The Hamilton County Election Board voted Sept. 18 to add an amendment to its proposed vote-center plan that prevents the county clerk or election administrator from unilaterally reducing minimum staffing or equipment at vote centers without unanimous board approval, but the board later failed to adopt the full plan as amended.

The amendment specifies minimums "in no case shall the clerk or election administrator reduce the number of poll workers per vote-center location below one inspector, four bipartisan judges and four bipartisan clerks; nor the number of voting machines per vote-center location be less than 10; nor the number of poll pads per vote-center location be less than four, without unanimous approval of the Hamilton County Election Board," language put forward by a board member and approved in a voice vote.

Board members and dozens of residents who spoke during the public comment period framed their remarks around access, efficiency and trust. The county clerk’s public-input report showed 225 survey responses: 133 (59 percent) supported the change to vote centers, 66 (29 percent) opposed it and about 12 percent were neutral or unsure.

Several residents and election workers told the board they supported vote centers for convenience and operational flexibility. "One of the things that I think is an advantage of the voting center is there have been times when machines fail for one reason or another," said Michael Colby, who identified himself as a longtime poll worker. "If you're running an early-voting center, I can just call the voting office. They can pick up a machine and bring it in."

Josh Lowry, chair of the Hamilton County Democrats, said he supported vote centers but urged a written floor on reductions in machines or staff to guard against partisan changes in future administrations. "If it said changes can be made as needed, but to go below the set number ... then it requires board approval," Lowry told the board.

County Clerk Beth (identified in the meeting as the clerk) presented the amendments to the vote-center plan and summarized public input. She said the plan added five new vote-center locations since an Aug. 13 draft — two in Carmel and one each in Fall Creek, Cicero and Westfield — and that the staffing and cost estimates were updated accordingly. She also said the county maintains a reserve supply of voting machines; the office uses about 88 machines for early voting and had roughly 35 machines available as extras for Election Day.

Board members debated the balance between operational efficiency and checks on unilateral decisions. One board member said routine, small adjustments (for example, replacing a worker who cancels) should not require a public meeting, but added that the proposed amendment was designed to prevent a future clerk from making substantial reductions unilaterally. The board and staff noted that state law provides an emergency process that can be used if a polling place is suddenly unavailable.

After debate and public comment, the board voted in favor of the amendment in a voice vote. Later the board took a separate vote on whether to adopt the vote-center plan as amended; that motion failed on a voice vote with more members saying "no." The meeting record does not show a roll-call tally in the transcript.

The board also received several operational reminders: the county will switch to electronic training manuals from the state in December, and staff committed to provide a written report about a prior voting-machine glitch at a future date.

The board did not finalize a vote-center implementation timetable in the meeting. Members discussed returning to refine site-by-site allocations after early-voting experience and ahead of the 2026 and 2028 election cycles.