Luzerne County Council Rejects Election Worker Protection Ordinance

The Luzerne County Council voted on January 27, 2024, to reject a proposed ordinance aimed at protecting election workers, leading to disappointment among some Democrats and progressive activists. The council’s decision was made in a 9-2 vote, with only two Democrats supporting the measure. This action has sparked concern about the council’s commitment to safeguarding the integrity of elections.

Chris Belles, one of the council members who voted for the ordinance, expressed his disappointment, stating, “There is disappointment almost universally with the Democrats, and I would say there is quite a bit of disappointment on the Republican side as well.” The proposed ordinance sought to impose fines of up to $1,000 against individuals who obstructed, harassed, intimidated, or doxxed election workers.

Opposition to the ordinance centered on claims that existing state laws already provide adequate protections for election workers. Denise Williams, a council member who opposed the measure, argued that the ordinance suggested that stronger protections were necessary when, in fact, they were already in place. “I was hearing poll workers say they wanted these protections, but there are,” she stated.

During the nearly five-hour council meeting, a public hearing allowed for input from 35 speakers, the majority of whom supported the proposed ordinance. This overwhelming public support highlighted a disconnect between constituent desires and the council’s decision.

Dave Macekura, campaign manager for Belles, criticized the council’s decision as a failure to uphold commitments made during the election campaign. He noted that the Democrats had campaigned on protecting election integrity and discouraging political violence, saying, “If we cannot deliver after being handed this mandate, how can you expect voters to again trust us with their support?”

Councilwoman Joanna Bryn Smith joined Belles in supporting the ordinance, emphasizing the need for a unified pro-democracy agenda. She stated, “You all ran on a pro-democracy agenda, and you should all be ashamed of yourselves for not supporting this ordinance.” The council previously regained a Democratic majority in November 2023 after flipping four of five seats.

Williams addressed the criticism regarding broken campaign promises, stating that the proposed ordinance had “nothing to do with supporting free and fair elections.” She cited statements from the Luzerne County District Attorney, Sam Sanguedolce, and the county’s Election Director, Emily Cook, both of whom opposed the ordinance. Sanguedolce expressed concerns that the ordinance could lead to confusion and litigation that might suppress legitimate complaints about electoral processes.

The council’s rejection of the ordinance has drawn ire from progressive groups such as Action Together NEPA, which argued that the vote should have been unanimous. Executive Director Alisha Hoffman-Mirilovich submitted a petition with 104 signatures in favor of the ordinance. Beth Gilbert, the voting and elections manager for Action Together NEPA, criticized the decision, claiming it was influenced by misinformation and fear-mongering.

The decision to reject the ordinance has raised questions about the council’s priorities. Williams previously expressed frustration over what she perceived as partisan distractions during council meetings, stating, “Maybe if they hadn’t wasted all that time, especially talking about elections and drop boxes, they could have been farther along with roads and bridges and things like that.”

Adding to the context, the day following the council’s vote, the FBI conducted a search at an elections hub in Fulton County, Georgia, further highlighting issues surrounding election integrity. This incident has underscored the importance of measures to protect election workers, as emphasized by Mary Ann Petyak, chairwoman of the Luzerne County Democratic Party, who noted that many Democrats felt disappointed by the council’s actions.

In light of these developments, the Democratic majority’s decision to reject the ordinance raises significant questions about their commitment to election security and public trust. As the council moves forward, it faces increased scrutiny from constituents and advocacy groups alike, urging a re-evaluation of priorities and a stronger stance in support of electoral integrity.