FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION REPORT - ELECTIONS-RELATED BYLAW CONTENT – OPTIONS

ELECTIONS-RELATED BYLAW CONTENT – OPTIONS

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT an elections-related bylaw be prepared that provides for:

• mail ballot voting;
• public access to nomination documents and campaign financing disclosure statements on the internet or other electronic means;
• ballot name order by lot;
• an increase in the number of qualified nominators from two to ten; and
• the second advance polling date to occur four days in advance of general voting day.

CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S COMMENTS: I concur with the recommendation.

PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To describe proposed elections-related provisions for potential inclusion in a new bylaw.

BACKGROUND:

Currently, the Town’s “Automated Vote Counting System Authorization and Procedure Bylaw No. 480, 2002” sets out procedures for automated voting and a few procedures in relation to the conduct of local government elections (see Attachment “A”). Bylaw No. 480 was last amended in 2008 by Bylaw No. 719 to facilitate the setting of advance voting dates in compliance with legislation and to provide a remedy for a tie vote.

In light of changes to legislation since 2008 and in advance of the October 20, 2018 general election, it is now a good opportunity to undertake a larger review of elections-related procedures.

DISCUSSION:

Described below are various items for the Committee to consider related to the conduct of local government elections:

1) Mail Ballot Voting

Section 110 of the Local Government Act enables local governments to offer mail ballots to persons who expect to be absent from the municipality during normal voting opportunities or have a physical disability, illness or injury that affects their ability to vote at another voting opportunity. Previously, the Local Government Act only permitted local governments to offer mail ballots to disabled electors or to residents of areas that had been declared “remote” by bylaw.

While mail ballots create an additional voting opportunity, there are implications in implementing the program. These implications can be categorized under three areas – operational, legal and electorate and are further described below:

a.) Operational: If undertaken, time and funds will need to be specifically allocated to implement mail ballot voting, including additional research to ensure a clear process for both the public and election staff and to properly administer the program.

Timeframes provided for the election process are seemingly insufficient to send/receive mail ballots out of province/country. For example, for the 2018 general election, key dates are as follows:

• Nomination Period is Tuesday, September 4, 2018 to Friday, September 14, 2018
• Withdrawal Period ends Friday, September 21, 2018 at 4:00 p.m.
• Ballots ordered Monday, September 24, 2018
• Advance Voting Day is Wednesday, October 10, 2018 (required) and potentially October 17, 2018
• General Voting Day is Saturday, October 20, 2018

The earliest ballots could be available is Monday, October 1, 2018 and this is contingent on there being no difficulties or errors with the printers and/or shipping. Ballots could be sent out Tuesday, October 2, 2018, if they are available, and must be returned by 8:00 p.m. on General Voting Day (sixteen days later or less).

b.) Legal: There is an increased risk of potential legal challenges given concerns about the security of the process and the eligibility of electors.

c.) Electorate: Mail-in ballots reduce the need for electors to travel to vote. There is some concern that with the extremely tight timeline, mail-in ballots will not be received in time to be counted, resulting in frustration and disappointment on behalf of the voter.

Practices and Findings from Others in Region: Input from other municipalities in the region regarding this option is as follows:

Municipalities that conduct mail-in voting are:

• Capital Regional District
• Central Saanich
• North Saanich
• Oak Bay
• Saanich
• Sidney
• Sooke
• Victoria

Comments from these municipalities about the mail-in voting option are:

• Adds considerable administrative and material costs;
• Complicates an already complicated process;
• Extremely tight turnaround time
  • resulting in return rates of approximately 67%;
  • discouraging to those travelling overseas; and
  • only useful for those that do not delay in returning completed ballot;
• Useful primarily for local shut-ins;
• If implementing, the distribution method that will be used must be made very clear to the public; and
• In 2018, the October voting dates will likely result in far fewer requests for mail-in ballots as people typically leave for warmer locations in November.

