LTC 125-2008 Meeting With Miami-Dade County Elections Department Regarding a Countywide Consolidated Election Schedule- `~ Z008 APB 24 Pty 3~ 39
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER i~i1 ~ ;,~.~. , ,,,~~ ~i~_ ~: l(„_
NO. LTC # 125-loos LETTER TO COMMISSION
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: April 24, 2008
SUBJECT: Meeting With Miami-Dade County Elections Department Regarding a Countywide
Consolidated Election Schedule
Attached for you perusal is a letter from Miami-Dade County District 6 Commissioner
Rebeca Sosa regarding the above subject (Attachment "A"}. Also attached is the report
referenced in Commissioner Sosa's letter that was brought before the Miami-Dade Board of
County Commissioners (Attachment "B").
I have asked Robert Parcher, City Clerk, to attend the meeting on Monday, May 5, 2008.
If you are interested in attending you can R.S.V.P. via the information provided in
Commissioner Sosa's letter.
i~
JMG/REP
Cc: Hilda Fernandez, Assistant City Manager
Jose Smith, City Attorney
F:ICLERICLERIFORMS1Consolidated Election Schedule.ltc.doc
/~ _ _- _ _ ^/ ~ J /~ ~ X
~(K(/~GG C~~ ~Q4~~iZ2Q/(iJ/ ~Q~n~/yyl/l/.1~~~'~iP~X~~
April 15, 2008
Mr. Jorge M Gonzalez
City Manager
City of Miami Beach
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami, FL 33139
Dear Gonzalez:
r s\~
I ~~,
L /
\S, /
~ _ ..,, ~ /
COMMISSIONER
DISTRICT 6
-, 1
,::7
I recently sponsored resolution R-1135-07 requesting that the County Manager evaluate the feasibility
and advisability of consolidating municipal elections into one day or in conjunction with countywide
elections. As a result, on February 5, 2008, a report was brought before the Miami-Dade Board of County
Commissioners that recommended we adopt legislation urging municipal officials to sponsor their own
legislation in support of a consolidated elections calendar. This recommendation was approved based on
the benefits that will be realized by both the municipalities and its voters.
We would like to begin discussing how a consolidated elections calendar would benefit your city and its
voters. The meeting will take place on Monday, May 5, 2008 from 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Miami-
Dade County Elections Department (2700 NW 87 Avenue). Lester Sola, Miami-Dade County Supervisor
of Elections, will be in attendance to explain the extensive planning and preparation that is required to
hold an election, especially in light of the recent law mandating the use of optical scan technology.
Historically, municipalities holding elections on one day or in conjunction with a countywide election
experience higher turnout and reduced election costs. Your municipality could see a significant cost
savings from the economies of scale realized through consolidating election-related services such as
ballot programming, printing, tabulation, equipment delivery, overtime and seasonal employee costs -all
of which are associated with administering separate municipal elections. in addition, your municipality will
benefit from an increase in voter participation as municipalities holding elections on one day or in
conjunction with a countywide election historically experience higher turnout, due in part to enhanced
media exposure.
I hope that you will join me to discuss this topic further with the hopes of making our election process
more efficient and keeping government spending low. Please do not hesitate to contact my office at the
number below if you have any questions or require additional information.
To confirm your attendance to this event, please R.S.V.P. with Carolina Lopez, Assistant to the Chief
Deputy Supervisor of Elections, at 305-499-8509 or via email at IopezcCa~miamidade.gov.
Sincerely,
Rebeca Sosa
Miami-Dade County Commissioner
cc: Alina T. Hudak, Assistant County Manager
Lester Sola, Supervisor of Elections
1000 S.W. 57T" AVENUE, SUITE 201 • MIAMI, FLORIDA 33144 (305) 267-6377 FAX (305) 267-6366
M
Date: February 5, 2008 Agenda Item No. 12~g)1
To: Honorable Bruno A. Barreiro, Chairperson
and Members, Board of C unty Commissioners
From: George M. Burgess
County Manager t~~
Subject: Report on the Feasibility of Consolidating Municipal Elections
This information is provided in response to Resolution R-1135-07 adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners on October 2, 2007, requesting the feasibility and advisabliity of consolidating
municipal elections onto one day or conducting municipal elections in conjunction with countywide
electlons. The Elections Department was charged with reviewing the current electlons calendar and
Identifying whether the consolidation of municipal elections would result in a more efficient use of
public resources and higher voter participation.
