The Committee on Elections, Procedures, and Ethics was called to order at 6:33 p.m., on Wednesday, March 31, 1999. Chairwoman Chris Giunchigliani presided in Room 3138 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All Exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Chairwoman

Mr. Bob Price, Vice Chairman

Mr. Bob Beers

Ms. Sheila Leslie

Ms. Kathy McClain

Ms. Kathy Von Tobel

COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXCUSED:

Mr. Joseph Dini

Mr. Richard Perkins

Ms. Sandra Tiffany

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

OTHERS PRESENT:

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.B. 613 and called on Harvard "Larry" Lomax, Clark County Registrar of Voters, Election Department and Alan Glover, Carson City Clerk Recorder, Association of Election Officials.

Mr. Lomax spoke from a prepared speech about the proposed changes to

A.B. 613 (Exhibit C) recommended by the elections department in the Office of the Secretary of State, the Association of Election Officials, the Clark County Election Department and the clerks. The proposed amendments were:

• Section 1: Clarified when a voter may sign a petition.

• Section 2: Changed deadlines for minor party candidate to file a petition to have name placed on the ballot from 40 to 25 days before the third Tuesday in August.
• Section 3: Clarified only a candidate for partisan office may not change party affiliation after the deadline.
• Section 4: Changed deadline for independent candidate to file petition to have a name placed on the ballot from 40 to 25 days before the third Tuesday in August.
• Section 5: Amended the law to exclude Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays.
• Section 6: Added a provision to the law that clarified a voter who had moved from one congressional district to another within the registrar’s jurisdiction must be allowed to vote at his old polling place.
• Section 7: Changed last day to submit a written challenge from 15 days to 25 days.
• Sections 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12: Changed the Municipal Primary election date from the first Tuesday in May to the first Tuesday in April.
• Section 13: Clarified law that addressed amendments to campaign contribution reports.
• Sections 14, 15: Clarified when a campaign contribution and expense report should be filed by candidates in the event of a recall.
• Sections 16 and 17: Recommended those amendments be deleted due to proposed date of Presidential Preference election.
• Section 18: Clarified law that pertained to required procedures if a public official subject to a recall petition resigned his office.
• Section 19: Clarified when an individual may request name removed from a petition.
• Sections 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24: Changed the Municipal Primary election date from the first Tuesday in May to the first Tuesday in April.

Assemblyman Price asked if there was a provision in the proposed amendments which allowed a name to be removed from the ballot if the person had died after he filed for office. Mr. Lomax stated the name would still appear on the ballot as it would be too late to delete it. If the person was elected, the office would have a vacancy.

Assemblyman Beers inquired about section 13 and amended returns. He wanted to know if the date for filing an amendment was mentioned anywhere else in the statutes, as he had not known of any specific date. Mr. Lomax stated he was not aware of any statute on record, and the filing date of the amendment could be extended. Each county retained the amendments filed as well as original copies. Section 13 was proposed for a person to file a timely amendment to the original filing form and would be determined on a case by case situation. Assemblyman Beers wanted to know if there had been cases of abuse with amended filings. He requested the deletion of the definite deadline for the amendment filing.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked Assemblyman Beers if the statutes and the regulations were changed, could the timelines and fines be determined later if the reports were not filed on time. She noted those issues would be discussed during a work session.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked what would happen if no other person had filed for that office and asked about page 11, section 18, in the bill. Mr. Lomax stated anyone could file a petition for a special election. Scott Wasserman, Chief Committee Counsel, responded by asking if the county wanted to have a special election if no one was listed to run for that particular office. If someone resigned and no one petitioned for that position, then there would be no reason for the election. Mr. Lomax stated Clark County would not want an election held at that time.

Assemblywoman McClain wanted to know if the congressional and the precinct lines were the same. If the person had moved from one area into another district, would the congressional districts be changed. Mr. Lomax stated according to the National Voters Registration Act (NVRA), a person who moved from one county to another would not be able to vote in the old district. The districts within the county were being discussed in the bill, not congressional boundaries. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated the bill would be discussed in a work session due to language conflicts, and to have specific clarification of when a person moved whether the voter would vote in an old district or in a new district.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.B. 613 with no action taken by the committee. She opened the work session on A.B. 200 and asked for discussion. She called on Michael Stewart, Committee Policy Analyst, to explain the proposed amendments for all the bills in work session (Exhibit D).

