Date Requested:March 07, 2013
Time Requested:02:47 PM
Agency: Secretary of State
CBD Number: Version: Bill Number: Resolution Number:
2013R2595 Introduced HB2863
CBD Subject: ESTABLISH FEE FOR SALE OF DATA LISTS
FUND(S)
8854 Help American Vote Act Fund
Sources of Revenue
Special Fund
Legislation creates:
Neither Program nor Fund

Fiscal Note Summary

Effect this measure will have on costs and revenues of state government.

    This measure will potentially impact state cost and revenues in five areas:
    
    1) Cost associated with the development, deployment and maintenance of a voter data subscription service.
    
    2) There will be revised revenue estimates for state produced data sets based upon the new proposed pricing structure.
    
    3) The anticipated shift of some data set production workload from the counties to the state will potentially result in a revenue increase.
    
    4) The transfer of program income generated by counties to the Help American Vote Fund.
    
    5) The state would be required to retain 100% of state generated program income for deposit into the Help American Vote Fund
    
    This change would result in a one time estimated cost in FY2014 of $10,000 and a decrease in revenue of $10,000 per year in FY2014 and FY2015. The estimated revenue should start in FY2016 of $12,000 per year as sales of the subscription service increase.
    

Fiscal Note Detail
Over-all effect
Effect of Proposal Fiscal Year
2013
Increase/Decrease
(use"-")
2014
Increase/Decrease
(use"-")
Fiscal Year
(Upon Full
Implementation)
1. Estmated Total Cost 10,000 0 10,000
Personal Services 0 0 0
Current Expenses 0 0 0
Repairs and Alterations 0 0 0
Assets 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0
2. Estimated Total Revenues -10,000 -10,000 12,000
3. Explanation of above estimates (including long-range effect):
    The changes in Estimated Total Revenues are based on the following:
    
    1) Revised State generated Revenue – The annual estimate is derived from a recalculation of four years of division gross receipts, recalculated using the proposed pricing structure, and averaged to reflect a single year income estimate.
    
    2) Workload Shift- The estimated additional revenue is calculated on communication from 9% of County Clerks indicating their intent to redirect list requests to the state, when possible, rather than produce the data-in-house. The respondents were jurisdictions with limited internal resources and the expected impact on state personnel resources is negligible
    
    3) Transfer of “program income” from counties to the state – The estimated revenue from transfer is based upon applying the revised pricing structure for county generated lists to historical county generated list sales volume less anticipated county expenditures for list production.
    
    4) Retention of 100% State-Generated Program Income – This estimate is based upon the portion of state generated program income previously directed to counties as reported in the audit of “Help American Vote Act” funds conducted by the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission. Gross receipts from list sales vary widely based upon the nature of the races and issuers on the ballot in any given year.
    


Memorandum
Person submitting Fiscal Note:
John Sandoro SOS
Email Address:
jsandoro@wvsos.com
    Program Income is defined as net proceeds remaining after list preparation-related expenses are subtracted from the gross receipts from voter data sales.