MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND PROCEDURES Sixty-eighth Session May 11, 1995 The Committee on Elections and Procedures was called to order at 3:35 p.m., on Thursday, May 11, 1995, Chairman Close presiding in Room 331 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Jack D. Close, Chairman Ms. Chris Giunchigliani, Chairman Mrs. Joan A. Lambert, Vice Chairman Mr. Richard Perkins, Vice Chairman Mr. Dennis L. Allard Mr. Joseph E. Dini, Jr. Mrs. Jan Evans Mr. Thomas A. Fettic Mrs. Vivian L. Freeman Mr. David E. Humke Mrs. Jan Monaghan Mr. Bob Price GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Assemblywoman Jeannine Stroth, District No. 5 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Robert Erickson, Research Director OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Alan Glover, Carson City Clerk/Recorder Ms. Janine Hansen, State President, Eagle Forum Chief Deputy Dale Erquiaga, office of Secretary of State Ms. Barbara J. Reed, Douglas County Clerk-Treasurer Ms. Mary Henderson, Government Affairs Director, Washoe County Ms. Marlene Henderson, Registrar of Voters, Washoe County Ms. Juanita Cox, The People to Protect America Ms. Kathryn Ferguson, Registrar of Voters, Clark County Mr. James Dan, Libertarian Party of Nevada Ms. Nancy Howard, Nevada League of Cities Mr. Francis Gillings, Independent American Party Mr. Tom Stown, Second Vice President, Veterans in Politics ASSEMBLY BILL 523 - Changes date of primary election Assemblywoman Jeannine Stroth, District No. 5, prime sponsor of A.B. 523, explained the numerous campaign signs displayed in her district and the length of time they were displayed was the source of complaints from her constituents and the reason for her legislation. The signs were displayed from February through September. She felt an earlier primary would alleviate the signs in her district. Nevada was one of a few states with a late primary, she added. The proposed June primary date was chosen to coincide with California's and other western states. In addition, she felt the eight week window after the primary election was not sufficient time to prepare for the general election. She submitted letters in support of the June primary. See (Exhibit C). Phone calls were made to the Registrars of Voters, and the June primary was supported by Carson City, Churchill, Clark, Eureka, Lyon, Washoe, Douglas and Lincoln Counties. The only two counties which opposed the legislation were Esmeralda and Pershing. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani and Assemblywoman Stroth discussed the time for filing and length of residency which Assemblywoman Giunchigliani said was 30 days within a precinct. Assemblywoman Stroth submitted a packet of statutes from Washoe County which would need to be changed and which were not changed by A.B. 523 (Exhibit D). Assemblywoman Evans conveyed the city of Sparks had an ordinance that campaign signs may not be placed earlier than 45 days before an election. Responding, Assemblywoman Stroth noted Clark County had the ordinance but it was challenged and found unconstitutional. Mr. Alan Glover, Carson City Clerk/Recorder, testified in favor of A.B. 523. An earlier primary would make it easier for the Clerks to mail the overseas and absentee ballots, and noted the time period between September and November was short. He agreed with a shorter period for filing discussed by Assemblywomen Giunchigliani and Stroth. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked the ideal number of days needed for filing. Mr. Glover said there was none. She asked the ideal number of days needed for balloting. Mr. Glover said an additional 30 days at least would aid the Clerks. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani agreed he needed more time between the primary election and the general election, and more time between the close of filing and the primary. Ms. Janine Hansen, State President, Eagle Forum, spoke in opposition to A.B. 523 which she felt would increase the cost of campaigning thereby increasing the pressure for candidates to raise money. While she understood the problems of the Clerks, she felt the problems should be balanced with increased cost of campaigns, increased personal cost to candidates and voter turnout. Mr. Dale Erquiaga, Chief Deputy, office of Secretary of State, opposed A.B. 523, pointing out it was rare the Secretary of State differed with the Clerks. The Secretary of State was the keeper of election law and the keeper of campaign law, he declared. A June primary would lengthen the campaign process as people would begin campaigning earlier. He continued, the Secretary of State believed voters focus on the election