Mr. Stewart stated there were four proposed amendments to A.B. 200. The proposed amendments were:

• Changed references to county and city auditor to county and city clerk throughout sections 4 and 5 of the measure, page 3, line 12, and page 4, line 5.
• Added language to page 3, lines 24 and 25, and page 4, lines 18 and 19, stipulating the regulations adopted by the board of commissioners or the city council regarding the date by which ballot question arguments shall be prepared, must allow compliance with the dates set forth in NRS 293.481.
• Added language to section 4 making the creation of a committee to prepare arguments for and against county ballot questions optional for counties with a population less than 50,000.
• Added language to section 5 making the creation of a committee to prepare arguments for and against city ballot questions optional for cities with a population less than 50,000.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani commented to Assemblyman Beers that his suggestion about the complexity of the bill had been taken into consideration when the amendments were done to be able to achieve what Assemblyman Mortenson had wanted the bill to accomplish. She stated she would entertain a motion on the bill.

Chairwoman opened the work session on A.B. 520 and called on Michael Stewart.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the work session for discussion of

A.B. 520. Assemblywoman McClain stated the bill would include 10 full days of early voting including the weekends. She wanted to know if the legislature could change the statute during the next session if the procedure was not working for the voters. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated the bill could be amended during the next session if not working properly. Assemblywoman McClain noted voters in Clark County loved early voting, and she did not want to infringe upon the early voters or the rights of voters. Assemblyman Beers wanted to know about the fiscal impact upon the counties for the early voting. Mr. Lomax stated one-third of the public voted early in Clark County and his main concern were the long lines of voters if the dates were changed. The discussion pertained to early voters, absentee balloting, and the registered voter. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated if voters knew the date to vote, they would show up for the election.

Janine Hansen, president, New Eagle Forum, and James Dan, member, Libertarian Party requested to be on record in favor of A.B. 520. Included in the record was a letter (Exhibit E) from Chris Azzaro, State Director, Libertarian Party of Nevada, who proposed amendments to A.B. 520. His proposed changes were similar to the amendments suggested during the work session.

Assemblyman Beers asked Chairwoman Giunchigliani about the deletions found in sections 12 and 13. She explained that the clerks had requested the language be changed or replaced, as the term public officer would be applied to anyone and everyone in office and the amendments applied to county commissioners, city council members, Senators and Assemblymen. The public officer would have included the sheriff and police departments.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she would entertain a motion on

A.B. 520 without consideration of sections 14 and 22.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the work session on A.B. 611 and called on Michael Stewart.

Mr. Stewart explained the proposed amendments were to the language in the bill in section 2, page 2, lines 32 through 39, which deleted proposed new language and retained the original Nevada Revised Statutes language regarding the reporting of source of income for public officers.

Assemblyman Price stated he was interested in the section that pertained to reports of disclosure for a person on more than one committee. He stated he had talked to the Ethics Commission, and the commission was aware of more than one report having to be filed and the possible changes due to A.B. 611.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated the bill had good factors, and some of the issues that had come up during testimony had been considered in the amendment. Assemblyman Beers asked if children in the household could be over age 18 before being considered as part of income reporting for the household. She asked Scott Wasserman about the legal aspects of children. He replied the amendment could be done for children 18 and over for the purpose of tracking revenue. Assemblyman Beers suggested that an amount of $10,000 be considered for a minor child. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated drafting of the language could be done.

Assemblywoman Von Tobel felt the amount of $50 was acceptable and would eliminate some of the expenditure disclosures of gifts given to legislators, such as free plane tickets and meals. Assemblywoman Leslie was not in agreement as there had been no public testimony on the bill, and she felt the amount of $200 was acceptable as stated in current law.

Assemblyman Beers requested to make a motion on A.B. 611 and suggested the change for the age to over 18 on page 3.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.B. 614 and handed the chair to Vice Chairman Price. She had sponsored A.B. 614.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani distributed a handout of the proposed amendments (Exhibit F). The proposed amendments were:

• Section 9: Page 7, line 4, delete 90 insert 30

• Section 10: Page 9, line 4, delete 90 insert 30

• Section 20: Delete

• Section 24: Delete references to 90 insert 30 days

• Section 25: Delete references to 90 insert 30 days

Chairwoman Giunchigliani explained many disabled voters were not able to vote. She gave as an example a person, who was not able to punch the card to vote. He took his wife and the registrar turned his back to her and she voted in place of her husband. She gave an example of people not being able to see the punchholes. She explained in the past there was no definite procedure, and the bill gave a procedure to the ballot process when someone was ill. In the past the person voting handed a statement to the voter registrar to enable the person’s vote to count. The bill would create a form to be used for such a procedure and would leave no guesswork.

