gen_1828.1.gif
gen_2948.1.gif
gen_6584.1.gif
gen_2986.1.gif
gen_1851.1.gif
gen_1848.1.gif
gen_1850.1.gif
gen_2907.1.gif
gen_2888.1.gif
gen_2401.1.gif
gen_1861.1.gif
gen_2913.1.gif
gen_2991.1.gif
gen_1883.1.gif
gen_1885.1.gif
gen_1865.1.gif
gen_2367.1.gif
gen_1843.1.gif
gen_1862.1.gif
gen_1841.1.gif
gen_5887.1.gif
gen_1858.1.gif
gen_1886.1.gif
gen_2970.1.gif
gen_5990.1.gif
gen_5998.1.gif
gen_2319.1.gif
gen_6559.1.gif
gen_6787.1.gif
e-mail me

Cost Comparison Optical Scan to DRE Touchscreen


 

            VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOTS ARE COST-EFFECTIVE

Operating Cost Comparison
for Different Types of Voting Systems

Optical Scanners in Wake and Durham Counties, and Direct Record Electronic Voting Machines in Mecklenburg and Guilford Counties

By Joyce McCloy, www.ncvoter.net

Touchscreen Voting Increases Election Costs in North Carolina
A Comparison of Total Annual Expenditures for TouchScreens and Optical Scanners
 
Not only have computer scientists advised the North Carolina Legislature that touch screen voting machines are less reliable and accurate than optical scan equipment, we find that they are more costly to own and operate. Clearly, this is no way to run an election.
 
Opponents to voter verified paper ballots often cited costs of printing paper ballots as an excuse for using paperless all electronic voting machines. They also used the argument that optical scan ballots take up more space, therefore increasing costs. We were intrigued, and set out to seek the truth.
 
The NC Coalition for Verified Voting, in 2005 - completed a study of annual expenditures of the election departments of four North Carolina counties. We found that the cost of using touch screen voting or direct recording machines in Guilford and Mecklenburg county was about 30-40% higher than the cost of using optical scan equipment in Wake and Durham county. This means that not only are touch screens more expensive to acquire, they are also more expensive to operate year after year.


One factor that may explain why having touch screens cost so much more than optical scanners is because the county has to own and maintain so many more machines. We estimate that one optical scanner can count handle six voter?s votes a minute (or 360 per hour) as they are cast but because it takes a voter at least three minutes to vote with touch screens, it would take 20 touch screens to perform per hour as well as optical scanners.  Additionally, touch screen machines use thermal paper ballots - both require special handling and climate controlled storage.  Justin Moore, of Duke University Computer Science Department found that counties using touch screen machines required 20% more poll workers, and about 10% more precincts.

A true cost comparison of voting machines cannot focus just on ballot printing costs. All of the Boards of Elections costs must be considered. This includes staff salaries, staff benefits, training expenditures, equipment programming, maintenance, storage, advertising, printing costs, postage and storage.
 
NEW - Verified Voting has prepared an update for years 2005-2008 downloadable at this link
 
Below is cost study of years 1999-2004 prepared by NC Coalition for Verified Voting:
 

The expenditure data for Durham, Guilford, Mecklenburg, and Wake Counties were provided by their county finance departments. For the counties other than Mecklenburg, the net expenditures were determined by subtracting the annual revenue from the annual expenditures. The information for number of registered voters was supplied by each county's Director of Elections.
 
Further, you will see that Wake County, an optical scan county - spent about $ 1 Million less than Mecklenburg, which has only 10,000 more voters but used the direct record voting machines in 2004. If in 2004 Guilford County had used optical scan equipment, instead of touch screens, it could have saved about $650,000.
 
Other cost studies
 
The North Carolina Coalition for Verified Voting was inspired to do this study after hearing of the work of Rosemarie Myerson, who compared six years of operating expenses of the election offices of two Florida counties: Sarasota with punch cards for 3 years and then touch screen DREs for 3 years to Manatee with optical scanners for 6 years. The results showed that the operating costs for DREs were about 1.5 times more than the operating costs for either of the other two types of voting systems.

Studies of the costs were inspired by the experience of one Florida County?s account of huge expenses following the purchase of new touch screen voting machines. Miami Dade County experienced a seven fold increase in costs for the 2004 general election over the costs of the 2000 election. The County Supervisor of Elections, Lester Sola recommended scrapping the new touchscreen voting machines. He found that the county would save over $13 million in the next five years if they purchased optical scanners and removed the touch screens from service, even while paying off the $20 million outstanding debts for the touch screens.
   
Durham County Annual Expenditures
 
Guilford County Annual Expenditures

 
Mecklenburg County Annual Expenditures
 
Wake County Annual Expenditures

Supporting documents:

Dr. Rebecca Mercuri recommends optical scan voting to the NC State Legislature. Testimony

Justin Moore, Duke University on touchscreen technology and manpower needed. PowerPoint

Miami Dade Elections Supervisor recommends ditching new touchscreen machines. Report page 12

Punch Card and Electronic Voting Machines in Sarasota County, Florida and Optical Scanners in Manatee County, Florida. Compare

Find out how to do your own cost study analysis - see Voters Unite  

 ______________________________________________________________________________________________

Additional notes:

If in 2004 Guilford spent the same per voter as Wake County, (optical scanners), then Guilford would have saved $653,667  The *2001 costs for Guilford would be significantly higher if the county had not received an unexplained $2.9 Mill in revenue, perhaps from a grant.

If in 2004 Mecklenburg County had used optical scan voting systems, instead of the Direct Record Electronic (DREs) they would have saved  $917,359 in annual operating expenses

Cost to upgrade Mecklenburg to the optical scan/ballot marking solution: with 190 regular precincts, and 10 one stop precincts, at $9,200 per precinct = $1,840,000

Estimated purchase cost per county  to Upgrade to VVPB   Download Aug25CountyPrecintsCostExcel.xls           (if you have trouble opening this file, try right clicking on it and opening in new window) Does not include service contracts, which all voting systems will require. State grant will pay $1.00 per registered voter up to $100,000 for election management software.

Purchase Price Comparison for voting systems for NC

There are 2,752 regular precincts and 128 one-stop precincts, = total of 2,880 precincts  in North Carolina

Let's allow for growth and figure costs for 3,000 precincts and add in backups, allowing for 3,500 precincts just to be safe. 

Optical Scan/Ballot Marking Device Solution - State grant will completely pay for. Each precinct would need one optical scan system plus one automark ballot marking device for disabled for a cost of $10,000 per precinct. 

Total cost for new voting equipment that is disabled accessible and has Voter Verified Paper Ballots: $45 million

Direct Record Electronic (Touchscreen or pushbutton digital voting machines) $145 million

financial analysis from the state government -- using data supplied by the State Board of Elections --  http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2005/FiscalNotes/Senate/PDF/SFN0223v4n1.pdf