be the first time, said John Logan Burrow, chairman of the Election Commission.
"We've been in court before over the outcome of elections," Burrow said. "The time we had to decide the mayor of Elkins with a name from a hat resulted in litigation, so we're no strangers to that process."
Burrow said this was a case where the voter made mistakes in filing the paperwork, but that is not the point. What matters is that this person was voting legitimately, he said, and it is not the intent of the law to make it difficult to cast a ballot.
"In my mind the whole reason for filling out the form is to make it clear that this really is that voter," Burrow said. "In every respect -the handwriting was the same, the signature was the same - there were four different documents written out by the same person. He just happened to make a few mistakes. "
Burrow said one thing that came to light was a discrepancy in that the law requires the commission to read the precinct of the absentee voter, though it doesn't ask for it. He said that change will likely make it to the next General Assembly.
It was unfortunate there was only one absentee ballot, which made it impossible to protect the privacy of the voter, Burrow said.
"I really regret the fact that we lost the ability to have a secret ballot for this voter, but there was nothing we could do," he said.
The ballot was mailed from a military installation in Panama.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