in the final month, and the current system, although sometimes difficult for the Clerks, did work. A June primary could almost double the cost for candidates' campaigns. Mr. Erquiaga emphasized Nevada had a June primary in 1954 or 1956 which, Senator Raggio said, did not work, and the date was changed back to September. Secretary of State Heller's position, Mr. Erquiaga said, is the only reason for advancing the primary date to earlier in the year would be to coincide with the Presidential preference primary. Ms. Barbara J. Reed, Douglas County Clerk-Treasurer, announced support of A.B. 523 for the reasons previously stated by Mr. Alan Glover. She discussed the time restraints previously outlined, overseas voters, military ballot requests and forms from the federal government regarding military ballots which must be completed. She suggested having the primary coincide with the Presidential primary so that Presidential candidates could appear on the ballot. She agreed with shortening the filing period to allow more time between close of filing and the primary election in June. She believed primary candidates' signs, which could come down after election, and signs for candidates for general elections which would go up at a later date would eliminate voter confusion. She submitted (Exhibit E), a calendar of dates pertaining to elections in Nevada, and asked if the office of the Secretary of State could review the dates to ascertain the dates were correct. Assemblywoman Monaghan asked Ms. Reed to review information for overseas and military ballot requests provided to the federal government. Ms. Reed said Douglas County mailed approximately 1500 absentee ballots out of 22,000 registered voters for the general election. Between 500 and 800 of the 1500 absentee ballots went to the military or overseas ballots. Ms. Mary Henderson, Government Affairs Director, Washoe County, and Ms. Marlene Henderson, Registrar of Voters, Washoe County, assumed the testimonial table. Ms. Mary Henderson testified Washoe County supported A.B. 523. Ms. Marlene Henderson favored A.B. 523 and said moving the date to June would allow sufficient time for the candidates to be put on the ballot and get sample ballots to voters at a reasonable time to allow the people to request an absentee ballot. Federal regulations require 45 days to mail an absentee ballot before the election to allow absentee ballot to be received by the voter and returned, she said. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani questioned whether the seven and ten days regarding absentee and sample ballots were fixed by statute. Ms. Henderson responded the dates were fixed by statute. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani said potentially the dates could be changed whether or not the time lines were extended. Ms. Henderson clarified after the primary election and after the time for the election to be contested, a ballot could then be printed. The time line for contesting the primary election and the general election were the same. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani conveyed the time for the mailing of the sample ballot as well as the absentee ballot were in statute. Ms. Juanita Cox, representing the People to Protect America, spoke in opposition to A.B. 523. She discussed the collection of signatures on page 1 of the legislation which could put a constraint on the people in northern Nevada due to the weather. On page 3 changing of the dates and the time length would present a problem due to the snowy weather. She concluded her testimony by asking the committee to oppose A.B. 523. Ms. Kathryn Ferguson, Registrar of Voters, Clark County, agreed with prior testimony of the Clerks and Registrars regarding A.B. 523, and she announced support of the legislation. Voters should receive the sample ballots in advance to allow time for review. Clerks and Registrars needed more time to get the ballots out in time for early voting. She also agreed with a shorter filing period, and a shorter period for candidates to withdraw. More time was needed to get the ballot prepared to avoid errors. She further mentioned problems with the post office. Two or three court cases had been filed in her county during the candidate filing period, and the cases had to be rushed through the court system. The Clerk's office could not go to print until the court cases were decided. She felt there was more turnout with an election in September and one in November as opposed to having one in June and another in November. The closer elections lose voters, she felt. If the committee addressed the dates as everyone had mentioned, she thought A.B. 523 would be very good. Assemblywoman