Municipalities that do not conduct mail-in voting are:

• Colwood
• Esquimalt
• Highlands
• Metchosin

Comments regarding this option from the municipalities that do not use it are:

• Previously considered the mail-in ballot option but decided to not implement it due to:
  • the extremely tight turnaround time; and
  • reports that a majority of uncounted ballots come in after the close of voting, too late to be counted, so concern that those eligible voters would be upset.

Staff propose that mail ballot voting be included in the bylaw though anticipate very low uptake given that the move from a November voting date to October should address the voting needs of most “snow birds”. At the same time, staff are concerned that the timelines available may make ballot return for out-of-town voters impossible, resulting in voter frustration.

2) Registering Electors

Under the legislation, there are three options for voter registration available to municipalities: a.) voting day registration; b.) maintain a municipal register of resident and non-resident property electors and provide advance elector registration; or c.) use the Provincial list of voters as the register of resident electors and maintain a separate municipal register of non-resident property electors (in this option, advance resident elector registration is optional).

In either option b.) or c.) described above, resident electors and non-resident property electors can still register at the time of voting as is the standard practice under option a.).

The main considerations in evaluating the difference between the three types of registration tools are security and efficiency.

a.) Voting Day Registration: Currently the Town, by bylaw, conducts elections using voting day registration.

Advantages include:

• extremely straightforward and easy to understand process for voters;
• voters are used to this process in the Town as it is the method used to date;
• high level of security regarding voter eligibility as identification confirmed right at the time of voting;
• most cost effective option as:
  • staff work to maintain a municipal register of electors or to adopt the Provincial list of voters as the register, including adjudicating potential objections to registration of an elector, is eliminated; and
  • costs of advertising advance registration and printing lists of electors are saved.

Disadvantages include:

• potentially additional time to process electors on voting day as proof of identity and residency is required;
• potential for frustration if some electors do not have the documents required for proof of identity and residency (though it should be noted that declaration forms are available to facilitate voting if less than required identification or residency proof is provided); and
• candidates may not be able to be provided with lists of electors (though staff is working with Elections BC regarding this).

b.) Municipal Register of Electors: A local government can choose to maintain its own ongoing register of resident electors and non-resident property electors.

Advantages include:

• registered electors are not required to provide proof of identity or residency which can reduce processing times (though some processing is still required before the ballot is provided and some municipalities still require identification to increase security around voter eligibility); and
• candidates have a list of electors to use.

Disadvantages include:

• considerable staff time required to maintain current registers of electors;
• staff time to adjudicate potential objections to registration of an elector; and
• cost associated with advertising advance registration and printing the lists of electors.

Should the municipal register of electors approach be used, advance registration must be available for both resident and non-resident property electors. Advance elector registration closes fifty-three days before general voting day and reopens on the Monday after general voting day. The Corporate Officer must give notice of the close of advance registration at least six but not more than thirty days before the closed period starts.

c.) Provincial List of Voters as Register of Resident Electors: The Town can, by bylaw, use the most current Provincial list of voters as the register and advance registration of residents is optional. A separate municipal register of non-resident property electors must still be maintained by staff and advance registration for these electors is required.

Advantages include:

• cost is less than maintaining a municipal register of electors as a municipal register only has to be maintained for non-resident property electors with this option;
• Provincial list may be more current than a register maintained by the municipality;
• registered electors are not required to provide proof of identity or residency which can reduce processing times (though some processing is still required before the ballot is provided and some municipalities still require identification to increase security around voter eligibility); and
• candidates have a list of electors to use.

Disadvantages include:

• due to the issue of incompatibility between the Provincial electoral boundaries and municipal boundaries, staff time is required to ensure accuracy of the list after the data is extracted;
• staff time to adjudicate potential objections to registration of an elector;
• cost associated with printing the list of electors; and
• should the Town opt for making advance elector registration available, the cost associated with advertising advance registration.

During the 2014 general election, out of the 159 local governments that completed CivicInfo BC’s election administration survey:

• 44% (70) used voting day registration only;
• 45% (71) used the Provincial list of voters, and
• 11% (18) maintained a register of electors.

