CITY COUNCIL: Report & Council Direction on Options for the 2012 Municipal Election

Meeting Date: October 5, 2010
Prepared by: Heidi Burch, City Clerk

City Council
Agenda Item Summary

Name: Receive report and provide Council direction on options for the 2012 Municipal
Election.

Description: Staff is requesting direction regarding whether the City should continue to conduct
a standalone election for the Mayoral and Council seats in April or consolidate with the
County’s November General Election.

Overall Cost:
City Funds: see staff report for cost estimates
Grant Funds: N/A

Staff Recommendation: Provide staff direction.

Important Considerations: Contracting with the Monterey County Registrar’s office for
election services for an April election is no longer a viable alternative due to significant
increases in costs.

Decision Record: Council considered this item at its September 14, 2010 meeting. It was
widely decided to continue this item so Council and the public could have more time to
consider the various options.

Reviewed by:

__________________________ _____________________
Rich Guillen, City Administrator Date

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR MCCLOUD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: HEIDI BURCH, CITY CLERK
THROUGH: RICH GUILLEN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 5, 2010
SUBJECT: CITY ELECTIONS

INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
The City has held its elections in April of even years since its incorporation in 1916. In the past,
the City has contracted with the Monterey County Elections Department to conduct its elections.
Significant cost increases, however, forced the City to conduct its own election in April 2010
rather than contracting with the County. The City contracted with Martin & Chapman to conduct
its election, thereby saving the City between $28,000 and $40,000. (Because the County quotes
varied greatly, savings by the City can only be placed in a range).
In reviewing the City’s 2010 election, the following items were noted:
The City would need to have at least one more experienced poll worker during the closing of the
polls. Poll workers that had previously worked on County elections had been placed at the two
precincts throughout the day. One precinct, however, did not have an experienced poll worker
present for the closing of the polls. This would be remedied going forward as a number of former
poll workers volunteered their services for the 2012 election.
The City’s use of volunteers to set up the polling places, post signage, work at the precincts from
7 a.m. to 8 p.m., close down the polls and reconcile votes placed saved the City thousands of
dollars in costs previously charged by the County.
The results of the election were calculated significantly quicker than during the election in 2008.
Results for the 2010 election were tabulated within 1.5 hours. The final results were available the
next day. By law, the county has 28 days to conduct the canvass and determine the final results
of an election.
82
Staff Report
3 August 2010
Page 2
City staff time to conduct the election did not increase significantly. City staff already had
election duties when contracting with the County. The main additions to those duties in
contracting with Martin & Chapman were the processing of the vote-by-the-mail ballots, which
included the verification of signatures, and duties on the day of the election. Deputy City Clerk,
Molly Laughlin, spent 25 hours and I spent 13 hours verifying signatures, photocopying ballots
and supervising the polls.
As contracting with the County to conduct future elections in April is cost prohibitive, there are
two remaining viable options for future Carmel-by-the-Sea elections. The City can continue to
conduct its election in April of even years or change the election to November and consolidate
with the General Election.
ANTICIPATED COSTS
November consolidated election – County
estimate
$12-$17,000*
Traditional April election –County estimate $50,679
Traditional April election – Martin &
Chapman estimate $23,000
* The City was charged $16,340 by the County for the election in November 2009.
SUMMARY
Contracting with the Monterey County Registrar’s office for election services for an April
election is no longer a viable alternative. Staff requests Council direction to continue contracting
with Martin & Chapman for its April election or to take measures to move the election to
November and consolidate with the County and other agencies.