Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
05/16/2025 09:00 AM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB64 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(FIN) am
"An Act relating to elections; relating to voters;
relating to voting; relating to voter registration;
relating to election administration; relating to the
Alaska Public Offices Commission; relating to campaign
contributions; relating to the crimes of unlawful
interference with voting in the first degree, unlawful
interference with an election, and election official
misconduct; relating to synthetic media in
electioneering communications; relating to campaign
signs; relating to voter registration on permanent
fund dividend applications; relating to the
Redistricting Board; relating to the duties of the
commissioner of revenue; and providing for an
effective date."
8:19:33 AM
Representative Stapp asked about section 12, page 9 of the
bill and the proposed rural community liaison. He did not
have an issue with the concept. He assumed that precincts
and rural areas were already staffed. He asked for an
explanation of why a special community liaison would be
needed.
Representative Johnson asked which page was being
referenced.
Representative Stapp referenced page 9, lines 1 through 5.
8:21:05 AM
DAVID DUNSMORE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL WIELECHOWSKI,
explained that the rural community liaison position had
been requested by the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN).
He relayed that staffing voting in rural Alaska had unique
challenges that were not faced in urban Alaska. He
mentioned urban communities with multiple precincts that
had redundancy to cover positions. He maintained that it
was more difficult in a rural precinct, and if a poll
worker was unable to come it could result in delayed or
closed polling places. He contended that there needed to be
preparation to ensure staff was recruited and trained. He
thought a full-time position dedicated to addressing the
issues would help the state be better prepared and ensure
voting was accessible in all regions.
Co-Chair Foster noted that there were people online to
answer questions.
Representative Allard stated that she was distributing a
flyer regarding the special needs ballot, which had come
from the Division of Elections.
Representative Stapp noted that the position was listed as
a range 16 in the fiscal note, which he did not think was a
very high range for what was discussed. He thought it would
be good to hear from the division of elections. He
mentioned a couple of precincts in the North Slope Borough
that had not opened on time on an election day.
8:25:04 AM
CAROL BEECHER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ELECTIONS, (via
teleconference) responded that in the primary election
there were several precincts that did not open due to
polling workers not being available that day. She relayed
that range 16 positions were helping with staffing of
polling places for all the regions. She noted that in
region 4, agreements were signed during the summer but
nearer to polling time the individuals sometimes were not
available at the last minute. In some instances the
division had not found out until the day before elections.
Ms. Beecher described making an agreement with Department
of Military and Veterans Affairs (DMVA) whereby the
division trained and sent DMVA staff to various hub
communities to be ready to travel to locations that needed
poll workers to open the polls for the general election.
She recounted sending two workers to Egegik. On the morning
of election day, the division found that the individual
signed up for Wales would not be available. Weather made it
impossible to send a poll worker, and the division found a
teacher that was able to open the polls in the afternoon.
She pondered whether a special liaison would help the
matter, and thought it was possible but was dependent upon
the communities being engaged and having people willing to
do the work. She surmised that the division could hire and
train people, but it was not possible to foresee if the
individuals would be there at the assigned time, thus the
development of the contingency plan.
Co-Chair Foster noted that a few of the communities
mentioned were in his district the previous election, and
he was made aware on the day of the election that some of
the polls could not open. He was appreciative of the
efforts of the division. He mentioned the staff from DMVA
in Nome being available. He commented on the challenge with
over 200 villages in the state.
8:29:48 AM
Representative Stapp asked for clarification of the
reference to Egegik versus Igiugig in Ms. Beechers
discussion. He asked if the DMVA staff were defense force
folks. He mentioned the teacher in Wales and was curious if
the avenue could be explored since there were schools in
every community.
Ms. Beecher repeated the village name as Egegik, where the
division had deployed two individuals from DMVA. She
confirmed that the individuals were regular staff and not
any kind of military. She relayed that the division had not
explored the concept of teachers as poll workers. She
mentioned school hours.
