Transcript Highlights:

• , they gain the right to vote in our elections.
• , they gain the right to vote in our elections.
• and appointed officials of the Town of Plymouth.
• Third reading of a bill: An act relative to elected and appointed officials in the town of Plymouth,
• Third reading of a bill: An act relative to elected and appointed officials in the town of Plymouth,

Transcript Highlights:

• And Lord, we pray for all of our elected officials from... ...our president down to local officials,
• Their only recourse is to go to tax ratification elections.
• This was important in a local context. ...election, by the way, as many cases of these are a local election
• Just thinking about the time and the effort we're wasting on this, whether local elected officials should
• I heard from many of our elected officials that this is not necessary.

Bills: SB 10 , SB 8 , SB 15 , SB 12 , SB 6 , SB 13 , SB 9 , SB 7 , SB 17 , SB 4 , SB10 , SB8 , SB15 , SB12 , SB6 , SB13 , SB9 , SB7 , SB17 , SB4

Transcript Highlights:

• And we've addressed it for folks like ourselves. ...elected officials, and people who deal with elections
• And we've addressed it for folks like ourselves, elected officials, and people who deal with elections
• no other elected official operating under that level of scrutiny, legal exposure, and constitutional
• No other elected official faces daily constitutional scrutiny in a courtroom.
• We should be allowing voters to have more control over their elected officials.

Summary: The committee first took up executive action on several bills. SB 5865 on garnishment forms was amended to require the Washington Pattern Forms Committee to finish the new forms by December 31, 2026, with an effective date of January 1, 2027; a competing amendment was withdrawn, and the bill received a due pass recommendation. SB 5880 on toxicology testing by certified laboratories was amended to clarify that local governments may accept private donations to help fund ISO-IEC 17025 testing, without requiring them to do so, and it also received a due pass recommendation. SB 5912 to reinstate the Indigent Defense Task Force was amended to remove legislators from the task force, add members, revise duties and reporting, and adjust staffing and reimbursement provisions; it too was advanced. SB 5855 on law enforcement face coverings drew extensive amendment debate. The committee rejected amendments that would have narrowed mask exceptions, added weather/environmental language, created a private right of action against federal officers, and established a claims account for officers, but adopted the proposed substitute and sent the bill forward on a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard public testimony on SB 6011, which would let Court of Appeals bailiffs conduct threat assessments and access certain criminal history information for Court of Appeals judges and staff, mirroring authority already given to Supreme Court bailiffs. The bill’s sponsor and the acting chief judge for Division I said the change would address increasing threats and allow bailiffs to investigate and refer matters efficiently; there was no opposition testimony. SB 6009, which would make permanent direct-review procedures for certain administrative and land-use decisions, was described as a successful COVID-era process that reduces unnecessary court steps and conserves resources. The sponsor and a Court of Appeals judge supported making the sunset provisions permanent, and testimony was generally favorable. Public hearing also continued on SB 5868, which would add one Superior Court judge each in Skagit and Yakima counties. Court officials, county leaders, and the Administrative Office of the Courts testified that both counties have growing caseloads, trial delays, and backlogs, and that the counties had budgeted their share of the cost. The committee then heard SB 5974, which would add eligibility requirements for sheriffs, police chiefs, and marshals, restrict the use of volunteers and specially commissioned officers, and clarify duties of sheriffs. Supporters argued the bill would improve professionalism, accountability, and public trust, especially in immigrant and survivor communities. Opponents, including several sheriffs, cities, and counties, argued it would undermine local control and voter authority, impose costly background checks, and raise constitutional concerns. Public testimony on SB 5974 closed when time expired, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• "We're supposed to be the ones who pick our elected officials, and we should all want the voter rolls
• We're supposed to be the ones who pick our elected officials, and we should all want the voter rolls
• This legislature has three times declined to give our elections officials authority to connect elections
• This legislature has three times declined to give our elections officials' authority to connect elections
• Representative Kolodin: Elections officials' authority to connect elections equipment to the Internet

Committee: House House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee of Reference

Summary: The Committee on Federal and Military Affairs and Elections met with all members present and began with an extended presentation on an investigative referral packet concerning alleged voter registration anomalies from March 2023 to the present. The presenter described multiple examples of registrations tied to out-of-state residents, deceased individuals, temporary residents, and registrations allegedly generated through Service Arizona, MVD, Access, county recorders, and third-party/NGO channels. The committee also discussed a Secretary of State email about party-preference changes, discrepancies between county and state counts, and a proposed criminal referral to the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice. Members asked questions about whether the issues were glitches or intentional, and several members said the examples reflected serious problems with voter-roll maintenance and automatic voter registration. A roll call was taken on whether members wished to sign onto the referral; some declined, while others agreed, and the committee said the referral would be transmitted after the meeting. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1259, which would allow certain protected individuals to use an alternate mailing address when filing candidate and financial disclosure paperwork. The sponsor said it closes a confidentiality loophole for people whose addresses are protected for safety reasons. Members raised concerns about how the bill interacts with in-district residency requirements, but the bill passed on a 6-1 vote. Senate Bill 1281, dealing with state land procedures for covered federal designations and notification of legislative leaders about land takings, drew opposition from the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter, which argued the bill was unnecessary, unfunded, and insufficiently protective of tribal consultation; it passed 4-3. Senate Bill 1037, concerning election equipment security and internet connectivity, prompted debate over whether the bill could be read to permit internet-connected election equipment and over a hostile strike-everything amendment that would have expanded voter-registration and election-administration programs, including ERIC participation and new funding. The amendment failed, and the underlying bill also failed on a 3-3-1 vote. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 1040, which would require county recorders to provide public online access to voter registration rolls and prohibit fees for downloading them. Staff explained that the bill would replace the current chairperson-request process with public access, while still excluding sensitive information such as Social Security numbers. Members debated how much information would be public and whether the bill adequately defined “voter registration rolls.” The bill passed on a 4-3 vote. The chair closed by asking members to look into school app data-sharing contracts and offered to show unredacted materials privately, then noted that dinner had been provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as is customary, we will take legislators and other elected officials out of turn.
• For more than a century, Walpole residents had had the right to elect officials who oversee important
• If we have a commission that is voted on and elected officials, those should be replaced by other elected
• Elected officials are not suggestions...
• Whenever it becomes politically inconvenient, elected officials are not suggestions; they are the direct