This is a topic that the Supervisor of Elections had previously discussed with my staff as it was
believed that a consolidation was beneficial from both an operational standpoint as well as for the
voters of Miami-Dade County. Upon passage of R-1135.07, a more comprehensive review of this
issue was undertaken, and it was found that the consolidation of munlclpa! electlons is both
feasible and desirable. However, municipal charter amendments will be necessary in order to
move election dates, thus cooperation from each municipality wil! be necessary.
Background
Miami-Dade is the only county in the State of Florida with an unconsolidated electlons calendar.
Each of the County's 35 municipalities' election dates is set by the municipality's charter without
Input from the County. Currently, their electlons take place on various dates throughout both even
and odd years. There are only a handful of municipalities that share the same date. Other counties
require municipalities to hold their electlons In conjunction with each other. Far example, Broward
County's municipal elections are consolidated and held on the same day in either February or March
in odd years and in March in even years. Palm Beach County's municipal elections are consolidated
and held on the same day in March in odd years with no municipal electlons in even years. In vast
comparison, the Miami-Dade Elections Department conducts approximately 30 electlons per year. In
2007, July was the only month in which an election did not take place.
Consolidating municipal elections In Miami-Dade County is both feasible and desirable, and can be
accomplished in two ways -consolidating onto one day not In conjunction with a countywide election
or consolidating in conjunction with a countywide election. Both scenarios will result In a cost
savings to the municipality for services provided by the Elections Department and a cost savings to
the County for Elections personnel. Of most importance is the increased voter participation that will
be realized, which is a direct benefit to both the municipalities and the County. it is too common that
important local issues are decided upon by a small minority of the electorate. Even if the municipal
races or Issues are impacted as a result of their placement towards the end of the ballot, the number
of voters deciding an Issue will be significantly higher than in "stand-alone" elections.
There are three scenarios for conducting a municipal election:
Option 1: Stand-alone election
In this option, the election date is unique to the municipality. The costs Incurred by each municipality
to hold astand-alone election are the actual costs incurred by the Elections Department. One
hundred percent of the costs associated with election-related services such as ballot programming,
emorandum "'c~i°`~°
Honorable Bruno A. Barreiro, Chairperson,
and Members, Board of County Commissioners
Page 2
translation, printing, tabulation, equipment delivery, poll worker pay and overtime costs are passed
onto the municipality in this scenario.
Option 2; Consolidated, not In conJunction with a countywide election
Municipalities share the same election date, which Is different Pram a countywide election date. The
costs Incurred by each municipality to hold its election on the same day is significantly reduced
because the costs stated above are divided among the municipalities and are calculated by using
the municipality's percentage of total registered voters.
Option 3. Consolidated, and In conJunction with a countywide election
Municipalities share the same election date as a countywide election, The cast Incurred by each
municipality to hold Its election in conJunction with a countywide election is most dramatically
reduced because the County is responsible for the costs associated with that election. The
municipalltles incur minimal casts associated with ballot programming, translation, and ballot printing
only. All other costs are absorbed by the Elections Department.
Table 1 (attached) shows the cast comparison of the three scenarios stated above. Not Included in
Table 1 Is the cost far Early Voting. Should a municipality opt to offer Early Voting during option 1 or
2, the cost would be Increased accordingly. In contrast, municipalities can offer Early Voting at no
additional cost when held in conJunction with a countywide election (option 3), should the
municipality utilize the County's 20 predetermined Early Voting locations. This is a service already
offered and paid for by the County,
The municipalities denoted with an asterisk will only realize a cost savings If their elections are
consolidated onto a countywide election {option 3). This Is due to the formula used to calculate
election costs, which is based on the number of registered voters In each municipality. For Instance,
these cities may not require additional support such as truck rental and seasonal personnel costs
during their stand alone election. However, In a consolidated election, not in conJunction with a
countywide election (option 2), this support is required and these additional costs are divided among
all the participating municipalltles. These municipalities would still realize a benefit from Joining a
consolidated calendar because of the higher voter participation. While the cost associated with
conducting the election is higher, the actual cost per voter is less,
The County will also benefit from a consolidated elections schedule. A cost savings will be realized
as the only cost not passed onto municipalities for conducting their elections Is for personnel during
regular County office hours. Currently, seasonal staff must be hired for varying Intervals throughout
the year In order to conduct the numerous stand-alone elections. If the elections calendar is
consolidated, the number of staff needed and duration of their employment will be significantly
reduced. Subsequently, the Elections Department personnel budget would be reduced accordingly.
