Timothy M.

Burke, Chair
Alex M. Triantafilou
Board of Elections 4700 Smith Road
Cincinnati, OH 45212
Caleb A. Faux H A M I LT O N C O U N T Y O H I O
Charles H. Gerhardt, III 513 632-7000
Fax 513 579-0988 or 744-9038
Sherry L. Poland, Director
Sally J. Krisel, Deputy Director www.VoteHamiltonCounty.org

September 24, 2018

To: John P. Bruggen, Budget Director, Hamilton County

From: Paulette Leeper, Fiscal Officer, Hamilton County Board of Elections
Re: Budget Reduction Impact Statement

The Board of Elections continues to utilize cost-saving measures.

We have made the required budget reductions, and in many cases, some of our operating budget will be
supplanted by our reserve fund for new voting equipment. Some cuts will not be sustainable going forward into
2020.

Implementation of the target reductions

Some of our budget revision was possible because our original request was based on the cost of two county-wide
elections plus an August election. We have revised that cost to cover 1.5 county-wide elections, not knowing, of
course, precisely the number of political subdivisions involving any number of the nearly 600,000 voters which will
participate in next year’s elections.

Impact on operations

The Board of Elections is subject to directives by the Secretary of State and mandated timelines. This year, we had
unforeseen expenditures totaling close to $50,000 due to the mandatory time frame for review of state-wide
petitions and mandatory early voting hours for non-county-wide elections. We have seen unfunded mandates
total ten times that amount, or $500,000, in past presidential election years.

Increased probability of late-year budget adjustments

The planned rollout of new voting equipment county-wide comes with unforeseen expenses, beyond those
targeted for our reserve. Expenses for training, support and maintenance will need to be paid at the county level
because the State will only cover the cost of the capital outlay for equipment. Although we anticipate those costs
coming from the reserve fund, the total cost is yet to be determined. There may also be on-going increased
operating expenses. One example is the yet-unknown cost of transporting the new equipment to hundreds of
voting locations.

Impact of restoring 10%, 20% or 30% of the reduction

The impact of restoring even a portion of the cuts that have been made will reduce the likelihood of petitioning the
Board of County Commissioners for late-year budget adjustments, and help ensure a smooth transition to funding
our operations with new voting equipment.

Att.