YourCT.com header image 2
← AAA Reports More Drivers Running Out Of Gas Norwalk: Card Carrying Pols Revel In Nostalgia →

Greenwich: Poll Workers In Short Supply


by turfgrrl


January 28th, 2008 · 8 Comments

This is news? From the Courant:

Greenwich election officials are having a problem for the upcoming presidential primary - not enough poll workers.

The town’s two registrars of voters say there’s a shortage of people to greet voters, read ballots and check IDs for the Feb. 5 primary.

GOP Registrar Veronica Baron Musca says moving up the presidential primary by a month has created a hardship for her office, which relies on many elderly residents to work the polls.

She says all of her people are in Florida for the winter as usual.

The two registrars says Greenwich still needs at least 35 more poll workers for Super Tuesday. They typically hire 120 to 140 people to work during elections.

source: Courant, Greenwich election officials seeking poll workers, By Associated Press, January 28, 2008

Tags: Presidential 2008

8 Responses so far ↓ “Greenwich: Poll Workers In Short Supply”



  • 1 Frustrated Voter // Jan 29, 2008 at 12:25 am

    Today I telephoned the registrars office repeatedly, both the Democrats and Republicans failed to answer the phone but let the calls transfer to voicemail.
    After numerous attempts by phone and email throughout the day to obtain registration information, finally someone picked up the phone on the republicans line. I requested “what identification was required to change my affiliation from Independent to Democrat”, in order to participate in the primary on Tuesday. I was rattled the apparently normal response that “it takes three months to reregister” and told that “perhaps I should not change my affiliation, because things may change”. I reiterated that I was an “INDEPENDENT and “did not know any law or rule that disallowed me from reregistering up till the 4th”, Again I was given the soundbite that it takes three months. I repeated again that I was an Independently registered voter and I wished to change my party affilation and that there were no rules or laws that I knew of by the local, state or federal staute that prevented me from doing so. The response was, after a hesitation, that I was correct. Again, I asked “what identification was needed”, I added “would a drivers license suffice”? This was acceptable to the registrars office. After trying to save time and plan a stop at the registrars office I now made an extra trip to reregister due to the confusion. Upon arriving at the registrars office I informed the clerk that I was an ‘Independent and wanted to reregister as a Democrat’, again I was given the drill, ” It takes three months to process re registrations and it would be a good idea to wait, things might change.” Somewhere, this must be illegal it is definately not in the spirit of a democracy. It certainly is not a response I was expecting by the registrar office, I mean if they don’t understand the rules, who does? I repeated again that I was an “unaffiliated registered voter and wished to change party affiliation”. Again came the spheel. Again, I stated my position. Firmly this time, attracting the notice of all present. Finally it struck home. “Oh yes, you can do that”, was the response. This I knew, the fact that no one else on staff, dealing directly with the public, apparently, doesn’t, is unacceptable. I would hope that it is only ignorance, as any other explanation is certainly liable for litigation and challenges to the process. I was turned away on the phone and in person repeatedly before I was able to register. The initial response to me was wrong, all around, especially after I made it clear at all times, repeatedly, of my current affiliation as an Independent. I later asked, after negotiating through the barriers and completing this not so simple task on my to do list, what was the response for registrations and was informed that it was phenomenal. This could be argued, why, I was initially thwarted at reregistering. It is correct that under CT law changing from a Republican to a Democrat requires a three month waiting period. Many have obviously been misinformed and have swamped the registrars office to change party’s to participate in Tuesdays primary and thus the auto pilot by the staff. My concerns here are two fold; how many other Independent voters have been turned away from participating in the primary? Secondly, no one from a registrars or any government office for that matter, should be advising me on what I should or shouldn’t do with my vote This is still a democracy, isn’t it? There has been correct information disseminated in the local media, guess no one pays attention to The Hour anymore, not even those writing the notices and stories. There is definitely room for improvement and I hope that all the tools and personel are made available to conduct an above board vote. This is my hope, I suspect there are many that join me in this wish.

  • 2 townie // Jan 29, 2008 at 6:03 am

    Frustrated Voter-Your experience is not an uncommon one. But one has to look no further then the leadership. Selling real estate seems more important to the dem reg, and the repub reg has the same work schedule as Sue Gunn. Not bad for two job that pay in the $50’s with full benifets. And they think the BOE is bad!

  • 3 Anonymous // Jan 29, 2008 at 8:04 am

    Townie, I think that Sue’s salary is closer to 70K plus benefits.

  • 4 Anonymous // Jan 29, 2008 at 10:18 am

    Maybe its time for new registrars who actually know that we are paying them for a reason and that reason is not to sell real eastate. Both have been an embarassment from the beginning and both seem to think they are not paid enough. RTC and DTC need to rethink who they appoint next time around or this will continue. The RTC had that chance a few years ago but chose the good ‘ol boy network instead and now it seems as if since Bondi has been blacklisted from the DTC that his daughter in-law may not be the next choice. Whatever happens , both parties need to wake up to the fact that we are tired of paying for below standard services.

  • 5 nwlknative // Jan 29, 2008 at 12:50 pm

    #1 - Is it possible that the registrar thought you were a member of the “Independent” party in town? I had the same thing happen - when I said I was independent, they thought I was a member of that party. I should have used the term unaffiliated.

  • 6 Democrat // Jan 29, 2008 at 5:08 pm

    Dear Frustrated voter, are you talking about the Norwalk registrars? Please let me know as this is unacceptable. If you give an email address, or contact the Norwalk Dems, perhaps we can get some redress.

  • 7 Anonymous // Jan 29, 2008 at 11:12 pm

    #1 Frustrated Voter. You really should contact the State and lodge a complaint. How many other voters have been disenfranchised in this city? It really isn’t a surprise though.

  • 8 norwalker // Jan 30, 2008 at 7:37 pm

    I too was in the office at the time that “frustrated voter” was. I was surprised, at first, at his entry. He must have had a very bad morning and was still carrying it over, and needed to take it out on on someone. I am sure that such a learned gentleman would know the difference between “unaffiliated” and “independent”. I heard that clerk clearly state that he was unaffiliated to which he trumpeted over that he was independent. As we all know, if you are unaffiliated it takes nothing more than a quick voter registration card to change to a party, which is what i was doing that afternoon. Of course, I am not as intelligent as frustrated voter and used the more pedestrian sounding term, unaffiliated. As an observer, it seems that this gentleman had an axe to grind and was going to create whatever happened in his mind to be fact. after all, it’s not a lie if you believe it. There are many things that need to be corrected in the Voter Reg office…however, the clerk was correct in her answer..and i would salute her for her calm and gracious manner in handling this bully.

Leave a Reply