Costly special elections take big bite out of lean budgets
A November ballot could force S.F. to trim clinic outreach

Lynda Gledhill
San Francisco Chronicle
Friday, April 1, 2005

Sacramento -- To close a $102 million budget deficit, San Francisco officials are considering a plan to shut down community health care clinics one day a week.

They say they will have to slash even more services if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger moves ahead with plans to hold a special election in November. The cost of a special election in San Francisco is projected at $1.2 million.

"I can't believe an election is more valuable than services," said San Francisco Controller Ed Harrington. "This is a big deal to us. That money is very, very important. We can't afford to make more cuts just for this purpose. "

County elections officials statewide are voicing their concerns about the projected $70 million cost of a statewide election this year, which would be the fourth in four years.

"We're the walking wounded," said Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters Conny McCormack. "People think an election is just one day, but it takes five months of preparation, plus a month after to finish counting the votes."

Los Angeles projects the highest cost for the election -- $10 million, according to a survey taken by the secretary of state's office. The total cost for all 58 counties tops $60 million, plus an estimated $10 million to $15 million in state costs.

While the state general fund reimburses the secretary of state's office for its expenses, such as mailing out the voter pamphlet, counties are required by law to come up with their own funds to hold an election.

County officials said they had requested to be reimbursed for the recall election, but those appeals were rejected.

"It's a mandated service with no funds," said Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson. "It results in the compromise of delivery of services, including health, safety and welfare. These are what are affecting people's lives, but we're taking money out of general fund that should be going to delivery of services and using it to pay for an election."

State law only requires reimbursement for election costs when there is a vacancy in the state Legislature or Congress.

Schwarzenegger has not called a special election yet but has said he will do so. Even if he and lawmakers are able to agree on reforms in the areas of pensions, the budget, legislative districts and education, some of the deals would probably be constitutional amendments, which would have to be approved by voters. Other interest groups are flooding the streets with petitions, gathering signatures for upward of 70 initiatives to also put on the ballot.

In some areas, the cost per registered voter to put on an election is staggering. Lassen County costs run $8.21 per registered voter, and in Santa Barbara it's $8.55 per registered voter.

Lassen County never holds local elections in an odd year, in part to keep costs down, said Theresa Nagel, the county registrar of voters.

"The county doesn't have a lot of money lying around," she said.

Some areas are already planning elections in November for local measures, which will reduce their costs of holding a special election.

Controller Steve Westly, a Democrat, joined local officials Thursday in calling for Schwarzenegger to abandon the idea of a special election, arguing that the policy measures the governor is pushing could wait until the next scheduled statewide election in June 2006.

"That's just a seven months wait," Westly said. "In the meantime, there is a lot of work to be done in Sacramento, and I think the governor should come back to his promise to compromise."

Schwarzenegger has said that he believes people elected him to move quickly, noting that if you have a broken arm, you don't wait six months to go to the doctor. His press secretary said that when people voted in the recall, they were demanding action.

"We're following that mandate and need to continue to deliver needed fundamental reforms to the people of California right away," said Margita Thompson.

But Westly said he didn't believe the governor's reform measure would pass.

"This is a much more politicized, partisan election, and I don't think that's the path to successful elections," he said. "This is not the right course for California."

Alameda County's Carson expressed his frustration with lawmakers and the governor for not working together.

"People thought when they elected the state Legislature that they would do the heavy lifting," he said. "Everyone shares in the blame to go to the initiative process and have voters make decisions, not the elected officials."

McCormack said her office would do what it could to keep costs down, including consolidating polling places. Costs have increased this year because of increased voter registration and new voting systems that have been put in place, she said.

"If there's going to be election, we would try to make it as cost effective as possible," she said.

Paying the price

Here is a look at the projected costs of a special election, as compiled by the secretary of state's office, through a survey of counties.

• Alameda -- $2.3 million; $3.03 per registered voter
  
  
• Contra Costa -- $2.5 million; $4.96 per registered voter
  
  
• Marin -- $650,000; $4.25 per registered voter
  
  
• Napa -- $275,000; $3.97 per registered voter
  
  
• San Francisco -- $1.2 million; $2.50 per registered voter
  
  
• San Mateo -- $1.4 million; $3.70 per registered voter
  
  
• Santa Clara -- $4 million; $4.87 per registered voter
  
  
• Solano -- $740,000; $3.79 per registered voter
  
  
• Sonoma -- $500,000; $1.96 per registered voter