MINUTES OF MEETING

      ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND PROCEDURES

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      March 16, 1993

 

 

 

The Assembly Committee on Elections and Procedures was called to order by Chairman Myrna T. Williams at 3:40 p.m., Tuesday, March 16, 1993, in Room 119 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda, Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Mrs. Myrna T. Williams, Chairman

      Mr. Robert E. Price, Vice Chairman

      Mr. Joseph E. Dini, Jr.

      Mrs. Jan Evans

      Mr.  Val Z. Garner

      Mr. David E. Humke

      Mrs. Joan A. Lambert

      Mr. William A. Petrak

      Mr. Gene T. Porter

      Mr. Robert M. Sader

      Mr. Scott Scherer

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

      None

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

      None

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Mr. Robert Erickson/Research Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau

      Mr. John R. Crossley/Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

      Secretary of State Cheryl Lau

      Ms. Barbara Reed/Douglas County Clerk Treasurer

      Mr. Gerard R. Fitzgerald, Las Vegas

      Mr. John Ponticello/Second Vice Chair Democratic Party, and Cochairman of the Legislative Support Committee of the Democratic Party, Las Vegas

      Ms. Mona Snape, Las Vegas

      Ms. Marlene Henderson/Washoe County Registrar of Voters

      Mr. Timothy Madden, Las Vegas

 

Mrs. Williams opened the meeting by welcoming the people in Las Vegas who would be participating through teleconferencing. 

 

AB 145:     Makes various changes relating to elections.

 

When AB 145 was written, she stated, the bill contained a number of drafting errors due to miscommunication with the bill drafters.  A major amendment was recommended, the amendment was adopted and a first reprint was done (Exhibit C).  The people in Las Vegas should have a copy of the reprint, she added.  Mrs. Williams pronounced the amendment clarified the intent of many items discussed.

 

Mrs. Williams welcomed Secretary of State Cheryl Lau. 

 

Mrs. Williams, for clarification of discussion, read section by section AB 145 with Proposed Amendment No. 37, giving explanations for each section.  She then informed the committee a vote would not be taken on AB 145.

 

Secretary of State Cheryl Lau greeted the committee from Las Vegas.  Although SB 250 was an election reform bill prepared by her office which awaited hearings by the Senate Government Affairs Committee, she was very pleased to see another election reform bill moving through the Assembly.  She found very limited duplication between the two measures. 

 

Nevadans could only be better served if the 1993 Legislature enacted the best reform possible, and she hoped AB 145 and SB 250 would serve as vehicles for change.  The legislation gave both parties and both houses of the legislature an opportunity to participate in this important process. 

 

Secretary of State Lau referred to the first reprint of AB 145 and thanked Chairman of the committee, Myrna Williams, for incorporating the Secretary of State's suggestions, particularly on former sections 2, 10, 11, 13 and with the word districts.  Secretary of State Lau spoke generally in favor of AB 145.  She urged the committee to adopt Section 2 of AB 145 and asked the committee to be aware some of Nevada's rural counties did not have daily papers.

 

Secretary of State Lau was pleased with Section 7 of AB 145 outlawing the bounty for deputy registrars.  However, the counties could not be forced to incur the hourly expense as written, she proclaimed.  Secretary of State Lau requested the committee to review Section 7.  Requirements of Section 9, which enabled a voter to be located and which identified errors, was an excellent addition to Nevada laws, she reported.  Secretary of State Lau expressed her support of Section 14 provisions for establishment of penalties.  Voters wanted to see real reforms, she discovered in her town hall meetings, and county clerks needed workable laws. 

 

She concluded her testimony by asking the committee to continue to consult with her office and election officials.

 

Mrs. Williams addressed Secretary of State Lau and reflected a difference of opinion was rare between them.  Mrs. Williams then expressed her appreciation of their ability to work together.  Mrs. Williams spoke to Secretary of State Lau confirming Douglas County did not have a daily paper, and, therefore, an amendment would have to be drawn.  She called attention to a point in existing law which required publication of voter lists 75 days before a primary (Section 12, Page 7, Line 4).  Mrs. Williams said Section 12, 1. (a) would be corrected.

 

Secretary of State Lau informed Mrs. Williams other than Section 12, 1. (a), a very good job had been done with AB 145.

 

Mrs. Williams then asked the committee not to internally discuss AB 145 in order for the people of Las Vegas and Carson City to be able to voice their opinions before the committee discussed the bill.  The committee had no objections.

