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." 3:32:45 PM Co-Chair Foster asked for an introduction of the bill. SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, CHAIR, SENATE RULES COMMITTEE, introduced the legislation. He stated that the bill had been in the works for many years, and included provisions from ten different bills that had been introduced by many different legislators and the governor's office. 3:34:29 PM AT EASE 3:35:56 PM RECONVENED Co-Chair Foster noted that the bill was large and substantial. His intent was to hear the introduction at present, and may come back later if possible. DAVID DUNSMORE, STAFF, SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, provided a PowerPoint presentation titled "SB 64 Election Reform" (copy on file). He began with slide 2, "SB 64 is a Comprehensive Election Reform Package": Cleans up Alaska's voter rolls Removes barriers to voting Faster and more transparent results reporting Ballot tracking barcodes for absentee ballots Bans the use of undisclosed deepfakes to influence elections Additional provisions to modernize Alaska's election laws Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 3, "SB 64 Includes Provisions from Bills Proposed by Republican, Democratic, and Independent Legislators in Recent Legislatures": 32nd Legislature • SB 39 (Sen. Shower) • HB 66 (Rep. Tuck) • HB 157 (Rep. Rasmussen) • HB 267 (Rep. Schrage) • HB 286/ SB 167 (Governor) 33rd Legislature • SB 1 (Sen. Shower) • SB 5 (Sen. Shower) • SB 7 (Sen. Shower) • SB 19 (Sen. Kawasaki) • HB 37 (Rep. Schrage) • HB 129 (House Judiciary) • SB 138 (Senate State Affairs) • HB 358 (Rep. Cronk) Mr. Dunsmore pointed to slide 4, "SB 64 includes several provisions from HB 63/ SB 70 introduced by the governor this year": Repeals the requirement that poll worker pay be set by regulation Repealing the requirement that absentee ballots that arrive after the deadline be counted during recounts Allowing cover sheets for absentee ballot packets to be submitted electronically Adding becoming ineligible for a PFD to the list of criteria that triggers a voter roll clean-up notice Beginning absentee ballot review 12 days before the election, governor originally propose 10 days but the Senate extended it to 12 days Stopping special needs ballots from being rejected due to mistakes by poll workers or representatives Requiring postpaid return envelopes for absentee ballots 3:39:06 PM Mr. Dunsmore turned to slide 5, "Voter registration list clean-up": In 2022 it was estimated that Alaska's voter registration list was equal to 106 percent of the adult population. SB 64 streamlines the process of removing voters who have left the state. Adds several indications of residency in another state to the list of factors that trigger notice and clarifies the definition of residency for voting. Voters who do not verify their registration are moved to inactive status. Inactive voters will not appear on precinct registers although their votes will be counted, and their registration reactivated if they vote or request an absentee ballot. 3:39:53 PM Mr. Dunsmore turned to slide 6, "Current Voter List Maintenance Process": • Every January DOE mails nonforwardable notices to voters who have not voted, updated their registration, or signed a petition within two general elections or who have had mail from DOE returned to sender. • If the voter does not respond confirming their address, DOE mails a second forwardable notice informing the voter that if they do not confirm their address within 45 days their registration will be inactivated. • Inactive voters registrations are canceled completely if the voter does not vote or contact DOE within two general elections. Mr. Dunsmore looked at slide 7, "Expedited process under SB 64": • DOE will mail a single forwardable notice requesting voters confirm their address within 45 days • SB 64 expands the number of voters who will be sent notices to include voters who there is evidence have claimed residency in another state • This process remains in compliance with the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act 3:41:17 PM Mr. Dunsmore moved to slide 8, "SB 64 requires notices be sent when DOE learns a voter?.": • Registers to vote in another state • Receives a driver's license in another state • Registers a vehicle in another state • Receives public assistance from another state • Serves on a jury in another state • Obtains a resident hunting or fishing license from in another state • Pays resident tuition for a public university in another state • Receives a residential property tax exemption in another state • Receives a benefit only available to residents of another stat 3:41:33 PM Mr. Dunsmore turned to slide 9, "Annual Review of Master Voter List": Requires DOE to hire a nationally recognized subject matter expert to review the voter registration list Expert will prepare an annual report to the Legislature making recommendations for improving Alaska's list management practices Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 10, "Clarifies the definition of residency and process to challenge a voter's residency": This bill clarifies that a voter's residence is a place where they have an articulable and reasonable plan to return to whenever they are absent. It also establishes that the presumption a voter's registered address is accurate can be rebutted by evidence that they reside at another location. 