Board rejects more than 500 provisional ballots.
Canton Repository. November 20, 2004 By KELLI YOUNG, staff writer.

CANTON ? Janet Gross of North Canton went to the Knights of Columbus Hall to vote this year like she does every year.

When she got there, the poll workers didn?t have her name listed.

They told her that she had to fill out a provisional ballot, which would be verified after the election.

Gross, who has lived on Circle Hill Road SE for 40 years, found out Friday that her vote won?t count.

Her vote was one of 505 provisional ballots rejected by the four-member Stark County Board of Elections because the vote was cast at the wrong precinct.

Gross may have been at the right polling place, but she went to the wrong precinct table. The Knights of Columbus had three precincts in the hall. Gross was supposed to vote in precinct 3D, but she voted in precinct 3C. The provisional ballot of her son, David Gross, also didn?t count because he was at the wrong precinct.

The Nov. 2 election saw 6,032 provisional ballots cast in Stark County, more than double the amount four years ago.

A local race that the provisional ballots could affect is the Stark County commissioner?s race between Republican incumbent Jane Vignos and Democratic challenger Mike Stevens.

Board members said they must reject the 505 ballots in question because of directives from the state and an appeals court ruling regarding ballots cast in the wrong precinct.

Board member Shane Jackson did so reluctantly.

?I have a problem with it,? Jackson said. ?They got to the right place, the right school or the right church, but not to the right table.?

He said it didn?t seem fair because the board, up until this year, used to ?remake? a ballot that was cast in the wrong precinct, meaning that the person?s vote would be put toward the appropriate races in the correct precinct. He also worried that voters may have been given bad information as to where they should be.

Ultimately, Jackson gave in to the law.

Board of Elections Director Jeffrey Matthews said in the future, depending on funds, the board may need to send periodic address forms for people to fill out if they have moved. That way, Matthews said, the board can send the voter a card to show where the new polling place is located.

The board rejected another 59 provisional ballots of voters who did not sign either the affirmation statement or the envelope.

Matthews said that putting a name in the signature book does not make the ballot valid.

?The signature book doesn?t have the affirmation statement,? Matthews said.

The next large chunk of ballots to be verified will deal with whether the voter is registered, Matthews said.

?The reason we are giving it a second or third look is because they (the voter) may be registered but they changed their name,? Matthews said.

The board scheduled a meeting for 8 a.m. Tuesday to consider the ballots.

Matthews said he hasn?t yet seen a problem where a voter appears to have voted twice. Other counties, such as Summit County, have reported problems of possible double voting.