In some cases a ballot will be damaged or otherwise unreadable by the tabulation units, in that case it will likely go to the duplication or electronic adjudication board to ensure all validly cast votes are properly counted.
The purpose of the Ballot Duplication Board is to ensure that a voter’s intent is tabulated in situations when that voter’s ballot cannot be scanned by tabulation equipment. The Ballot Duplication Board does this by creating duplicate ballots by hand according to the “clearly indicated … intent” of the voter. 2023 EPM at 206. If the voter’s intent is not clear or the Ballot Duplication Board does not agree on the voter’s intent, the ballot is referred to the Snag Board or the County Elections Director. 2023 EPM at 206.
Generally, the Ballot Duplication Board only duplicates Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) ballots, early ballots, provisional ballots, and ballots cast at voting locations without a tabulation machine on-site, and generally, this is done at a central counting facility. 2023 EPM at 206. The reason the Ballot Duplication Board’s role is usually limited to only creating duplicates of these types of ballots is that voters who vote at a polling place with a tabulation machine on-site feed their own ballots directly into the tabulation machine. 2023 EPM at 206. If there is an error (e.g., an over-vote) or the ballot is unreadable for some reason, the voter is made immediately aware of this problem and is present to correct the problem. 2023 EPM at 206.
Other instances when a ballot is sent to the Ballot Duplication Board include when the voter marked or corrected selections on the ballot in unconventional ways. In some cases, a voter may have consistently marked their ballot in a way to indicate their selections, but in a way that tabulating equipment cannot read. For example, the voter might have indicated their selected candidate (or response to a ballot question) by circling that choice, placing an “x” by that choice, or placing a checkmark next to that choice. 2023 EPM at 207. In other cases, the voter might have correctly indicated their choice, but marked it with an ink or crayon that cannot be read by the tabulating equipment. 2023 EPM at 207. Sometimes, the Early Ballot Board might even receive ballots that have been corrected with white-out or erasures that render the ballot unreadable by tabulating equipment. 2023 EPM at 207. In all these cases, if the “voter’s intent can be determined, the ballot [is] duplicated and counted.” *2023 EPM* at 207.
Finally, ballots that are received via fax, email, or the secure web portal from UOCAVA voters are forwarded to the Ballot Duplication Board. 2023 EPM at 207. Under these circumstances, if a UOCAVA voter writes the name of a candidate on a Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot (“FWAB”), a vote is counted for that candidate. *2023 EPM* at 207. If a UOCAVA voter writes the name of a political party on an FWAB in a general election, that choice is counted as a vote for the candidate of that party. 2023 EPM at 207. Furthermore, any “abbreviation, misspelling, common nickname, or other minor variation in the name of a candidate or political party” is disregarded in determining the validity of the vote “if the intent of the voter can be ascertained.” 2023 EPM at 207.
Ballot duplication is necessary because it is “never permitted to enhance or alter a voter’s original ballot markings to render the ballot readable.” 2023 EPM at 208. Doing so requires the Ballot Duplication Board to follow some mandatory procedures.
First, the Ballot Duplication Board must ensure that it is using the correct ballot style according to the voter’s assigned precinct to create the duplicate ballot. 2023 EPM at 207. If applicable, that precinct identification code must be marked on the ballot. *2023 EPM* at 207. Next, the Ballot Duplication Board must mark the original ballot and the duplicated ballot with an identical serial number; if there ends up being any spoiled ballots, those must also be marked with the identical serial number. 2023 EPM at 207. The original ballot must be “conspicuously” marked as “DUPLICATED.” *2023 EPM* at 207. The duplicate ballot must be “conspicuously” marked as “DUPLICATE.” 2023 EPM at 207. Next, the Ballot Duplication Board must use the damaged or unreadable ballot “as a guide” to “mark a blank ballot with votes identical to those on the original ballot.”[1] 2023 EPM at 207.
Once the duplicate ballot has been completely marked, the Ballot Duplication Board confirms that the duplicate ballot is identical to the original ballot. If the original ballot included an over-vote and the voter’s intent cannot be determined, then that over-vote, as well as any under-votes, is copied onto the duplicate ballot. 2023 EPM at 208. If the Ballot Duplication Board makes any errors in the process of duplicating a ballot, that error-stricken duplicate ballot is conspicuously marked as “SPOILED” and this process is repeated. 2023 EPM at 208. Once all the ballots needing duplication have been duplicated, the Ballot Duplication Board places all the original ballots in an envelope or container labeled “ballots that have been duplicated.” 2023 EPM at 208.
If a damaged or unreadable ballot includes write-in names for candidates that are not on the authorized write-in list, these names are not copied onto the duplicate ballot. However, the bubble or target area that is intended for a voter to indicate their selection of a write-in candidate is copied over. 2023 EPM at 207. Essentially, this means that the voter's selection of an unauthorized write-in candidate will be reflected on the duplicate ballot, even though their vote will not be cast for that candidate. If a ballot marking device is being used to duplicate the ballot, and the name or line cannot be left blank, the Ballot Duplication Board types “blank” or “unofficial” to fill the blank. 2023 EPM at 207.
Counties also have the option to either supplement or replace the work of the Ballot Duplication Board with an Electronic Vote Adjudication Board. 2023 EPM at 208. The Electronic Vote Adjudication Board is appointed either by the Board of Supervisors or the County Elections Director, and it uses a “certified electronic adjudication program to process specific votes requiring adjudication.” 2023 EPM at 208. These adjudications are limited to two situations: when the tabulating equipment comes across a ballot that appears to have an over-vote and when the equipment comes across a ballot that appears to have a blank or is unclear. 2023 EPM at 208.
In the case of an apparent over-vote, the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board evaluates the ballot to determine the voter’s intent and to make necessary adjustments to the ballot record if the voter’s intent is clear. 2023 EPM at 208. If the voter’s intent is not clear for a specific race or ballot measure, then the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board does not apply a vote toward that specific race or ballot measure. 2023 EPM at 208.
If a tabulation machine indicates that a ballot was blank or unclear, the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board also evaluates these ballots. 2023 EPM at 208. If the voter’s intent can be determined, the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board makes “corresponding adjustments” to the ballot record. 2023 EPM at 208. If the voter’s intent is not clear for a specific race or ballot measure, then the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board does not apply a vote toward that specific race or ballot measure. 2023 EPM at 208.
The work of the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board is recorded one of two ways to ensure a board-verified paper audit log that can be reviewed later. *2023 EPM* at 211. The first way the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board can do this is to maintain a manual, hard-copy record of its selections for each ballot or vote electronically adjudicated by it. *2023 EPM* at 211. The second way the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board can meet the requirement of a board-verified paper audit log is to print a log of the ballots and votes electronically adjudicated by the board from the electronic adjudication program. *2023 EPM* at 211. This document records the selections made by the Electronic Vote Adjudication Board for every ballot and vote. *2023 EPM* at 211. The Electronic Vote Adjudication Board then verifies that the printed log accurately reflects its decisions and confirm that those selections are “accurately reflected in the electronic adjudication application prior to committing the selections to the [election management system] for the purpose of updating results.” *2023 EPM* at 211 (emphasis in original).