State, local election officials tell Virginia subcommittee consolidation would ease some workloads but pose operational challenges

A Virginia joint subcommittee heard detailed testimony from state and local election officials on administrative effects of consolidating general elections into federal (even-numbered) years, including how the change would affect special elections, ballots, voting equipment, audits and voter experience.

The testimony came from Susan Beals, commissioner of elections for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and Eric Olsen, director of elections and general registrar for Prince William County and representative of the Voter Registrar Association of Virginia. Both warned lawmakers that consolidation would carry trade-offs: more time for statewide implementation and training, but greater operational pressure on election day and during early voting if many offices and referenda were moved to the same ballot.

Beals told the panel she prepared a multi-year chart showing how statewide, county, city, town and school-board offices would shift into federal election years and warned that moving offices to even years would not eliminate all odd-year elections. "Saying we're shifting everything to an even year doesn't necessarily mean you're not gonna have any elections in those odd years," she said, citing how other states still hold municipal or special elections in odd years. Beals noted there were "over 70" local special elections scheduled in Virginia in 2025 alone and reminded members that Virginia law requires special elections to be called within 30 days of certain vacancies, which can force odd-year contests.

Beals and Olsen described administrative benefits of consolidation: more time for accessibility surveys of polling places, expanded training windows, longer lead time to implement new laws and procure or build IT projects. Beals said current practice often gives the Department of Elections about 60 days between a bill becoming law in April and the start of early voting in mid-September, a tight turnaround that consolidation could relax.

But both witnesses listed operational drawbacks and technical questions. Beals and Olsen said longer, multi-office ballots expected in consolidated years would increase the time voters spend at check-in and voting booths, raise the number of undervotes, lengthen ballot-scanning and reporting times and likely require additional voting machines and scanners in busier localities. Beals noted some jurisdictions print ballots that can reach 19 to 22 inches; she and Olsen said multi-page ballots would complicate mail voting, reconciliation, recounts and post-election audits.

Language access also raised specific complications. Beals described counties that currently include multiple languages on a single long ballot and said consolidation might force jurisdictions to produce separate language ballots or adopt ballot-on-demand printing: "After speaking with [Fairfax County], they would have to move to a different ballot for each language," she said, and asked how jurisdictions would decide which absentee voters receive which language version.

Witnesses discussed risk-limiting audits (RLAs) and campaign-finance reporting timing. Beals said RLAs are required before certification under current law and shifting some races into even years may require changes to RLA timing or windows. She also warned that a campaign-finance review report due July 1 could become more burdensome if it must cover additional cycles and suggested legislators might consider shifting that deadline.

Olsen described operational planning tools and site-day accounting for early voting, and he urged lawmakers to reconsider the statutory requirement that early voting be available at the general registrar's office (or satellite). He said the office requirement can be restrictive because some registrar offices are small or poorly located; removing or clarifying the requirement and setting minimum site-day standards by county size could promote more uniform access. He also recommended consideration of minimum staffing standards for election offices; VRAV supports legislation to require at least two full-time employees in each local election office, citing more than 20 localities that currently have fewer.

Lawmakers asked technical questions about vote centers, ballot-on-demand printers, how voting-machine counts are determined, and how ranked-choice voting would interact with a consolidated ballot that also includes federal contests. Olsen and Beals said vote centers and ballot-on-demand printers are used in other states and would require code changes and investment in printers and machines. On ranked-choice voting, Beals and Olsen said that jurisdictions that already use it include those contests on the same ballot and that the voting systems vendors can process multi-page ballots, but longer ballots make voter education more important.

Neither witness recommended an immediate or single-path policy. Olsen summarized the overall message to lawmakers: consolidation can work if the General Assembly considers necessary code changes, budget implications, minimum service standards and transitional planning, but failure to provide resources or to adjust statutes could create longer lines, delayed results and greater administrative burdens in high-turnout elections.

The committee had no public commenters at the meeting and adjourned. This meeting was the final session before the upcoming General Assembly session, and lawmakers indicated they would continue study and consider statutory fixes discussed by witnesses.