3:42:42 PM Mr. Dunsmore moved to slide 11, "Voter ID reforms": • Adds tribal IDs to the list of acceptable IDs for voting and voter registration • Removes hunting and fishing licenses from the list of acceptable identification • Requires that utility bills, government checks, paychecks, or other government documents must be issued within the last 60 days to be used as identification Representative Tomaszewski asked if a state or other picture ID was required to vote. Mr. Dunsmore replied that Alaska did not require a picture ID. Alaska's voter registration cards were not picture ID. Representative Tomaszewski asked if the bill included a provision stating that a person needed a photo ID when voting. Mr. Dunsmore replied in the negative. Representative Bynum asked whether the presentation would include current acceptable processes, and what was actually being removed from law. Mr. Dunsmore replied that there was not a slide with those specific ID requirements. The voter ID provisions showed up several places in statute. Representative Bynum would coordinate with staff on the alignment for proper preparation for the debate portion of the bill process. 3:45:37 PM Mr. Dunsmore moved to slide 12, "Codifies a procedure for voters to cancel their registration": Currently the Division of Elections will cancel a voter's registration if they request, but it is not required by statute. Voters would be allowed to cancel their registration in person or electronically. The process for cancelling a registration would be posted at polling places. Mr. Dunsmore addressed slide 13, "Updating election related crimes": • Adds opening or tampering with ballot envelopes or packages, and hacking election equipment or software to the crime of unlawful interference with an election • Adds knowingly disclosing results before the polls close or any confidential election information to the crime of election official misconduct in the first degree • Both of these crimes are class C felonies Mr. Dunsmore highlighted slide 14, "Codifies Data Sharing Between PFD Division and DOE": Data will be shared monthly for purposes of voter registration, confirming residence of a voter, identifying duplicate registrations, detecting voters who moved, and detecting ineligible voters Data will include addresses, whether the applicant opted out of voter registration, and names of people attesting to the applicant's residency SB 64 also codifies PFD applicant's right to opt-out of registering to vote or updating their registration 3:47:42 PM Mr. Dunsmore turned to slide 15, "SB 64 removes barriers to voting": Repeals the witness signature requirement for absentee by mail ballots Stops special needs ballots from being rejected because of mistakes by poll workers or representatives Creates a ballot curing process Requires secure ballot drop boxes be made available Requires postage paid return postage for absentee by mail envelopes Mr. Dunsmore discussed slide 16, "Repeals the witness signature requirement for by-mail ballots": • In the 2022 special primary election, 2,724 ballots were rejected because of a missing witness signature- 1.7 percent of all ballots cast. • Witness signature rejections disproportionately affected rural Alaska and military voters. • In District 38, 10.9 percent of all ballots cast were rejected for missing witness signatures in the 2022 special primary. • In the 2024 general election, District 18, which is mostly Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, had more by mail ballots rejected than any other district. • There is no indication of any misconduct with these rejected ballots. Representative Bynum // Senate minority members. He asked if the bill was compiled by a taskforce // Mr. Dunsmore responded that the provisions to repeal the witness signature // there had been a bill by a previous // He concluded slide 16 // 3:50:03 PM Mr. Dunsmore moved to slide 17, "The witness signature requirement provides no meaningful election integrity protection": • DOE has testified that they do not verify that witness signatures meet the statutory requirement that they be from a person at least 18. • The Division accepts as valid any mark made in the witness signature portion of the envelope. • There is no practical way for DOE to verify the identity and age of witnesses from other states and countries. • The absentee by-mail envelope does not even provide space for the witness to print their name or provide their date of birth. Co-Chair Foster would recess the meeting. He would keep public testimony open throughout the process. 