HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04182000 - C101 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Stephen L. Weir, County Clerk-Recorder
Registrar of Voters
DATE: April 16, 2000
SUBJECT: Consolidation of City of Pleasant Hill
Elections with Statewide General Elections
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
1. APPROVE request of the City of Pleasant Hill to consolidate elections with Statewide
General Elections subject to item 6(below), amortization of mail inserter equipment costs.
2. FIND that the Clerk-Recorder has made progress overthe past yearthatwill accommodate
consolidations in the following ways:
a. The increased number of ballot cards requires additional vote counter stations. Due
to space limitations and the capacity of the current Data General computer, the
Clerk secured six(6)additional machines from Multnomah County, Oregon,for 2O%
of new cost. In addition, the Clerk has acquired a P.C. based tally system (B.C.
WIN) that will allow for these machines to be used.
3. CONSIDER the following qualitative issues which are expected to result from the
requested consolidation(s):
a. Timeliness.With the B.C.Win system and a new streamlined ballot delivery system,
ballots will arrive and be counted faster than in the past. It should be noted that with
consolidation, a slower vote count will take place than without consolidation.
b. Accuracy. Additional extra staffing help will be needed to conduct consolidated
elections. However, the demand for the staff will go down in odd number years.
There are concerns about having trained temporary staff; however, we believe that
we can bring on temporary staff early enough to train them for each election.
CONTI ED ON ATTACHMENT X Yes SIGNATURE:
_ "E OMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
/ r
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD/0N_ A r;1 IS, 9fffl APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED Xx OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT — — — — — — — ) ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
AYES: NOES: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
ATTESTED_ April 18, 2000
cc: Elections Office PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY DEPUTY
Board Order
Page 2
Election Consolidation Request
C. Voter Impact. While turnout at a general election is higher than the turnout at an"off
year" election, high voter turnout and long ballots result in long lines at the polls and
"voter drop-off' towards the end of the ballots and issues on the backs of some
ballot cards.
4. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Clerk-Recorder attempted to find a way to "work with local
agencies to develop a fee structure that does not penalize agencies which choose to hold
elections in the odd-numbered years." While this issue was a directive of a 1997 Board
Order, County Counsel has determined that the Clerk cannot structure a pricing
mechanism that would favor one election year over another.
5. ACKNOWLEDGE that with consolidations off of odd numbered years onto even numbered
years, revenues will go down significantly for odd year elections and will go up slightly for
even numbered year elections. (The first impact will be noticed in budget year 1999-2000.
It is not possible to determine the impact at this time until the full impact of consolidation
is considered. However, it is safe to assume that when a major district moves its election
off of the November, odd numbered year, any district that remains on that ballot will have
to pay a higher election charge.)
6. ACKNOWLEDGE amortization of the cost of equipment identified in item 1 (above) over
a five year period (Elections in November, 2000, 2002 and 2004) and the spread of those
costs among those agencies seeking consolidation off of November, odd numbered years
onto November, even numbered years. This funding proposal was approved bythe Board
of Supervisors on March 24, 1998.
BACKGROUND:
After lengthy discussions in March, 1997,the Board denied eight requests for consolidation
upon the recommendation of the Clerk-Recorder. The Board directed the Clerk to work
with the districts to see if a way could be found to equalize costs between even and odd
years. Based upon a November, 1997 County Council Opinion, the Clerk and the County
are restricted in the manner in which election billings can be formulated. The Board also
asked the Clerk-Recorder to review capital and space requirements. The Clerk has
determined that with the exception of expanding the inserting capacity of the Elections
Office, all other concerns have been, or will be addressed.
The City of Pleasant Hill formally filed a resolution with our office to consolidate with the
even number year elections.