Election office briefs commissioners on 2026 budget needs, equipment lifecycle and vote‑by‑mail challenges

Fred Sherman, Johnson County election commissioner, told the Board of County Commissioners that election budgeting follows 2‑ and 4‑year cycles and that 2026 — a gubernatorial election year — will require higher spending and staffing than a typical non‑election year.

Sherman said the 2024 presidential cycle produced peak demand, including over 200,000 voters using early‑voting locations in the November 2024 cycle. He described upgrades to the election office facility for early voting and noted an award for a Microsoft Power Automate‑based quality check process. The recommended 2026 budget increase of roughly $2.8 million reflects anticipated costs for the gubernatorial cycle, Sherman said.

Sherman flagged three planning and operational challenges: the age of voting equipment (some tabulators first purchased in 2015), changes to post‑election audit requirements that require physical ballot retrieval for randomly selected precincts, and voluntary voting system guidelines (VVSG 2) adopted by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission that impose new hardware and software security and auditing standards. Sherman said vendors are working to produce equipment compliant with VVSG 2 and that a multi‑year planning and funding approach will be necessary; he said an equipment replacement request was included in earlier requests but not recommended for 2026 funding in the manager’s proposed budget.

Sherman also noted vote‑by‑mail operational constraints tied to postal service delivery timelines and Kansas law’s timeframe for ballot transmission and return; those constraints, combined with postal reliability, can complicate vote‑by‑mail programs. He also noted inflationary pressure on stipends paid to election workers and the difficulty in forecasting election costs year‑to‑year.

Commissioners asked whether the current equipment is certified and adequate for 2025–26; Sherman said present tabulators are state‑certified and adequate for near‑term elections but will eventually need replacement under VVSG 2 expectations. The commission discussed whether to pursue a smoother, more level budgeting method to reduce large swings across election and non‑election years; Sherman said staff are studying a stabilization or sinking fund approach and incremental staffing moves (converting seasonal roles to FTEs) could help even out cycles.

Ending: No county appropriation vote was taken at the presentation; Sherman’s office will return with follow‑up or as equipment replacement planning advances.