3:52:08 PM RECESSED 5:59:10 PM RECONVENED Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony and would leave it open throughout the process. He intended to hear the bill the following day at both meetings. He wanted to get through the bill introduction during the current meeting and review fiscal notes. He realized there was some urgency to see the bill move during the current year while making sure to do the due diligence. He had been encouraged to set an amendment deadline for the following evening, but it was very soon. People seemed to be okay with setting an amendment deadline of Saturday morning at 9:00 a.m. Representative Allard wondered if the amendment deadline could be pushed to Saturday at noon. She had not been briefed on the bill. Co-Chair Foster stated he would set an amendment deadline of noon on Saturday with the intent of hearing the amendments and reporting the bill out later that day. 6:04:29 PM AT EASE 6:04:40 PM RECONVENED Co-Chair Foster reviewed the public testimony call in numbers. 6:05:36 PM AT EASE 7:14:48 PM RECONVENED Co-Chair Foster am deadline for Saturday at 12pm but requested submission of the amendments as soon as possible. 7:17:40 PM MELISSA PATACK, MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION, LOS ANGELES, CA (via teleconference), testified to propose an amendment section 64 of the bill starting on page 26. She referred to the "deceptive synthetic media section" of the bill. She remarked that the amendments aligned with laws adopted in several other states. She stated that the first amendment would add a timeframe to the provision, which was "within ninety days of an election." She furthered that in the paragraph that exempted certain services, that other applications were also exempted as long as they were not the creator of the synthetic deceptive media. Representative Stapp remarked that the synthetic media would ban "memes", and felt that he was struggling with the intention of the section. Ms. Patack responded that that parody and satire were protected by the first amendment, but remarked that there may be synthetic portrayal in the future. Representative Bynum asked the testifier to follow up with her suggestions via email. 7:22:52 PM DAVID JOHNSON, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), did not like the bill. He said he was knowledgeable about voting, and remarked that dead people were voting. He stated that the problem was not solved, and felt that the hand count portion was excluded. He stressed that correct numbers were important. He asked to look at a logic and accuracy test, and felt that the machines could be breached. He felt that there was no transparency, and stressed that non- citizens should not be voting 7:29:28 PM Representative Allard asked him to email her his remarks. Mr. Johnson said the email would not work. He would email Senator Shower. Representative Stapp asked if he considered the bill an election reform bill or a voter fraud bill. Mr. Johnson responded that no one was held accountable for voting. 7:31:32 PM ALEX KOPLIN, SELF, HOMER (via teleconference), felt opposite as the previous testifier and supported elections, and felt that the division was doing a good job. He appreciated the collaboration and compromise of the legislators. Representative Stapp appreciated the comments on incrementalism. 7:36:14 PM Mr. Dunsmore continued the presentation on page 18: Alaska Law Generally Allows Self-Certification of Documents, and the Division of Elections Accepts Self- Certification of Petition Booklets Representative Allard asked about it disenfranchising military voters. Mr. Dunsmore replied that in the previous general election, the district that had the highest number of rejected absentee ballots was a district with mostly military voters. Representative Allard asked what was the proof or statistics from the Division of Elections on that assertion of disenfranchisement. She wondered whether it was because of lack of witness signature on the ballot. Mr. Dunsmore responded in the affirmative. Representative Allard thought they should still do the witness signature. Representative Stapp asked what mechanism could be utilized instead of the witness signature. Mr. Dunsmore responded that it would be the same as the current mechanism for special needs ballots and questioned ballots, which was to verify the identifiers provided by the voters. He furthered that the Senate Finance Committee added the sharing of the names of those who had attested for availability for investigation. Representative Stapp wondered whether there was a link between permanent fund dividend (PFD) fraud and voter fraud. He asked for an elaboration on that mechanism. Mr. Dunsmore replied that it was the data sharing on the PFD application. 