Complaint by: Rydingsward
A registrar of voters who allegedly appoints an experienced polling place moderator whose certification has lapsed can violate Connecticut General Statutes §9-229. The complainant, the Democratic Registrar of Voters in Bristol, alleged that Sharon Krawiecki, the Republican registrar, appointed a moderator whose certification had lapsed. Krawiecki reported that she made an attempt to hire certified moderators and that an insufficient number were available. The Secretary of the State's Office e-mailed Krawiecki that she could appoint moderators, if she personally trained them. The State Elections Enforcement Commission found that Krawiecki appointed Vern Koch, a veteran moderator whose certification lapsed before the August 2012 primary. Krawiecki, wrote the State Elections Enforcement Commission, "violated General Statutes §9-229 by utilizing Mr. Koch, an uncertified moderator." A civil penalty was not merited, because Koch was an experienced moderator whose certification had only recently lapsed. The State Elections Enforcement Commission also found that Krawiecki failed to timely submit a list of moderators and alternate moderators to the town clerk, pursuant to C.G.S. §9-229(a). Krawiecki's list of moderators for the Aug. 14, 2012, party primary was date/time-stamped nine days afterward, on Aug. 23, 2012. A civil penalty was not merited, because it was Krawiecki's first violation of this type, and there was no evidence of material harm. Krawiecki also violated C.G.S. §9-436, because she appointed a ballot clerk to work half the day, which did not comply with recently enacted statutory requirements that she appoint a ballot clerk to work the entire Aug. 14, 2012, primary. A civil penalty was not merited, because this was Krawiecki's first violation of this type, and it concerned a recently amended statute. Krawiecki worked as an instructor of polling place primary workers, and her poll worker training report did not include all the required information. A civil penalty was not merited, because it was Krawiecki's first violation of this type, and there was no evidence of material harm. The complainant failed to prove Krawiecki was required to provide proof of oaths to the town clerk, as alleged. The State Elections Enforcement Commission ordered Krawiecki to comply with the election statutes henceforth.