Published: October 09, 2008 08:39 am         

Board of Elections members lobby for pay increase

Responsibility of position has ‘grown tremendously,’ Salary Study Commission told

CUMBERLAND — The three regular members of the Allegany County Board of Elections on Wednesday explained to the Salary Study Commission why they each felt their governor-appointed positions merited a raise.

Each member serves a four-year team and earns $3,600 per year. There is no increase of pay for Patricia Malloy, board president, although the other two members, JoAnn Spiker and Georgia Martin, both felt there should be. Substitute members Lionel Baker and Richard DeVore Jr. are paid on a per diem basis and were not present at the meeting.

The amount of level of difficulty in the work to be performed has “increased immensely,” Spiker said when it was her turn before the board.

Kitty Davis, administrator of the board who oversees the election process in Allegany County, lobbied for a raise for the positions because members’ “responsibility has grown tremendously.”

Malloy agreed. She said board members are “very involved” in the election process and need to have the knowledge and ability to read technical manuals for voting machines, “deal with personnel, implement rules and regulations from the federal, state and county governments and (be familiar with) handicapped laws.”

“We are really involved in trying to make this a smooth process,” said Malloy, whose board also is involved with voter outreach and education and, when needed, provided supplemental office support to Davis. “There’s always something that requires our attention.”

Davis said since 2002, they’ve had to adapt to convenience voting — which allowed any Maryland voter to vote anywhere within the state on election day at any state polling place. That was challenged and withdrawn, but Question 1 on the November ballot could resurrect that concept.

Board members also will adjust to their third voting system in eight years in 2010.

“In 2002, we went to a touch-screen voting system,” Davis said. “Prior to that, we were voting on the same voting system we were voting on in the 1950s.”

Malloy said it’s important to note that her board operates on a two-year cycle, election years and non-election years. Board members average up to 150 hours in a non-election year and more than 300 hours in an election year. That’s an average of about $16 per hour worked over a two-year period.

Board members do not receive any overtime or compensation time, health benefits or retirement benefits. They do receive mileage reimbursement, more prominent on election days when members visit polling places.

The three-member Board of Elections were interviewed separately but each heard the others’ testimony. Commission members said that was the opposite approach of what they had agreed upon earlier and would revert to individual interviews in the future.

Board member Antoinette Wiseman said it might be a good idea to obtain a projection of the county’s financial outlook, even though the Board of Elections won’t change over until June 2011.

Members of the Salary Study Commission chose to hold off on deliberating the office until the end of the process. A report must be presented to the county commissioners before Jan. 31, 2009. There appeared to be a general consensus that this board, if any, might deserve an increase in pay.

“I was in awe of their responsibilities,” said Chamber of Commerce representative Rick Collins.

The county commissioners approved a $400 raise for each board member when the Salary Study Commission last convened in 2006.

The next meeting is scheduled for 5 p.m. Oct. 22. The three-member Judge of the Orphans’ Court is slated to be reviewed then. At the same time Oct. 29, the Board of License Commissioners, known as the liquor board, will be interviewed.

The meetings are open to the public. Commission members have agreed the public is able to ask questions as long as they are relevant to the focus of the commission.