Legislature(2017 - 2018)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/28/2018 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
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 | |
| SB192 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 192 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 154 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE BILL NO. 192
"An Act relating to the confidentiality of voters'
addresses; and relating to the fees charged by the
division of elections for providing a copy of the
state's master voter registration list or a copy of
the list of individuals who voted in an election."
9:02:47 AM
BRITTANY HARTMAN, STAFF, SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON, explained
the original intent of the bill. She stated that the
constitution outlined that the right of the people to
privacy was recognized and shall not be infringed. She
stressed that the constitutions allowed Alaskans the right
to privacy and prioritized victims' rights. She felt that
the state was not living up to its own standards, and
should be leading the nation on privacy and victims'
rights. She shared that some were not happy that their
addresses were being sold by the state to the general
public. She remarked that some were choosing not to
register to vote, because of the lack of privacy of their
information. She stated that there were specific requests
related to public safety and privacy. She shared that there
was an individual who had escaped persecution and
harassment by her family. She chose not to register to vote
due to fear of being found by her family. She stated the
after years of not voting she and her husband chose to
register to vote. She stated that within two weeks of
registering to vote, her family had found her and caused
harassment. That harassment was from someone considered
unstable, however they did not want to file charges against
that family member.
Senator Olson wondered whether there were items in the
House district that may not be questionable. Ms. Hartman
stated that the original bill specifically mentioned the
address.
Co-Chair MacKinnon announced that she was the sponsor, but
she asked that the chair of the State Affairs Committee
address the committee substitute.
9:08:02 AM
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, MEMBER, SENATE STATE AFFAIRS
COMMITTEE, explained an amendment that he offered in the
State Affairs Committee. He did not agree with the original
approach in the bill. He felt that there were ways a
person's information could be available. He remarked that
there were two tasks on a voter roll. He noted that one was
to see that a person was a credible resident, but he felt
that individuals should also verify that address. He
remarked that there was a desire to be a resident of the
state for many different reasons. He noticed that other
states had an address confidentiality program, which was
incorporated as an amendment into the bill. He stated that
it was asked to be housed in the Department of Law. He
shared that a person who had a protective order for
domestic violence, stalking, or sexual assault could apply
for the confidentiality program. He remarked that the
person could have a broad confidentiality protection. He
understood that it did not answer the question of the
person who chose not to seek that protection.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether a victim of stalking
could simply report the incident to law enforcement, or
whether the victim needed a court order.
9:13:47 AM
JORDAN SCHILLING, STAFF, SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, replied that
eligibility for the program did not require a conviction.
Rather, the crime must be reported to a criminal justice
agency.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the victim had to
reapply every three years. Senator Coghill replied in the
affirmative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that she served as the executive
director at Standing Together Against Rape (STAR). She
remarked that there was an issue of whether a victim wanted
to report to an agency. She felt that the reapplication
process required a revictimization process. She agreed that
the intent was to solve one problem, and not the overall
problem of data collection. Senator Coghill responded that
that he agreed on the major issue. He wanted to determine a
way to provide safety.
9:20:22 AM
Mr. Schilling looked at Section 4:
Creates the Alaska Address Confidentiality Program
under the Department of Law. An individual in this
program may use an address designated by the
department as the individual's own address, designate
the department to receive mail, legal process and
voter registration or absentee ballots on behalf of
the individual, and provide that the department
forward the mail, legal process, and voter materials
to the individuals actual mailing address.
An individual is eligible for this program completes
an application for this section, is a resident of the
state, and must have their incident reported to a
criminal justice agency.
For application requirements, see subsection (c).
The program requires: a participant be enrolled for 3
years, develop a safety plan in consultation with the
department, the department must notify all state and
municipal agencies and units of government that the
individual is a participant in, may re-enroll every 3
years.
9:28:06 AM
Senator von Imhof surmised that the program could be
expensive. Mr. Schilling replied that he had not seen a
fiscal note, but had some preliminary discussions with the
Department of Law. He shared that the bill outlined that
the department may not charge a fee to apply for or
participate in the program.
Senator von Imhof stated that it was free to the victim,
but not free to the state. She wondered what would happen
if someone in the program was sharing their information.
Mr. Schilling replied that it would defeat the purpose of
their participation in the address confidentiality program.
He stated that some states include provisions in the
application. He looked at page 4, line 2, which highlighted
the concern.
