At the October 14 Election Board Meeting, the County Commissioners agreed to postpone their decision on a new write-in voting policy, citing a need to further refine and understand the implications of the proposed parameters. The central lingering question related to whether the new ‘guidelines’ might, in certain circumstances, disqualify votes that could be definitively interpreted.

The discussion began when Mary Stehman, Chief Clerk/Registrar of the Election Office, clarified that, although a last name would be accepted, this would only apply if there were no other registered voters with that last name in the relevant voting area. As Commissioner Craig Lehman put it, “If it’s a write-in ballot, no write-in candidate is actually on the ballot. So if there’s more than one personal in that district with the same last name, it’s impossible to tell…”

To rigidly follow the new guidelines, a mayoral write-in vote for “Smithgall” would only count for Charlie Smithgall if there were no other “Smithgall”s registered in Lancaster City. If it were a write-in vote for “Smithgall” as County Commissioner, the vote would only count for Charlie Smithgall if there were no other “Smithgall”s registered in the entire county.

As reported at the Tuesday Work Session, one of the new guidelines calls for the rejection of any write-in vote that does not include a last name. At the Wednesday meeting, however, a comment from Immo Sulyok of West Lampeter brought this standard into question: In case of unusual first names, the visitor asserted, one could clearly determine a voter’s intent.

The Commissioners generally agreed that, when a unique, unmatched first name is written in, the guidelines should allow for that vote to be counted.

Since the guidelines, as currently proposed, require some further clarification, Commissioner Scott Martin recommended that the Board postpone their vote until the next Election Board Meeting on October 21. The Board agreed with Martin and decided to take no further action at the present meeting.