A scrutineer for one of the candidates in the Sept. 17 Div. 5 byelection in Westlock County has submitted a formal complaint to Municipal Affairs with concerns she was not properly able to fulfill her role because she was not able to observe the markings on ballots as they were counted.
Donna Kinley wrote to the ministry Sept. 24 and received word from a rep Oct. 11 regarding her concerns.
“Municipal Affairs has reconfirmed information previously shared that, in accordance to the Local Authorities Elections Act, during the vote count the deputy returning officer, scrutineers or candidates present must be allowed to view the ballots as they are read. This observer role and responsibility is to ensure the validity of each ballot, determine if any ballots are to be rejected, and/or allow any objections to be made by those present during the counting process,” wrote Kinley in a letter to county councillors.
Kinley is the spouse of candidate David Woynorowski and acted as his scrutineer for the byelection which saw Isaac Skuban receive 101 votes over Woynorowski’s 93 votes. Candidate Lori Latreille received 40 votes, while Mary Ashton-Groulx had 33.
Westlock County CAO Leo Ludwig acted as returning officer with the county’s director of finance Diane Urkow taking on the role of deputy returning officer.
When initially approached, Ludwig declined to comment as he had not spoken to anyone with Municipal Affairs on the topic.
“As such, it would be quite inappropriate for me to comment at this time,” he said via e-mail.
Later, Ludwig did provide a thorough statement on the processes undertaken citing sections of the Local Authorities Election Act.
He noted the counting centre was properly established and set up pursuant to Section 85 of the act.
He also pointed out “the individual making the allegations had the opportunity to stay in the counting centre for the ballot account process which, after the count is finished, reconciles the number of ballots counted to the number of signed voting register forms; and the number of the counted ballots, spoiled ballots and unused ballots, to the total number of ballots originally supplied to the voting station. They chose not to do so.”
Ludwig went on to say the option to request a recount was available for 44 hours after the original count, if there was concern the count was not done properly, but Kinley and Woynorowski chose not to do so. They could have also requested a judicial recount within 19 days of the count, which they also chose not to do.
“Despite several clear, directed and tested legislative and judicial processes in which to appropriately raise concerns about the ballot counting process, the individual chose not to do so. Rather, what they did choose, was a process completely outside of the very act that governs such activity. That could raise questions as to the legitimacy of the allegations, which are inconsequential at best and vacuous at worst in my view, based on the comments and processes available within the act,” said Ludwig.
“If there was anything not set up properly it was that the scrutineers could have originally been seated closer to the count table.”
Kinley said she had no desire to overturn the vote and that the concerns were not a matter of “sour grapes.” She only wants the proper processes to be followed in upcoming elections.
“The reason I am raising these points now is to ensure future elections in Westlock County conducted by the returning officer and the deputy returning officer fully meet the responsibilities as outlined in the Local Authorities Elections Act. This will ensure scrutineers are able to conduct their responsibilities in an appropriate manner, and most importantly, ensure all elections are conducted in a fair, open and transparent manner,” said Kinley’s letter.
“The individual making the allegation about insufficient access to view the ballots during the count had opportunity at any time during the counting of the ballots to request of the returning officer a different vantage point from which to observe the count. They chose not to do so,” stated Ludwig.
Candidates weigh in
Ashton-Groulx said she was minutes late for the ballot counting and was not allowed in. She observed through the glass doors at the Clyde Community Centre where the poll was located.
“I didn’t even realize Donna and Lori were there because I couldn’t see them anywhere,” she said. “I could see the table and the ballot box and Leo had his back to me, counting, and the two scrutineers were sitting at the table whereas Leo was standing. So I could watch Leo pull the ballots out of the box. He would look at them and add them to one of four piles. I’ve worked elections before, so I know something about the process, and I thought it was odd that the two scrutineers couldn’t see the ballots,” said Ashton-Groulx.
Latreille, who was in the hall at the time the ballots were counted said she was not aware of Kinley’s concern.
“I did not have a scrutineer. On election night, I was told that I could be in attendance while the votes were being counted as long as I was there before the polls closed. I sat a table with Donna while the votes were being counted. That is really all the information I have.”
Isaac Skuban was also approached for his perspective on the situation, but after conferring with reeve Lou Hall, he declined to comment.
“I did have faith in the process and thought I would be there for the vote count and to see the ballots, but it didn’t quite work out that way,” said Kinley. “I regret that I didn’t speak up or question a little more thoroughly because I feel like I let down Division 5 voters and the candidates because there shouldn’t be this shadow hanging over the byelection. The night of the forum, I was so impressed by all of the candidates and they all deserved a fair chance. I can’t say something inappropriate has happened here. I can’t go that far. All I can say is that by not being able to see the ballots I cannot validate that all of them were marked accordingly.”
Additional steps
Ludwig said the county will be taking unprecedented steps to assure the results are legitimate.
“In discussion with the reeve and deputy reeve, we will be looking into a process in which an independent third-party is brought in to conduct a recount, giving all of the candidates and their agents/scrutineers an opportunity to personally examine all of the ballots and related election forms,” said Ludwig.
“This would be quite outside of any course of recount process outlined in the Local Authority Elections Act this long after the ballots were counted and we are not fully certain there is a legally acceptable way to do such. However, as the county supports full appropriate transparency along with due process, this is an action we will pursue should there be a lawful manner in which to do so.”
