TULLYTOWN - There won't be a new election in Tullytown, Bucks County Judge Clyde W. Waite ruled Friday.

“The petitioners' recount has been satisfactorily completed and there are no grounds which have been revealed to warrant a change in the election results,” his ruling read. “The vote differential would not change the result in the election,” the ruling continued.

In June, Lawrence M. Otter submitted a petition for a recount of the May 15 primary election results. The petitioners are Rick Adams and Ida and Matthew Pirolli.

Councilwoman Beth Pirolli, the daughter of Ida and sister of Matthew, lost her bid to keep her seat by four votes, 272 to 268, to challenger George Fox Jr. Incumbent Edward Czyzyk (339 votes) and challenger Edmund Armstrong (307) were the other winners in the race for three council seats.

Since the results stand, incumbent May Kucher (238 votes) also lost her seat. Challenger Hal Lefcourt got 65 votes in the Democratic primary. No Republicans filed to run.

“The Pirollis had their day in court and the honorable Judge ClydeWaite made his decision,” Fox said. “And the people of Tullytown voted. I will keep my promises I made during my campaign.”

The Courier Times was unsuccessful in reaching Beth Pirolli for comment Friday.

The petitioners claimed that votes weren't properly counted at the Tullytown polling place.

Bucks County Board of Elections Director Deena Dean testified during one of two hearings in June in Doylestown that the Tullytown poll didn't report any discrepancies to the board.

In his ruling, Clyde stated that there wasn't evidence of any impropriety in the handling of absentee or provisional ballots.

At a June 27 hearing, a recount was conducted by Board of Election officials and Otter. Election board records show that 602 votes were cast in the electronic voting machines, 605 names were entered in the poll book and 608 names were on a list of voters. Because the three numbers should match, Otter requested that Waite rule in favor of a new election.

“Beyond the conclusions asserted by petitioners, there was no evidentiary basis to suggest that the machine had malfunctioned and there were adequate and plausible reason given for the discrepancy between the poll book numbers and the numbers recorded on the electronic machines,” Waite's ruling read.

Waite concluded that there were 604 eligible voters out of 608 on a list that gives each voter a number after signing in; 602 votes were recorded on the machines; and 605 voters who signed the poll book.

“The difference of two or three votes, respectively, [is] possibly the result of voters' failure to register their votes by pressing the green "vote' button, or electors leaving the polls after signing the poll book and before voting due to the delay in opening the machines,” Waite's ruling reads.

Otter begged to differ on some points made by Waite.

“With all due respect to the learned judge, I think he missed the point of propriety of the ballot image report as a recount tool that has been severely questioned by the Commonwealth Court in an earlier ruling this year,” he said.

Otter has 10 days to appeal the court's decision. “I will have to discuss the matter with my client,” he said.

Otter pointed out that Waite came up with a fourth number, 604.

“Now we have four numbers, none of which match,” he said. “If that doesn't scream out an error, what does?”

Article's URL: 

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/111-07212007-1381153.html