Freeman asked what percentage of voters in Clark County voted early. Ms. Ferguson did not know the percentage, but 10,000 voted early in the 1994 general election. Assemblyman Fettic stated campaigning in Carson City in January through April was not appealing because of the cold weather. He asked if a time other than June would give relief to the various Clerks. He disagreed with Ms. Ferguson on the closeness of elections and believed a June primary would be too long from the general election for the candidates. Assemblyman Fettic saw A.B. 523 as a bill which would primarily help the clerks which, he announced, he would be glad to do with the exception of having the primary in June. Ms. Ferguson said the month would not matter. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani stated issues which dealt with dates and would impact time periods would be contest period, early voting times, sample ballot mail- out times, absentee ballot mail-out times, close of filing, period to withdraw, and submittal of petitions. Ms. Barbara Reed, Douglas County Clerk-Treasurer, discussed the calendar which contained all of the time lines with the exception of specific issues which must be addressed by each clerk. See (Exhibit E). A copy was provided to the committee. Chairman Close informed committee Idaho had its presidential primary on the first Tuesday in March, California's was presently the first Tuesday in March, Utah and Arizona did not have presidential primaries, only caucuses, and the Oregon primary was the third Tuesday in May. Mr. James Dan, representing the Libertarian Party of Nevada, testified in opposition to A.B. 523. He discussed the interaction of a provision in A.B. 523 and A.B. 564. Current law provided if only two candidates filed for a partisan office, and they were both from the same political party, no primary would be held. They both would go on to a general election. But if another candidate from a different party files, then those two candidates would go into a primary. The filing deadline for the minor party to file its list of candidates with the Secretary of State was the last Friday in May as proposed. Chairman Close closed the hearing on A.B. 523. Chairman Close then reopened the hearing on A.B. 523, and, for the record, stated committee had been notified by Legislative Counsel Bureau that A.B. 523 if it passed as currently constituted was in conflict with A.B. 273. He advised that committee would have to deal with the conflict. Chairman Close closed the hearing on A.B. 523. Chairman Close asked Mr. Erickson to comment regarding the request for a Resolution. Mr. Erickson stated the Legislature passed A.B. 407 in 1993 which required the Governor, the Supreme Court and the legislature each to designate an Energy Retrofit Coordinator for the buildings occupied by that branch of government. Subsection 3 of A.B. 407 reads, "The legislature by Concurrent Resolution shall designate an Energy Retrofit Coordinator for the buildings occupied by the Legislative Branch." A.B. 407 was not signed into law until June 28, 1993, so there was not time in the 67th Session to submit the Resolution. Legislative Counsel Bureau had talked to leadership and suggested the Director of the Legislative Counsel Bureau be so designated through a Concurrent Resolution. Chairman Close asked for a motion. ASSEMBLYWOMAN GIUNCHIGLIANI MOVED TO REQUEST A COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION WHICH WOULD DESIGNATE THE LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL BUREAU DIRECTOR AS THE DESIGNATED INDIVIDUAL FOR THE POSITION OF ENERGY RETROFIT COORDINATOR. ASSEMBLYMAN DINI SECONDED THE MOTION. Chairman Close asked for discussion. THE MOTION CARRIED. * * * * * * * * * ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION 27 - Proposes to amend Nevada constitution to provide for initial selection of judges by appointment with annual reviews of performance and subsequent retention by election. Chairman Close, sponsor of A.J.R. 27, responded to the concerns previously expressed by the committee regarding the legislation. He submitted (Exhibit F) regarding the appointment of the Commission. ASSEMBLYMAN ALLARD MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.J.R. 27. THE AMENDMENT WOULD BE TO STRIKE SECTION 3 ON PAGE 2. ASSEMBLYMAN FETTIC SECONDED THE MOTION. Chairman Close asked for discussion. THE MOTION CARRIED. ASSEMBLYMAN DINI AND PERKINS VOTED NO. ASSEMBLYMAN HUMKE AND ASSEMBLYWOMAN EVANS WERE NOT PRESENT FOR THE VOTE. * * * * * * * * * Chairman Close opened the hearing on Assembly Bill 562. ASSEMBLY BILL 562 - Removes limitation on cost of printing ballots for elections. Ms. Mary Henderson, Government