 

Ms. Barbara Reed, Douglas County Clerk Treasurer, who also represented several rural counties, addressed the committee concerning AB 145.  She commented Section 5 was fine as it was written.  Regarding Section 6, absentee voters had in the past spoken with Ms. Reed concerning their privacy.  Women who were home alone were concerned someone would know, resulting in some hesitation about voting if the fact was public record.  The voters did not have concerns if the information was made available to the candidates or a designee of the candidates because the information would be used for election purposes.  Voters feared having their absence known because of the possibility of criminal activity occurring at their homes.

 

Ms. Reed had concern with Section 7 because cost to the county would be considerable.  She also did not believe Section 7 would eliminate the voter fraud problem. 

 

At this point, Mrs. Williams interjected suggesting the minimal amount for county clerks be left in, and hourly wage or salary be used by political parties.  Ms. Reed felt Mrs. Williams' suggestion would be better for the county budget, but was not sure the voter fraud concern would be alleviated.  Mrs. Williams expressed hope other sections of AB 145 would deal with voter fraud.

 

The chair recognized Mrs. Lambert who asked Ms. Reed if deputy registrars were now hired under the ten cents per voter registration.  Ms. Reed responded Douglas County had about 110 deputy registrars, all of whom were volunteers.

 

In reply to Mr. Scherer's query, referencing Section 6, for the specific information included in the application for an absentee ballot, Ms. Reed replied the application contained name of the voter, political party, physical address, and mailing address to which the application was mailed.  Ms. Reed said for internal purposes and because prioritization was necessary, absentee voters were asked when they would be leaving town.

 

Mr. Scherer then asked Ms. Reed if she created a list of people who had requested absentee ballots which would not have personal information on the list.  Ms. Reed explained a list was created and was in the computer, and the list showed the address the ballot would be mailed to.  If the mailing address was not a local address, obviously the voter would be absent from the residence at election time.  She added the list created did show the mailing address, but the applications contained all the other information.

 

Ms. Reed continued with her testimony on AB 145.  She had no problems with Section 8 and thought Section 9 was excellent.  She questioned Section 10 and noted each registered voter was currently provided a stub which was not a duplicate of his Affidavit of Registration, but the stub showed the voter's name, residence, political party, date the Affidavit was filled out, and, if a deputy registrar registered the voter, the deputy registrar's signature was shown.  Ms. Reed asked if stubs provided to registered voters would serve as the duplicate copy.

Mrs. Williams replied the stub would not be sufficient because uniform registration throughout Nevada was needed.  Greater accountability would be achieved with the entire form, she stressed.

 

Ms. Reed questioned whether the triplicate copy would replace the stub, and Mrs. Williams confirmed it would.

 

Regarding Section 11, Ms. Reed communicated a voter registration card was a good suggestion.  She also felt the address should be verified when mail was returned to the County Clerk.  Currently address verification was done by a check of the tax rolls and by calling the individual, she pointed out. 

 

Small counties were required to publish the list of registered voters.  Therefore, Section 12 did not apply to Douglas or to the other rural counties, she noted.

 

Ms. Reed thanked the committee for Section 13 as the fifth Saturday.  At this time, Mrs. Williams stated her intention to request deletion of Section 13 relating to the dates because more information had been received by her office, and those dates were not conclusive.  Another bill existed which dealt with the close of registration, Mrs. Williams related, therefore, this could be deleted from AB 145 and inserted in AB 214 so election reform would not be delayed while additional information was gathered.

 

Ms. Reed commended the committee for Section 14, and, in closing, indicated the counties would support her comments and probably would share her concerns. 

 

The Chair recognized Timothy Madden of Las Vegas but Mr. Madden declined to testify at that time. 

 

Mr. G. R. Fitzgerald, Las Vegas, addressed the committee and asked permission to testify regarding recall.  Mrs. Williams said his testimony was acceptable, but she informed Mr. Fitzgerald, recall was not addressed in AB 145 and suggested the appropriate time for discussion would be at the time a bill which addressed recall was heard.

 

Mr. Fitzgerald testified on a specific instance of recall.

 

Mrs. Williams recognized the committee was dealing with election matters, but she pointed out, recall was not specifically related to AB 145.  She was aware recall would be in another bill, and the committee would address recall at another time.  She informed the people in Las Vegas the committee would try to teleconference when the recall bill was heard.  Mrs. Williams then asked for testimony from those people wishing to address AB 145.  Mr. Fitzgerald asked for a notice to be sent to his home when a date for the recall meeting was confirmed.

