Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township

The ‘To Toll or Not to Toll’ Discussion Continues . . . A Personal Response from State Rep Warren Kampf

June 10, 2011
16 Comments

The ‘To Toll or Not to Toll’ discussion continues . . . the tolling of 422 continues to make headlines and yesterday was a busy day for legislators on either side of the issue.

In an op-ed article (6/9/11) in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Joe Hoeffel (D), vice chair of the Montgomery County Commission and chair of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, wrote, “there isn’t enough state or federal money for the job. The state has budgeted $250 million for the Route 422 corridor over the next decade, but transportation experts agree that $750 million is needed. And nobody believes the legislature or Congress will provide that kind of funding anytime soon. Without a new funding source, 422 will not be fixed for at least 30 years, according to projections by the state Department of Transportation. By that time, the highway will be gridlocked for much of the day.” Hoeffel supports tolling of 422 and believes that a modest toll could generate $800 million in a few years.

Opposing the tolling of 422, state representatives David Maloney, (R) Berks, Marcy Toepel, (R) Montgomery, Tom Quigley, (R) Montgomery and Warren Kampf (R), our 157th district representative, held a news conference in Phoenixville yesterday. Calling the 422 project, the Hoeffel Tolling Plan, these local legislators do not believe that tolling is a viable option to pay for infrastructure improvements. Click here for a short video clip of the press conference.

There continues to be much written and discussed about the tolling of 422. Depending on how you feel about the topic, you can find supporters on either side of the issue; those for tolling and those against tolling. However, regardless of your personal views on tolling, I think we can all agree that the traffic congestion on 422 is a commuter’s nightmare and that something needs to change, and. . . we need people with a vision to encourage that change.

We aware that our own state representative continues to stand behind his ‘no tolling of 422′ campaign message — but it was unclear to me whether Kampf considered that Route 422 was actually a traffic problem. Seeking clarification on his ‘422 traffic’ position, I sent him this simple email a couple of days ago:

Dear Rep. Kampf,

As my elected State Representative, do you believe that there is a traffic problem on Route 422?

Thank you and I look forward to your response.

Pattye Benson

As some of you are aware, my previous communication with Kampf has not always been the most successful. Now that he is our elected state representative, I was curious to see if anything had changed and admit I was pleasantly surprised that he took the time to send a personal and lengthy response. I believe that there is value in my sharing his response and have notified him that I would be adding it to today’s post on Community Matters. His reply to my email:

Pattye:

Thank you for your email. I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you may have heard, I am on record as being against tolling 422. I believe that this “toll” is just another name for a tax on the already overburdened commuters of that roadway. But I recognize that 422 is a transportation problem for commuters.

The idea to address 422’s needs without tolling is not solely mine; Governor Corbett has convened a Transportation Funding Advisory Committee that is looking at over 50 prospective ways to address the funding gap for our road/bridge infrastructure (tolling is one of the options but in no way is it the only option being discussed). I believe that prioritizing, finding cost savings and advocacy for our regional roadways must be tools considered as part of the discussion too.

I have empathy for the people who drive that roadway, and I have my own personal experience on 422 to draw from. We all pay the same gas taxes and vehicle fees that others in Pennsylvania pay, but the response to fix our road has been to ask my constituents to pay up to $5 a day more for the privilege of driving that road! That just seems unfair.

Other areas have had road and bridge needs addressed. PennDOT does have a larger plan for the area’s roads. As you know, 202 is getting significant improvement. Route 309 was also rebuilt. These projects came to fruition not with tolling revenue but with the already existing sources within the Commonwealth that I mentioned above. Why is 422 unique?

There is over $240 Million currently programmed for improvement of 422 during the next eight (8) years within the PennDOT plans. This is in the plan without tolling. While it is not enough, and does not come fast enough, it will be a good start. Tolling does not appear likely to make this set of improvements happen any faster that I can tell. Further, this proposal is being billed as a public private partnership, but fundamentally it is almost entirely public money—both tolls and other transportation funding—that will pay for these improvements. Finally, there is a rail line proposal in the mix here, paid for with toll money. While I certainly recognize the attractiveness of restored rail to towns like Phoenixville, this will in all likelihood require management by SEPTA, or some such entity, and we know such rail lines usually run at a significant deficit year in and year out. That cost will ultimately pass on to the taxpayers, and I campaigned on a platform that promised the taxpayer, in tough times such as these and in good times, a seat at the table when these decisions are made. I feel I am making good on that commitment but seeking alternatives.

