Pennsylvania directs counties to print full year on mail ballots, instead of only first two digits

Starting with the upcoming general election, Pennsylvania counties must print the entire year on outer envelopes instead of only the first two digits, according to a July 1 Department of State directive.

This date issue was at the forefront in Luzerne County because 111 mail ballot voters in the April 23 primary election filled in the correct month and day on the outer envelope but failed to add “24” in the blank boxes at the end of the year.

As part of a state redesign of mail ballots that took effect in all counties for the primary, the “20” start of the year was pre-filled, but voters were supposed to write in “24” at the end.

Multiple counties encountered blank year boxes, prompting the state to issue post-primary guidance to county election boards indicating ballots should not be disqualified due to the final two boxes for the year left blank.

A Luzerne County Election Board majority agreed to accept the 111 because everything else was in order.

Jamie Walsh unsuccessfully challenged six of those mail ballots in his tight Republican race for state representative in the 117th District against incumbent Michael Cabell.

Issued July 1, the new state directive — which is a requirement as opposed to guidance — says counties must add the applicable final two year digits on the outer envelope for each election.

“This prescription is immediately in effect for all elections taking place following the issuance of this directive,” it said.

Williams said Monday she welcomes clarity on the matter.

When faced with the 111 ballots missing “24” during the election board’s post-primary adjudication on April 26, Williams had questioned if the state should have directed counties to pre-fill the entire year rather than just the first half, particularly because the outer envelopes are not reused for other elections.

Williams had said voters may not have picked up on the blank boxes because the first two digits of the year already were filled in.

During this adjudication session, Assistant Solicitors Gene Molino and Paula Radick had advised the board of both the state guidance and a federal appeals court panel last year that upheld enforcement of the technical date mandate on mail ballots, saying the decision was up to the board.

Election Board Vice Chairwoman Alyssa Fusaro had argued the date was mandatory based on the court ruling, saying state guidance has been wrong before.

Election Board member Rick Morelli had said all 111 voters wrote in the correct month and day and noted the timestamp marking the ballots as received reinforces the year as 2024.

Fusaro was the lone board member to vote against accepting the 111 ballots, with board members Albert Schlosser and Daniel Schramm voting yes with Morelli and Williams.

At the board’s regular meeting last month, Williams had proposed the possibility of the county pre-printing the full year on mail ballot return envelopes for the Nov. 5 general election.

The board held off because Molino told the board the state’s then-latest November directive on the redesign did not give counties discretion to pre-print all four digits of the year.

More importantly, Molino advised against deliberating while Walsh’s litigation was pending on the subject.

Walsh’s appeal of the six ballots in the 117th District argued a full date is required as affirmed by the 2023 Supreme Court decision.

A three-judge county Court of Common Pleas panel upheld the board’s decision to accept the ballots, saying the pre-printed 20 was specifically produced for the 2024 primary election and “therefore, it would stand to reason that the date, as written, could only be for the calendar year 2024.”

Walsh’s further appeal of that ruling resulted in a three-judge Commonwealth Court panel concluding the appeal must be thrown out on the grounds that the legal challenge was not filed on time in the first place.

Walsh has until Saturday to exercise an option to present the matter to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which has discretion over whether it would agree to hear the case.

The six votes Walsh wanted uncounted already were factored into the unofficial results that left him with a three-vote lead over Cabell.