 

Mr. John Ponticello, Second Vice Chair of the Democratic Party and Cochairman of the Legislative Support Committee of the Democratic Party, stated the purpose of his testimony was to express the democratic party's viewpoints and ideas.

 

The democratic party's main concern was registering voters and making it as easy as possible, he said.  The party also wished to help restore integrity to the system.  He clarified Section 7 said political parties could have registrars on the payroll on an hourly basis.  However, Mrs. Williams corrected, and added political parties or public interest organizations.  He felt the bounty system had brought harm and should be eliminated.

 

Mr. Ponticello added his understanding was not one fraudulent vote was cast in Clark County.  Mrs. Williams agreed with his understanding.

 

Ms. Mona Snape, Las Vegas, testified regarding AB 145.  She wanted to see Section 2 changed to notify the voters who had voted and had returned the ballot.  Mrs. Williams said the committee shared her concern, and language would be adjusted.

 

Ms. Snape then discussed Section 5.  Mrs. Williams stated the intent of Section 5 was to ensure poll watchers would not interfere with the voters while the voters were voting, and to make it easier for the poll watchers to perform their jobs.  Section 5 was not intended to disallow poll watchers at the polls.  Ms. Snape then asked for this language to be inserted and for the bill to be specific.  Ms. Williams stated the Reprint, which was just delivered to the committee, should be written to ensure the poll watchers would be at the polls.

 

Regarding Section 7, Ms. Snape discussed the bounty program and the need for control of the program.  She suggested using a four part noncarbon form.  She cited language did not specify "only deputy authorized deputized persons" should be used as registrars.  One of the biggest problems in Las Vegas was the use of "undeputized unregistered" persons, she conveyed to the committee.  She felt the law must be made clear. Referring to Section 8, Ms. Snape advised Clark County was stressed using current time frames.  Mrs. Williams informed Ms. Snape Section 8 would be discussed in committee.  The 90 days should ease the burden of work on registrars, she clarified.

 

Ms. Snape continued, under Section 9, #8, she suggested using a four part form for registration which would also be used instead of a voter registration card (Section 11) which she was against.

Ms. Snape spoke against Section 9 and Section 11, and said mail service in Clark County was very bad.

 

Mrs. Williams agreed with her, but said the registration could not be canceled.  A challenge had to be issued.  The voter would have to prove the challenge was invalid.  Section #9 made certain prior to the challenge being issued, every effort was made to ensure the challenge was legitimate.

 

In Section 14, Ms. Snape would like to see a fine and forfeiture against election and public officials who did not perform their jobs properly.  She suggested forfeiture of public office and prohibition from public employment for one year.  She did not feel deputy field registrars or private persons should be treated differently from public employees.  Mrs. Williams rebutted public officials and election board members were also private citizens and subject to the same laws as everyone else, and she stated Section 14 would be discussed.

 

Ms. Snape, concluding her remarks, stated she would like to see a provision added to AB 145 to help the Clark County recall.  She believed legislation was imperative.

 

Ms. Marlene Henderson, Registrar of Voters, Washoe County, spoke before the committee (Exhibit D).  She agreed with Sections 3 and 5.  A discussion ensued between Mrs. Williams and Ms. Henderson regarding effect of Section 5 on voters at the polls. Ms. Henderson acknowledged poll workers cooperated by not interfering with election board workers during busy times.  She explained her opposition to paying an hourly wage to deputy registrars because no tracking system of their work was possible.

 

Mrs. Williams reiterated some areas in AB 145 had to be worked on.  The intent was the political parties or political action committees would be allowed to hire at an hourly wage or a salary as long as no bonuses and no incentives were paid, and nothing was involved which related to numbers of persons or partisan numbers. 

 

In response to Ms. Henderson's request for clarification of Section 8, Mrs. Williams repeated Section 8 language would have to be refined.  Section 8 was intended for voters who moved within the county and if voters moved from one area to another within a 90 day window, voters could remain registered at their previous residence in order not to be thrust into a new situation and new people.

 

Ms. Henderson noted a law existed addressing a voter's move before close of registration and after close of registration.  Mrs. Williams said the statute did not provide adequate time for some of the people, and it created problems.  Section 8 would be discussed, she reiterated.