As a final thought, we built 422 with public money. We have maintained it with public money. We have continued to collect those monies and have an obligation to serve the people who drive that road. One could argue it would be a violation of the public trust to change the game now and introduce tolls. The 422 corridor continues to grow in large part because of the access that road provides. Indeed, it is a road regularly used for shopping and other trips not related to “commuting.” I believe my constituents feel as I do, and I welcome your input.

Thank you for your question.

Warren

Looks like the 422 Tolling Vision has Taken a Step Forward to Becoming Tomorrow’s Reality!

June 7, 2011
30 Comments

The vision of some to toll 422 moved one step closer to a reality yesterday . . . and by all accounts, did so with flying colors.

Barry Seymour of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) along with Joe Hoeffel, Montgomery County Commissioner presented the 422-tolling proposal to the Governors Transportation Funding Advisory Commission. To review the 422 Corridor Plus slide presentation from the meeting, click here. — I found the information detailed and informative; helped to give me a better picture on the scope of the project.

I was curious to hear the comments and reactions to the 422 presentation and spoke with a Paoli resident who attended the Harrisburg meeting. Reportedly, there was no tolling opposition from the advisory group – in fact, there was much positive feedback from those in attendance. Although this meeting is only the first step in a long process, it seems that the DVRPC’s presentation answered several of the questions that I had —

If approved, what the timeline for the 422 project: 2015.
How much commuter time saved: DVRPC estimates 20 min.
Toll costs: A range, $.50 – $2.65, depending on distance travelled. Four electronic toll booths to be constructed; drivers to use EZ pass.

As discussed earlier, the management of the 422 tolling project would remain local and all revenue generated from the project would be used for local projects, including the light rail commuter train. I don’t know how I feel about creating another commission or board for this project. According to a friend, this project could fall under the umbrella of the PA Turnpike Commission with a mandate to keep the tolls generated from 422 locally in Berks, Montgomery and Chester counties. If that’s the case, why create another board; why not have the project fall under the Turnpike Commissioner’s responsibility. I guess the thought is if the project is handled separately under local management, it helps sell the project to residents and possibly adds a level guarantee that the tolling dollars remain here.

In asking how the project would be funded, I was told that initially it would be funded with a $1 billion bond, which would be repaid by tolling revenue. I’m guessing that the bond issue needs support from the local municipalities involved – would the funding of the project require a voter referendum in the Chester, Montgomery and Berks county districts involved?

Looks like the 422 tolling vision of some has taken a step forward to becoming tomorrow’s reality!

For Whom the Road Tolls: Day of Reckoning for Rt. 422 Tolling Begins

June 5, 2011
14 Comments

The tolling of Rt. 422 was front-page headlines in Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer. Rising to the top of the local news charts, the tolling of 422 is not ‘new’ news for most of us. Unless you have had your head buried in the sand, you could not have missed this much discussed campaign topic during the last State House 157 election cycle. There was much heated debate from both sides on the ‘to toll or not to toll’ 422 issue.

If you are one of the 110,000+ commuters who daily sit in parking lot gridlock, known as Rt. 422, it looks like there may be light at the end of the tunnel. Tomorrow (Monday), Barry Seymour of Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) will present agenda item, ‘US 422 Plus: A Proposal for Funding Improvements’ (click here for agenda) to the Governors Transportation Funding Advisory Committee. The DVRPC $625K plan “would create a locally run authority to collect 11 cents per mile and keep that money to fund improvements such as new lanes”. Seymour hopes his DVRPC plan will convince the advisory committee and ultimately Gov. Corbett of the value of the 422-tolling project.

If granted legislative approval, the project would become the first locally managed highway toll system of its kind in Pennsylvania . . . a ‘model’ for the state. All of the revenue would be devoted to 422-corridor projects and DVRPC plan supporters believe that making Rt. 422 a toll road in Berks, Montgomery and Chester counties is the only way to pay for a new passenger-rail service to Reading and to finance the badly needed upgrades to the congested highway.

