Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/26/2004 08:03 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 496-YOUTH VOTE AMBASSADOR PROG/ELECTION BDS Number 0043 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that the first order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 496, "An Act creating the Youth Vote Ambassador Program and relating to that program; authorizing the members of the program to be appointed to serve on election boards; relating to qualifications for appointment to election boards; and providing for an effective date." Number 0088 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS) for HB 496, Version 23-LS1766\H, Kurtz, 3/25/04, as a work draft. CHAIR WEYHRAUCH objected for discussion purposes. Number 0095 KELLY HUBER, Staff to Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Alaska State Legislature, discussed the changes made by Version H, on behalf of Representative Dahlstrom, sponsor. She said Version H deletes legislative findings. It clarifies that poll workers will be from their registered precinct. However, if there are not enough qualified individuals in the precinct, then the [Division of Elections] will select people from the district. As a last choice, if there are not enough people from the district to work at the polls, then the division will select people statewide. MS. HUBER said [Version H] clarifies that the two youth ambassadors will be in addition to the three "adult board election members." She noted that at the previous hearing on HB 496, there had been a question regarding whether the youth ambassadors will be compensated. She said they will, because the way the system works is that they will also serve on the election board, which is a compensated position. However, if they choose to do outreach on behalf of the division, that would be in a volunteer capacity. MS. HUBER turned to another concern stated at the previous hearing, regarding whether a youth would be put in a position to make decisions on challenges at the poll. She said that she spoke with people from the division and the answer is no, because in training, there is a chairman of the board, and that chairman would be an adult. The chairman is the only one at the poll who would make those decisions regarding challenges. Number 0230 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON remarked that although there will be compensation given to the two [youth ambassadors] added to each polling place, there is no fiscal note reflecting that fiscal impact. MS. HUBER said she is not certain there would be two added to each. She said she would defer that question to a representative from the division, and she reported that a fiscal note was "on the way." Number 0265 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH asked why the language couldn't provide that the youth ambassadors "may" be compensated. MS. HUBER concurred. She noted that she had asked the division that question and the director's response indicated that the youth will be working, and the idea is to bring the youth into the system and let them learn; therefore, in some way, being compensated is fair. Number 0300 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL, in response to Chair Weyhrauch, confirmed that [Version H] dealt with his previous concerns. Number 0333 LEONARD JONES, Elections Special Assistant, Division of Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, in response to a question from Representative Seaton, said the rate of compensation for "the individual" would be $7.50 an hour, which is currently identified in 6 AAC 25.035. He said the division believes that with the reduction of older workers, there will be a zero fiscal note "on this impact." He noted that [the youth ambassadors] will be paid in training status. He estimated, "It will probably be no more than 16 hours for this compensation." MR. JONES, in response to a question from Representative Seaton, explained that [the two youth] would be in addition to the three qualified poll workers. He said the division thinks it has sufficient funds for the positions. He said the regional supervisors will make the determinations based on their budgets. He reiterated that the division doesn't think this will have a significant impact, "especially to the division." Number 0472 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked how many poll workers would typically be in a downtown precinct. He asked if HB 496 would change the number from five adult poll workers, for example, to three [adult poll workers], with two youth workers. MR. JONES said that customarily there would be a minimum of three [poll workers] in each precinct. He said he didn't think there would be a youth poll worker in all precincts, but in those with them, that would increase the number by one or two. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he's getting conflicting messages and wants to "get this straight as to the effect of this bill on the poll workers that we're currently using." Number 0592 MS. HUBER explained that there is a group of poll workers whose number is dwindling, as its members get older. She stated that is why the program was suggested, to teach the youth about the election process and bring them in. Those youth won't replace "the ones you're talking about" right away. She described [HB 496] as a pilot program for the youths until they become adults. She stated, "I think what the division is saying is because in some places we just don't have the number of poll workers that we used to, the numbers are fluctuating a bit; ... therefore, they can absorb it [in] our budget." She indicated that the youth would not become "person for person" replacements, but would learn the process over time and, hopefully, continue with their involvement in the years to come. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated that if [the youths that would be hired] would be in addition to the current number of workers, then there would be a fiscal note of $7.50 an hour times how many hours and workers. However, if the older people who stop working are being replaced, then perhaps there wouldn't be a fiscal note. He clarified that he is trying to find out which situation it would be. He said he doesn't have a conflict with it being either way, or with a training program, but just wants to understand the situation. He asked if, for example, there are currently five workers in an urban area, and if, [with the passage of HB 496], that might turn into three regular workers and two youths. MR. JONES answered that that scenario could happen. He said pay scales would vary, and he offered examples. He reminded the committee that the regional supervisors will consider their budgets when deciding whether to [hire] someone. He reiterated that the division feels that it has the resources available to cover the $7.50 an hour, with possible combinations of three to six [workers] at each polling place, and didn't see the need to project additional resources in a fiscal note. He added that the division can't predict how many [youths] will be taking part in the program. Number 0829 REPRESENTATIVE HOLM stated his understanding that the reason for [HB 496] is to increase awareness of the election process and to get the youth of Alaska interested in voting. He noted that the legislature doesn't get paid a lot and he is not a legislator because of the money. He opined, "Because we have requirements as to being a member of society, it's inherent upon us to do these things for the right reasons." He questioned why the youth would be paid to learn to be responsible citizens. He turned to [the bottom of page 4 of a handout entitled, "New Millennium Best Practices Survey," included in the committee packet], which shows that 74 percent of states have laws that allow for election day workers under the age of 18. He asked if they are paid. MR. JONES answered that, based on the information he has reviewed from "a few of the other states," the youth are paid at the minimum rate established of the state. He added that he can't speak to every state that has a program. REPRESENTATIVE HOLM suggested that the youth not be paid, not that he thinks they shouldn't get money, but because it's important that they do this for the right reason. He defined the right reason as understanding that they have a duty to help society. He indicated he may offer that as an amendment. Number 0980 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he would like to ask the state if there would be any liability problems if the youth are not compensated. Number 1002 MS. HUBER noted that there is [language] in the bill that would allow the youth to be volunteers in an outreach capacity. She stated her assumption that if they can be a volunteer in outreach for the division, then the division would be all right in having them as volunteers on the board. She stated her only concern regarding not paying the youth is that the youth ambassadors are members of the election board for the precinct, which is why the division felt that they should be compensated. She stated it is the committee's decision. Number 1048 REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if any coordination has been made to ensure that the youth involved can get time off from school to participate. MS. HUBER answered no. She said she thinks that any students chosen for the program would work with their school to get a day off during Election Day. She posited that it is one of those decisions that would first be made between the parent and child, and then be negotiated between the student and the school. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN stated he has philosophic problems with underage people being on an election board. He said, "This is the very bedrock of our society - the voting process." Number 1131 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL revealed that, as someone who has taught civics to students who get totally bored with the subject, one of the more exciting things that happens to him as a teacher is to see the light go on in the students eyes that "this is really about our country, about our life." He said he thinks [HB 496 would provide] a good opportunity. Furthermore, he stated that if he had a student that was going to leave his class to participate in [this program], he might consider giving that student an A for effort and a little extra credit. Regarding the issue of payment, he opined, as long as the election board feels that it can absorb the cost, he certainly doesn't have a problem with [the youth getting paid]. He indicated that it would be a little encouragement and "the others" are going to be paid anyway. He stated that he is ready for the bill to move out of committee. Number 1187 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH said he agrees with "participation in the process." In regard to the issue of money, he said he thinks it would be fine [to pay the youth] as an incentive and to be on equal footing with the other paid workers. He added, "If they have the money to pay them, if they don't they don't." One way to deal with that, he suggested, would be to say that they "may" be compensated. He stated that he doesn't have strong feelings on the issue one way or another and it's up to the committee [to decide]. REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL stated that he thinks the youth should be compensated. Number 1230 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ concurred with Representative Coghill. He said, "It just seems to me that if we're asking people to do a job, we ought to pay for it. It's capitalism at its best." Number 1244 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated that, notwithstanding his support of the program, he would like the clarification made regarding how the program will work - whether the numbers of workers will be an addition or a replacement. Number 1267 MR. JONES, in response to a question from Chair Weyhrauch, explained that the fiscal note was called for this morning at 7:30 a.m. and [is not yet available]. Number 1275 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH said the committee would set HB 496 aside until a fiscal note is available. Number 1284 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL indicated that the words "shall" and "may" [are both used in regard to the appointments made by the election supervisors]. He noted, "That would be optional for the youth." He offered his understanding that the issue of pay may be addressed in the bill; therefore, he said he would be considering that when he receives the fiscal note. [HB 496 was taken up again later in the meeting.] HB 496-YOUTH VOTE AMBASSADOR PROG/ELECTION BDS CHAIR WEYHRAUCH returned to HOUSE BILL NO. 496, "An Act creating the Youth Vote Ambassador Program and relating to that program; authorizing the members of the program to be appointed to serve on election boards; relating to qualifications for appointment to election boards; and providing for an effective date." Number 1981 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH said he believes that Representative Seaton had made the motion to move CSHB 496, Version 23-LS1766\H, Kurtz, 3/25/04, [from committee]. He asked if Representative Seaton wanted to maintain his motion. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed concern that the fiscal note isn't accurate because he didn't see how there could be additional employees in many places and have a zero fiscal note. Therefore, Representative Seaton withdrew his motion. Number 1954 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report CSHB 496, Version 23- LS1766\H, Kurtz, 3/25/04, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ pointed out that if the committee doesn't agree with the fiscal note, it can move to amend it. REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL opined that the permissive language doesn't demand that new people are hired. He further opined that there is a lot of flexibility, and therefore he accepted the zero fiscal note. CHAIR WEYHRAUCH inquired as to the difference between a zero fiscal note and an indeterminate fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ interjected, "An indeterminate fiscal note goes to the Finance Committee." Number 1907 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH asked if it's possible that since it's discretionary to pay [for the members of the youth ambassador program], the fiscal note may be indeterminate. LEONARD JONES, Elections Special Assistant, Division of Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, stated that the division, in talking with its regional supervisors, believes the cost of these workers can be absorbed. Furthermore, the division doesn't foresee any additional impact. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said that he didn't see at all that this is discretionary with regard to whether these [youth ambassadors] are compensated. He pointed out that page 2, lines 10-12, read: "(d) A member of the program who is appointed under (c) of this section is compensated as provided in AS 15.15.380 only for service on the election board of the precinct." Therefore, the discretion is with regard to whether any [youth ambassadors] are hired or not. CHAIR WEYHRAUCH said he understood. However, he understood Representative Coghill to be referring to the language on page 2, line 26, which specifies "may appoint". Therefore, there seems to be a conflict between the "is compensated" language and the "may appoint" language. He related his understanding that the election board is given the discretion to do this if the funds are available. If the funds are available, the election board "may appoint" these individuals and will compensate them. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ withdrew his objection. Number 1825 CHAIR WEYHRAUCH announced that there being no objection, CSHB 496(STA) was reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|