Good afternoon. Call to order. the meeting of the Philadelphia City Commissioners Return Board for Friday, November the 14th, 2025. This meeting is in compliance with the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act. The
Philadelphia City Commissioners are a three member bipartisan board of elected officials in charge of elections and voter registrations for the city of Philadelphia. Each commissioner is elected to serve a four-year term that coincides with the municipal election cycle for mayor and
city council. The commissioner set and enforced departmental policies to administer voter registration and conduct elections in accordance with federal state voter registration and election laws. The city commissioners were created by the
Pennsylvania assembly in 1711 with the focus on taxation and held various regulatory powers throughout the centuries. The commissioner started maintaining border list in 1799 and took on more election related responsibilities but didn't emerge in
its current form until the adoption of Philadelphia homeown charter in 1951. We will start off with public comments before beginning their comments. Commeners shall state where they live or if they are not a resident Philadelphia and that they are a Philadelphia
taxpayer. Public comment. It's not an opportunity for dialogue or Q&A. It's public comment. Chance for you to tell us what you think. Each speaker will have two minutes to speak. However, I may extend the time at my discretion. Public comment must concern matters on
today's meeting agenda. Finally, it is my responsibility to preserve the order and decorum of the meetings. As such, profane, slanderous, discriminatory, personal attacks will not be tolerated. If you wish to make a public objection
to a perceived Sunshine Act violation, please raise your hand and I will recognize you. Outbursts will not be tolerated. Anyone wishing to offer public comment, please step forward. Hearing none, we will now move to report
from Secretary Seth Bluestein. Are there any email public comments? >> As of 10:45 a.m., there were no email public comments. >> Thank you very much. We will now proceed to new business. We will begin by consider the first agenda item under new
business, professional violence sufficiency determinations. These categories will be presented by our voter registration administrator, Kevin Richardson. Good afternoon, Kevin. >> Good afternoon, commissioners. >> Can you please read the first category and the number of votes?
>> Yes, sir. Okay. The first category is a missing board worker signature. There was a total of 245 for one board worker signature on the ballot or the affidavit was 155. No board worker signatures were 90.
>> I move that this board's count the provisional ballots in this category. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Sure. Uh go ahead, vice chair. >> Proceed.
>> You want to make a comment? Yes, I'm sorry. >> Hello. >> It is the board workers um responsibility to sign their section of the provisional ballot envelope. I do not believe that the voters should be disenfranchised for mistakes by the
election board workers. >> Thank you. Uh secretary, did you have anything you want to say? >> I have nothing to add. Thank you. >> Okay. Secretary, please call the role. Vice Chair Dy >> I
>> I vote I chairman Seir >> I please proceed. >> Okay the next category is not registered not sure system at all. There's 283 ballots. >> Okay. Did anyone want to me comment
before we second it or even move on >> hear? No. Okay. I move that this board does not count provisional ballots in this category. Is there a second? Second. >> Secretary Bluestein, please call the role.
>> Vice Chair Dilly. >> I. >> I vote I. Chairman Seabir. >> I. Please proceed. >> The next category is no voter signature anywhere on the affidavit for a total of one. >> I move that the board does not count
original ballots in this category. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Anyone wish to make comment? Please proceed. Uh the next category I went to to the vote. >> No, >> vice chair. >> I >> I vote I chairman
>> I >> please proceed. >> Uh the next category is it was determined by the staff that voters voted in person 30 total 30 ballots. >> I move that this board does not count provisional ballots in this category. Is
there a second? >> Second. >> Anyone wish to make comment? Secretary Blueststein, please call the role. >> Vice Chair Dey, >> I >> I vote I. Chairman Seir, >> I please proceed. >> Uh the next category is voters had their
registration cancelled for one reason or another for a total of 107. >> I move that this board does not count provisional ballots in this category. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Any commissioners want to make comment? Secretary Bluestein, please call a role.
>> Vice Chair Daily. I >> I vote I chairman Seabir. >> I Please proceed. >> The next category is the voter was determined to be registered out of county. That's 324. >> I move that this board does not count provisional ballots in this category. Is
there a second? >> Second. >> Any commissioners want to make comment? Hearing none. Secretary Bluestein, please call a role. >> Vice Chair Dy >> I. >> I vote I. Chairman Samir >> I. Please proceed.
>> Uh the next category is the voter returned a mail in or absentee ballot that was counted. There was a total of 40. >> I move that this board does not count provisional ballots in this category. Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Any commissioners want to make comment? Hearing none. Secretary Bluestein, please call the role. >> Vice Chair Dy >> I. >> I vote I. Chairman Seir >> I. Please proceed. Uh, the next category is the voter only signed once on the
affidavit for a total of 210. >> Mr. Chairman, I have a question for Kevin on this category prior to the motion. Please, >> please proceed. >> Kevin, was there a signature on the envelope? >> Yes, by the voter. >> Was the staff able to compare that
signature to the registered voter in the shore system? >> Yes. >> In all cases, the signature was determined to be genuine? >> Yes. Did all of the voters in this category sign on the left side and not on the right side or did some sign on the right and not on the left?