Others voice opposition to the 422 tolling issue, including our own State Rep Warren Kampf. Still standing behind his campaign promise to voters not to toll 422, Kampf believes that “Tolling is just another way of taxing people going to work in these hard economic times. They’re already paying a lot of money in gas taxes and other fees” and he doesn’t “think that this is something they want.”

Where does this leave the frustrated, brake-slamming, horn-worthy commuters who suffer the daily use of Route 422? Maybe answers will emerge as the day of reckoning begins in Harrisburg tomorrow.

Looking for a Job? Local Government has Openings

June 4, 2011
11 Comments

Our local government has a couple of immediate employment opportunities – for a Director of Public Works and a Zoning & Code Enforcement Officer.

Steve Norcini’s last day on the job as Tredyffrin’s Director of Public Works Department was this past Friday. It is my understanding that Steve left Tredyffrin for a new job as the director of Public Works in Radnor Township. Under Steve’s leadership in Tredyffrin, the Public Works Department successfully battled the last couple of winters for the residents – this was no easy task and the residents were very grateful for the long hours and time to keep the roads cleared for the residents. Snow removal was just one responsibility on the long job description list as head of Tredyffrin’s Public Works Department.

Tredyffrin’s loss of Steve Norcini is Radnor’s gain . . . he will be missed! Congratulations and best wishes Steve!

Here is a partial description of the Director of Public Works position. If you are interested in the position, email a cover letter and resume to the attention of Mimi Gleason, Township Manager, director@tredyffrin.org .

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

The Director of Public Works must be well-organized with strong leadership and motivational skills. Capital projects must be demonstrably well-designed and cost effective. Effective communication with the public and staff is a must. The next Director must have the ability to develop a strong relationship with employees to maintain trust and morale while addressing the challenges facing local units of government today. Other necessary skills include effective budgeting, smart use of technology and time management. New initiatives will include developing performance measures and using web-based technology for work orders.

Minimum qualifications: Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering or related field and ten years experience, at least five years in a supervisory capacity in Public Works or a closely related field. Excellent benefits, salary based on qualifications.

Click here for job description.

The second job opportunity currently available in our local government is for a Zoning & Code Enforcement Officer. Emmy Baldassarree, an employee of the township for 18 years, currently holds this position but will be retiring in a few short weeks. As Zoning & Code Enforcement Officer, Emmy is actively involved in much of the township zoning and application process in the township. As a member of HARB for a number of years, I have had the pleasure of working with Emmy . . . she will not be easy to replace and will be missed by many in the community. Here’s to a happy retirement Emmy, you earned it!

If you are interested or know someone who may be interested, below is the job description for the Zoning & Code Enforcement Officer position.

ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

Professional position involving administration of the zoning permit review process, making determinations of compliance with the zoning ordinance and property maintenance ordinance, managing the application process for and providing professional advice and assistance to the Zoning Hearing Board, maintaining the zoning map, conducting on site inspections, researching zoning ordinance and subdivision and land development ordinance inquiries, preparing regular reports to the Board of Supervisors, attending professional association meeting and conferences to remain current on planning and community development trends.

Minimum qualifications: College degree with one year of related experience. Necessary skills include ability to communicate clearly and concisely orally and in writing, general proficiency with common computer programs and software including Microsoft Office and Arc View, and manage multiple tasks efficiently and simultaneously.

Full time position with excellent benefits and competitive salary. Send resume and references to: zoposition@tredyffrin.org EOE.

T/E School Board’s Special Meeting on June 1 includes Amended TENIG Agreement . . . No Custodial Outsourcing but What about the $800K Proposed Savings?

May 31, 2011
31 Comments

The TESD 2011-12 budget process started in late 2010 and has included multiple budget, finance and school board meetings and updates to the public. The school board and administration have worked to present a timeline of budget information and to keep us informed on budget strategies. Hearing the ‘shared sacrifice’ appeal from the Board to the Tredyffrin Easttown Education Association (TEEA) teachers union, both sides were able to come to an agreement for the 2011-12 school year, which included a salary wage freeze. The process was tedious and both TESD and TEEA appeared satisfied with the results.