7:41:20 PM Representative Allard asked about active duty military members, and the assertion of the lack of witness signature. Mr. Dunsmore responded that the Division of Elections only provided the data at the district level. Representative Allard asked why the largest city requested that there were signatures on the ballot, and why the state would counter that request. Mr. Dunsmore responded that it did not require a witness signature. He stated that the municipality used signature verification software. He stated that the fiscal notes were cost-prohibitive on that software. Representative Allard surmised that the Municipality of Anchorage did not support witness signatures on ballots. Mr. Dunsmore replied that he did not know how recent a change that took place. Representative Allard disagreed. She queried what were the security measures in place to ensure that someone was not forging a signature. Mr. Dunsmore replied that the voter was required to provide an identifier that would be verified in the ballot process. He stated that the process was already in place. Representative Allard surmised that there was nothing added as security for the absentee ballot. Mr. Dunsmore responded that there had been no evidence of the witness signature providing election integrity. He shared that there was no verification of witness signature. 7:45:43 PM Representative Allard asked what the proof was that there was no proof of fraud. Mr. Dunsmore responded that the last point was that there had not been any evidence of fraud being prevented but there was evidence of voters ballots being thrown out for a technical error on the witness signature. Representative Allard asked why it would not be stricter for the Division of Elections to implement verification of the witness signature. Mr. Dunsmore responded that the law required that the witness be over 18 years old. He stated that there was no possibility on the envelope for the witness to provide further verification measures. Representative Allard stressed that other states did enforce the witness verification. She stressed that voters were disenfranchised, because those individuals were not notified that their ballot was determined to be a rejection. Mr. Dunsmore responded that it was in the bill included ballot curing, and the division did sent people a letter when their letter was thrown out. Representative Allard asked how they knew it was voter fraud if they did not check the signature. Mr. Dunsmore responded that ballots would not be rejected for the lack of witness signature, but would be rejected for an identifier. Representative Allard thought it would allow people to commit voter fraud due to the bill, because of the lack of witness signature. 7:50:19 PM Representative Bynum wondered if there were options for voters to have their vote be counted if their ballot was rejected by the Division of Elections. Mr. Dunsmore replied that the division determined that to be a prohibition against voting twice. Representative Bynum asked about the signature verification issue, and argued that the fiscal note issue was really a matter of policy. He wondered whether there were discussions about adding further witness signature verification requirements in the law. Mr. Dunsmore did not think that discussions came up in the Senate. Representative Bynum felt that the issue was more important that the fiscal note. He wondered about the design of the ballots. 7:55:46 PM Mr. Dunsmore asked if he was talking about the ballot envelope or the ballot itself. Representative Bynum replied that he was concerned with the ballot envelope. Mr. Dunsmore replied there were no specifics in statute about the envelope. Representative Bynum felt that the instruction process could be clearer for voters. Mr. Dunsmore stated that there were no specifications about the ballot envelope in statute. 7:57:44 PM Co-Chair Josephson expressed concern about the rejected ballots due to the lack of witness signature. He wondered whether there were circumstances where there was a witness signature, that was never verified, and the ballot was accepted as a valid ballot. He wondered whether a ballot was rejected due to a lack of witness signature, even though the person was an actual person submitting a ballot. Mr. Dunsmore agreed, and replied in the affirmative. Co-Chair Josephson looked forward to correcting that issue. Representative Jimmie wondered how someone be able to obtain a required witness signature from an adult 18 or older to validate their ballot. Mr. Dunsmore responded that the youth ambassador program was available, but they would not meet the statutory requirements for a witness signature. Mr. Dunsmore replied that there was not an attempt to enforce the witness signature verification, because a witness may not be a registered voter. 8:01:39 PM Representative Allard wondered if there was a way to investigate voter fraud through the division. 