Turnout high in June election

With less than 1,000 ballots left to count, officials have yet to certify the election, or call the results final, but they are getting a pretty clear idea of voter turnout, which Church said clocked in at more than 44 percent. Compared to the 27.5 percent turnout logged in the June 2014 election, which was also a gubernatorial primary, Church was ready to call the results promising.

“This was an extremely successful election,” he said. “Mail ballots are clearly the way of the future. I think it’s only a matter of time before the other counties in the state implement this new model of voting.”

Having spent months before the election laying plans for 39 vote centers open days before the election and mailing vote-by-mail ballots to each one of the county’s 388,298 registered voters, among other changes implemented under Senate Bill 450, Church was hesitant to draw a direct connection between the changes implemented for the June 5 election and the increase in voter turnout officials observed. San Mateo County was one of five counties to pilot changes under SB 450, otherwise known as the Voter’s Choice Act, aimed at enable jurisdictions to host all vote-by-mail elections under certain conditions.

But he said the some 30,000 vote-by-mail ballots dropped off at vote centers or drop-off locations on Election Day and 40,000 vote-by-mail ballots received in the mail on Election Day and in the three days following it signaled that voters may have been taking time to review the many candidates and measures on the ballot June 5.

“I would say nothing is surprising because no two elections are alike,” he said. “Voters are taking their time to review all the information before them to make informed decisions before voting, and that’s a good thing.”

Result of close races

Though the outcomes for most races were apparent the night of June 5, Church acknowledged that for close races, the time it took for vote-by-mail ballots to be counted after Election Day held many in suspense for days after the election. He said officials are already thinking about hiring additional staff to process the high volume of vote-by-mail ballots they are expecting in the days leading up to and following the November election.

Church added recruiting more people to help guide voters at vote centers and ballot drop-off locations would also be considered so those who only need to drop ballots off don’t have to stand in a line. Because some voters who visited popular ballot drop-off locations had to wait as staff dealt with high volumes of visitors on Election Day, he said officials are considering creating drive-by drop-off options for some locations.

“It’s a function of staffing and training,” he said. “We just need to have more staff and train staff to assist these voters who simply want to drop off their ballots.”

High traffic

Church said some 12,566 voters cast ballots at vote centers, where new technology allowed elections officials to print the ballot for a precinct at any of the 39 centers officials opened in the days leading up to the election. Though four vote centers were open in the 30 days leading up to the election, officials opened five more 11 days prior to June 5 and an additional 30 four days before the election to bring the total to 39 vote centers in locations across the county. He said small glitches such as a delay in pulling up voter profiles at one vote center for about an hour on Election Day and an error with a printer at another location presented minor hiccups, and voter feedback was overwhelmingly positive.

Because vote centers received much more traffic in the days just before the election, Church wondered if in the future resources should be directed toward opening them as close to Election Day as possible. He added an option allowing voters to conditionally register to vote and cast provisional ballots at vote centers after the registration deadline passes also extended the timeline for counting some ballots, as officials checked with counties where those voters had previously registered to ensure they didn’t cast ballots there.

Recommendations

Church said his office is compiling a detailed report with future recommendations to be presented to the state Legislature later this year. For Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, D-South San Francisco, seeing the five counties piloting the Voter’s Choice Act -Madera, Napa, Nevada, Sacramento and San Mateo counties — show turnout well above the state average was encouraging. Having authored Assembly Bill 2028, which made San Mateo and Yolo counties the first to conduct all-mail ballots, Mullin said pilots of these new approaches, which are aimed at taking on barriers to voter participation, are set to make the electorate look more like the population and better represent each of the 58 counties in California.

“I think it is a resounding success for San Mateo County,” he said. “I think it I’d say it further affirmed San Mateo County’s leadership on the all-mail ballot and lowering barriers to participation.”

Mullin acknowledged the pilots have sparked questions about the approach each county will use to verify signatures on vote-by-mail ballots, noting some may check for similarities between the signatures on a voter’s ballot and registration and others may check for differences. Though he said a precise set of statewide standards had yet to be identified, it has been a priority for legislators studying the changes.

‘Double win’

Mullin also acknowledged the potential for backlogs of vote-by-mail ballot counting to drag out a final result of an election, but said he would gladly take that outcome if it meant more voters are participating in elections and counties are seeing cost savings as a result.

“It’s a double win for the counties that have opted to particulate, so I think you’re going to see a whole slew of counties want to join the party in 2020,” he said.

anna@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106