Affairs Director, Washoe County, and Ms. Marlene Henderson, Registrar of Voters, Washoe County, assumed the testimonial table in support of A.B. 562. Ms. Mary Henderson stated the Registrar was limited by statute in terms of the amount of money which could be paid to have the ballots printed. The best way, they felt, would be to allow the Registrar to go to competitive bid. She discussed the dramatic increase in the price of paper, and noted the Reproduction Department had recently sent a memorandum to all departments to expect a seven percent per month increase for paper for the next several months. A.B. 562 would provide the needed flexibility on the competitive bid to reflect reality in terms of paper prices. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani did not understand why it was in statute if locals were paying for it. Assemblyman Dini informed it was an old statute from approximately 1929 to 1958. Mr. Alan Glover, Carson City Clerk/Recorder, testified in support of A.B. 562. He asked that language on lines 10 and 11 be mandatory to assist rural clerks. Ms. Barbara J. Reed, Douglas County Clerk-Treasurer, stated she was in favor of A.B. 562. Ms. Kathryn Ferguson, Registrar of Voters, Clark County, stated she was in favor of A.B. 562. ASSEMBLYMAN DINI MOVED DO PASS ON A.B. 562. ASSEMBLYWOMAN FREEMAN SECONDED THE MOTION Chairman Close asked for further discussion. There was none. THE MOTION CARRIED. ASSEMBLYWOMAN LAMBERT AND ASSEMBLYMEN HUMKE, PRICE AND PERKINS WERE NOT PRESENT FOR THE VOTE. * * * * * * * * * Chairman Close opened the hearing on Assembly Bill 564. ASSEMBLY BILL 564 - Makes various changes to provisions governing elections. Ms. Kathryn Ferguson, Registrar of Voters, Clark County, requestor of A.B. 564, recapped each section of the bill. Ms. Ferguson referenced page 5, line 44, the hourly posting log and asked the requirement for the log to be alphabetical be removed. Chairman Close stated the rationale for alphabetical was to more easily find those who had voted and those who had not. He asked for her rationale to not make it alphabetical. Responding to Chairman Close's inquiry, Ms. Ferguson said an additional person had to be hired for the polling place to stand there, and, as people voted, put their names on a list. To do that hourly and alphabetize the log was prohibitive. Chairman Close asked if a method existed for alphabetizing other than manually. Ms. Ferguson said Clark County assigned unique identification numbers to every registered voter when the non-forwardable voter registration cards were mailed to all active people on the roll. The number returned for bad addresses was approximately 60,000; approximately 24,000 wrote in or called in to update their addresses, and approximately 40,000 voters were inactivated. Every active registered voter was given an identification number which would stay with the voter throughout Clark County's system, she said. The number was bar coded on the cards. When the voter returns, the card can be scanned and a notice automatically sent to the voter saying, "It has come to our attention you no longer live at this address. You have 15 days to respond or you will be canceled." The Registrar of Voters could use the same identification number on sample ballot forms, and, if the state could go to that system, candidates could use that number on voter lists and have a cross reference to an alphabetized list, she said. Chairman Close thought the system should be discussed further. Ms. Ferguson continued the recap of A.B. 564. Page 8, lines 1 through 3, would move the deadline to submit the question to the Clerk to 90 days before the election from 60 days. Page 8, line 7 moved the deadline to submit city questions to 60 days before a city election from 35. Chairman Close questioned whether the dates were similar to other counties, and Ms. Ferguson said they were the same. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked for dates concerning the city election. Ms. Ferguson said the copy of the question was presently submitted 35 days before the election, and A.B. 564 asked the number of days to be changed to 60. Presently the primary city election must be held in each city of the first class and in each city of the second class, which was so provided by ordinance, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May. A.B. 564 would move the date to April because the June general election would give more time. A candidate to any office to be voted on for the primary city election must file an affidavit of candidacy with the City Clerk not less than 30 nor more than 40 days before the date of the primary election. A.B. 564 asked that the days not be less than 60 nor more than 70 days. A candidate for any office to be voted on at the general city election must file an affidavit of candidacy with the City Clerk not less than 30 days. A.B. 564 asks 60 days. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani said committee would have to be cognizant that all city charters may have potentially different dates for their elections. Chairman Close and Assemblywoman Giunchigliani noted information should be obtained from the other city entities regarding their charters. Mr. Erickson said typically when the legislature changed the general city provisions relating to elections, they would not necessarily change them with regard to the charter cities. The city of Reno and possibly the city of Sparks were going to change their municipal elections to be the same as the county and state elections, he said. Chartered cities were not normally or necessarily changed at the same time general law was changed, Mr. Erickson offered. Ms. Nancy Howard, Nevada League of Cities, testified to her knowledge to date Reno was the only city that changed their elections to coincide with the county election. General law cities were held in May, and when the general law changed, all the cities changed. The charter cities would require a change to their charter in order to change the date. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani requested Ms. Howard obtain a list of charter cities and general law cities. Ms. Howard informed five were charter cities and the remainder were charter cities. Ms. Ferguson, Clark County Registrar, advised Clark County cities could not comply with the law as it was presently written. The last day for a candidate to withdraw is also the first day for early voting to start. There was no time to get the balance done. Clark County could not comply with any of the deadlines, she explained. Assemblywoman Monaghan conveyed her feeling A.B. 564 was a housekeeping bill needed to clean up dates because of problems in another bill. Assemblywoman Monaghan asked Ms. Ferguson if she had any intent or desire to change primaries other than those listed in A.B. 564. Ms. Ferguson stated the city primaries were more difficult than the others. Clerks can comply under great duress with the other deadlines, but cannot comply with the law on the municipal deadlines, she explained. Ms. Janine Hansen, representing her brother, Joel F. Hansen, Attorney for the Independent American Party, testified Mr. Hansen was unable to attend the meeting. She said her testimony would address problems which A.B. 564 contained. At this time, Chairman Close interjected to inform Ms. Hansen Mr. Erquiaga from the office of Secretary of State was present to possibly discuss Ms. Hansen's concerns. Ms. Hansen agreed to delay her testimony, and Chairman Close then asked Chief Deputy Dale Erquiaga, office of Secretary of State, to testify regarding A.B. 564. Chief Deputy Dale Erquiaga, office of Secretary of State, announced the Secretary of State had problems with two sections of A.B. 564 for legal reasons. He drew attention to Section 3 which dealt with minor party lists of candidates, minor party declarations of candidacy and minor party Presidential candidates. Those are three separate instances outlined in Section 3 and are three periods for filing something. Those filings relate to the filing of a petition to qualify as a minor party, he cited. Mr. Erquiaga advised committee it was the position of the Secretary of State and the Attorney General's office position in providing the counsel that Secretary of State's office had requested, that if the dates in Section 3 were changed, it would not withstand a court challenge. Minor parties by United States Supreme Court decision and by a federal decision in 1992 in Nevada are accorded special privileges. They are allowed to file later in the year. Their petitions cannot be forced to be filed too early in the year. In 1992 the statutes required they be filed June 10. The Court held that was too early. Those have to be left where they are for that reason and these dates need to be left alone in our opinion, Mr. Erquiaga declared. They will not withstand challenge, he reiterated. Section 6, on pages 4 and 5, dealt with independent candidates, specifically at line 11 on page 5, an attempt to move a date forward for independent petitions. "It is our position that Section 6, those dates, need to be left alone," he exclaimed. The dates in Section 4 of the bill dealing with regular candidate filings, Republicans, Democrats and non-partisans could be moved earlier in the year if committee chooses, Mr. Erquiaga continued. Those are not related to the minor party and the independents. Secretary