Fresno Bee Article Says California Election Administration is Jeopardized by Budget Cuts

The Fresno Bee has this story, in which Fresno County election officials make a case that election administration in that county, and likely other counties, is in jeopardy from lack of resources. The article, in the second half, mentions that Proposition 14 (the top-two system), passed by the voters in June 2010, makes the problem worse.

In early 2010, county elections officials had testified that Prop. 14 would make election administration considerably more expensive, but a State Court of Appeals ruled that this information could not be mentioned in the Voters Handbook. Instead, the Voters Handbook carried a statement by a state official denying that Prop. 14 would increase the costs of election administration.


Comments

Fresno Bee Article Says California Election Administration is Jeopardized by Budget Cuts — No Comments

  1. Having elections is one of the very few things that governments in the U.S.A. MUST DO — regardless of the LAWLESS party hacks.

    Thus – the courts WILL BRING DOWN a HAMMER on the party hacks if such party hack play their EVIL party hack games with elections.

    One more reason to go to ALL paper mail ballots ???

    NO overheated crowded polling places on election days.

    See Oregon — ALL paper mail ballots — Oregon survives.

  2. Most of the County Clerk’s costs are reimbursed by other sources: the federal government, state government, local government. Victor Salazar mentions the 2005-2006 year as if it were the norm, when in fact it was anomalously large. $3.2M, $3.2M, $4.0M, $3.0M, $3.0M $3.0M. Which number is not like the others, which doesn’t belong? If you guessed 2005-2006 you are right. But the county actually spent $4.8M that year and $1.3M the next. So the cost for some elections must have been shifted around.

    The county clerk had more than 50 employees after a warehousing function was switched to his office. After it was eliminated the extra staff disappeared. I’m sure Salazar can be more specific – but it wasn’t that he had 50 full time staff working on elections. More like 15, isn’t it?

    There was some communication between the board of supervisors and the 2009 special election. They say it cost $715,000. Since there were 94,888 voters, that is $7.54 per voter, not the $1.88. Fresno County didn’t accidentally divide by the number of registered voters did they?

    In the 2010 June primary, 39.1% of registered Republicans voted, 27.8% of registered Democrats, but only 18.9% of other voters. Those 13,192 other voters, 33 for each polling place required 7 different ballot styles. I wouldn’t be surprised that any additional cost associated with a longer ballot will be compensated in the reduction of complexity of the election. Of course more voters may turn out, once it isn’t an election mainly for the big parties, and there may be more independent candidates. But that is not a bad thing, is it?

  3. The voter’s pamphlet said:

    “Fiscal Impact: No significant net change in state and local government costs to administer elections.”

    In 2010, turnout in California was around 200 to 300 voters per precinct. 4 election judges cost $625, so that is around $2 to $3 in labor per vote. How much does an additional sheet of paper cost? And what if it does not require an additional ballot paper? What is the overhead cost for registration? What is the cost of printing 9 different primary ballots?

    How considerable is “considerably more expensive?”

    One would not expect Richard Winger to be advocating the “ballot crowding” argument.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.