Mail-in municipal election back up for debate in Libby

City councilors in Libby are reconsidering a mail-in municipal election in the fall after comparing the cost with opening an in-person polling location.

When a resolution to hold a mail-in election came before city councilors Aug. 2, they voted 4-1 to nix the idea. But that was before they compared the costs between mailing ballots and holding a poll election.

At the time, the only hard number city councilors had to work with was the estimated $3,000 cost of a mail-in election. On Aug. 16, City Councilor Gary Beach raised the question anew, saying a poll election would cost local taxpayers $7,000 “on the low end” as compared to the $3,000 for mail-in.

“The reason I brought it up, I just want to make sure we’re fiscally responsible,” Beach said. “If it were $1,000 or a little closer to $3,000 I would say, ‘Yeah, let’s do it in person. I’m all for it.’ But double or triple the cost of what it is for mailing, that’s a big difference.”

Beach said he got his figures from Paula Buff, the county’s election administrator. County employees oversee municipal elections and Buff had recommended Libby join Eureka and Troy in conducting a mail-in election, something the county seat has done multiple times in the past. About 62 percent of Libby’s electorate already votes by absentee ballot, she told The Western News earlier this month.

Beach told his colleagues he also spoke with Buff and concluded a mail-in election made financial sense.

“[Buff] said the $7,000 — that was the lowest. She is anticipating between $7,000 and $9,000,” he said. “So out of your 1,702 voters [registered in Libby], you’re literally spending possibly $6,000 for the 646 who want to cast a vote …”

“And that’s provided everybody shows up to vote,” said City Councilor Kristin Smith. Smith cast the lone vote in favor of a mail-in election two weeks prior. Holding up the percentage of absentee votes as evidence, she said voters favored mail-in voting.

“I think it also reflects the sentiment of the voting public,” she said. “Sixty-two percent are voting absentee.”

The proposal ran into opposition from city councilors Rob Dufficy and Hugh Taylor. Dufficy, who earlier this month argued in favor of a poll election relying upon unsubstantiated accusations of widespread fraud during the 2020 election, warned that mail-in voting left the remaining 38 percent “disenfranchised.”

“I think these people, the 38 percent, I don’t think we need to disenfranchise them,” he said. “I think they can come here to vote. I think they should have that right.”

Dufficy dismissed the cost difference between the two types, saying taxpayers expected their dollars to go toward holding elections.

“To be honest with you, $5,000, $6,000 is really not a lot of money,” he said. “It’s the cost of doing business. It’s what the taxpayers pay their taxes for."

Taylor, who previously argued that it was the constitutional responsibility of voters to show up for an election, questioned the renewed emphasis on the cost. How could they claim fiscal responsibility when they gave the Cabinet View Golf Club a $500,000 grant earlier in the year, he asked.

“We’re talking about being fiscally responsible, we’re talking about $4,000 or $5,000, we just gave half a million to the golf course,” Taylor said. “We’re arguing about $4,000 or $5,000 for people who want to cast their vote.”

City Councilor Brian Zimmerman, who supported the golf club grant, told Taylor that those dollars came from federal economic funds as opposed to locally raised taxes.

“Those are totally separate funds,” he said.

To reconsider the proposal, city council needed a two-thirds vote. Beach, Smith, Zimmerman and Mayor Pro Tempore Peggy Williams put their support behind the motion. Dufficy, who joined Taylor in opposing reconsideration, accused his colleagues of keeping him in the dark prior to the meeting.

“I … never even had a chance to see this,” he said, asking to know where the motion to reconsider a mail-in ballot came from.

When Williams pointed out that it was the same resolution he had voted on two weeks prior — just up for reconsideration — he asked why it wasn’t in his agenda packet.

“Somebody had this written ahead of time,” he said of the resolution.

“It’s the same one that was in our packets to begin with. It’s exactly the same,” Williams told him.

“Well, I never got a copy of it,” Dufficy replied.

“It’s the one you got two weeks ago,” said Beach.

“— That you voted on,” Williams said.

Dufficy later clarified that he meant the decision on how to conduct the fall election occurred at a prior meeting and should not have come back up again. City councilors met, debated the question and voted 4-1 against a mail-in ballot, he said, and that was the end of it.

Smith pointed out that parliamentary rules allowed for reconsideration, especially given new information, like the estimated price tag and the percentage of voters who use absentee ballots. She brushed back against what she considered criticism of local election workers implicit in the debate.

“This is a lot of bluster. These are our friends and neighbors who are working at the election office,” Smith said. “The folks who work at the elections office are people we know, everyday [people], and the people who show up to help with the elections, they’re volunteers and they take it very, very seriously.”

“These are employees,” Dufficy countered. “Basically, citizens vote. Not them.”

Taylor rejected the idea that his opposition to a mail-in election undermined the integrity of the county’s election personnel. He maintained that he preferred casting a ballot in person.

Williams and Smith noted that voters could bring their mail-in ballots to the courthouse personally and receive an “I voted” sticker if they so chose.

With the clock ticking on giving county officials a clear direction on how to conduct the vote — the deadline is 55 days prior to an election — city councilors ultimately tabled Beach’s reconsideration at Dufficy’s behest. He asked for extra time to speak with his constituents.

“I’d like to see how they feel about this,” he said. “We don’t have the public here tonight.”

Taylor offered a second to Dufficy’s motion. Smith cast the lone vote against tabling, meaning Libby City Council will take up the measure for a third time on Sept. 7. City Attorney Dean Chisholm, who was not in attendance Aug. 16, is expected to be present for that meeting.

Smith, Beach and Dufficy are all up for reelection in November and will appear on the ballot amid a crowded field of challengers. Taylor and Williams are both in the running for the position of mayor.

Will Langhorne contributed to this report.