Chester County Board of Elections unanimously certifies May 20 municipal primary; director cites equipment damage and signature mismatches

Chester County Board of Elections voted unanimously June 9 to certify the results of the May 20, 2025 municipal primary after receiving a report from the county’s director of voter services about the election’s administration, equipment problems caused by storms and a rise in mismatched mail‑in ballot signatures.

“It takes many months of preparation and lots of paperwork to be where we are today,” Director Barsoom said as she summarized the department’s timeline and post‑election reconciliation work. The board then approved Resolution BOE0525 to certify the municipal primary results.

The director told the board the county handled 68,794 total ballots in the primary, including 40,987 Democratic ballots and 27,807 Republican ballots, from a registered voter roll of 382,113. Turnout for the contest was 18 percent. Of the ballots counted, 41,206 votes were cast in person, 27,439 were mail‑in ballots and 149 provisional ballots were tabulated, Barsoom said. The department also processed more than 41,000 write‑in “snippets” to identify potential write‑in winners.

Barsoom described two separate heavy‑rain incidents before and during the deployment of equipment that she said affected the county’s equipment center. “So for those 10 machines at that time, we totally replaced it with spares that were tested,” she said, adding that reduced spare inventory and on‑the‑ground adjustments — including instructing larger precincts not to use their secondary tabulator unless necessary — were used to maintain operations on election day. She said the affected machines were taken into custody at an alternate secured county facility and are under evaluation.

The director outlined the department’s reconciliation process required by the election code, including checks that no contest returned more votes than registered electors in a district and other chain‑of‑custody procedures. Barsoom said common reasons ballots were not moved forward in tabulation included voters placing sample ballots or other papers in secrecy envelopes and signature mismatches; she noted more than 80 mismatched signatures in the municipal primary compared with about 30 in the prior presidential contest.

Commissioner Eric Rowe praised voter services and said he intended to support certification. “I intend to be voting for this certification. I’m happy with the low variance,” Rowe said during the meeting. After a motion and second, the board voted aloud; board members present said “aye,” and the motion passed with no oppositions recorded.

During public comment, Elizabeth Seeb of Calvin Township questioned the department’s spending and use of third‑party contractors. Seeb cited figures comparing vendor support and contracted project management costs from 2020 and 2024 and asked the board to review operating costs that she said increased even though mailed and provisional ballots in 2024 were lower than in 2020. “All of this spending for a municipal primary with an overall 18% County turnout and only 27,000 mailed ballots and less than 200 provisional ballots received,” Seeb said.

Barsoom said the department had communicated any referrals to the district attorney’s office when incidents warranted additional review and that staff provided reconciliation spreadsheets to the board for detailed review.

The board completed the certification vote without recorded opposition and adjourned shortly thereafter.