To more fully understand how Virginia’s election policies and procedures are put into practice by election administrators, Informing Democracy commissioned surveys of Virginia’s General Registrars and Electoral Board members, in consultation with the Voter Registrars Association of Virginia (”VRAV”) and the Virginia Electoral Board Association. Informing Democracy undertook these surveys in order to identify and understand local variations in the vote counting and certification processes. By statute, all localities have a similar operational structure: a three-member Electoral Board with a Chair and Secretary. Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-106. Each locality must also have a General Registrar. Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-110. However, we suspected some variation in how these officials operate. Therefore, our goal was to bring increased transparency to these local practices, and with this knowledge, increase confidence in the integrity of our elections. These survey findings primarily surfaced thought-provoking patterns and observations. More research is needed with an increased sample size to test and better understand these trends; please see the survey methodology below for more details.
Despite statutory uniformity, survey results suggest some variation both in practices among localities, as well as an understanding of processes between General Registrars and Electoral Board members. The survey surfaced variations in when preprocessing of absentee ballots begins, length of terms of officers of election, and authority to set the quantity of ballots that are ordered for an election. Additionally, findings suggest that the relationship between General Registrars and Electoral Board members is not uniform across the Commonwealth. In some cases, General Registrars and Electoral Board members may not be fully aligned in their understanding of the discretion afforded to General Registrars at various points in the election process.
Importantly, while there may be variations in some practices, findings show those variations do not always result in different outcomes. For example, despite variations in the geography and size of localities, a vast majority of respondents indicated that it typically only took them one to three days to complete the canvassing process.
Perhaps most interesting, the surveys show that General Registrars seek advice from more sources than Electoral Board members. Electoral Board members seem to primarily rely on guidance from the Virginia Department of Elections, whereas General Registrars also seek assistance from peers and city or county attorneys. Also, two-thirds of election officials surveyed indicated that they relied on locally developed guidance. However, there was a slight difference in the percentage when broken down separately by General Registrars and Electoral Board members.
From June to August 2023, Informing Democracy worked with the Voter Registrars Association of Virginia (“VRAV”) and the Virginia Electoral Board Association (“VEBA”) to distribute surveys to their respective members via online survey platforms. In order to facilitate analysis across localities, surveys were designed using multiple-choice questions with an “other” option that allowed for some respondent-generated answers.
From the General Registrars and their staffs, we received 17 responses; six from independent cities and 11 from counties.
From Electoral Board members, we received 26 responses. Of those responses, eight indicated they were the secretary of the Electoral Board, five were Electoral Board chairs, two were “members,” and 11 did not specify their role on the Electoral Board.
Full survey results are available below.
As mentioned above, the survey findings are so far mostly just thought-provoking patterns. More research is needed with an increased sample size to test and to better understand these trends. Additionally, more qualitative conversations are warranted to help uncover further details that can’t be captured in this type of structured survey. For example, future research might attempt to unpack how the collaboration of general registrars with their peers affects local practice. Does it increase overall uniformity in election practices or perhaps create regional pockets of variation?