2021-113 Council Resolution - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

obligations of each party to Anoka County's election system. We looked at administrative and technical processes, discussed how election services could be delivered in the most logical and cost-effective way, and implemented organizational and procedural improvements in our precincts and respective offices. Throughout the study and planning process the following basic premises were considered by our participants: • The electoral process is the bedrock of democracy and must be administered with the utmost level of professionalism and integrity • Government should provide necessary services in an efficient and effective manner at the lowest possible cost • Solutions developed must ease administrative burden and control the cost of services • The division of duties between county and local governmental units must be logical and effective • System security and legal defensibility must be maintained • Cost -sharing models to support the voting system must be equitable for all parties We also developed a cost sharing proposal for the next equipment purchase that goes beyond the initial capital purchase and provides on -going support to ensure the future integrity of the system. Following development of the ACE Work Group proposal, the "Anoka County Voting Equipment Task Force" was convened. This group, comprised of city and school administrators and board members, has met twice in 2012 to review, discuss, and adjust the plan. We are now ready to propose its adoption. Proposed Multi Jurisdiction Election Agreement The ACE Workgroup and Anoka County Voting Equipment Task Force are recommending adoption of an agreement between election jurisdictions in Anoka County that establishes Anoka County as the sole owner of the voting equipment system and calls for an annual fee to be paid to the county by cities and school districts to supplement system costs. The model used for our last system purchase separated ownership of the system into various pieces and parts, and did not address issues related to the system as a whole such as maintenance, required software and hardware upgrades, and replacement of non-functioning units. Establishing Anoka County as sole owner allows us to more effectively manage the vendor contracts and administrative tasks that apply county -wide. Rather than transferring ownership of individual components to our cities and schools, the county would collect a fee to supplement system costs. The proposed fee will be based on actual (and defined) capital and operating costs of the voting equipment system with cities paying 30%of the total cost and schools paying 15%, leaving the county with responsibility for 55.% of the total cost. Within those percentages, the cost to each individual city and school district will -be based upon their population at the time of the 2010 census. We are also recommending that the agreement include provisions to address other election duties and responsibilities. Statutes require the Office of the Secretary of State to develop a cost sharing plan for jurisdictions that share the same ballot. That plan allows cities to invoice school districts according to a complex formula for services that are not well defined. Jurisdictions can choose to use either the OSS cost sharing plan or share costs according to a negotiated agreement, as long as that agreement addresses all expenses included in the OSS plan. Our recommendation is to include language in our agreement that addresses each election duty spelled out in the OSS cost sharing plan. Both cities and schools would contribute their share to the county -wide system via