DUPLICATE BALLOT SCANS ON ELECTION NIGHT DUE TO TECHNICAL ISSUES, BUT OVERALL OUTCOME UNAFFECTED

  

Issues with voting equipment on Election Night in Washington County led to the duplicate scanning of ballots, but local election officials say the overall results were not impacted.

During a commissioners court meeting on Friday to canvass the results of the November 4^th election, Elections Administrator Carol Jackson briefed the court on technical difficulties with a ballot scanner and tabulator that caused discrepancies between the number of ballots counted and the number of actual voters.

Jackson said ballots run through the DS200 ballot scanners during early voting had no issues.  However, the DS450 scanners on Election Night inadvertently scanned 147 ballots twice after they were flagged, resolved and re-scanned for having unclear markings, like having marks not fully shaded in or made with an X or check mark. 

Jackson said there were no problems with ballots that were marked correctly and stressed that, because of the margin of approval for all of the propositions being voted on, none of the results would have changed.  Additionally, she said the Secretary of State has been made aware of what occurred and that, moving forward, elections staff will undergo additional training. 

Commissioners asked Jackson if replacing the DS450 scanners with DS200 units would rectify the problem, to which she replied it would, so discussion then moved into how to do so.  She said the county currently has three DS200 scanners, which cost roughly $6,000 each, and would need a total of at least 16.  She noted that she does have access to grant funding which should cover most if not all of the cost, minus the matching funds needed from the county. 

When asked what the timeline would look like if the county addresses this now, Jackson expressed confidence that everything should be ready in time for the March elections.

Commissioners then moved to canvass the results of the November 4^th election.  Between the 4,066 voters during early voters, the amended total of 2,158 voters on Election Day – a reduction of 147 from the previous figure – and 43 absentee voters, the county saw 6,267 ballots cast.  The county had 25,698 registered voters for the election, leading to a voter turnout of 24.3 percent.

A full statement from Jackson regarding Election Night can be read below:

Public Statement on Election Process and Technical Challenges:

This year’s election cycle presented several operational challenges that have offered important lessons and opportunities for improvement. I want to acknowledge these issues transparently and share the steps we are taking to ensure greater accuracy and reliability moving forward.

Ballot Processing and Scanner Issues:

During the ballot counting process, we encountered technical difficulties with the DS450 ballot scanner and tabulator. While mail ballots and the first Election Day box from the Event Center – Expo were processed without issue, the scanner began malfunctioning as additional boxes arrived from other polling locations.

Key issues included:

• Ballot Adjudication: Ballots with unclear markings—such as lightly shaded ovals, multiple selections, or marks made with an X or check, were flagged by the scanner and sent to Central Count for resolution. Once adjudicated, these ballots were re-scanned. Due to scanner malfunctions, some ballots may have been scanned more than once.
• Duplicate Scans: A total of 147 ballots were inadvertently scanned twice. This was confirmed after technical support was contacted and temporary fixes were applied.
• Legible Ballots: Clearly marked ballots were counted without issue.
• Blank, Undervoted, or Overvoted Ballots: These were processed according to standard procedures.

Election Integrity and Outcome:

Despite these technical challenges, the margins in both elections were overwhelmingly decisive. After a thorough review, we are confident that the integrity of the outcomes remains intact and the results stand as certified.

Steps Toward Improvement:

To prevent similar issues in future elections, we are implementing the following measures:

• Strengthening scanner maintenance and testing protocols
• Enhancing adjudication tracking and documentation
• Providing additional training for myself and Central Count personnel

We remain committed to transparency, accuracy, and continuous improvement in our election processes. Thank you for your understanding and continued trust.

Carol Jackson, Elections Administrator