Assemblyman Beers wanted clarification about the procedures and application to early voting. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated those procedures only applied to the official election day, not the rest of the time. The procedure would be applied on an emergency basis. If a voter was in the hospital or unable to attend the actual voting process, she had delivered the ballot herself.

Vice Chairman Price asked if there were further questions for Chairwoman Giunchigliani. None were asked. Vice Chairman Price called on Alan Glover, Carson City Clerk Recorder, Association of Election Officials, and Larry Lomax, Registrar of Voters, Clark County.

Mr. Glover stated there were a number of items in the bill that had been recommended by clerks. He suggested page 2, line 10, be changed from 2 years to 1 year. Mr. Lomax stated the tracking for disabled people for 2 years could be expensive as well as time consuming. Mr. Glover stated Carson City had the same problem with mass mailings. During the last election the elections department had to order extra ballots as the department ran out of ballots. He noted the price for several thousand ballots was less than just ordering a thousand ballots. The election ballot basis for ordering ballots was estimated on the previous 2 years election turnout plus 10 percent, and the elections department still ran out of ballots. He requested the Office of the Secretary of State to describe a standard form for voters with the ballots. When a specific date was noted by the secretary of state, then that office needed to place instructions on paper for early voters and absentee ballots. He suggested an amendment on line 40, subsection 2, about the class E felony, as that needed to be a misdemeanor rather than a felony. He felt the purpose of the elections department was to obtain voter participation, not have it eliminated due to felonies.

Mr. Lomax distributed a handout (Exhibit G) explaining the fiscal impact

A.B. 614 could have upon counties. He explained those impacts section by section. He noted if ballots were increased in print to 14 points, it would increase the ballots by 8 pages and the cost would increase by $89,000. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she would remove line 12 of the bill.

Discussion began between the committee about the language included in A.B. 614. Information included for the record was a letter (Exhibit H) from John Mason, chairman, Nevada State Republican Party and Paul Henry, chairman, Nevada State Democratic Party about the concerns for the consideration of absentee ballots and mass mailings. Yolanda Garcia, acting chairwoman for the Nevada State Democratic Party, read the letter. They stated in the letter the parties were concerned about the severity of penalties associated with violating the provisions for mass mailings of absentee ballots. Both parties were concerned at what appeared to be an attempt to limit a form of voting which had been successful in past elections. They felt voter turnout would be decreased with the passage of A.B. 614.

James Dan, member, Libertarian Party, wanted to know the official law on residency pertaining to A.B. 614. Mr. Wasserman stated the law read the intent of where home actually was located, regardless of how many homes a person might own within the state.

Lucille Lusk, member, Nevada Concerned Citizens, stated her concern was that not everyone would know about the provisions for the felony or misdemeanor, and a person, according to the bill, could then break the law.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated A.B. 614 would be discussed during a work session with more of the language to be clarified. Vice Chairman Price asked if there were any further questions. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.B. 614 with no action taken by the committee.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani opened the hearing on A.B. 615, and called on Pamela Crowell, Deputy Secretary of Elections, Office of the Secretary of State, and Larry Lomax, Registrar of Voters, Clark County.

Ms. Crowell read from a prepared speech (Exhibit I) and explained the proposed amendments to A.B. 615. Some of the amendments suggested were:

• Permitted the county to hold special elections by mail.
• Clarified when a person was qualified to sign a petition.
• A nominating petition to fill a vacancy in nonpartisan nomination to the signature verification process.
• Changed the word votes to signatures and added a notification requirement in the event of an appeal of the secretary of state’s ruling of insufficiency of a petition to recall a public officer. The public officer against whom the recall was sought would be notified by the secretary of state of the appeal.
• Two changes of wording appeared as proposed changed "the" to "this" in referring to Nevada.
• Clarification that a major or a minor political party nomination fill a nomination vacancy if only for partisan office.
• The words "for partisan office" appeared in sections primarily to clarify the provisions for minor political candidates.
• Clarification pertaining to the eligibility of a person who wished to be a candidate.
• Changed the date by which the office must forward the certified list of candidates each of whom had filed with the secretary of state.
• Dealt with family court seats of the district court.
• Pertained to the means by which an independent candidate for partisan office became qualified for the ballot.
• Separate reports to be made for early voting returns.
• County clerk shall forward the certified abstract and mechanized options from which an individual number can be drawn for a voter registration.