9:30:57 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the Department of Law
was trained to develop safety plans for victims. Mr.
Schilling replied that there were conversations with Alaska
Network on Domestic Violence, and they generally supported
confidentiality programs. He stated that there was a
concern about that plan.
Co-Chair MacKinnon felt that Department of Law was not
trained to provide safety plans. She looked at page 3,
lines 25 and 26. She wondered whether there was a concern
about the lack of conviction. She noted that the language
required an acknowledgement and notification of other
people of a possible issue. She wondered whether there was
an exposure to other problems in the state. Mr. Schilling
replied that page 3, line 10 described the eligibility
provisions. He stated that a victim or parent/guardian of a
minor child who was a victim stalking, domestic violence,
or sexual assault; or a crime in another jurisdiction with
elements substantially similar to stalking, domestic
violence, or sexual assault that was reported to a criminal
justice agency. He stated that the requirement was a
report.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the applicant must
notify their employer, if they work for a state agency.
Mr. Schilling replied that it was about whether an
individual worked for a state agency, so it was important
to note that to the Department of Law.
9:36:38 AM
ALPHEUS BULLARD, COUNSEL, LEGISLATIVE LEGAL (via
teleconference), introduced himself.
Co-Chair MacKinnon queried the identification of a state or
municipal employee that there could be an alleged charge.
Mr. Bullard replied that the intent was to ensure that a
participant's actual address was not provided to a person
against whom a complaint was directed.
Senator von Imhof felt that the problem was the collecting
and selling of data available on a public website. She
wondered whether there was a way to apply confidentiality
broadly across the state. Senator Coghill replied that it
was a problem that should be pondered moving forward. He
hoped to fix a problem for people that felt that they
needed protection for safety reasons.
9:41:41 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon stressed that the P.O. box allowed for a
stalker to wait at the post office. She understood that it
was a complex issue, and there should be a larger
conversation about the complexities of confidentiality with
the internet.
9:46:59 AM
Senator Micciche remarked that the original bill was about
the voter registration, but now the bill had expanded to be
more about witness protection. He felt that the issue could
not be solved in the legislative session.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that the application for the
permanent fund dividend resulted in automatic voter
registration.
Senator Micciche struggled with a reason that one would not
have a right to privacy. He felt that voter rolls were a
very useful tool in research. He stressed that there was a
way to find someone who was not registered to vote. He felt
that there were now two different efforts within the bill.
Senator Coghill thanked the chair for discussing the issue.
9:51:52 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon wanted to get the eleven senators in
support of the issue.
Senator von Imhof remarked that she wanted to hear from the
Attorney General and Department of Law about the post
office box clearing house.
9:54:09 AM
CARMEN LOWRY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA NETWORK OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, originally offered their support of the
bill, because a person should register to vote without
their personal information be shared. She stated that she
was also in support of the amendment, and felt that there
should be further conversations about the Department of
Law's preparation for safety planning. She felt that there
should be an examination of more application opportunities.
9:56:26 AM
LYNETTE CLARK, SELF, FOX (via teleconference), announced
that she was a "strong constitutionalist." She agreed that
there should be a bigger conversation in order to initiate
what was going to work.
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.
9:58:37 AM
ED SNIFFEN, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, CIVIL DIVISION,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW, introduced himself. He discussed the
bill's possible impacts to the DOL. He remarked that there
was an attempt to understand the impacts, and whether the
department was a sophisticated mail forwarding service for
the program. He remarked that the bill allowed for DOL to
receive and forward mail for those that qualify for the
program. He shared that there were many variables related
to the program. He remarked that there may be a concern
related to property tax records. He stressed that Alaska
was unique, and stressed that one model for Alaska may not
work.
10:08:02 AM
Senator Stevens expressed concern about the alternate
address. He wondered how it would be determined that the
voter was in the correct district. Mr. Sniffen replied
there would be a designated address to track the program.
Senator Stevens expressed more concern about the election
process to ensure that they were voting in the right
district.
Co-Chair MacKinnon replied that the information was
available to election workers when a person votes. She
stated that the two versions of the bill were very
different.
10:12:09 AM
Vice-Chair Bishop queried the anticipated target impact in
Co-Chair MacKinnon's version of the bill.
Co-Chair MacKinnon replied that it was a continuum. She
stated that people that use data were concern that all
people would opt out of sharing their data when registering
to vote.
10:12:46 AM
Vice-Chair Bishop wanted to see an estimate of those who
would use the program.
Co-Chair MacKinnon shared that there was a huge number of
Alaskans who were victims of domestic violence and sexual
assault, but did not know if they would all want to opt
out. She felt that the Division of Elections could answer
those specific questions.
Senator Micciche felt that voter initiatives were further
complicated on the election registrations. He stressed that
people were registered to vote upon applying for the PFD.
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that she had voted against the
initiative, because there was an unintended consequence for
those that chose not to vote for personal reasons.
10:17:54 AM
Senator Micciche expressed support for a working group to
discuss the issue.
Senator Stevens agreed.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether a working group would
replace movement of the bill.
Co-Chair MacKinnon felt that the Judiciary Committee should
be a part of the development and conversation.
Senator von Imhof wanted to take time to consider the
working group.
10:21:08 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that she wanted to ask the
Department of Law to take a pause on the issue.
Vice-Chair Bishop felt that Department of Law was not the
proper place to take the program.
Co-Chair MacKinnon felt that a working group would explore
where the program should be housed.
Senator Olson appreciating the articulation of the main
goal of the legislation. He wanted to hear the main
priority of Senator Coghill, because he felt that there
were two different paths addressed in the two versions of
the bill.
Senator Micciche sensed that the Department of Law should
cease from doing work. He stressed that this would be a
massive project.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wanted to know who would have access to
the voter list. She queried a range of a ball park of
consideration of the cost of the program.
10:25:49 AM
AT EASE
10:28:19 AM
RECONVENED
Mr. Sniffen deferred to Mr. Spencer.
10:28:37 AM
DAN SPENCER, DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT
OF LAW, stressed that developing a number would require
many different parts. He felt that the cost would begin at
a minimum of $200,000 to initiate the program. He explained
that the amendment said that all mail would be delivered,
so it did not place restrictions. He remarked that
restricting that mail would be through regulation or an
amendment. He remarked that there would still be no
estimates of participants. There would be a minimum
appropriation, but there would probably be supplemental
requests.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wanted to establish a working group. She
stated that the issue was about the change from $50 to
$1000 for a statewide voter list. She asked that the work
on the Department of Law fiscal not cease until further
notice.
Senator Olson queried the reason for proposing the
amendment.
10:32:19 AM
Senator Coghill stated that he struggled with the original
idea for a "no trespassing sign for any cause." He felt
that his version was a more narrow and protective solution
to confidentiality. He remarked that he did not have the
time for the due diligence to find a solution, because he
struggled with the bill. He remarked that there could be a
creation of more problems.
10:36:40 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon wanted all senators to support the idea,
but she understood that it could not be fully solved. She
stressed that the fee schedule changed in the committee
substitute.
Senator John Coghill agreed to the dialog at the table.
Co-Chair MacKinnon remarked that the lowest bar would only
limit access to the voter database. She understood that
data was available for sale through various platforms. She
stressed that the original intent was to encourage voter
participation. She stressed that the original intent did
not solve privacy issues.
10:42:13 AM
Senator Coghill announced that there could be a requirement
every time that someone changed address. He struggled with
"any cause", so he asked for a higher bar. He was open for
a bigger conversation.
Senator Stevens hoped to hear from the director of the
Division of Elections.
Co-Chair MacKinnon announced that there were conversations
with the Division of Elections. The consensus was that the
efforts were doable.
Co-Chair MacKinnon wanted comment about safeguards and
fraud. She stated that a committee substitute would include
a process to review the safeguards.
Vice-Chair Bishop stated that he would like to have a
conversation with Department of Labor and Workforce
Development (DLWD).
10:46:41 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that there would be the same
access between state and local governments.
Co-Chair MacKinnon stressed that the intent of the bill was
to protect the voters' rights, and to stop the selling of
the voter registration data.
Senator Coghill stated that both addresses would be
removed, but the precinct would be included. He felt that
anyone could cross reference those items.
Co-Chair MacKinnon stressed that the stalker could go into
a neighborhood with the alternate address.
10:51:31 AM
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that the afternoon meeting was
cancelled. She discussed the following day's agenda.
SB 192 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 192 Sectional Analysis ver. J.pdf |
SFIN 3/28/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 192 |
| SB 192 Sponsor Statement ver J.pdf |
SFIN 3/28/2018 9:00:00 AM |
SB 192 |