 

Mr. Sader believed Section 8 indicated if a voter moved, the voter would have to vote in the old precinct even if the voter preferred voting in the new precinct.  Mrs. Williams then requested Mr. Sader modify Section 8 language to its original intent.

 

Discussion ensued between Mr. Scherer and Ms. Henderson regarding Section 8 and whether county clerks communicated with each other when a voter moved from one county to another.  Ms. Henderson explained a voter was asked the last place he was registered, and a card was mailed to the previous county saying the voter had registered with the new county and asking the voter's former county office to cancel the registration.

 

Mrs. Williams interjected at this point and explained in all election matters, a voter when registering was swearing under penalty of perjury.  The bill was intended to further protect registrars, county clerks and voters, and to assure accountability was documented and unfounded accusations would not occur.  Mrs. Williams further discussed the severity of the penalty and contended it was necessary because people had forgotten the importance of a person's right to vote and the right to vote legitimately.  She declared people had the right to vote and not be interfered with or have the system subverted.

Ms. Henderson and Mrs. Williams then discussed methods of accountability by the deputy registrars, and Mrs. Williams reiterated a need for protecting volunteer deputy registrars.  Ms. Henderson referenced Section 10 and gave a scenario of missing information on an affidavit which led Mrs. Williams to confirm use of the affidavit or application in duplicate form.  Ms. Henderson voiced her approval of a voter registration card in Section 11 of AB 145.  She described the method used by her office to keep current address files.

 

In response, Mrs. Williams clarified the reasons for Section 11, and specifically mentioned Clark County where mail was not delivered to people even though in many cases the mail was properly addressed, resulting in a situation where voters were erroneously declared illegitimate voters.  Challenges were automatically issued against those people, she continued, and some of the people who were denied their right to vote and who received challenges were older, and others were intimidated by the challenges which contained penalty of perjury language.

 

Ms. Williams announced not everyone on the committee had the opportunity to go through the Reprint of AB 145, but since the teleconference was scheduled, the committee wanted people in Las Vegas to have the opportunity to testify.

 

Mr. Timothy A. Madden gave testimony regarding recall (Exhibit  E), which he admitted did not pertain to AB 145 because his understanding was the subject would be recall reform.

 

Mrs. Williams thanked Mr. Madden and informed him the committee had no questions, but when the bill came before committee she expected Mr. Madden would be testifying once again and at that time, the committee would have questions.

 

Mrs. Williams then asked for further testimony from Las Vegas.

 

Mr. Gerard Fitzgerald, Las Vegas, stated approximately 15 people had come to testify about recall.  He wanted the committee to be aware the people did come and would return.

 

Mrs. Williams replied she understood, and had received the sign-in list.  People had written on the sign-in list, she said, they attended the meeting for the purpose of recall.  She apologized for the misunderstanding and informed Mr. Fitzgerald the committee had not intended to hear recall today.  The committee had not received the bill yet.  Mrs. Williams understood the recall bill was the Secretary of State's bill, and suggested if Mr. Fitzgerald spoke with Secretary Lau, she could probably give him more information since the Elections and Procedures Committee had not seen the bill.

 

Mrs. Williams then asked for testimony from Carson City and recognized Ms. Thelma Clark, Nevada Seniors Coalition.  Ms. Clark referred to Page 5, Lines 12 through 14, and gave her interpretation.  Mrs. Williams notified Ms. Clark mechanics of the voter registration would have to be worked out.  Mrs. Williams believed people who were registered would be able to go in, verify the registration and receive a voter registration card.  She concluded the mail-out provision was for people who mailed in registrations or registered through a deputy registrar.  But registered voters should be able to go in and get the card if a person was a registered voter.  Mrs. Williams reiterated the mechanics would have to be worked out.

 

Ms. Clark explained she would like to see every person receive a voter registration card even though the voter might have been registered to vote for many years.  Mrs. Williams confirmed this was the intent and noted many states used the voter registration card as a form of identification.

 

Mrs. Williams thanked everyone for coming and stated after AB 145 was refined, possibly another teleconference would be held.  She was aware most of the attendees were interested in the recall bill and communicated an effort would be made to hold a teleconference on the recall bill.

 

There being no further business to come before committee, the meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

 

      RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

                             

      BOBBIE A. MIKESELL

      Committee Secretary

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assembly Committee on Elections and Procedures

March 16, 1993

Page: 1