Throughout the budget process, the administration and Board supported TESD’s educational standard as its focus and priority. Any budget strategies requiring cuts to educational programming was only with much discussion. One such expense reduction decision was the budget strategy that included eliminating Latin and German in the middle school . . . a difficult decision, but one that was required to help bridge the budget deficit. Generally, I have observed willingness on the Board’s part to fully disseminate the budget information and to keep the budget process as transparent as possible. It is for that very reason that I find this week’s special board meeting and the notification of agenda items (or lack of notification) somewhat troubling.

I received email notification last week of TESD’s upcoming special board meeting on Wednesday, June 1 at 5:30 PM. The stated purpose of the meeting is to approve the Conestoga High School graduating Class of 2011. There was no mention of any other agenda items at the meeting – and I probably would not have bothered to check further except that a township resident alerted me. In review, the June 1 agenda includes a “proposal to amend the TENIG collective bargaining agreement”. Contained in the agenda materials is the proposed amended TENIG agreement and schedule of wages, effective 4/29/11 – 6/30/14. (Click Here for meeting agenda, see pgs. 5-7 for TENIG agreement and schedule of wages).

I will discuss the contents of the TENIG agreement and wages later in this post, but first I will address TESD process as it relates to the outsourcing of custodial services. For months, there has been discussion at the budget, finance and regular school board meetings about the possibility of outsourcing of custodial services as a budget strategy option. At each meeting where details of the budget were presented, there was always a slide indicating the possible savings of $800K for custodial outsourcing. To quantify the District savings, the administration sent out a RFP for custodial outsourcing earlier in the year. According to the School Board Meeting Minutes of 3/21/11, “. . . the results of bidding on outsourcing custodial services will be available on April 4 and will be provided to TENIG for review. The committee will evaluate the bid results as an option to balance the budget”.

The School Board Meeting Minutes of 4/25/11 further reflected that “. . . The District is in the process of analyzing bid results for the outsourcing of custodial staff. These bid results have been shared with TENIG, and we continue discussions with TENIG on alternatives to outsourcing. . . “

At the May 9 School Board Meeting, the 2011-12 Final Budget was presented; (Click Here for Final Budget) Page 15 shows the following:

*Remaining Budget Shortfall ($2,183,448)
Options to Close Shortfall:
1. Outsourcing Custodial Services: $800,000
2. Pay Increase Waiver TENIG only: $300,000
3. Additional Budget Strategies $0
4. Use of Fund Balance $2,183,448
(Tentative for Proposed Final Budget on May 9th)
*Includes TEEA Proposal of 50% Pay Increase Waiver of May 6th

Contained in the proposed final budget is the salary freeze offer from the teachers union, TEEA. There was no mention in the budget presentation of the status of the custodial services outsourcing or of TENIG’s contract.

After the meeting, I mentioned to a couple of Board members that I was surprised that custodial outsourcing was not on the agenda nor was there any mention made of the results of the bids for the outsourcing; but received no response. There was indication in the final budget (see above chart) that one of the few options remaining to close the shortfall was outsourcing of custodial services — an expected savings of $800K. How many outsource bids were received? What were the offers? How did the custodial outsourcing bids stack up against TENIG’s contract for custodial services?

Following the May 9 school board meeting, the TESD released a press release summarizing the proposed final budget:

http://www.tesd.net/2127101028153743227/lib/2127101028153743227/11may9.pdf

Highlights of the proposed 2011-12 proposed final budget includes:
(1) Property tax increase of 3.77%, which equates to an average increase of $171 to T/E homeowners;
(2) $3.85 million in expense reductions and revenue increases;
(3) And $2.25 million in fund balance contribution to address the $8.9 million budget gap between revenues and expenditures.

The press release further explained that the proposed final budget includes the offer from the T/E instructional collective bargaining unit (TEEA). As was the case at the TESD Board Meeting, the summary does not (1) address the projected savings resulting from outsourcing custodial services ($800K) or (2) pay increase waiver from non-instructional collective bargaining unit, TENIG ($300K). According to the May 9 School Board Meeting Minutes these are the only remaining options to close the budget shortfall

What I find fascinating in the May 9 press release is the statement that the Board is “still evaluating other options to close the budget shortfall and will present the final budget on June 13”.