Representative Allard followed up on Representative Stapp's
remarks. She thought it was great that the DMVA staff were
working. She mentioned the Alaska State Defense Force
(ASDF) as an alternative source of poll workers.
Representative Johnson echoed Representative Allard's
comment about ASDF. She asked if there was a prohibition
against having a cooperative effort with other state
workers in the area.
Ms. Beecher responded that the division currently used
state workers to work polls, and there was no prohibition.
The employees still earned their daily rate in addition to
a poll worker hourly rate.
Representative Bynum referenced the proposed community
liaison position, and thought the department was looking
for solutions. He referenced Section 57 of the bill that
spoke to doing an evaluation and report and considered how
to get better responses in rural communities and low-income
neighborhoods. He asked Ms. Beecher to discuss what the
division was currently doing to address the issue. He asked
if the division was currently doing the report referenced
in Section 57.
8:34:46 AM
Ms. Beecher responded that the division was looking at
innovative ideas of how to transmit election results. She
mentioned the ability to scan. She mentioned that early
voting ballots were not tallied until election night, which
was only possible with the ability to scan. She mentioned
bandwidth and staffing issues. The division was considering
Starlink and other ideas that might be a great solution for
far-flung communities.
Representative Bynum discussed the issue of getting
volunteers. He asked what the department's primary role was
in trying to get volunteers and get ahead of the problem
before the next election.
Ms. Beecher responded that traditionally the division
called on people that had worked the previous election, who
in turn contacted others to be poll workers. The division
scheduled training throughout the summer in rural
precincts. The poll workers were normally scheduled for
working the primary and general elections (and sometimes
REAA elections) in the summer. The division had found it
difficult to get the workers since the Covid-19 pandemic,
as many had been retired or older individuals. She noted
that struggling to find poll workers was not isolated to
rural communities. She relayed that the division would be
expanding the notification that the division were looking
for poll workers and not just leaving it to the poll
workers to try to find people. She mentioned using social
media.
8:39:29 AM
Representative Hannan asked if she could expand on training
for poll workers in summer. She asked about the length of
the training and considered the complexity involved in
volunteering for the polls.
Ms. Beecher responded that in areas like Anchorage, the
training was usually a four-hour block. Depending upon
duties assigned, some workers would receive extra training
blocks. Training for rural areas also included separate
training for bilingual outreach. Rural areas often had
training that lasted a full day or day and a half. The
division had done a workshop for handling the tablets that
handled other languages. The training was only every other
year and was comprehensive.
Representative Hannan asked about the division's
positioning of DMVA employees to go out to rural areas. She
asked if there was separate training or if the employees
took the same training as other poll workers.
Ms. Beecher was not certain and offered to follow up. She
noted that there was online training available and there
was some training that could only happen in person.
8:43:09 AM
Co-Chair Foster spoke to the value of the rural liaison
position proposed in the bill. He discussed events on
election day and observed that over the past two elections,
it was clear how challenging things could get. He noted
that Nome alone covered a huge geographic swath. He
emphasized that there were over 200 small communities in
the state. He contemplated that if four or five communities
in the state had an issue on election day, it would be nice
to have someone there to ensure the process was done
securely. He referenced the day Wales had issues, when the
weather had been challenging. He thought the position would
be helpful.
Representative Bynum thought creating the rural community
liaison position was a reasonable position to have. He
asked if the person was expected to be effectively readily
available to do all the technical correspondence involved
with an election. He knew that communications capabilities
had been expanded in the recent decade and mentioned fiber
and low orbit satellite connections.
Ms. Beecher responded that the division currently had
technical people who were very familiar with the equipment
in hubs, and were available for phone calls to troubleshoot
machinery. The employees tended to be very busy on election
day.
Representative Bynum pondered the technical aspects of
election day and wondered if the department was readily
available to answer technical questions from rural
communities.
8:47:37 AM
Ms. Beecher responded that the current process was that the
poll workers were in communication with the division
frequently leading up to the election. When there had been
any kind of problem, workers called into their region where
there were people answering phones to address questions.
