Erie County Board of Elections tables purchase of smart ballot drop boxes after debate over privacy and chain of custody

The Erie County Board of Elections on April 17 voted to table Resolution 3 of 2025, a proposal to purchase Sentinel smart mail ballot drop boxes from Runback Collection Services, after an extended discussion about privacy, chain of custody and how designated-agent forms would be handled. The motion to table carried 3 to 1.

The resolution would have authorized four indoor “smart” ballot drop boxes that take a photo of the person depositing material and scan the inserted paper, and would have connected to a courthouse dashboard showing box fill levels. Gary, elections staff, described the system as “a smart ballot box” and said the county has a working relationship with Runback Collection Services; he said the boxes would be “a secure fireproof box that just allows papers to be inserted” and that “on our dashboard, we'll have the picture of the person putting the ballot in.” He said the vendor estimated a 16-week build time for Erie County and listed a cost of $12,500 per unit plus roughly $2,500 per year in maintenance and warranty costs.

Board members and speakers raised several operational concerns. A resident who spoke during public comment asked the elections office to consider accessibility and the impact of recent state-level proposals that would tighten registration documentation requirements, saying some voters may lack passports or birth certificates. During the box discussion, several board members and commenters pressed staff on how the system would handle multiple envelopes deposited by one person, how the boxes would link a designated-agent form to a specific ballot, and whether the system would automatically flag potential problems. Gary said images and a scan of the inserted paper would be captured and stored on the dashboard, but that the box does not run facial recognition or automatically reject items. “We'd have to review every picture,” he said; the board discussed doing targeted or random reviews or creating a local policy to check images when boxes are emptied.

Staff said that physically set-aside ballots would still be returned to the courthouse, processed through the existing sorting machine and subject to the county's current chain-of-custody procedures. Tanya, elections staff, said designated-agent forms would be kept and set aside and that right-to-know requests for those forms have been honored in the past. Gary said the boxes would provide an additional option for returning mail ballots in outlying areas but would not replace existing options.

Supporters said the boxes add security features and give voters an additional return option; opponents said the changes warrant broader public education and more time for review. Board members noted the purchase would also require county council action and potentially a waiver of the purchasing code because the vendor was presented as a sole-source provider.

Because of timing from the vendor, staff said the county would need to act promptly to meet a September deployment target; the board opted to table the resolution and revisit it at a later meeting. The tabled motion carried 3–1.

Ending: The board did not adopt Resolution 3; members instructed staff to continue researching and to provide additional information for future consideration, including vendor security documentation and suggested public-education steps.