We now fast forward to tomorrow’s special board meeting and find that negotiations between TESD and TENIG have apparently already taken place and there is now a proposal for an amended TENIG agreement.

Questions: What happened with the custodial outsourcing bid process? What were the results of the bids? Why did the notification for tomorrow’s special board meeting not include any mention of the TENIG amended agreement proposal?

The custodial services outsourcing process began correctly but somehow the Board lost the transparency in the process and now we are left with the end product – the amended TENG contract. Although the Board continued to say meeting after meeting that there were looking at the final remaining budget savings options, we skip over the $800K option to outsource custodial services without explanation. To be fair, it is entirely possible that after reviewing the bids for outsourcing, the Board decided for any number of reasons (cost, student security, etc.) that they wanted to keep the custodial service ‘as is’ and covered by TENIG. These reasons could be valid – but why not let the public know why and how that decision was made?

Now we if look at the amended TENIG agreement; I have received several questions and concerns from taxpayers on this matter. Yes, TENIG has agreed to a salary freeze for 2011-12 year and I think that savings may be $300K. However, there are two additional years to the TENIG contract with increases of 4.5% each year. Was there any attempt by the Board to negotiate those increases? Is it possible that the District is (1) losing the cost savings of outsourcing custodial services and (2) additionally giving a pay increase to custodial staff?

The Board has been so diligent in their budget review process when cutting educational programs and increasing student fees (increased student parking fees and driver’s education training), I am surprised that non-education wages of TENIG are increased.

In closing, I have a couple of problems: (1) where was the transparency in the outsourcing process, and (2) understanding there remains a $2+ million budget shortfall in TESD, how can the Board rationalize an increase in TENIG wages in 2012 and 13 when the District has been forced to cut educational programming and increase fees.

Memorial Day: Remember to Remember

May 28, 2011
Comments

Memorial Day weekend marks the unofficial start of summer and usually means a relaxing day off from work, maybe a trip to the Jersey Shore or hot dogs on the grill.

But in the midst of all the fun, please take some time to remember those who have served and sacrificed their lives to provide us with the freedoms and opportunities we so enjoy and to remember that freedom is not free.

Take pause this Memorial Day 2011 to remember the number: 1,344,000. That’s the number of American military members who have died in wars and skirmishes defending our way of life. War is a deadly business. This day is for those 1.3 million lives cut short, and their untold millions of dreams left forgotten and unfulfilled. Behind those lives lost are acts of heroism and sacrifice, known and unknown, on battlefields large and small, on very imaginable landscape in every corner of the globe. Their deeds and sense of duty helped save countless other lives and preserved our nation.

Our soldiers, our sailors, our airmen and our Marines . . . they take up arms to defend our freedoms. They protect us from tyrants and offer their lives in the name of liberty. For one day each year, we stop to remember those names on a wall that didn’t come home. Remember all those men and women who died defending our way of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Lee Greenwood’s lyrics say it best, “I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free. And I won’t forget the men who died, who gave that right to me.”

Memorial Day 2011, let us give thanks for our freedom and remember those who made it possible.

TTDEMS Chair Dariel Jamieson Offers Comment on Special Election Ballot Hand-Counting

May 26, 2011
8 Comments

Dariel Jamieson, chair of the Tredyffrin Township Democratic Committee, provided a comment to Community Matters. Jamieson’s remarks speak directly to the hand count by Chester County Department of Voter Services on Monday of the Special Election ballots. Her remarks provide us with further details of the recounting process and I thought it important to provide them in this post (see below).

In her remarks, Jamieson brings up an interesting point – it certainly would have helped if Voter Services had run the ballots through a voting machine prior to the hand count. I would think that if Voter Services could duplicate the machine malfunction error, there would be a greater probability of correcting the problem! Echoing a question that another CM reader posed, what were the candidates told by Voter Services as the ‘reason’ for the 61 uncounted votes.

[Subsequent to this post, Dariel Jamieson has provided an official press release from the TTDEMS, click here to read. According to Jamieson’s information, over 100 of the 223 precincts in Chester County have not reported voting irregularities. In my opinion, there should be a complete internal examination of systems and procedures at the Department of Voter Services.]

In reading between-the-lines of Jamieson’s remarks, is there a sense that the end of the story may not yet be told?