Ms. Crowell offered amendments from sections 2 through 38. Mr. Glover

stated Carson City supported the proposed amendment for section 2 of the bill. He felt special elections would be successful, and larger elections might enable the use of voter fraud.

Assemblyman Beers wanted to know about the reports for the first year of the elected term being excluded and asked Ms. Crowell about the statements. Ms. Crowell stated only someone who had not reached threshold on the disclosure form would be exempt as then it would be duplicate documentation. She stated there were not many candidates who reported in excess of $10,000. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated she was not clear on the issue of $10,000 and any unspent portion needed to be declared. Assemblyman Beers stated presently candidates were required to file on June 30, and the form was due no later than July 31. He stated timeframe for the form became a short 4 or 5 week period before the primary election. He felt new guidelines needed to be placed so a candidate had the bulk of money reported on the form before the deadline. Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated the form was not user friendly.

Information included for the record was a statement from Larry Lomax

(Exhibit J) about A.B. 615. The proposed amendments to the bill were:

• Section 21. 293.507.4 The form for an application to register to vote must have included:

(a) A line on which to enter the number on the voter’s social security card, driver’s license or identification card issued by the department of motor vehicles and public safety or other identification card issued by an agency of the state or the Federal Government that contains:

(1) A unique number not to exceed 12 characters; and

(2) A photograph or physical description of the voter

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.B. 615 with no action taken by the committee. She opened the hearing on A.B. 671 and asked for discussion.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated some of the language in the bill could be moved to A.B. 615. The bill dealt with the county fiscal office and all clerks and legislators. She felt the language was better in A.B. 615.

Mr. Glover stated at present statutes required the elections department to keep all ballots for 22 months, and ballots took up a lot of space. He suggested the timeframe for storage of those ballots could be shorter. He explained that unless there was a recount, there really was no need to keep ballots. Many precincts had one or two voters and then the elections department included those votes within another precinct to save time and money.

Mr. Wasserman noted, for the record, at present the bill was only in skeleton form. Information for the record was received from Larry Lomax (Exhibit K). He proposed an amendment to A.B. 671. The amendment was:

• Section 10 (293.5170 6a): The proposed increase to 15 characters in the voter identification number would have a significant impact to Clark County. Current computer software had the ability to accept 12 characters. The majority of software programs would have to be modified to accommodate an increased field length. Although the preference to Clark County would be to have the social security number as the identification number, the proposed amendment in A.B. 615, section 21, would be more manageable with system.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated A.B. 671 would be discussed during a work session. She asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.B. 671 with no action taken by the committee. She opened the hearing on A.B. 631 and called on Lorne Malkiewich, Director, Legislative Counsel Bureau.

Mr. Malkiewich distributed a handout (Exhibit L) explaining the amendments. He stated if the committee did not like some of the proposed amendments to take them out of the section. He did not know if the State of the State address given by Governor Quinn would be part of the amendment, as the governor must submit the budget 2 weeks before the start of the session. Those amendments suggested were:

Mr. Malkiewich explained the bill section by section (Exhibit M) and stated that 73 percent of the bills were submitted by legislators at request from individuals. As of March 27, there had been 1,200 bills drafted.

Brian Doran, Deputy Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, spoke in favor of A.B. 631. He noted on page 4, section 2, and subsection 6, of the bill needed to have constitutional officers listed. The Legislative Commission had approved the gray badges for all state employees.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, the hearing closed on A.B. 631. She stated a work session would be scheduled for the bill.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani stated there was one more item of business. She would entertain a motion for the minutes for March 1, March 3, and March 8, 1999, to be approved.

Chairwoman Giunchigliani asked if there were any further questions or comments. Hearing none, she adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Jodie Van Wyhe,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, Chairwoman

DATE: