Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
03/02/2021 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB83 | |
| SB84 | |
| SJR1 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 84 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SJR 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 83-ELECTIONS; VOTING; BALLOT REQS
3:33:59 PM
CHAIR SHOWER announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 83
"An Act relating to elections; and providing for an effective
date."
He listed the individuals available to answer questions.
3:34:35 PM
JOSH APPLEBEE, Chief of Staff, Lieutenant Governor Kevin Meyer,
Juneau, Alaska, stated that SB 83 stems from the experience of
the 2020 election cycle, which, due to COVID-19, was unlike any
other. It offers four ideas for the committee to consider to
help "bolster, tighten, and tweak" the election system.
First, SB 83 provides the director of the Division of Elections
flexibility to conduct additional hand counts if the
circumstances of the election warrant it. The statute currently
only permits a hand-count verification on one randomly drawn
precinct within each district. Further hand counts are allowed
only if the hand count comes back with significant deviation. He
said the division believes that the ability to audit more
precincts to ensure confidence in the results would improve
election integrity.
Second, SB 83 clarifies that two voter identifiers are required
in order to apply for an absentee ballot, and that both a voter
signature and identifier are required on an absentee ballot
envelop. He said this is how the division interpreted and
applied the law during the 2020 elections so this is codifying
current practice.
MR. APPLEBY emphasized that SB 83 does nothing to change the
requirement for a witness signature. He highlighted that the
Lieutenant Governor and the Department of Law argued to keep
that requirement in the 2020 election but were unsuccessful in
court. He further highlighted that that the court decision only
applied to the 2020 elections and not any subsequent elections.
Third, SB 83 allows the director to establish in regulation the
amount of deposit required for a recount. He noted that the
amounts in the existing statute are outdated and do not cover
the actual costs.
Fourth, SB 83 allows, but does not require, communities with a
population of less than 750 to conduct elections by mail instead
of in person. In the last election, some communities shut down
their polling stations for legitimate health and safety reasons,
but even in non-pandemic times it can be difficult to find staff
and a polling location in small communities. This bill offers
flexibility for the division to work with small communities to
find the best way to ensure that every voter can exercise their
right to vote.
3:38:54 PM
CHAIR SHOWER advised that he requested a meeting with the
Lieutenant Governor's Office to try to prevent overlapping
efforts between SB 83 and SB 39, which he sponsored.
3:39:45 PM
MR. APPLEBEE presented the sectional analysis for SB 83.
Section 1. Provides the Division of Elections the
flexibility to count more than one random precinct in
the ballot review process should the Director have
concerns about the elections process.
Section 2. Clarifies a space for the voter identifier
be made on the voter certificate that accompanies an
absentee ballot.
Section 3. Clarifies that one of the voter
identifiers must be a voter's date of birth.
Section 4. Clarifies that the voter certificate must
include the information required in AS 15.20.030.
Section 5. States that the absentee ballot counting
board shall examine the voter certificate and
determine that it has been properly executed including
a voter's signature and voter identifier.
Section 6. Clarifies that an absentee ballot may not
be counted if the voter certificate does not contain a
voter's signature or voter identifier.
Section 7. Removes the deposit amount for a recount
from statute and requires the Director to adopt
regulations establishing the amount and manner of
payment for a recount.
Section 8. Gives the Division the flexibility to
conduct voting by mail for communities with a
population under 750 if necessary.
Section 9. Adds the definition of voter identifier
into statute.
Section 10. Directs the Division to adopt regulations
necessary to implement this bill.
Section 11. Makes Section 10 effective immediately.
3:40:46 PM
CHAIR SHOWER highlighted that while the court decision only
applied to the 2020 elections, it did set precedent so nothing
prevents a court from changing an election in a future
emergency. He emphasized that, "The legislature is the
constitutional authority for setting that law, not the courts."
SENATOR REINBOLD echoed the previous concern and voiced support
for sidebars.
3:42:00 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked Cori Mills with the Department of Law if
the court case placed conditions other than the pandemic.
[Ms. Mills dropped off line and Senator Kawasaki posed a second
question.]
3:43:01 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI noted the perjury implications for a voter who
falsifies information when providing an identifier on an
election ballot application and asked if perjury also applies
for anybody who signs as a witness.
3:43:38 PM
CORI MILLS, Deputy Attorney General, Civil Division, Department
of Law, Alaska, Alaska, cautioned that she might need to correct
her answers after consultation with the criminal division. She
said the applicable criminal laws are perjury and falsification
and she believes that it would be a crime of falsifying a signed
statement to falsely witness a ballot.
CHAIR SHOWER asked for the penalty for that crime.
MS. MILLS cited AS 15.56.040. Voter misconduct in the first
degree. She offered her understanding that falsely witnessing
would fall under that statute and it is a class C felony.
SENATOR KAWASAKI referred to the ballot he applied for but did
not use. He noted that the only requirement under the witness
affidavit is to be over age 18. He asked if she could explain
why it was written that way.
MS. MILLS said she would guess that the language has been that
way for some time, but she would defer to Ms. Fenumiai to
explain the reason.
3:47:56 PM
GAIL FENUMIAI, Director, Division of Elections, Office of the
Lieutenant Governor, Juneau, Alaska, confirmed that that
language has been on the by mail return envelopes for at least
the last two decades.
CHAIR SHOWER pointed out the very small print warning outside
the box for the witness signature says, "False statements made
by the voter or by the attesting witness on the certificate are
punishable by law."
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked Ms. Mills for the basis for the unanimous
decision in the 2020 elections court case.