>> It was a combination of both. >> Mr. Chairman, I would like to request that this category be broken out into two different votes. One that deals with the voters that signed in location one but not two and another for voters that
signed in two but not one. The reason I ask for this is because in Ray Canvas of provisional ballots in the 2024 primary election deals with the former, there has not been a case that deals with the latter. Each has offended a different
line of the election code. Thank you. I move I make a motion that this board does not count ballots in this category. Is there a second? >> Second. Secretary Blstein, please call
Vice Chair De. >> Um I have remarks on the motion. more remarks. >> Yes. Just to assist in showing everyone what what I'm talking about here, I would like to display a blank pro provisional deck envelope because I
think the core of this issue is the lack of understanding that we are asking voters to sign the same envelope twice. The signature boxes are within inches of each other. When reading the inray canvas of provisional ballots in the 2024 primary election, I believe that
the court ered because this fact was not plain to them. To start, they referred to one to one signature ballots as unsigned. Quoting from the majority opinion, quote, Walsh additionally emphasizes Wagner provided a full executed affidavit attesting that the
ballot was the only one he submitted in that election. As such, Walsh characterizes the envelope signature requirement as unnecessary and superfluous. That affidavit that they are talking about is not on some other piece of paper. It is a signature line
on the left side of the envelope that you will see on the screen listed as voter signature number one. The decision further spends several pages diving into the meaning of the word shall in the sentence shall place his signature on the front of the provisional ballot
envelope in the election code. This sentence refers to the right side signature box listed as voter signature number two, but nowhere does it mention that the voter had already placed their signature on the front of the provisional envelope on the left side. It then goes on to affirm that the staff
must compare the signature on the envelope with the one in the voter shore record to assess whether it is genuine and executed by the same person who signed the affidavit. I will note that all of this is activity all of this activity of signing provisional ballots
is happening in the polling place in front of the election board workers. So, I'm not sure what situation is occurring where the person signing the left side would be different from the person signing the right side. It seems to me the judge of elections would have to put a stop to that if two different people
were filling out provisional envelopes. As we heard from Kevin, our staff only needs one of the two signatures to compare it to to the shore system and determine if it is genuine. I am aware of what 25 PS3050 says about the need for both signatures,
but it would not be the first thing in the election code to be thrown out because it unfairly disenfranchises voters. In conclusion, I believe that the court errored in its decision and ra canvas a provisional ballots in the 2024 primary election. I think that if presented the full picture, and I have
faith in our law department's ability to do that, they would find using the buzzwords, the buzzwords of the day, that there is no compelling government interest in making voters sign the same piece of paper twice when we only need one to complete our check. I will also note that with the issues that occurred
in Chester County on November 4 with their paper poll books that resulted in an extreme number of provisional ballots, we could see this case revisited as there may be local races there where these ballots are determinative. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. So, I do believe before you made your comment, uh, Secretary, you correct me if I'm wrong. You already voted in affirmative. >> I seconded your motion to not count the balance. >> I just second the motion. >> Okay. So, now proceed uh to vote. Can
you please call a role? >> No. >> I'm sorry. >> Vice Chair D. >> No. >> I vote I chairman Seir. >> I please proceed. >> Okay. The next category is where the secrecy envelope was not used. We have
132 ballots. >> Okay. I move that this board does not Hold on. Did I make the motion? Sorry. Make the motion. Okay. >> Kevin, I I >> Hold on one second. Hold on. I make the
motion. Uh, and then you can make a comment. >> No, I have a question for >> Oh, before we make the motion. >> Yeah. >> Proceed. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Kevin, these voters were determined to be registered voters, correct? >> Yes.
>> These voters signed the affidavit. >> Yes. >> The only thing wrong with these ballots is they're not inside the secrecy envelope. >> That is correct. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Move that this board does not count provisional ballots in this category. Is there a second? >> Second,
>> Mr. Chairman. Remarks on the motion. Please, >> please proceed. I believe whether or not a ballot is in the secrecy envelope not material in determining whether or not such individual is qualified under state law to vote in such election. But unlike the mail ballots where the voters are filling them out on their kitchen
tables, these voters are doing this process in a polling place. The judge of elections should be instructing them to place their ballot in the secrecy envelope. So this is a poll worker error that we should not be punishing the voter for. Furthermore, the difference
here is the provisional ballots are outlined in federal law, the Help America Vote Act, and this is a federal election. No, this is not. I'm sorry. State law determines if someone is eligible to vote. If we determine these voters to be registered and that they
signed the affidavit and that they have not already voted in another way, then we must count them. PA law has extra hurdles, but putting a ballot in a secrecy envelope has no bearing on whether or not someone is qualified to vote. I believe that Pennsylvania law is
in conflict with the Help America Vote Act. This has not been this has not been the subject of recent court challenges and therefore I believe that these ballots should count. >> Secretary, please. >> Vice Chair Dey, >> no.
>> I vote I. Chairman I >> so in the other category there is none. >> Mr. Chairman that concludes my report. >> Thank you. I appreciate you and I think appreciate uh you and all your staff working tirelessly to get this done. That concludes our provisional balance
sufficiency termination. Thank you for all your hard work. We appreciate it. >> You're welcome. Have a good day. >> We now move to the non-aggenda items. We will move to any additional comments by commissioner uh vice chair Dylan. Did you have any other business to be ready at this meeting? >> I have none. Thank you
>> secretary. >> I have nothing to add. Thank you. >> Uh before we uh this pause or re uh recess or whatever we call it. I just wanted to really uh again thank staff and I do realize that there needs to be
additional training to our board workers and so and I'm pretty almost certain that the board workers who are making some of these mistakes are the same board workers. So maybe we can do additional training targeting them to see if we can get this number out
because definitely it's harden me to see uh these numbers here because people you know they tried to vote and everything else. So again, I think we can do a better job. So we definitely can reach out to those uh board workers and even have to do additional training. I'm all
in support of that. Thank you.