BAY MINETTE, Ala. — A state comptroller’s refusal to reimburse about $170,000 in advertising costs to Baldwin and Mobile counties related to advertising alternate Presidential Preference Primary election dates due to Mardi Gras has prompted county officials and legislators to set up meetings with state officials for non-payment explanations.

Baldwin County Commissioners have paid $83,000 in advertising costs and were awaiting reimbursement from the state, while Mobile County spent $89,000.

In 2006, the Alabama Legislature adopted Feb. 5 as the date for the state’s presidential primaries.

Later, legislators discovered that date fell on Fat Tuesday and added legislation providing an additional day of voting for Mobile and Baldwin counties and funding for the added expense.

Advertising costs up to $100,000 for each county were included in the package to alert voters of the alternate voting date.

On Monday, county officials were apprised that state officials did not interpret the legislative act specific to Baldwin and Mobile counties to include advertising costs.

“The issue is that the state comptrollers interprets the legislation differently than the county did,” according to Steve Pryor, director of the Baldwin County Legislative Delegation Constituency Services office.

“The delegation has not had time to meet and discuss how to correct it,” Pryor said. “The delegation was asked by the Baldwin County Commission to pass a resolution that would specify the intent of the act.”

Assuming advertising costs were included in the legislation, Baldwin County Probate Judge Adrian Johns launched an advertising campaign notifying voters that they could vote early at the Foley Civic Center.

Mobile County Probate Judge Don Davis spent $89,045 on the awareness campaign. In addition, Mobile County spent $19,000 on postage and printing of postcards to notify voters of the early voting day, according to Roxann Dyess, Mobile County Probate Court Elections Coordinator.

“We usually send out postcards prior to the primary and general elections, so we knew this $19,000-plus figure would go over our allotted $100,000 budget,” Dyess said Tuesday. “We actually submitted $108,695 to the county, knowing that the amount above the $100,000 would be charged to election expense.

“We would have spent the $19,650 anyway.”