Heller opposes moving that date earlier in the year. It would lengthen the campaign process here. He likes them where they are now, but that is not a legal reason. That is his position, Mr. Erquiaga said, referring to the Secretary of State. In Section 5, page 4, lines 19 and 20, whatever is done with the regular filing dates in Section 4, NRS 293.177, be sure to do to the dates in Section 5, Mr. Erquiaga asserted. Whatever committee does in Section 4, please do in Section 5, he reiterated. "We understand the Clerks' reasons, but we don't want campaigns to begin in February as opposed to beginning in March." He noted this was a policy decision. Discussion ensued between Assemblywoman Giunchigliani and Mr. Erquiaga regarding dates and time lines for minor parties and independent candidates. Assemblyman Humke stated he was unconvinced that the state of the federal law as interpreted by the federal courts is still the same as when the last case was brought. He stated he would like to see some opinions, and advised there was a lack of respect for the process because there were various dates. Mr. Humke believed one set of dates was necessary. He asked to see the United States Supreme Court case and the federal court case which Mr. Erquiaga cited. Mr. Erquiaga said, "Mr. Chairman, would the Committee prefer that the Secretary of State's office provide that or would you prefer to go to your own Counsel? I'll be happy to provide that," he added. Assemblyman Humke, addressing the Chairman, suggested Mr. Erquiaga work with Legislative Counsel because Mr. Malkiewich and Ms. Erdoes had a body of information. Mr. Erquiaga's Attorney General could work on it also. Chairman Close asked Mr. Erquiaga if Mr. Humke's suggestion was agreeable to him. Mr. Erquiaga said that it was, and Chairman Close then asked Mr. Erquiaga to comply. Mr. Erquiaga agreed, and Chairman Close said, "Thank you." Chairman Close asked Ms. Hansen if she would like to testify at this time and asked if Mr. Erquiaga's testimony answered her concerns. Ms. Janine Hansen, representing her brother, Joel F. Hansen, Attorney for the Independent American Party, testified in favor of amending A.B. 564. Mr. Hansen was unable to attend the meeting, she said. The party did not oppose the change in the dates in terms of when the candidates had to file because there had been some confusion in that area. Ms. Hansen brought copies of briefs which were filed on successful Independent American Party suits. See (Exhibit G). In Section 3, page 2, one of the problems was the date starting on line 10. The national convention of the I.A.P. is after that date in August, and, just like the Republican convention is after that date, the I.A.P. would not be able to comply with that. She pointed out a problem with current law and not a part of the amendments in this bill. The bottom of the page where you have the Declaration of Candidacy for Office, there are two declarations: one is for Candidacy and one is for Non- Partisan. There needed to be a third declaration of candidacy for minor party candidates. Page 2, lines 34 and 35 refer to a Primary election. Minor parties do not have primaries so lines 34 and 35 do not apply. Ms. Hansen referenced page 2, lines 40 through 43 which she said was a problem because of the federal cases Anderson v. Celebrezze and Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut. They said the dates that were set too far ahead for minor parties discriminated against their fundamental rights of voting and were burdensome, and they struck those states down. Ms. Hansen continued her testimony reading from (Exhibit G). She concluded her testimony by saying a Declaration of Candidacy was needed specifically for minor parties. The September 1st deadline may create a challenge. The other dates which Mr. Erquiaga gave as deadlines for the minor parties were no problem for Common Cause. Copies of two briefs filed on cases won by Common Cause are part of (Exhibit G). Mr. Dale Erquiaga, office of Secretary of State, assumed the testimonial table for the purpose of clarification of points which he said did not need to be addressed in A.B. 564. There is a minor party declaration of candidacy, he stated. It is prescribed by the Secretary of State pursuant to 293.247 which gives the Secretary of State authority to proscribe any form or take any action necessary for the effective administration of an election. That form is not in use in all counties and I can guarantee you that the Secretary will ensure that it is in use in the next election, he asserted. It does exist under that authority. Mr. Erquiaga addressed the statute to which Ms. Hansen referred, NRS 293.176, which is not addressed in A.B. 564 and which was challenged in 1994. The Secretary of State's bill draft addresses that issue, and that is, in our opinion, the proper place to do it, he emphasized. The time frame needs to be changed to ensure it provides the protection the court has required of us for the minor parties in terms of switching. Mr. Erquiaga affirmed the two issues were valid and could be taken care of in another manner. NRS 293.247 is the Secretary of State's general authority to proscribe form, he further asserted. