KITTANNING -- Some voters in the county may have experienced problems with electronic machines during Tuesday's primary, according to reports circulating at the courthouse annex building on election night.
Armstrong County Director of Elections Wendy Buzard said Wednesday that the cases, mainly involving the casting of write-in votes, were isolated and were a matter of voter error and not a malfunction of any of the voting machines.
"We didn't have any technical problems with the voting machines whatsoever," Buzard said. "We had some calls about potential problems, but as it turned out, it was either voter error or they weren't understanding exactly how to do the write-ins."
Referring to a situation that occurred at a polling place in Ford City, Buzard said she believed the voter there was typing in a name but then not hitting "record write-in."
There were some reports also of electronic voting machine not accepting voted ballots.
"Sometimes when the person encodes the card, when they stick it in, it says create and they have to hit 'yes' and then it turns to clear," Buzard said. "Sometimes they hit that 'yes' button again and it clears it. We just have to re-encode it."
There was a delay of about 45 minutes in reporting election results transmitted electronically for public viewing at the annex building and before appearing online on the county's Web site.
"We had a minor problem with the computer," Buzard said. "The registration figures were not in like we had put them in, so we had to re-enter them before we could run the reports. Once we got those in and got it up and running, it was fine."
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.