This approach makes sense from an operational and logistical perspective. While the department Is
accustomed to conducting various elections, continuing to hold elections In this manner will became
more complex due to the recent mandate to convert to optical scan technology. The planning and
preparation that is required to hold an election will be more extensive and will require additional time
to print paper ballots. This will become extremely challenging considering the short time frames
between currently scheduled elections.
The Increase in voter turnout that will result from a consolidated elections calendar is another
compelling factor. Historically, municipalities holding elections in conjunction with countywide
elections experience higher turnout. The successful experiences of our neighboring counties, as well
as those across the country, prove the same will occur In Miami-Dade County, There are many
instances within our county where these results repeatedly occur. This is apparent from looking at
voter turnout In 2006. Table 2 (attached) shows the comparison of voter turnout in stand-alone
elections versus countywide elections that contained municipal question(s) only months apart.
Honorable Bruno A. Barreiro, Chairperson,
and Members, Board of County Commissioners
Page 3
This Increase can be attributed to several factors. First, voters typically know when countywide
elections are being held due to the wide-spread media attention inherent In large elections. In
addition, the Elections Department launches Its own awareness campaigns via television, radio, and
newspaper and holds hundreds of outreach events throughout the community. These are
opportunities that municipalities can benefit from should their elections occur on the same date.
Having a single election date for all municipalities will allow for enhanced media exposure. The
County and municipalities can spend advertising dollars on a single, shared election date, resulting
in a much farther reaching audience and therefore contributing to higher turnout. Should the
munlcipalitles piggyback onto a countywide election, voters will only have to remember maJor
election dates thereby increasing the likelihood of their participation. Granting voters the ability to
vote on all Issues, both local and beyond at once, will further ensure their voices will be heard on all
Important issues. I understand, however, that there are Instances when astand-alone election Is not
only required, but prudent. There are times when a municipality needs to place an Issue or other
Item on the ballot for consideration by their residents and astand-alone election Is the best
approach. The Elections Department will certainly accommodate municipalities in cases such as
this.
Even with these benefits to both government and our voters, cooperation from the municipalities Is
necessary to consolidate the elections schedule. Buy-in from each municipality Is essential as
charter amendments will be required in order to move Its election dates. Some municipalities will
also require amendments to candidate qualifying dates and potentially term limits. The Elections
Department Is currently In discussions with the municipal clerks to gain support for this essential
consolidation. The Clty of Aventura has seen the value in consolidating and has agreed to pass a
resolution In early 2008 moving its municipal election to coincide with the Mlaml-Dade General
Election beginning in 2010.
The most mutually beneficial approach Is for munlcipalitles to hold consolidated elections In August
and November during odd years, and In conJunctlon with the Primary and General Elections In even
years. Each municipality can determine which interval best cults their city and Its residents as
making a change such as this may require an extension of term limits for certain offices during the
transition to the new schedule. Those munlcipalitles choosing to consolidate on even number years
will draw the additional cost benefits inherent with piggybacking onto the countywide elections.
Those cities choosing to consolidate on odd number years will also realize a cost savings, albeit
less. All municipalities will be afforded the other benefits stated above.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners adopt legislation urging municipal
officials to sponsor their own legislation in support of a consolidated elections calendar. The
Elections Department will be available to assist munlcipalitles with the creation of such legislation. In
order to provide ample time for the municipalities to make the necessary arrangements, the
consolidated elections calendar should be promoted to have a 2010 effective date.
Municlpalitles would not only benefit from the cost savings of consolidating election-related services,
it would also allow the election process to function more efficiently. In addition to the cost benefits to
government, the residents of Mlaml-Dade County will undoubtedly benefit from this change as voter
turnout would invariably be increased.
istant County onager
J
Estimated Munlclpal Election Costs
Table 1
unicl ailtles
Number of
Registered
Voters
Stand
Alone
0 tlon 1 Same Daynot
with a
Countywide
0 tlon 2 Same Day - In
ConJunctlon with
a Countywide
O tlon 3
City of Aventura* 15t657 ; 84,255' ~ ~ 76,507
„ ~ 8,415
Vllia~e of Bal Harbour
_ 1 484 ~
. ~ 17,870
7,251
_. ®w 4,118
~~ ~
Town of Bay Harbour Islands 2,469 , ~
_ ,18~~~2 ~ 12,085
~ 4,928
_,.