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked Mr. Erquiaga to provide a copy of the candidacy form. Mr. James Dan, Libertarian Party of Nevada, stated Mr. Erquiaga and Ms. Hansen had addressed most of his concerns. With regard to the 14 month requirement for switching parties to become a candidate for a particular party, an Attorney General's opinion is attached to the end of 293.176 which gives an exception in certain cases to major party candidates, he said. It states that if a person has not already registered with the major party, he is allowed to switch into that major party and become a candidate, the 14 month requirement notwithstanding. Mr. Dan did not know the legal basis, but it was there and he found it strange and perhaps unfair. He suggested it be considered when reviewing the other bill which Mr. Erquiaga referred to. Mr. Dan stated they would object to maintaining that 14 month requirement. Mr. Francis Gillings, Sparks, Nevada, a member of the Independent American Party, stated he was in favor of A.B. 564 with an amendment. "To put a time line on the minor parties for changing as you do the major parties is an extreme inconvenience for the other parties ever to grow," he said. Ms. Marlene Henderson, Registrar of Voters, Washoe County, announced agreement with Ms. Kathryn Ferguson, on A.B. 564. She pointed out page 5, line 48 and requested the list be done every four hours. Pages 8 and 9 regarding city charters, may conflict with city of Sparks' charter. City of Reno would no longer have a city charter in 1997. Reno would be on Washoe County's ballot in 1996 and Reno would have elections at the same time Washoe County has their elections. She could not speak for the city of Sparks regarding their charter. Ms. Juanita Cox, representing herself as a former candidate for the Independent American Party, announced opposition to many of the things discussed in A.B. 564. The Independent American Party national convention starts August 12, 1996, so "we will be in compliance and we will be in violation of A.B. 564," she said. The proper form should be included as many counties look here for direction. We should have a sample of that because many candidates were forced to sign something that was absolutely wrong. Mr. Alan Glover, Carson City Clerk/Recorder, referenced page 2 section 4, the earlier discussion, and said if the period for filing for office was going to change, it would help the Clerk/Recorders if committee could give an additional month even if you do not go to the June primary. The other month helps and makes a really big difference when there are challenges. He referenced page 5, line 37, and announced agreement with Clark County the number needed to be raised to at least 3,000. A major problem would arise in the future with the National Voter Registration Act. He felt page 5, lines 39 and 40 was a good provision. On page 7 he asked an amendment to lines 13 and 14, "The county clerk may include any Sunday that falls within the period...," and add the language, "any state holiday." Mr. Glover explained Nevada Day state celebration was in Carson City. Carson City elections office closes that day and felt we had the legal authority to close because it was a state holiday. He felt it would be nice to put that in the law, but suggested it be made permissive because the offices may want to stay open on that holiday. Most counties do stay open, he added. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani asked if there was a rule that the inactive have to be counted in the election precincts as well as on the reapportionment. Mr. Glover said he believed Mr. Erquiaga would be addressing that subject in their major bill. If you are on the inactive list, you are still eligible to vote. As a Clerk, I think those people should be on a roster poll book, because if not, some kind of certificate of error has to be issued which is not true because they were entitled to vote. Assemblywoman Giunchigliani understood under reapportionment, numbers are based not on registration but on the numbers. However, she said, you also look at those numbers as you are looking at your lines. So that could have a