Comment from Dariel Jamieson, Chair, Tredyffrin Township Democratic Committee

I have been told by our witnesses that there was NOT a machine count of the Tredyffrin votes prior to the full manual recount. We believe Voter Services acted with good intentions, thinking it would be helpful to speed resolution of the special election by going right to a manual count. While this did speed things up, I personally believe that a machine count first might have shed some light on how and why the machines might have been malfunctioning.

Voter Services also told our witnesses that there was no way to know for sure that all the uncounted ballots were Republican, although seeing the outcome of counting them Makes it look like they were. We were told that all the ballots that were accepted into the machines end up in the same compartment, so it could not definitively be said which ones were counted and which were not. If something was wrong with only Republican ballots, why did they not all reject?

A reconciliation of the number of ballots that were counted in the manual count has not yet been reconciled to the number of signatures in the sign in sheets and names in the poll books. Voter Services has said that those kinds of reconciliations will be done after all the precincts in the County have gone through the official count process. If those numbers all match, then one could conclude that the number of physical ballots that were manually counted was the correct number of ballots. If they should not match, one would have to ask where the additional ballots came from.

Speculation that putting the ballots in face up, face down, backward, or with poor tears of the perforation could all be possible, but that seems incompatible with the idea that all the unread ballots were Republican.

And adding 61 ballots to the mix will almost certainly change the totals in the other races, bur probably not enough to change any primary election vote outcomes.

We, too, are waiting for answers.

Steve Shapiro, Judge of Elections for Tredyffrin’s W-2 Precinct, Offers Step-by-Step Guide to Voting Procedures

May 26, 2011
3 Comments

To help us better understand our voting procedure, Steve Shapiro, the Judge of Elections for the W-2 precinct, has graciously provided us detailed notes below. Steve’s explanation offers us the step-by-step guide to the voting procedure and to the close out at the end of an election day. As I read his notes, it is clear that Steve takes extra steps to protect the voting system process and to insure the quality and accuracy of election results. I know that all that read Community Matters, join me in thanking Steve for his thorough explanation . . . a great community service. Thanks Steve!

Steve Shapiro
Judge of Elections
W-2 Precinct, Tredyffrin Township

Here is an overview of the voting process and the end-of-night procedures:

Before we open the polls, we set up the paper ballot scanner (the M-100) and the electronic machine (the iVotronic). We print out a tape from each showing that no votes have been cast on either machine.

During voting hours, we look up each voter in the Poll Books. If we find them, we have them sign the Poll Book. We also record their name in a different book, called the “Numbered List of Voters Book,” which contains a separate numbered line for each voter. The Numbered List of Voters Book allows us to easily determine, at the end of the day, how many voters signed-in and received a ballot (either paper or electronic). If a voter chooses to vote on a paper ballot, we record the number of the ballot next to his or her name in both the Poll Book and the Numbered List of Voters Book. If the voter chooses to vote electronically, we so indicate in both books. Here a sample of the Numbered List of Voters Book from our poll worker manual, click here.

After a paper ballot voter makes his or her selections, he or she takes the completed ballot to the M-100. An election worker removes the strip at the bottom of the ballot that contains the ballot number, and gives it to the voter as receipt. Now that the ballot number has been removed, the ballot becomes anonymous (it cannot be traced back to the voter) and the voter places the ballot into the machine.

If there are no problems with the ballot, the M-100 processes it and drops the ballot into a locked compartment for safe-keeping. If there are any errors on the ballot that prevent the scanner from reading it, the M-100 displays an error message and returns the ballot (at least, that’s what it’s supposed to do). If there are any over-votes on the ballot (for instance, a voter votes for 3 candidates in a race where he only may vote for 2), the M-100 will display an error message and ask the voter whether he wants to either accept the ballot as-is (thereby invalidating the vote in the race in which he over-voted) or take the ballot back and correct it. Here is the summary of the possible M-100 scanner errors from the poll worker manual – click here.

If a paper ballot voter makes a mistake and needs to correct his or her ballot, we issue a new ballot, change the ballot number for that voter in both the Poll Book and the Numbered List of Voters Book, and keep the spoiled ballot so we can account for it when we close the polls.