8:02:02 PM CAROL BEECHER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ELECTIONS, OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR (via teleconference), the Division of Elections did not investigate, rather there were issues referred to the Department of Law to make the decision whether to investigate. Representative Allard asked if there was input by the division that the witness signature should be removed from statute. Ms. Beecher responded that the division did not make policy, but rather commented on the outcome of the policy. Representative Allard wondered whether the witness signature was beneficial to the ballot submission. She queried the cost of the witness signature. Ms. Beecher responded that the cost of the witness verification for Anchorage, which was estimated to be $1 million for each witness verification machines. She restated that it was not the role of the division to make policy statements. Representative Allard asked if she personally thought that the witness signature helped or did not help the Division of Elections. Ms. Beecher responded that the witness signature was in statute and had been for many years. She stressed that there had been no evidence of fraud. Representative Allard asked if fraud had been committed with the witness signature. Ms. Beecher responded that they had turned over what was something untoward on a witness signature, which resulted in prosecution. 8:07:19 PM Representative Allard asked if it was $1 million for each machine. Ms. Beecher responded that it was based on the cost of machines that the municipality had, so the regions would be the ones that had to have the machine. Representative Allard remarked on the large cost difference between $5 million and $12 million. Representative Bynum requested the number of machines in the Municipality of Anchorage. Ms. Beecher responded that there was only one machine. Representative Bynum felt that not having any connecting information could be problematic. He wondered whether the ballot curing would solve the problem of an incomplete ballot. Mr. Dunsmore responded in the affirmative. He felt that there would still be a requirement of the voter to take a proactive step. Representative Bynum asked what the timeframe was for ballots to be sent out. Mr. Dunsmore responded that the ballot could be mailed 45 days before the election. 8:11:50 PM Representative Jimmie stated that in rural Alaska in 2022 there was 13.74 percent rejection rate. She stressed that it was significantly higher than the state average. She felt that it indicated disenfranchisement. Mr. Dunsmore agreed. Representative Allard remarked that the rural communities could "count the tapes" and "send the tapes." She surmised that there could be an adjustment date, and felt that the deadline should be changed to the day of the election. Mr. Dunsmore replied that votes cast in precincts in mostly rural districts did a hand count on site. He remarked that there were not subsequent counts, but there were several villages that were not included in the counts. Representative Allard asked if most ballots were impacted due to lack of witness signatures. Mr. Dunsmore replied in the affirmative. Representative Allard asked why they could not get witness signatures. 8:15:11 PM Representative Jimmie stressed that the weather impacted the transportation of the ballots. Representative Allard surmised that most rural communities voted by absentee ballot. Mr. Dunsmore responded that there were some in person precincts, but some villages did not have access to a precinct. He also stressed the problem of staffing polling places. Representative Allard felt that the state was failing the constituents. She asked how many people in rural voted by absentee, due to not having reasonable access to a polling place. Mr. Dunsmore replied that he did not know the data. Representative Allard asked if she could pose the question to Ms. Beecher. Ms. Beecher responded that she would follow up with the specific, and shared that there were permanent absentee voting sites. Representative Allard asked if voters could call in and vote on the phone. Ms. Beecher responded that they could not vote over the phone but could vote via fax. Representative Allard wondered whether they voted on sample ballots. Ms. Beecher would follow up on that question. 8:20:28 PM Representative Bynum commented that the election system was overall very complicated for many different reasons. Representative Jimmie commented that absentee voting was important in rural areas. Representative Allard was concerned that the maker of the bill was using the military as an excuse, but felt that it did not line up with her percentages. Mr. Dunsmore would verify the information. 8:24:05 PM Representative Hannan asserted that there were a variety of ways for Alaskans to participate in voting. Ser husband had never voted in person because he was always commercial fishing and it was not possible. Representative Johnson was nervous that they could do due diligence they needed to do in the next few days on the bill, and did not think there was enough time to work on it. Co-Chair Foster stated that he would recess the meeting until 9 the next morning. Co-Chair Foster reviewed the meeting agenda for the following morning. SB 64 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. [Although he said adjourned, he intended to say recessed. The meeting was treated as recessed. The meeting reconvened the following morning at 9:13 a.m. See separate minutes dated 5/15/25 for detail.]