The division had not fleshed out all the responsibilities
of the proposed liaison position, but she anticipated that
the person would be made available as part of the group of
people available for technical questions.
Representative Jimmie asked when the division of elections
was last sued for violating the Voting Rights Act in
relation to language assistance for indigenous voters.
Ms. Beecher responded that the last lawsuit was in 2012
[Toyukak v. Dahlstrom was a was voting rights case
successfully brought against the state in 2013].
Representative Jimmie asked what adjustments were made due
to the outcome of the case.
MS. Beecher relayed that as a result of the lawsuit, the
state was in continuing settlement. She described that
every couple of years the division went back to the court
to see if there were changes or updates to the settlement.
She described that the settlement was very prescriptive and
had many defined requirements for the division with regard
to provision for the Yupik language and dialects.
Representative Jimmie asked if the settlement remained in
effect past 2026.
Ms. Beecher answered affirmatively and noted that it was an
ongoing settlement.
8:50:59 AM
Co-Chair Foster relayed that there was another meeting at 9
o'clock, and the committee would be adjourning soon.
Representative Bynum referenced Section 18 of the bill
which addressed informing voters of language assistance. He
asked about accessibility of language information and
ballot information and asked what kind of coordination the
division was engaging in with villages and specifically
with tribes. He wondered what kind of communication the
division was having with the tribes.
Ms. Beecher responded that as a result of the Toyukak case,
the division had a language program with a coordinator and
translator. The division was in the process of hiring an
outreach coordinator in the language management group. In
relation to tribes and municipalities under the settlement
umbrella, the division reached out to find translators.
Without recommendations from the tribes and municipalities,
the division reached out further to colleges and other
communities. She shared that the process was year-round.
The division had a glossary of the various Yupik dialects
and worked to make it clearer over time. She noted that for
an election year, initiatives had to be translated, and the
official election pamphlet had to be translated. She noted
that the election for 2024 was only translated into Bristol
Bay Yupik and Central Yupik. She expressed appreciation for
the enormous amount of labor the translators did. She
relayed that there was continuing communication with the
tribes in many ways. The materials were sent to tribes and
communication was ongoing.
Representative Bynum contemplated the legislature providing
money for the division and complying with federal law. He
asked if the division was able to articulate what it was
doing to comply with federal law, who it was coordinating
with at the tribes, what feedback the division was getting
from the process, and what other resources were needed.
8:55:14 AM
Ms. Beecher responded that the division was required to
provide a court report as part of the settlement. Every
year the division complied documentation of different
outreaches and responses. She thought the report might
address Representative Bynum's question about tracking what
the division was doing with the language program and case.
She clarified that the division did not provide a court
report pertaining to the other languages including Inupiaq
and Tagalog.
Representative Bynum asked if the department had
communication from the tribes and the communities regarding
requests and issues. He thought the department was working
on issues it was trying to solve. He wondered about issues
or concerns raised by tribes or communities.
Ms. Beecher responded that the division sent out surveys
and took the information that was received in response. She
had not heard back concerning complaints regarding the
languages.
CSSB 64(FIN) am was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the agenda for the following
meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 104 Version I Sectional Analysis (34-LS0484I) 5.13.2025.pdf |
HFIN 5/16/2025 9:00:00 AM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 Version I Sponsor Statement (34-LS04841) 5.13.2025.pdf |
HFIN 5/16/2025 9:00:00 AM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 Version I Summary of Changes, Version N to I, (34-LS0484I) 5.13.2025.pdf |
HFIN 5/16/2025 9:00:00 AM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 Version I Supporting Document Definition of a Peace Officer (34-LS0484I) 5.13.2025.pdf |
HFIN 5/16/2025 9:00:00 AM |
HB 104 |
| HB 104 Version I Supporting Document, SOA Voter Registration Application (34-LS0484I).pdf |
HFIN 5/16/2025 9:00:00 AM |
HB 104 |