An electronic voter makes his selections on the iVotronic’s touchscreen and presses the “Vote” button when he or she is done. The iVotronic will not let a voter over-vote or otherwise mess up his ballot, so we never have to deal with spoiled electronic ballots.

At the end of the night, the first thing we do it process the absentee ballots. The County delivers absentee ballots to us in sealed envelopes with the voter’s signature on the outside of the envelope. We first check the Poll Books to make sure that the voter did not vote in person and that the signature on the envelope matches the signature in the Poll Book. If everything checks out, we open the outer envelope, and remove the sealed inner envelope that contains the ballot. We then mix up the sealed inner envelopes to anonymise them before opening them, removing the ballots and scanning them into the M-100.

Next, we close the voting machines. For the iVotronic, all that entails is a few presses on the touchscreen to lock down the voting function on the machine. We then print off a closing tape that shows the total ballots cast and the number of votes each candidate received. The tape shows only totals — it does not show how each voter voted. We also remove the data card on which the votes are electronically recorded.

The M-100 requires more effort. First, we print out a tape that shows the total ballots cast and the number of votes each candidate received. Then we remove the data card on which the votes are electronically recorded. Next, we open the machine and remove the ballots. The M-100 deposits any ballots with write-in votes into a different compartment. We review those ballots and hand-write the write-in votes onto a tally sheet. We then add the ballots with write-in votes to the rest of the ballots and count all of them by hand to see how many ballots we have (in a primary we have the added step of separating the ballots by party before we count them).

Once the hand count is completed, we fill in a “General Returns of Votes Cast” form. Here is a link to a sample General Return from the poll worker manual:

The form is basically a worksheet that allows us to ascertain whether we have accounted for all of the paper ballots. We add up the number of paper ballots cast, the number of spoiled ballots and the number of left-over ballots. That sum should equal the number the ballots the County delivered to us at the beginning of the day. We also add the number of paper ballots cast to the number of electronic ballots cast to come up with the total number of ballots cast. If, during this process, the numbers do not add up, you are supposed to flag that for Voter Services by writing a note in the “Remarks” box on the General Return.

At this point, it is my practice to check the total number of ballots cast on the General Return against the following to make sure they jive: (1) the number of voters listed in the Numbered List of Voters Book; and (2) the number of ballots cast as reported on the machine tapes. That is how we discovered the problem last week — the number of ballots cast on the General Return did not match the number of ballots cast on the tapes. I concede that neither the General Return nor the poll worker instructions direct us to make that comparison (maybe it should), but it seems like common sense to me. In addition, all poll workers take an oath before we open the polls, and I believe that checking all of the numbers for discrepancies is consistent with the part of the oath in which I swear to faithfully perform my duties to the best of my judgment and ability. A copy of the oath from the poll worker manual is here.

After we discovered the problem last Tuesday, we made a note in the remarks box on the General Return. I also emailed Voter Services and copied a representative of each party (that is not required, but it seemed like good practice).

As for the poll workers’ signatures, even if the numbers on the General Return do not add up and we leave a note for Voter Services, we still have to sign the General Return. So we are not certifying that the numbers are correct; rather we are saying that the reported numbers are what we counted. Likewise, although we have to sign the tapes from the machines, we are are not certifying that the numbers on the tape are accurate. We could not possibly know, for instance, whether the M-100 scanned the votes properly. Rather, by signing the tapes we are saying that these are the tapes we printed from the machines.

Finally, we place the General Return and the data cards into a small pouch, which we seal with a security tab. We place the paper ballots into a large pouch, which we also seal with a security tab. We then drive both pouches, along with all of the other election supplies, to Voter Services in West Chester. The unofficial results you see on election night are taken, I think, from the data cards (the tapes are just a print out of the information on the data cards).

Although the Dark End of the World Predictions Failed, There’s Light for Tredyffrin’s Special Election

May 23, 2011
5 Comments

If you are reading this, the end of the world predictions failed to pan out for Harold Camping. The religious broadcaster made the world’s biggest mistake, twice. Camping got the date wrong in 1994 when he said the world would end that year, and later explained its continued existence by saying he had made a mathematical error.