Staff recommend that the current method of voting day registration remain in place as it is cost effective and extremely straightforward for both electors to understand and elections staff to administer.

3) Posting Candidate Information on the Town Website

Respectively, section 89(8) of the Local Government Act and section 59(1) of the Local Elections Campaign Financing Act, provide the public, by bylaw, access to nomination documents and campaign financing disclosure statements in any manner the local government considers appropriate, including the internet or other electronic means.

Accordingly, staff propose to include language in the new voting procedures bylaw to provide for public access to nomination documents and campaign financing disclosure statements on the Town’s website and by other electronic means. This approach will eliminate the current “request for permission” form which has been part of the nomination package in the past (2014 general election and 2017 by-election).

4) Ballot Name Order

Pursuant to Section 117 of the Local Government Act, the order of the names on a ballot may be determined by “lot” if this method is included in the bylaw. Alternatively, if this method is not included in the bylaw, candidate names are to be arranged alphabetically by surname – which is current practice. However, the practice of alphabetical name ordering provides an advantage to those positioned in the beginning of an alphabetical listing.

While it does add minor complication and staff time to undertake, it is proposed that the bylaw include the name order on ballots to be determined by “lot”, removing the aforementioned alphabetical bias.

5) Required Number of Qualified Nominators

Currently, in accordance with the Local Government Act, the required minimum number of qualified nominators is two. However, based on the municipality’s population of “over 5,000”, in accordance with Section 86(2)(a), the Town may, by bylaw, set the minimum number of qualified nominators to ten or twenty-five.

Staff propose that the minimum number of qualified nominators be amended from two to ten. This approach highlights the seriousness of the role for which the candidate is seeking.

6) Advance Voting Opportunity

Currently the Town has two advance voting opportunities as required by legislation. One of these advance voting opportunities is required to be set on the tenth day before general voting day while the second advance voting opportunity can be established, by bylaw, by the local government as it sees fit.

At this time, the Town’s bylaw establishes the second advance voting opportunity as the third day before general voting day. However, staff have observed that it would be more useful for voters if the second advance voting opportunity was held on a different day of the week than the required tenth day given that people may have a weekly commitment on the same day each week.

Accordingly, it is proposed that the second advance voting date be held on the fourth day in advance of general voting day. As a side note, with the move to an October election, this date will not be impacted by a statutory holiday (unlike Remembrance Day in November previously).

7) Election Promotion

Finally, unrelated to bylaw development, in addition to the required newspaper advertisements, staff intend to promote the upcoming local government election on the Town’s website and also through unaddressed ad mail.

Work on the website content is already underway and, once launched, will be able to be added to over the coming months.

Unaddressed ad mail is anticipated to be sent in September to advertise voting and advance voting dates as well as the voting locations for these opportunities. The mail-out will not include specific candidate information though will have the Town’s website address for those seeking more information.

CONCLUSION:

The above recommendations are in keeping with available resources.

If supported by Council, some of the recommendations would be written into a new elections procedures bylaw while others would simply be included as amendments to the existing “Automated Vote Counting System Authorization and Procedure Bylaw No. 480, 2002” as they deal directly with items already contained in that Bylaw.

TIME CRITICAL:

Legislation states that all election bylaws must be adopted at least fifty-six days before the first day of nomination period (September 4, 2018) of a general local election. Therefore, an election bylaw must be adopted by July 9, 2018 to apply to the 2018 general election.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT an elections-related bylaw be prepared that provides for:

• mail ballot voting;
• public access to nomination documents and campaign financing disclosure statements on the internet or other electronic means;
• ballot name order by lot;
• an increase in the number of qualified nominators from two to ten; and
• the second advance polling date to occur four days in advance of general voting day.

SUBMITTED BY: S. Jones, Corporate Officer

SUBMITTED BY: E. Bolster, Deputy Corporate Officer

REVIEWED BY: K. Anema, Chief Administrative Officer