County solicitor Wil White answered complaints about relocating a township polling place.

Two Concord Township residents recently raised questions about the county commissioners’ decision to relocate the polling place from the municipal building to Concord Presbyterian Church.

Kandi Nassy, a former township supervisor, and Roberta Andrade filed the complaints with the Department of State, which oversees elections.

Both buildings are on Hooker Road.

The commissioners on Oct. 5 unanimously voted to make the move, after unanimously voting against the move at their Sept. 21 meeting.

In the complaints, filed Oct. 6, Nassy and Andrade told the state that they believe the county had to issue a notice of its intention to relocate the poll two weeks before voting on the matter.

The state forwarded the complaints to White, who is serving as interim director of elections. He responded to Nassy and Andrade by explaining that the county has the sole authority to select polling places, and the two-week notice the county provides is intended to give residents an opportunity to express their opinions, but is not required.

On Tuesday, Nassy said she understood White’s response, but she isn’t pleased about it.

“I’m not thrilled with the response,” Nassy said

Andrade said she accepts White’s explanation, but does not support the move. She said there is plenty of room in the municipal building to conduct voting, and the church should not receive taxpayer money for housing the poll.

The county offers all polling locations $75 for hosting elections, but many don’t accept the stipend, White said. He said he doesn’t know if the church is being paid.

“The Elections Code (@ Section 302) quite clearly states that the Board of Elections is the entity with the sole power to select and equip polling places within the County. There is no ‘2 week requirement’ anywhere in the Code. Rather, that is a practice which this County chooses (voluntarily) to try to utilize. That practice is … we announce at a public meeting our intention to consider a polling location change and the Board typically waits until a subsequent public meeting (usually every two weeks or so) before acting upon the possible change. This voluntary local policy is intended to allow/encourage those who might be affected by the proposed relocation the opportunity to be heard regarding the proposed relocation,” White wrote in his response.

The commissioners also serve at the board of elections.

At their Sept. 7 meeting, the commissioners, acting as the board of elections, announced that there might be a change of the polling place for the Concord Township voting precinct, White said.

A motion to move the poll from the municipal building to the church appeared on the agenda of the commissioners’ meeting for Sept. 21. Nassy addressed the commissioners, saying she opposed the move.

White told the commissioners that one other person contacted the bureau to express opposition to the move. The commissioners unanimously voted against the motion, but directed the bureau to investigate the situation and determine what options were available and preferable, White said.

After the investigation, the bureau recommended relocation. The bureau also received more than a dozen calls from voters who wanted the polling place to be relocated, and the commissioners were presented with a petition that contained 53 signatures of voters who favored relocation, White said.

At the commissioners’ Oct. 5 meeting, the commissioners unanimously voted to relocate the poll to the church. Notification of the move was mailed to precinct voters and the township, he said.

White said the section 3582 of the Election Code includes only a preference that polling place changes be made no sooner than 20 days before an election.

The state Sunshine Act requires matters to be placed on a meeting agenda that is publicly posted at least 24 hours prior to the public meeting, and that requirement was followed, White said.