With Election Day approaching, North Carolina has a problem. The state is rapidly losing county elections directors. In the past five years, the state says North Carolina’s 100 counties have seen 61 election director changes. That turnover could have an impact on voters when they go to cast their ballots.
A Carolina Public Press investigation has found low pay is what’s driving the change. It’s 3-part series is called Elections Brain Drain.
Reporter Mehr Sher joins me now to talk more about it.
Marshall Terry: So every county has an elections director. Just what do they do?
Mehr Sher: They play a core role in our democracy. In a nutshell, I'd say that county-level directors prepare for and administer elections, and it's a very public-facing role. It involves managing the Board of Elections office and staff, preparing election schedules, preparing voting equipment, receiving and submitting election results, investigating complaints, preparing election budgets. And among a number of other duties that they have, also maintaining accurate records in the state election information management system.
Terry: Ok so you found the driving force behind these turnovers is pay. What is the average pay for a county elections director in North Carolina?
Sher: Perhaps a better way to understand the findings of my investigation is to discuss the range that we're looking at. The lowest hourly pay, which I'm talking about, is $19.28 per hour, and that's for the director in Hyde County. The lowest yearly pay is $40,000 in Graham County, and the highest paid based on the data that I gathered is in Wake County at approximately $198,000. In most of the counties that I interviewed, directors from many feel that they're not being compensated fairly. Elections directors are paid less than most department heads. For instance, in one county, the library director earns more. And you know, in several counties, and especially the smaller ones, sometimes it's actually either just a director or a director and one or two full-time employees running elections.
Another way to understand how this disparity works is to look at the state statute. It's a vague statute that enables the pay disparity systematically. It hasn't been revisited since 1999, so that's about 25 years ago and it sets the minimum wage at $12.00 per hour, including benefits. So, Marshall, there's nothing illegal about how counties are currently paying their directors. But the question really is whether it's fair, and based on my investigation, we found that it really isn’t — and it's also driving the rapid loss of directors.
Now, I do want to emphasize that we didn't find, based on the data that I gathered, that any county is paying that minimum amount, but the law is antiquated, according to Karen Brinson-Bell, the executive director of the state Board of Elections. She recognizes that directors need to be paid more to compensate for their work and also to retain them.
Terry: Elections are also increasingly charged, tense, and vicious at times. What role does that public animosity towards elections officials play?
Sher: So many of the directors I spoke with statewide told me that since the 2020 presidential election, their work has become more contentious, demanding and stressful. Melissa Kirstner, for example, the elections director in Randolph County, said that it's a more tense, negative environment for staff and precinct workers, and she's worked in her role for more than 13 years. Also, Cliff Marr, the elections director in Polk County, described working conditions as very stressful. And he said that, you know, “we get one chance to do it right and can't afford any mistakes in an ever-changing and unforgiving environment.”
One issue that elections directors are increasingly dealing with is election denialism. But aside from that, it's also the public sentiment and increased frustration from all of the legislative changes to election laws. So it's a high-pressure environment for them and a very public-facing role to be in. Nine counties reported to us increased instances of harassment. Some were through e-mail, phone calls and others were in person. There were many counties that didn't report those incidents to me when I was reporting on the story, but that isn't to say that incidents of harassment didn’t take place at all.
Terry: It seems like one of those jobs in which the pool to choose from is small. Am I right in thinking that?
Sher: You're absolutely correct. Turnover is resulting in a major loss of institutional knowledge and it's very difficult to find highly trained individuals who can also be trusted to do this kind of demanding, skilled, high-pressure, public-facing work.
Terry: How could all of this turnover make its way down to everyday folks when they go to cast their ballots?
Sher: Firstly, turnover is expensive rate. It is costing taxpayer money to search for, hire and train new staff. Another way that this affects the average voter going to cast their ballots, and this is a scenario that we aren't yet seeing in North Carolina and can prevent, but it is happening in other parts of the country where turnover is resulting in entire boards of elections shutting down in places where there are unfilled positions. So, it could result in the collapse of elections offices if we continue down this path.
Terry: So what are some of the solutions here? I guess the obvious one is increased pay, right? Is there a push to do that?
Sher: Yes. And in my third story, we explore potential solutions and how they may or may not be implemented in North Carolina and we explore how Florida implemented certain changes. But in a nutshell, Marshall, the strongest consensus among my sources was on revisiting the state statute, revisiting how salaries are determined. And yes, ultimately increasing pay.
Another simple way is for the state to issue a new guidance that perhaps could encourage counties to pay more, along with providing state funds to supplement the increase in counties where they may not have the budget to pay more.
And in terms of whether or not there's a push to do any of this, I spoke to Senator Jay Chaudhuri and he said he would like to speak to some of the stakeholders and explore possible solutions, but he didn't commit to anything specific.
I would like to emphasize that this is a bipartisan issue, but there is a lack of political will in the legislature to take action on the issue, and that's what any solution really boils down to, is political will to actually make necessary changes.