Village of Biscayne Park ,, .. 1,733
~ 17,984 '
8,488 4,322
~.
City of Coral Dables 28,328 I 139,878 128,840
~~~
~ 8,815
Town of Cutler Bay
_ ~
51
18,
3
._ r
-
~ 7,021
_
~
~
Cit of Doral
y 10,5
31 I
53 007 is1,459
~ 5 281
~
Vllla(~e of EI_Portal _ __ _ _ ~. 1 s10 17,384 __ .. s 7,378 ~ _ 4,138.:.
City of Florida City 4 ,_r _~ 3,583
~~ 30,772 ~ 1,7,508
. a~ .,.
~ _ 4,558
Town of Golden Beach _
566 ~ „ 15,531 ~ 2,781
~~~~ 3,358
"
Clt
of Hlaleah
,
~ 77489 331,894 *
378
648 _ 20_,323
~
" ~
Clt of Hlaleah Gardens 7,400 ~
~ ~
~
32,787 36159 5,001
.
o 14,180 67,183 } 88,338 ,__ 8,085
.:.
e of ndlan Creek ~
VI la
4_ 34 i
_
14,900 ~
188 2,920
City of Islandla _ 8 _
....,...~~....
14,883
288__
,_. ..:._:..~_,.e
2,897
Biscayne* 5 2
Town of Medle ~.-
482 ! 18,581 ~
2,365 3,290
of Miaml*
Cit
y
146160
`
702 321: 71
4,199 ~ ~_s
_ 35,778
y
Cit
of Miami Beach 38,889 3'028 ~
192,488 ± 18 11,642
*
City of Mlaml Gardens ~~ ~~~ 59,649 ~ 282,301 _ 291,470 _
18,313
Town of Mlaml Lakes" 14,,387 ' 83,423 ~ = 70,301 ~ 8,129_
Cit of Mlaml Shores
y
~ ~
8 241
~~~~~~~
~~
~
28,8„ ,
0,488
~ ~~~~ 6,045
,
_
Cit
of Mlaml 3 rln s"'
Y p 0 ,~. 7
a81
.~..~. ~ ~._.- . a _ .
~ 28,348 3
6,087
_ 4,998....
llla a
y
9
X .
R _
.
74 10 291
~
~ _.@_~.
4 829
,
_
-
~.~.~
Cit of North Miaml
.y ... :
,.~:._..
23 792
_~.. ~ _
....____ ~..
1.22,8
3.T ~.. 118,25$ , _ .
8,245
I Beach*
~ _.- 1
1
Cit~
of Opa•Locka i_
8 48 ~ ~ 50,887 3 f~~
31,869 I 4,739
Vllla~e of Patmetto Bad 14,456 _am~
~ 81,008 ; 70,838
~ i 8,145
~~ ~~
a
~...
1 078
55,593
.,.
Z~ i
5,452
Cit
of South Mlaml
y _ ,. m 8,435
... '
1
31,444
_ 82 ~ '
4,728
Clt~ of Sunny Isles Beach ~ 7,799 __
.
_
1 48,238 f 38,109
t_ _,......._.
5,115
.. f_... - ... p 5 ~. 14,410._:.
g x__. ~, ..~._. ~8t328
C t of Sweetwater
_
_ 4 887
x. i
~
99 23,880 8,184
Vllla~e of Vlrglnla~0ardens
~
1 168 :.
=n~
17,037 s _
6,808
~
3,872
City of Wes#
Mlaml ~ :.~r 2,983 =
20,359 ~ 1,4,478 _
..
~ . _ 5,336
Totals _ _ _
~ :, 682,189 __ .
e$2~768,912 $2,687,858m
~~__.
$243,808
mn nclp, illle• wl II only rallrrta ~ ~ _ .. .,: w ... i
i i,~....
opt ~~
q •ellon• ors con~olid~ted
onto ~ countywltl• •I~ctlon du• to th•
tormul~ wed to c~lcul~to cots, I f i
k
Parcentape of Vatar Turnout for Municipal vs Countywide Electlona in 2008
Table 2
5