Approved Report: To Move Or Not To Move Local Elections

The Montclair Municipal Election Review Commission met Monday night to approve an interim report that will be presented to the township council.

The interim is a summary of the issues that the commission is studying, although the commission has yet to reach any conclusions or provide any recommendations.

The commission plans to hold a public forum early in 2012 to gather input from residents.

The commission has been studying the repercussions of moving the local elections from May to November.

Below is the interim report approved Monday night.

Interim Report of The Montclair Municipal Election Review Commission (MMERC)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY—12/11/11

On July 19, 2011 the Montclair Township Council passed a Resolution to establish the Montclair Municipal Election Commission for the sole purpose of reviewing and analyzing the pros and cons of moving the Montclair municipal election from May to November, and to provide the Township Council with its findings. The commission has elected a chairperson, co-chairperson, and secretary, and has adhered to the Open Public Meetings Act. Since its creation the commission has held several meetings.  

Since the passing of the original resolution, by council majority the scope of the commission’s authority was expanded on October 18 to include the relative impact to the community of changing the township charter to provide for staggered municipal terms.

In an effort to meet the original November deadline of providing the township council with an interim report, the commission concentrated on the two issues identified as the rationale for the original initiative to move the municipal election from May to November (voter participation and election costs), and the impact (if any) on retaining the integrity of our non-partisan elections if moved to a November date.

Enclosed, please find the interim report submitted by the Montclair Municipal Election Commission. For simplicity and discussion purposes the report is presented in bullet form. 

To date the subject of staggered terms has not of yet been official taken up by the commission. Findings on the aforementioned will be presented in subsequent reports. 

Commission Objectives

• To identify specific issues that would impact Montclair Local Elections by moving the current May Municipal Elections  to the November General Election
• Produce a written report outlining the considerations for Residents related to each issue and the possible impact on the current nature of Montclair Municipal Elections
• Provide objective research, when available, to support the impact considerations of each issue indentified by the Commission
• Commission will operate under the rules of the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA)
• Report to the Town Council by the second week of March 2012

Areas of Review: The Commission has indentified three major areas of consideration that would be impacted by moving the date of the Municipal Elections

• Voter Participation
• Costs of the Municipal Elections
• Impact on Non-Partisan Elections

Current Status of Municipal Elections

• Municipal Elections for all offices are held every 4 years in May, within the same year as Presidential Elections
• Municipal Officials and Town Initiatives are typically only items on Ballot
  • 3 Town Wide Officials (Mayor, 2 “At Large” Council Seats)
  • One Council Seat for each Ward
  • Ballots are designed to Vote in Row by Organized “Slates”
  • By Statue no involvement permitted by organized Political Parties
    • State and Federal Election Campaigns are not typically active during this period
    • The Current Cost of the May Elections are approximately $50,000 every 4 years
    • Voter Participation for May Municipal Elections range from between 6,000 to 7,600 or approximately 30% of Registered Voters

Voter Participation

• Explore the potential impact in the level of voter participation by moving to the General Election
• Approximately 26,000 Registered voters in Montclair
  • Presidential Elections Years have an approximately 70% voter participation in Montclair
  • Review the impact of ‘Under Votes” An under vote happens when the voter chooses to not vote the allotted number of votes in any one contest. There is a trend of diminishing participation by the Voter on State, County and Local Issues. 
    • Recent Example: 2009 General Election 12,800 votes for Governor, and 9,000 Votes for Montclair Elected School Board Issue.
    • MMERC Sub-Committee Research
      • Reviewing the voter participation for all Montclair Municipal (May) and General Elections (November) since 1988. (Assuming Records are available)
      • Review the participation by voters in 3 -5 Towns that have switched their elections to this November. We are assuming that these Town Voting records will be available not later than December, 2011

Election Cost Issues

• Research the current costs and the potential cost savings by moving the Election to November
• According to Township Clerk and County Clerks offices, there are fixed costs for Municipal Elections regardless of their date. Costs may include Ballot Production, Voter Machine programming  and Election Supervision
• MMERC Sub-Committee is researching the specific line item costs and the possible savings to Montclair. MMERC has the full cooperation of the Township Clerk in researching this issue.
• Determine the potential cost impact on Montclair and County Taxpayers
  

Issues related to Non-Partisan Elections

• Partisan Involvement: While still Non-Partisan by Statute, will there be a potential Influence of active Federal and Statewide Election Campaigns during General Elections? We are exploring the potential impact caused by the following factors:
  • Access to Campaign Workers, Donations, Offices, Phone Banks, Polling
  • Endorsements by Federal and Statewide Candidates
  • Research the impact by monitoring the three NJ Towns that have made the change for this General Election
  • New Ballot Design:  The law allowing non-partisan elections to be held in November requires that the non-partisan municipal candidates be separated on the ballot from the partisan candidates for other offices." Committee members will meet with County Clerk to determine design options available to Montclair. Design Changes include: 
    • Municipal Candidates would be at the bottom of Ballot
    • Candidates will be organized by Office not “Slate” affiliation
    • Campaign Clutter: Explore the impact on the ability to communicate local campaign and issues
      • Presidential and State-wide campaigns and issues will dominate news and media. Voters are inundated with Ads, “Robo” Calls, Canvassers, mailers. etc
      • Explore if there will be an increase in the cost of a local campaign to maintain a competitive election. What will the impact on increase expenses to campaign in November on local candidates and slates? A related question is the cost of the materials. If there is more competition for campaign materials, will it impact the availability of services and the fees for  these materials.
      • Explore the potential impact on Clutter for Ward and/or independent Candidates.
      • Would the change to a November election encourage or discourage people to run for Council or Mayor?

Public Participation

•  The MMERC will conduct a Public Forum for residents to present their comments on any issue related to changing the election date or suggest additional topics that the Commission should investigate.
  •  Online: Explore an Online Forum for the Public to submit its recommendations/Comments in writing
  • Public Forum: The MMERC will arrange a Public Hearing for Residents to present to the entire commission the recommendations and comments in a Public Forum. The Forum will be held in early 2012, Date, Time and Location TBD.