Election Costs: What States Pay

[3] Local election officials in Louisiana may choose to complete the Louisiana Voter Registration Administrators' Certification Program, through Auburn University and the Election Center, to receive an increase in salary. 

Some states assist counties even further, by paying for some personnel costs associated with elections. Personnel costs, including poll workers for Election Day as well as temporary employees to assist with everything from entering voter registrations to working overtime to get ballots counted on election night, are typically the largest line item in a local election official’s budget.

• In Alabama poll workers who attend a precinct election official training school are entitled to an additional $25 per day in compensation from the state (Ala. Code. §17-8-12).
• In Hawaii the state provides mandatory training and stipends for Election Day poll workers. The state may also pay for overtime costs for local election officials if it is strictly related to state responsibilities (Hawaii Rev. Stat. §11-184).
• In Kentucky counties can request reimbursement from the state for personnel costs up to $0.50 per registered voter per year (Ky. Rev. Stat. §117.343).
• In Louisiana the state pays the salary of permanent and temporary employees that perform election duties and for law enforcement officers to maintain order for gubernatorial, congressional and presidential preference primary elections, unless local candidates or questions are on the ballot, in which case the state pays half. (La. Rev. Stat. §18:1400.1 to §18:1400.8). The state also reimburses for some expenses in providing training to poll workers and pays for personnel expenses incurred by early voting hours outside of regular business hours.
• In New Jersey counties may apply for reimbursement for compensation for members of district boards of elections (N.J. Rev. Stat. §19:45-6.2, 19:45-7).
• In Oklahoma the state reimburses counties for the chief election official’s salary, and provides training for poll workers each even-numbered year, paying $25 for attendance. (Okl. Stat. Ann. tit. 26 §2-118, §3-105.1, §3-109 to §3-111).
• In Tennessee the state covers part of local administrator of elections’ salaries if they are state-certified (Tenn. Code Ann. §2-11-202).

State Providing Ballots or Other Supplies

Some states have taken on the task of providing ballots or other polling place supplies to local jurisdictions. In particular, this practice is common in northeastern states where elections are often run on the township level. The state provides ballots for local jurisdictions in Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont. In many of these states the state also provides polling place supplies such as ballot boxes and voting booths. In Oklahoma the state prints ballots for statewide primaries, runoff primaries, general elections and special elections.

State Voter Information

Some states are required to produce and distribute information to voters, particularly voter information pamphlets, information on state candidates or ballot measures, or sample ballots. This often requires a mass mailing to every voter in the state, a large financial undertaking. Every state election agency also has a website that provides information for voters, though the information and services contained on these websites vary greatly. This is yet another way that state election offices pitch in money and resources for election administration. See NCSL’s webpage on Voter Information: Varied State Requirements for more detailed information.

Revenue for Election Administration

Election administration is not often thought of as revenue generator. However there are a few things that election administrators can charge for, mostly when providing information or materials to candidates or campaigns. For example:

• In Louisiana proceeds from the sale of maps of precincts and election jurisdictions by the secretary of state’s office go into a Voting Technology Fund.
• In Maine the secretary of state may charge fees for providing voter information or absentee list information to political parties, organizations or individuals. These fees are put into a dedicated fund to offset the cost of keeping up the statewide voter registration list.
• In Mississippi monies derived from the annual report fees imposed on limited liability companies are deposited into the Elections Support Fund.
• In West Virginia the secretary of state may charge for data originating in the statewide voter registration system, and proceeds are deposited into the State Election Fund.
• In Nebraska, filing fees for candidates who file in the office of the secretary of state (national, state and most special district candidates) are credited to the Election Administration Fund.

Allocating Costs Between Counties and Other Political Subdivisions

The above analysis looks at the ways in which states assist counties with paying for election administration. But counties often require smaller political subdivisions to pay for portions of elections that county officials help run. For example, it is common for school board elections, municipal elections, or special district elections to be consolidated into a single election, run by the local election officials. There are many ways that the smaller entities help with costs; here are a few examples:

• Shared costs based on formulas:
  • In Arkansas school elections that are combined with other county elections, the school district pays for expenses incurred for poll workers at individual polling places, with the share of the total being determined by the number of votes cast in the school election as a proportion of the total number of votes cast in the election (Ark. Code Ann. §6-14-118).
  • In Louisiana if there are both state/federal candidates or statewide ballot questions as well as local candidates or questions on the ballot, the state pays for half of the election expenses, and the other half is shared pro rata by the local entities according to the “real estate” used on the ballot. The share that local entities pay is determined by dividing the entity’s number of offices, propositions or questions on the ballot by the total number of all offices, propositions or questions on the ballot (La. Rev. Stat. Ann. art. 18 §1400.4).
  • In Missouri when more than one political subdivision has candidates or issues on the ballot, they share costs based on the number of registered voters in that subdivision as a percentage of the total number of registered voters eligible for the election (Mo. Rev. Stat. §115.065). 
  • In Nebraska when there are several political subdivisions participating in an election, costs chargeable to the subdivisions are determined by “dividing the total cost by the number of precincts participating in the election to fix the cost per precinct, prorating the cost per precinct by the inked ballot inch in each precinct for each political subdivision, and totaling the cost for each precinct for each political subdivision, except that the minimum charge for each primary and general election for each political subdivision shall be one hundred dollars” (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 32-1203).
• Shared costs at discretion of county
  • In Colorado counties conduct a “coordinated election” if more than one political subdivision (state, county, municipality, school district or special district) holds an election on the same day in November. In these cases, there is a “reasonable sharing of the actual cost,” which does not include the cost of maintaining the county election office (Colo. Rev. Stat. §1-7-116). It is left to the discretion of counties to determine exactly how to divide the costs, except that if there is a statewide ballot measure on the ballot the state pays its typical rate (90 cents per active registered voter for counties with 100,000 or fewer active registered voters or 80 cents per voter for counties with more than 100,000 voters) (Colo. Rev. Stat. §1-5-505.5).
  • Montana political subdivisions bear a proportional share of the costs as determined by the county governing body (Mont. Code Ann. §13-1-302).
  • The costs assessed by a county clerk to a municipality in Utah may not exceed the actual costs incurred, including costs or rental fees associated with election equipment, supplies and reasonable and necessary administrative costs (Utah Code Ann. §20A-5-403).
• Fees for using voting machines:
  • In Delaware cities or towns may use county-owned voting machines if they pay all associated costs and expenses (Del. Code Ann. tit. 15 §5003A).
  • Georgia law specifies that counties may not levy a fee for use of the state voting equipment but may require municipalities to reimburse the county for the actual expenses related to the election (Ga. Code Ann. §21-2-300).
  • New Jersey counties may charge up to $5 per voting machine for municipalities that would like to rent them for elections (N.J. Stat. Ann. tit. 19 §48-3.18).
  • Wyoming counties may charge subdivisions a fixed fee per day for use of county-owned voting machines, which then goes back into the county fund used to acquire and maintain voting machines (Wyo. Stat. §22-10-105 et seq.)
• Reimbursement of personnel expenses:
  • In Indiana most expenses for municipal elections are the responsibility of the county, but the county may charge a municipality for the wages of extra persons employed to provide additional assistance related to the election (Ind. Code §3-5-3-1).
  • In Oklahoma municipalities, school boards or other entities that authorize an election to be conducted by the county must pay the county upfront for compensation and employer’s share of benefits for poll workers involved in the election (Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 26 § 3-105.1). The county may request reimbursement later for other expenses incurred during the election.

Election Administration Cost Studies

In terms of making policy decisions and improving the administration of elections, more and (better) data would always be helpful. If there is one thing that is particularly hard to pin down, though, it’s the question of how much running an election costs. The sections above outline why this is such a complicated question. What’s more, how much something “costs” can vary widely between different counties within a state. A larger county may pay less per ballot for printing costs than a smaller county because of economies of scale. And a smaller county may have no problem recruiting and paying poll workers, whereas this may be a complicated and expensive proposition or a larger county.

Efforts to collect better cost data are occurring in some states:

• In 2018 Washington introduced HB 2529. If passed, it would create an election costs task force to examine the costs related to the administration of elections in the state.
• The California Association of Clerks and Elected Officials (CACEO), with support from the James Irvine Foundation, has an ongoing study of election costs in California counties beginning from the year 2004. It includes information on costs associated with staff salaries, services and supplies and election technology. Visualizations of the data and more information can be found at: http://results.caceoelectioncosts.org/ 
• Colorado’s ACE project (Accountability in Colorado Elections) has a variety of statistics, graphs and visualizations about Colorado elections, among them are election cost statistics.
• North Dakota has collected the cost of administering elections since 1980 and makes this information, which includes the total cost and the cost per voter of each election, publicly available here. 
• The Wisconsin Election Data Collection System (WEDCS) also collects a variety of information, and contains specific cost reports. Wisconsin has a particularly diverse system, since elections are run at the local level – in 1,853 jurisdictions in the state.