However, the May 21, 2011 prediction was different; Camping and his followers lavishly spent more than $100 million on billboards and radio advertising. Now Camping is left shaking his head, bewildered, that things did not go according to his prediction and the world did not end at 6 PM on May 21. With no Plan B in place, Camping may be forced to find some obscure, overlooked translation or an error in his math and then move the apocalypse date to a new date.

To follow up on last week’s special election in Tredyffrin, by the time you read this, there may be further news. It is my understanding that at 9 AM this morning (Monday), the two at-large supervisor candidates, Democrat Molly Duffy and Republican Mike Heaberg are meeting with Chester County voter service representatives. (The special election determined who would fill the vacated seat of Warren Kampf until January 2012). Also in attendance for the voter services meeting will be a representative from the local Democratic and Republican parties. Additionally, Duffy and Heaberg will each have an attorney present. Voter services will be conducting a hand count of the votes from the special election with Duffy, Heaberg and others in attendance.

I am not clear if voter services is hand counting the votes from all 17 precincts or only the precincts where is evidence of voting machine malfunctions. As it now stands, the unofficial vote count from last week’s special election indicates 2,266 votes for Duffy and 2,226 votes for Heaberg, a difference of 40 votes. The public needs to know that the total count in the special election is accurate and that all votes were counted, but . . . we as a community need to get to the other side of this issue and accept he voter services hand counting today.

Tonight is the Board of Supervisors meeting . . . will supervisor Heaberg remain on the dais as a member of the Board of Supervisors or, if the hand count with voter services supports the unofficial results that Duffy is the winner, will she take her seat as a supervisor? Originally, all indications were that the official results from the special election would be official and certified in 4-6 weeks. However, the special election hand counting is taking precedent over voter services handling of the primary election results; perhaps there will be an official vote count released today. Stay tuned.

The End of the World is Today, May 21, 2011 . . . Or Not

May 21, 2011
2 Comments

“Apply yourself both now and in the next life. Without effort, you cannot be prosperous. Though the land be good, you cannot have an abundant crop without cultivation.” ~ Plato

Plato’s words may be put to the test today. The AP wires and major news networks worldwide are running with the story . . . the end of the world is nigh; today, May 21, 2011, to be precise. At least today is the date that Harold Camping, a preacher from Oakland, California is predicting the end will come.

If Mr. Camping were speaking from any normal pulpit, it might be easy for us to dismiss him as just another religious eccentric. However, thanks to America’s airwaves, 2,000 billboards coast to coast and worldwide news reporting, we find his unlikely Doomsday message difficult to ignore.

Camping comes from a long line of seers, sages, preachers and prophets – all of whom time has proven wrong. What makes Camping different is the precision of his prognostications – an exact date and time, providing an uneasy sense of certainty in uncertain times. He is predicting that the end of the world will start today, Saturday, May 21. Camping believes the end will start in New Zealand at 6 PM (local New Zealand time) with the largest earthquake in human history. If we factor in the time difference, what does that mean for us on the east coast? Or . . . is it already Sunday, May 22 in New Zealand?

At 89 years old, Camping delivers his impending end of the world message out to his followers daily via the Family Radio Network, a religious radio organization funded entirely by his listeners, which he founded in the 1950s. Through the generosity of supporters, with assets over $120 million, the deep pockets of Family Radio now owns 66 stations in the US alone. Camping’s programming on Family Radio is delivered in 48 languages, and boasts tens of thousands of followers around the globe, with radio stations in South Africa, Russia and Turkey.

Camping’s prophecy comes from numerological calculations based on his reading of the Bible. When asked about his end of the world prediction, Camping is quoted in Britain’s newspaper, The Independent, “We’re not talking about a ball game, or a marriage, or graduating from college. We’re talking about the end of the world, a matter of being eternally dead, or being eternally alive, and it’s all coming to a head right now.”

Should we be planning how to spend our last hours on Earth?

Before you give away your car or make plans for your last shopping trip to the mall today, you should know that Camping has been wrong before. Yes, Camping’s last prediction for Judgment Day was September 6, 1994, and . . . 16-1/2 years later, the world remains. Such predictions are nothing new, but Camping’s latest has been publicized with exceptional vigor.

Preferring to take the positive, half-full approach to life, I choose to believe that we all will still be here tomorrow, May 22nd. But then again, maybe it already is tomorrow in New Zealand.

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme