California: Special election could cost $1.7 million; officials look for ways to improve efficiency | Redding Record

When it’s all added up, the special election to fill the state Senate seat vacated by Doug LaMalfa, who has moved on to Congress, could cost north state counties more than $1.7 million. … County boards over the next few days will be asked to spend additional money to hold the special election. The amounts range from $35,000 in Colusa County to $362,000 in Butte County. The extra expense in Butte County, the most populous county in the district, takes into account, among things, the cost to hire poll workers and set up polling sites. It does not factor the costs for the regular elections staff.

Voting Blogs: Outside Looking In? Public Access to Election Databases | Election Academy

The Indianapolis Star recently ran an editorial calling on the Marion County Election Board to give access to five “unslated” (i.e., non party endorsed) candidates running in the Hoosier State’s May 8 primary.

Here’s the crux of the issue, from the editorial:

The unslated candidates point out that the database is a public record compiled at taxpayer expense. The state Public Access Counselor has informally sided with them, but has advised that the Marion County Election Board adopt a policy ordering the registration board to act.In a special meeting last week, County Clerk Beth White moved to do so. Neither of her fellow election board members offered a second. Patrick Dietrick and Mark Sullivan both are party appointees; but each said he needed to know more about the cost and complexity of releasing the data, as well as the privacy implications.

Indiana: Access to Marion County voter database triggers lawsuit | Indianapolis Star

Three Marion County judicial candidates and two candidates for the Indiana House on Thursday sued the Marion County Election Board and the Board of Voter Registration for access to the county’s voter registration database. The complaint, filed in Marion Circuit Court, says the voter registration office unlawfully denied requests to access the database for their campaigns. The plaintiffs are running against their parties’ endorsed candidates in the May 8 primary.