The outcome of a ballot to decide the placement of North Kessock’s bottle banks should be declared null and void because of double voting, a local resident has claimed.
Jackie Patience, who lives directly opposite the main car park where the bottle banks have been placed, said that several people allege they were sent two sets of ballot papers.
Councillors deemed the use of the ballot as the only fair democratic way to end the near five-year dispute.
Do the claims have merit?
Mrs Patience said: “Some people were getting two sets of papers into some of the houses.
“There is rumour going around that others were photocopying theirs.
“I don’t believe for one minute that nearly 600 people want to put the bottle banks down the front. That just doesn’t seem right.
“Somebody of some standing within the community, who I don’t wish to name, has said they received their papers through and then two days later received another set.
“To me, that just makes the whole thing null and void.”
The claims have been denied by Highland Council who say the process was fair.
Highland Council say thorough checks carried out during voting process
More than 60% of the electorate returned their vote.
The overwhelming majority voted in favour of the bottle banks returning to the main car park.
Highland Council has said there was no indication of any irregularities in the voting process.
The depute returning officer is also confident in the integrity of the vote.
A spokeswoman said: “A high turnout was anticipated for this election and is in line with community council elections. The most recent community council election had a turnout of 65.5%.
“All ballot papers which were printed on coloured paper were uniquely numbered with a watermark.
“Count staff and election staff are trained to detect any irregularity with the ballot. For example, the mark itself, different weight of paper, different colour.
“If any of these ballots are identified as doubtful they are considered by the depute returning officer if the vote is valid or not.
“Additionally, given that ballot papers needed to be returned in the provided return envelopes, it would have been obvious if multiple returns were received.
“No envelope was detected containing two ballots.”
Was more consultation needed?
Mrs Patience also said she believes the streaming of the count – which failed at points due to technical errors – also hampered the process.
She has, however, said that if all appears to be above board, she will accept the outcome.
She feels that more consultation should done with residents who are directly affected by the placing of the bottle banks.
Mrs Patience added: “If it is that the vote is accurate, then we will accept the decision of the vote. But I don’t believe so.
“I don’t object to them coming into the car park. I would rather it was discussed with us and not just dumped there, which is what they have done.
“They are right on our doorsteps, the people living along here, so I feel we should have some say.”
Screening of the bottle banks to minimise their impact, both in terms of noise and sight, has been proposed.
