On the other hand, the write-in vote for petitioner recorded under window three was properly excluded from the final vote tally because it was not correctly cast in the place designated on the machine for the office of board member. Moreover, voters were instructed by election officials and petitioner's campaign literature to write in their votes in window one. Even if the vote had been counted, it would not have changed the outcome of the election. Petitioner also alleges that one unnamed individual who does not reside in the district was allowed to register and vote. There is no evidence that a proper challenge was made in this case.
Respondent board denies the allegation and affirms that no voter registered after the deadline.
The record indicates that the district's publications informed voters that the last day for personal registration for the May 5 election was April 28, 1993. In the absence of any evidence to support petitioner's allegation that voter registration extended beyond the established deadline, the claim must be dismissed. Petitioner also claims that the facility used for the election was inaccessible to persons with disabilities but presents no proof that any voter was denied access to the polling place. Respondent denies the allegation but acknowledges that one voter in a wheelchair requested and received assistance from election officials. Voting took place on the ground floor of a school building.