Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisor of Elections presents options to move Lynn Haven municipal elections to November
Summary
Bay County Supervisor of Elections Nina Ward told Lynn Haven commissioners that moving city elections from April to November could boost turnout and save the city money but would shift early‑voting control to the county, complicate runoffs and extend some term lengths; commissioners asked the charter review committee to study the change before an August 18 referendum deadline.
Bay County Supervisor of Elections Nina Ward told the Lynn Haven City Commission that several Bay County municipalities have already moved municipal elections to the November general election and that the city should consider doing the same as part of a current charter review.
Ward said turnout is consistently higher in November — roughly 75% in presidential years versus about 19–22% for Lynn Haven’s recent municipal elections — and that moving the city’s contests to the countywide timeline would likely increase participation and save the city the direct cost of running standalone municipal elections. “Right now your city elections cost about $31,000 when you include a runoff,” Ward said, noting that moving to a county timeline would typically remove that municipal printing and administration cost from the city’s ledger.
But Ward and commissioners also warned of tradeoffs. On a county ballot, many voters reach down‑ballot contests less often, producing higher “undervote” rates on city races. Ward cited county experience showing thousands of voters who turn out for top‑of‑ticket races do not cast ballots in some local contests. She also said logistics change: early‑voting sites and schedules would be set by the county, not the city clerk, and candidate qualifying windows and runoff timing would shift — potentially extending current terms by roughly 18 months during a transition to an even‑year schedule.
Commissioners asked Ward to return with additional detail and instructed the city’s charter review committee to evaluate whether and how to place a date‑change or related charter amendment on the ballot. Ward reminded the commission that any referendum language intended for August 18 must be delivered to the supervisor of elections by the qualifying deadline of June 12.
What’s next: The charter review committee will examine the options and report back to the commission; commissioners said they want a public discussion that highlights both turnout projections and how runoffs and candidate qualifying would work under any change.
