C, 2012 Budget Updates - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

staff time, the 2008 and 2010 elections averaged $20,000 or $10,000 annually. When compared to the County proposal, the extra cost to the City is $5,500 annually. Sue and I conservatively estimate that $5,500 annually is about the cost for staff time to manage the local elections. Sue and I have not done all the math, but if the Deputy Clerk spends 200 hours on elections over two years and all the other support staff (Public Works and Clerical) also spend 200 hours combined every two years on elections, then the cost to the City for the County doing the election is a "push" financially. It is not hard to image this amount of staff time being spent on such activities as conducting the actual primary and general election, training, attending County meetings, accuracy tests, nursing home voting, setting up and taking down the four voting sites, etc. Even with the County conducting the City elections, City staff (and the City Council) will still be involved in some election activities but it will be relatively minor compared to the amount of time currently invested in the election process. One side benefit to having the County do our City elections is that the City will gain significant storage space by having the election equipment located at the County facility. Another possible benefit to the City with this proposal is that the Deputy Clerk can now take all City Council meeting minutes. This would save the City about $9,000 per year on our Timesavers' bills. Sue will need to watch to see how this new assignment works out, but we think that Becky can do the minutes and her required Clerk duties if elections are largely being removed from her work schedule. Finally, having a "turn key" elections relationship with the County will reduce the stress factor at City Hall around election time and we will also not have to deal with all the issues related to election judges (i.e. recruitment and training). Recommendation Overall, staff thinks that the contract from Ramsey County represents a significant benefit to the City and we support the proposal. One reason that Sue and I have not "done all the math" is that the main reason for the recommendation to contract with the County for election services is due to potential new laws that will make elections much more difficult to administer (i.e. voter photo ID requirement) and due to the recent state wide recounts where the actions of election judges (and therefore the actions of Cities) were placed under the microscope because every vote in every precinct was important. Staff simply believes that the City is best served by leaving the election to the professionals; which in this case is Ramsey County. Even if this proposal was not cost neutral, staff would still be recommending accepting the County contract proposal. City Council Meeting P:\Admin \Council\Agendas & Packet Information\2011 \ 10 -10 -11 Work Session\Packet Information\ 10 -10 -11 2012 Budget Update.doc Page 2 of 2