Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Security And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public reviewers question security costs and e‑poll book plans as county outlines chain‑of‑custody procedures
Summary
At an Oct. 31 meeting, Chester County Voter Services described layered security for drop boxes and ballot transport, while public commenters raised concerns about the cost of security contracts, proposed e‑poll books and high departmental turnover.
Chester County Voter Services described multiple layers of security for ballots and equipment on Oct. 31, and public commenters questioned whether the county's security contract costs and plans to buy e‑poll books reflect fiscal or cybersecurity trade‑offs.
Director Karen Barsoum told the Board of Elections that equipment storage areas have 24/7 surveillance and access controls and that voting machines undergo public logic‑and‑accuracy testing prior to sealing. "There are cameras in both spaces," she said of the programming and server rooms, and she described a two‑person access rule and tight key control for drop‑box pickups.
Barsoum said drop boxes have motion‑activated, night‑vision cameras with nightly battery checks; seal logs are kept and separate keys control the mail slot and the pickup compartment. She said the collection teams for drop boxes are escorted by armed guards wearing body cameras from pickup through delivery to the county facility on the fourth floor, where ballots are kept under limited access.
Several public commenters pressed the board on related costs and staffing. Elizabeth Seed of Cowan Township asked for an itemized explanation of a $4,472 line item and questioned the county's total security spending, including a previous invoice figure and multiple contract amendments. She also raised concerns about a proposed $740,000 capital request for e‑poll books and noted that Voter Services had replaced ballot bags at what she described as higher unit cost; she tied those spending items to recent staff turnover in the department and asked whether the board had concerns about management and oversight.
Another resident expressed cybersecurity concerns over e‑poll books, citing a demonstration in which a registration appeared to change. "All things electronic are hackable," the commenter said, urging caution before widespread use of e‑poll books.
The board did not take procurement votes at the meeting. Routine motions to appoint poll workers and the return board were approved by voice vote; the board did not provide a roll‑call tally for those votes during the meeting.
The county's voter‑services staff said they have posted procurement and operational notices on chesco.org/elections and that specific contract and budget questions can be pursued with county finance and procurement staff.
