During the May 27 meeting of the Ohio County Fiscal Court, several court members were concerned about complaints they received from voters in their districts about the May Primary Election.Fifth District Magistrate Kenny Autry began the discussion by talking about several problems voters had in his district during the primary election earlier this month.“I had some confused, very misdirected people, that were sent from one precinct to another, from one district to another,” Autry said. “I would like to get to the bottom of this, of who messed up, and the people have asked me who to complain to. I don’t think its the fiscal court, I think it's probably the board of elections and the county court clerk’s office.”Autry, who was defeated in the Republican Primary Election for Fifth District Magistrate, said he had several voters in his district who were sent to the Fourth District and believed issues like this were widespread.Third District Magistrate Brandon Thomas, who won the Democratic Primary for judge-executive, said he, too, received calls from voters who had problems. Among the problems, voters had to travel long distances to vote and some were sent to the wrong district to vote.Second District Magistrate Jason Bullock, who won the Democratic Primary for Second District Magistrate, said he also had voters who were sent to the wrong district.Bullock had one case, in which a husband was sent to one precinct to vote and his wife was sent to a different precinct to vote. Autry had two cases like that in his district.“It’s a genuine mess up and I think the Board of Elections should probably take complaints and go from there, if there’s anywhere to go,” Autry said. “I think we need answers as to how this (happened).”The issues would seem to stem from the voter redistricting that took place earlier this year. By law, the county should have been redistricted after every census, but according to county clerk Bess Ralph, this is the first time in 20 years Ohio County has been redistricted. The fiscal court approved a county redistricting plan that was sent to the state for approval. The state approved the plan in late January.Due to the adoption of the court’s redistricting plan, the boundaries of the magistrates' districts were changed, placing some voters into new districts. In theory, each magistrate’s district should have an equal number of voters. In the end, 2,700 voters had to be moved into a different district, according to the new redistricting plan.The county clerk’s office had about six weeks to carry out the new plan and move all the displaced voters to the proper district and inform them of the change. If not for a delay by the state legislature to approve the new redistricting plan, the clerk’s office would have had a year to move displaced voters.Ralph said her office, the Board of Elections and the fiscal court followed the law when handling the redistricting of the county.“I don’t know how we could have done any better, under the circumstances,” she said.After moving the 2,700 voters into the correct district, notifications were mailed to those who had been moved. Ralph and her office then tried to double-check the information of the 16,800 voters in the county, but there wasn’t enough time.“It was an impossible task to get done before May,” Ralph said. “We did the best that we could.”Ralph knew there would be some issues on election day due to the redistricting and planned accordingly. She called in more employees to help with problems and told precinct workers to call her office if there was a problem with the voters, especially if a voter was at the wrong precinct.“Every one of my precinct workers were instructed to call the clerk’s office and we (would tell the voter where to) vote,” Ralph explained. “No one was told they could not vote. I can’t imagine precinct workers would have told them that.”Before the magistrates brought up their issues with the voting, Ralph hadn't receivedany more complaints about May’s Primary Election than in past elections.“It was as calm an election as I’ve ever had. I was shocked,” Ralph said. “There was absolutely nothing intentionally done wrong. Everything wasn’t perfect, but other than (a few circumstances), the election went very, very well, compared to the amount of changes that there were.”Ralph's office will continue to double-check each voter’s information to make sure everything is correct for the November election. The clerk’s office has until Oct. 9 to complete the review.“It will almost be impossible (to do), but I’m going to do everything I can to get it done by then,” Ralph said. “I can’t make a promise that it will be totally done, but we’re working on it.”