A report released last week bumped up the cost of keeping polling places open in Snohomish County from $1 million to $1.67 million.

County officials don’t know where the money will come from. The idea of taking out a loan has been floated. County Council members say financing plans are in the works and will be presented in two weeks.

Whoa. Let’s rethink this idea before we gallop into the sunset on an expensive, outdated horse.

Look at the facts. All-mail ballots are already in place and working in nearly 30 counties in Washington. Eventually, all Washington voters likely will be casting ballots by mail. Why should Snohomish County wait? Why should the county spend $1.67 million to keep polling places open, only to eventually switch to the mail system? Especially when the majority of county voters already vote by mail.

County Council members John Koster and Gary Nelson have questioned the potential for fraud with mail-in ballots. Given the problems that were exposed in the governor’s race, that sounds like a legitimate concern. However, there is no evidence that fraud took place in Snohomish County during that fateful election, in which 61 percent of county voters cast their ballots absentee.

Incompetence clearly took place in King County, and a task force investigating the botched election is looking at ways to prevent a recurrence. In addition to recommending that the election director be elected rather than appointed, the task force is likely to suggest King County move to all-mail ballots. Once in place, an all-mail system would eliminate the chance someone could vote absentee, then show up at the polls and vote again.

Koster has said he would be inclined to support all-mail ballots if voters could be compelled to re-register. Federal law absolutely prohibits forcing voters to re-register, according to Snohomish County Auditor Bob Terwilliger. There are no prohibitions, however, from updating voter lists.

If the county went to all-mail ballots, the updating of lists would go something like this: The county would notify every voter by mail about the change. Voters would be asked to confirm their address and provide a current version of their signature, to be sent back in a pre-stamped envelope. These mailings could go out twice a year, Terwilliger said. Failure to respond to these mailings, however, is not grounds for canceling a voter’s registration, in keeping with federal law.

For voters who want to keep the civic tradition of going to the polls, stations could be scattered throughout the county, where voters could drop off their ballots.

Since Oregon switched to all-mail ballots in 2000, it has recorded higher voter turnouts and no charges of fraud. The state has recorded millions of dollars in savings.

It’s our civic duty to find the most effective, and cost-effective, way of conducting an election. All-mail ballots win by a landslide.