Greenwich RTM Meeting Ends After Some Members Say Votes Not Counted Properly

GREENWICH, CT — Tuesday's Representative Town Meeting gathering, which featured one of the more hot-button issues for the town's legislative body in recent years, was cut short and thrown into chaos around 11 p.m., after members claimed their votes had not been accurately counted by the new electronic voting system.

Before the meeting ended and after about two hours of strong debate, the RTM narrowly approved the acceptance of a $500,000 grant from the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence, an offshoot of the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) "for the purpose of planning and operationalizing safe and secure election administration infrastructure," by a vote of 104 in favor, 101 opposed and five abstentions.

The RTM was in the middle of discussing a separate appropriation related to the CTCL — agenda Item 11 — when members began to question the results of the vote for agenda Item 10.

The hybrid meeting was held at Central Middle School and via Zoom. Some members both in-person and virtually claimed their vote was not represented properly on the results screen.

Members are given a one minute window to cast their vote — either yes, no or abstain — via a clicker. On Zoom, members can securely cast their votes through an app. Results are shown for all to see a few seconds after the voting window closes.

The electronic voting system successfully made its debut last month after months of testing. This is the first time the results of an agenda item have been called into question.

As calls to clarify the situation increased Tuesday night, Town Attorney Barbara Schellenberg was called upon for guidance.

"I think we're going to have to look into it and determine exactly, to the extent we can, what happened. There may need to be a re-vote, there might need to be a special meeting for that purpose. But I don't think we can make that decision right now without knowing exactly what the facts are," Schellenberg said.

The RTM voted to postpone the item related to the grant to March until there was clarification. RTM Moderator Alexis Voulgaris adjourned the meeting.

By Wednesday afternoon, there were still no resolutions.

"The Town Clerk’s Office is carefully and thoroughly reviewing Tuesday night’s votes on Item 10 of the RTM call," Town Clerk Jackie Budkins said in an emailed statement Wednesday. "We are working closely with Meridia, our electronic voting platform vendor, on this matter. We appreciate your patience as we determine the facts."

The ending to Tuesday night's meeting was fitting, considering the build up to Item 10 and consideration of the $500,000 grant. In committee reports before discussion began Tuesday, committee chairs noted this had been one of the more divisive agenda items in recent memory.

In November, due to their commitment to being a "leader in safe, secure and inclusive elections that put voters first," the Greenwich registrars of voters were recognized with a new national honor from the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence.

Greenwich became part of an inaugural group of localities designated as a "Center for Election Excellence."

The town received a $500,000 grant from the Alliance "to be used exclusively for the public purpose of planning and operationalizing safe and secure election administration infrastructure in the Town of Greenwich."

Additionally, a second "scholarship" grant totaling $9,600 would pay for the membership in the Alliance program for the two years.

In 2020, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg donated $350 million to CTCL. The funds were then disbursed to election offices.

In April 2022, NBC News reported that CTCL said it would not disburse similar donations in the next round of aid for elections.

CTCL then launched the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence, which is a five-year, $80 million nonpartisan program that brings together election officials, designers, technologists and other experts "to envision, support, and celebrate excellence in U.S. election administration."

Opponents of the grant on Tuesday questioned the motives of the CTCL and whether they could influence elections or pry voter data.

Some RTM members said private money from a nonprofit organization should not be injected into local elections, and that public trust in Greenwich's elections would wane as a result.

Lucia Jansen, chair of the RTM's Budget Overview Committee, noted that Greenwich currently has no written policy, guidelines or criteria for accepting a grant earmarked for municipal elections.

Proponents said the money was needed to purchase and update pertinent election equipment and technology, and to respond to provisions of state law related to early voting.

In the weeks leading up to Tuesday, Greenwich's Registrars of Voters Mary Hegarty, a Democrat, and Fred DeCaro III, a Republican, met with RTM committees to quell concerns related to the funds.

Hegarty said misinformation has been spread about the grants, and that she and DeCaro have been "personally attacked."

"Be assured of two things. First, contrary to what you will possibly hear from speakers who follow us, these grants are not about private funding of elections," she said, noting that the CT Secretary of State and the state legislature dictate how elections are conducted. She also noted that voting equipment is also determined by the Secretary of State.

"The grants have no bearing at all on this fundamental election infrastructure," Hegarty said. "The second basic point is that funds can only be appropriated when both registrars agree on an appropriation. We in effect have spending veto power over each other."

Additionally, the Greenwich Board of Estimate and Taxation must grant approval for any appropriation.

The RTM on Tuesday night even voted for an amendment with 183 in favor, 24 opposed and four abstentions so that it, too, will have to grant approval on any allocation of money related to the grant.

"Embrace the possibilities offered by these grants for innovating and improving election administration in Greenwich," Hegarty concluded. "Fred and I are not people content with acceptable. We work to provide our beloved town with exceptional election administration. Don't be content with the status quo."

Aidan Wasserman, a Greenwich teenager who said he's volunteered as a poll worker in town, said that while Greenwich's elections run smoothly, there is a need to update aging equipment and streamline processes. He also said public/private partnerships have been helpful in other areas of town over the years.

"Greenwich voters overwhelmingly approved an early voting ballot measure last November. We don't know yet how many additional voting days will be added, but we do know that our registrars cannot manage early voting with their current budget," he said. "We also know they are unlikely to get the funding they need through our BET, which has maintained a level services budget for three years."

RTM member Henry Orphys of District 7 urged his fellow members to vote no "for the peace and harmony of our community."

He said that Greenwich does not underfund its registrars, so rejecting the grant money would have no effect on them. He said if the registrars need money, those funds should come from Greenwich taxpayers, and not outside sources.

"Funding our registrars of voters exclusively from taxpayer dollars will avoid the appearance of an outside political influence in our elections and will thus keep out of Greenwich the type of partisan fighting over election results that very unfortunately has arisen in other parts of our country," Orphys said. "We do not need the money. We do not need to go down this path."

Karen Fassuliotis, member of the Greenwich BET, spoke as an individual and urged the RTM to vote no.

"Your vote tonight will decide whether forevermore our current nonpartisan election office will be politicized and subject to the perception that elections can be bought," she said. "I've watched as one argument declares that left wing liberals with nefarious intentions are behind this grant, while the other proclaims that right wing conspiracy mongers are those who are against it."

Fassuliotis said the grant request has already started the politicization of Greenwich's elections

"If this grant is accepted here tonight, there's nothing to prevent the major political parties for politicizing it further... You have the power to declare that our elections should be only publicly funded by the state or town, free from outside moneys," she said. "It's that simple."

About 30 people spoke on the matter, and debate was cut-off with 23 speakers to go so a vote could take place.