big impact. Ms. Barbara J. Reed, Douglas County Clerk-Treasurer, testified in support of A.B. 564. She referenced page 5, line 37, and was in support of increasing the number of registered voters per precinct. On line 47, she concurred with Washoe County Registrar, instead of being posted hourly, to post four or six times a day. On page 6, line 2, Ms. Reed asked for a period to be placed after the word "voted" which would delete the time restriction. She asked committee to consider adding a section under early voting which is NRS 293.3602, section 2, regarding custody of the ballots and the boxes. When the ballot box is delivered pursuant to subsection 1, the County Clerk shall provide a new ballot box lock in the manner prescribed. The larger counties do not have the problem. She discussed the logistics of the number of ballot boxes during early voting and suggested having the workers sign a certification they had 91 or the number of people who voted that day, drop the certification into the ballot box, seal it, send the same box out, have them just slit the seal, if it went to the same polling location, drop the new ballots in, also sign a certificate dropping in how many people voted. On election night when boxes are opened and the Accounting Board looks at them, they could take all of those signed certificates from the election workers, add them up so they total 300 ballots and count to see that they had 300 ballots. We know we cannot get into the ballot box because it does have two separate locks on it. I think this is probably unique only to the rural communities because of the small voter turnout. It would help keep the cost down and also the number of openings of all the ballot boxes for 20 ballots or 90 ballots. She agreed with Alan Glover regarding Section 11. Chairman Close asked if Ms. Reed also supported the lists not being alphabetized. Ms. Reed said she did not feel strongly either way. Douglas County did have them alphabetized. "We just produced a separate computer program and had all of those listed alphabetically with a line next to them," she said. She hired an extra worker for this. Mr. Tom Stown, Second Vice President of Veterans in Politics, spoke on their behalf and stated he was also a member of Nevada Election Watch, Clark County. He suggested preprinting a list of the voters in that precinct and then marking names off as they vote. Mr. Stown discussed Section 1 of A.B. 564 where "Electioneering" was described. Mr. Stown suggested adding a section which stated, "Government funded entities may not electioneer for any candidate or ballot issue." He cited a case in Las Vegas where a school had a large banner that read the school children supported a proposition. He read NRS 293.3602, Custody of Ballots, and felt a situation was being created with early voting which would leave the election system open to unmonitoring. Poll watchers were designed to observe elections and with early voting, polling places were scattered throughout the valley for 21 days. He felt it would not be possible for the public to observe elections. His organization was in favor of having early voting only at the Election Department. We have to weigh the convenience factor of early voting in temporary sites with complying with all of the statutes. He referred to the Motor Voter Act, the National Registration Act, and said Nevada had just passed the tenth amendment resolution which basically declares the Motor Voter Act to be a federal mandate. Tenth amendment says Nevada does not have to comply with federal mandates. There will be follow up legislation to the Tenth Amendment Resolution which will give the right to accept or reject, he said. Mr. Stown continued discussion of early voting procedure. He did not approve of deputies picking up the ballots early after five hours of voting as the people watching elections would not be able to observe since this would be at a random time. It would defeat the purpose of monitoring the elections, he added. There were no questions from the committee, and no one else wished to testify. Chairman Close closed the hearing on A.B. 564. Chairman Close reopened the hearing on A.B. 564 to notify committee a Conflict Notice had been received on A.B. 564 in conflict with A.B. 273. If A.B. 564 passed as currently presented, the conflict must be resolved, he stressed. There being no further business to come before committee, the meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Bobbie Mikesell, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Assemblyman Jack D. Close, Chairman Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, Chairman Assembly Committee on Elections and Procedures May 11, 1995 Page