MS. MILLS advised that it was a preliminary injunction motion in
the superior court. The court looked at the pandemic and the
health and safety risks of interacting with another person. The
Department of Law (DOL) appealed the decision to the Alaska
Supreme Court and that court found that the superior court judge
did not abuse her discretion in granting the preliminary
injunction. She clarified that the Supreme Court did not go into
the merits of the case, just whether the decision was within the
judge's discretion.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if she believes that DOL would be able to
win the case in the Alaska Supreme Court if it weren't a
pandemic and the argument was more broad-based.
MS. MILLS replied it was DOL's legal position that the law is
constitutional both under the pandemic and if there weren't a
pandemic.
3:51:50 PM
CHAIR SHOWER reported that in March 2020, the legislature took
up the issue of the witness signature and the decision was to
keep that requirement intact.
SENATOR HOLLAND referred to Section 8 on page 6 and asked about
the benefit of providing a definition for the term "community."
CHAIR SHOWER noted that this was an area of overlap between SB
83 and SB 39. The Alaska Municipal League suggested the
population of 750 and SB 39 provides a more nuanced definition.
He asked Mr. Applebee to comment.
MR. APPLEBEE explained that the term "community" refers to any
size town or village that has a population of less than 750 and
that number is the break between small and larger.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked about defining the type of pandemic
because she feels the situation of the COVID-19 pandemic has
been exploited.
3:55:45 PM
MS. MILLS responded by adding precision to her response to
Senator Kawasaki. She said the concerns were specific to COVID-
19 and the evidence before the court was specific to
transmissibility, death rates, and health information related to
COVID-19. That is the information the plaintiff's council
presented and the court weighed. The Department of Law put
forward their own information, specifically related to COVID-19,
about the safety options to get a witness signature.
SENATOR REINBOLD asked about providing a clear definition of
"pandemic" in this or another bill that would be applicable in
the future.
MS. MILLS said it is an interesting concept and the department
would be willing to look at any proposal brought forward.
CHAIR SHOWER asked Mr. Appleby what led to the decision to make
750 the population cutoff for conducting an election by mail.
MR. APPLEBEE answered that the basis was conversations with
community leaders and time spent recruiting election workers in
rural areas. The determination was that 750 is the size where
recruiting becomes difficult for an in-person election.
3:59:26 PM
CHAIR SHOWER asked Ms. Mills if DOL raised the issue of the
courts' ability to change election law at either the state or
federal level.
MS. MILLS answered no; this was a state-centered issue.
CHAIR SHOWER asked what protocols were in place to ensure the
accuracy of the voter rolls.
MS. FENUMIAI advised that she provided a document to the
committee that outlines the list maintenance processes that the
division undertakes to keep the voter rolls in accordance with
state and federal law. She asked if members had the document.
CHAIR SHOWER answered yes and asked for a 30,000-foot view.
4:01:55 PM
MS. FENUMIAI explained that the division follows the provisions
in AS 15.07.130, which meets the guidelines under the National
Voter Registration Act. The division participates in a 30-state
cross matching program, sends notices to people who appear to be
registered to vote in other states, and receives notices about
voter deaths from a variety of sources. This includes
information from the non-profit organization ERIC, secretaries
of state offices, state health and analytics, voters' families,
obituaries, and voters who request cancellation.
4:03:36 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the division receives updated
information when a person applies online for a permanent fund
dividend (PFD) and they list an address that is different than
is in the voter roll.
MS. FENUMIAI replied the division receives the information from
the PFD and their process is to notify the person and ask if
they want the information on the PFD application to update their
voter registration record. These voters have a 30-day window to
opt out of changing their voter registration record. If they do
not opt out, the division uses the information they provided on
their PFD application to update their voter registration.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the system is automated or if there is
discretion. He mentioned the PFD fraud unit that uses data to
determine the truthfulness of residency claims.
4:05:05 PM
MS. FENUMIAI answered that the division takes the information at
face value just as they do for those who register to vote,
certified under penalty of perjury, directly with the division.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked how the voter roll is affected when
someone applies for a PFD and claims to be in the state but
their IP address identifies them as applying from out-of-state.
MS. FENUMIAI asked for further clarification of the question
because a voter does not need to be in the state to remain
registered to vote.
4:06:13 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked if the division has a way to prevent a
person who lives out of state from becoming registered to vote
if they apply for a PFD online claiming that they live at a
former Alaska address.
MS. FENUMIAI answered no. A voter who registers through the PFD
application and does not respond to the opt-out notice is
registered to vote based on the information provided from the
permanent fund.
CHAIR SHOWER added that his office recently learned that the
data from the PFD application passes directly through to the
Division of Elections.
SENATOR REINBOLD recalled a bill that allowed members of the
military who had left Alaska to apply for a PFD if they intended
to return at some time. She asked Ms. Fenumiai if she was aware
of that legislation.
MS. FENUMIAI said she does not know the PFD rules, but Title 15
provides that an individual who has an intent to return does not
lose their residency for voting purposes.
CHAIR SHOWER related his personal experience that when he was
stationed outside Alaska he was always able to vote absentee but
he did not receive the dividend.
SENATOR REINBOLD opined that "intent to return" ought to be
defined.
4:10:30 PM
CHAIR SHOWER found no further questions and stated he would hold
SB 83 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 84 Dept of Revenue PPT.pdf |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 84 |
| SB 84 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 84 |
| SB 84 Bill.PDF |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 84 |
| SB 83 Sectional Analysis version A.pdf |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 Sponsor Statement version A.pdf |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 A.PDF |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83-1-2-021221-GOV-N.PDF |
SSTA 3/2/2021 3:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |