Out with the new and in with the old.

The Butler County commissioners on Tuesday voted to recommend the purchase of a paper ballot voting system to replace the electronic version used by the county for last several years.

Gov. Tom Wolf mandated all counties purchase new voting systems from a state-certified vendor that includes a paper ballot.

The mandate came after the federal Department of Homeland Security determined Pennsylvania was among 21 states targeted by Russians for voter hacking in the 2016 election. New systems must include a paper recording of each vote.

The commissioners recommended the county buy the voting system from Election Systems and Software of Omaha, Neb., at an initial cost of $991,000.

The cost of the equipment over 10 years — which includes maintenance, paper and printing costs, accessories and other associated fees — is $2.3 million.

Because all three commissioners are running for re-election in 2020, a substitute election board appointed by the commissioners will vote on making the final purchase of the system, according to solicitor Julie Graham.

Graham said county Judge William Shaffer will approve the appointees, who will then act in the commissioners' stead and approve a vendor.

Shari Brewer, the county's elections director, said voters will be handed a paper ballot containing candidates' names in the new system.

They would then go to a booth to cast their votes by manually filling in the circles next to their candidates' names.

When the ballot is complete, the voter will slide it into a special “secrecy sleeve” and deposit it into a locked box, where it will be scanned. No poll workers will touch the ballot after it is completed, and the scanner can alert the voter if the number of votes cast was incorrect, Brewer said.

Brewer said the county has been considering a new voting system for three years as the current system is nearing the end of its projected life span.

She and the commissioners attended presentations from four vendors certified by the state, and called two back for more information before choosing ES&S.

Use of hardware and scanners, tabulation, technical support, cost and other factors were compared by the commissioners and Brewer on spreadsheets according to strengths and weaknesses.

On Feb. 20, the commissioners welcomed 79 poll workers to the county training center on West Cunningham Street to try out the machines sold by the ES&S paper system, the ES&S ballot-marking system and the system sold by Clear Ballot, another vendor.

The poll workers were then surveyed in six categories and asked to give an overall rating for each system.

Although it was not chosen, the ES&S ballot-marking system received the highest ratings from poll workers for user-friendliness, overall experience, screen visibility and properties of the controls for poll workers and audio ballot. However, the system would have cost $3,400 per machine for more than 500 machines plus an annual maintenance cost of $55 per machine, in addition to the cost of the ballot scanner and other items.

Commissioner Kim Geyer said the commissioners broke down each system on spreadsheets to review every part of the system.

“It was at times grueling because it was a lot of information to learn, and each company was unique and had different equipment and ways of dealing with balance, so it was really important for us to pay attention and keep focused on each (voting system),” Geyer said.

She added that she thought of the voters who will use the equipment as she sat through the demonstrations on each system, and of the national media's attention in recent years to voter hacking.

“It's more crucial than ever for us to get this right,” Geyer said.

She said two factors among the many they considered to be important in choosing a voting system were portability and the ease with which the equipment can be set up.

“A lot of our poll workers are older and we can't have pieces of equipment that nobody can lift,” Geyer said.

Leslie Osche, commissioners chairwoman, said she liked the attributes of the ES&S paper ballot system in addition to its cost.

“I like the flexibility of the equipment and the idea that if we have a higher (number of voters) in some election years, with the paper ballots, it's relatively inexpensive,” she said.

Osche said the recommended system might reduce lines at each precinct, which was not the case for the ballot-marking systems.

Regarding the cost of the recommended system, Osche said federal funding could help pay the county's initial costs for the new system, and state funding proposed to be rolled out over four years could help with annual maintenance costs, if those funds become available.

She said financing options are available as well.

“I'm not sure that is something we are going to necessarily need to do,” Osche said.

She said she expects the substitute election board to act quickly on the voting system purchase, so it can be ordered and training can be carried out.