Sedgwick County election office requests modest 2026 increase as officials warn of $11–12 million equipment cost

Laura Rainwater, Sedgwick County Election Commissioner, presented the office’s 2026 operating request and described staffing, mandatory duties and a looming large equipment purchase. Rainwater told the Board the office is currently at full administrative staffing and has 9.2 FTE in election operations, with many temporary poll-worker positions unfilled between elections. She said mandatory services include election administration and candidate filings, equipment security and maintenance, voter-registration list maintenance, ballot printing and required federal and state compliance work. She described nonmandatory work—student engagement, a sticker contest and mock or school elections—that she said help voter education and outreach. Rainwater said the office is seeking a roughly $240,000 increase in next year’s budget, driven “all in personnel” by higher costs for a gubernatorial election year and higher election‑worker pay because turnout is expected to rise. She warned of a potential major equipment purchase timed to federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) 2.0 certification: “You’re looking at probably 11 to $12,000,000 for that equipment purchase.” She said software certification timing could push the purchase from 2027 to 2029. Commissioners and staff discussed funding options for the equipment reserve. County staff noted a year‑end transfer earlier in 2025 had moved a substantial balance into an equipment reserve (referenced during the meeting as a multi‑million dollar transfer), and commissioners said another transfer could be considered in future years if excess investment income is available. Rainwater also confirmed the county is coordinating a joint RFP with other large counties, similar to 2017, to buy equipment jointly. Panelists and commissioners discussed alternate approaches to reduce long‑term equipment and maintenance demands, including relying more on paper ballots with tabulators (a model one commissioner said Shawnee County uses to meet ADA needs by providing one ballot‑marking device per polling site and defaulting most voters to paper ballots). Rainwater described the current express‑vote ballot‑marking devices as electronic ballot‑marking printers that still require programming, maintenance and verification and generate a barcode read by tabulators; she said those devices focus much of the office’s programming and maintenance workload. Rainwater also noted recurring software costs: the county pays about $65,000 per year for the county voter‑registration system (referred to in the presentation as “ELVIS”), and she expects a new version and higher vendor fees in the future. The presentation closed with a reminder that the commission was in an information‑gathering phase: the commissioners are “asking questions” and not making final budget decisions during the hearing.