Bills: H5426 , H5434 , S3084 , S3087 , S3088 , S3092

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill authorizes a program to permit an election official trainee to be appointed as an election
• training that other election officials go through.
• officials and includes family members, but it doesn't include treasurers for the elected officials.
• There's no mention of the treasurer for the elected official.
• official... ...appointed or served as a judicial officer, prosecutor, public defender, elected official

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 4198, which would require employers to use E-Verify to confirm new hires’ work authorization and impose escalating penalties for violations, including warnings, debarment from state contracts, loss of business licenses, and other sanctions. Counsel and senators raised extensive drafting concerns, including circular language, conflicts with existing record-retention provisions, unclear references to “seeks to employ,” possible application to babysitters, lawn care, and other casual or household arrangements, and uncertainty about how the bill would work for employers who never actually complete a hire. The bill sponsor defended the measure as a way to strengthen compliance with existing law, protect employers who use E-Verify in good faith, and deter illegal hiring. After debate, a motion to table the bill failed on a roll call vote, 6 in favor and 10 opposed, and the chair then announced the bill would be sent to a subcommittee to be cleaned up, with instructions to resolve the drafting conflicts and other ambiguities. The committee then turned to House Bill 4710, with an amendment, which would require a person to be registered with a political party or as an independent 210 days before filing a certificate of candidacy. Counsel explained that the change would lengthen the current 60-day requirement and would affect both party-switching and independent candidacies, making it harder for candidates to change affiliation shortly before an election. Senators asked about how the 210-day period would work relative to the primary and general election filing deadlines, and counsel clarified that it would be measured backward from the relevant filing dates. The discussion focused on the practical effect of the bill as a “sore loser” measure and on the timing rules for candidacy filings.

Transcript Highlights:

• or appointed officials and their elected or appointed officials from<00:02:41.120><c> entering</c><00
• </c><00:04:19.840><c> officials</c> conversations their elected officials conversations their elected
• </c> right to know what their elected right to know what their elected officials<00:04:56.479><c> and
• <c> in</c> electeds, when elected officials in electeds, when elected officials in general<00:05:10.400
• I definitely think that having elected officials, let alone city officials, sign NDAs creates many problems

Bills: HF4077 , HF3798 , HF3886

Committee: House Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:

• as official as an official<00:05:03.800><c> language</c><00:05:04.600><c> and</c><00:05:04.720><c> shows
• </c><00:05:05.000><c> that</c><00:05:05.120><c> the</c> official language and shows that the official
• </c> portraits do we have an official portraits do we have an official portrait<00:46:45.680><c> of</
• </c> beneficiaries to be the ones to elect beneficiaries to be the ones to elect our<00:58:54.799><c>
• </c><01:13:07.639><c> changes</c> election official to enact the changes election official to enact the

Committee: Senate Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The Committee on Hawaiian Affairs opened its first meeting of the 33rd Legislature with housekeeping announcements, including live streaming, a two-minute testimony limit, and notice that the committee would reconvene later if technical problems forced an early adjournment. Members introduced themselves, and the chair explained that written testimony was already on file and that public testimony would be taken measure by measure. On SB 109, which concerns the relationship between Hawaiian and English versions of state laws, the Department of the Attorney General raised concerns that broadly allowing the Hawaiian text to supersede English could create ambiguity, and recommended narrowing the bill to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were never later amended in English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language, while OHA and several individuals also supported it. Testimony in support emphasized the importance of honoring Hawaiian language and preventing it from being treated as secondary. The committee then heard SB 268 on burial councils and SB 269 on the OHA budget. SB 268 drew strong support from OHA-related witnesses and many members of the public, who said burial council quorum problems and delays have hindered protection of iwi kupuna; one Moka representative opposed the bill, arguing the island had not been adequately consulted and that the real issue was the state process rather than council size. SB 269 received support from OHA and public testifiers who said OHA should be strengthened and better funded to serve Native Hawaiian needs. The committee also heard SB 624 relating to Prince Jonah Kūhiō, with DHHL and OHA supporting the measure to display portraits of Prince Kūhiō in public buildings; testifiers said the bill would promote cultural pride, education, and recognition of his legacy. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• ES&S is fully committed to ensuring election officials have the voting technology that they need to administer
• But today, just as we have adapted and changed to meet the needs of election officials and voters over
• over</c><00:54:20.480><c> the</c> election officials and voters over the election officials and voters
• And let's remember, too, that just in terms of, you know, getting to the official result of elections
• Election officials, staff, poll workers, and yes, even the employees of the voting systems vendor are

Summary: The committee met, approved the October 21 minutes, and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal to prohibit the use of tax dollars and public resources to advocate for or against ballot questions, including constitutional amendments. Senator Rawlings and the other presenters argued the current law already bars such advocacy but lacks meaningful enforcement, citing the 2024 school choice amendment campaign and other examples where public officials and school systems allegedly used taxpayer-funded resources to influence voters. They said the bill would add civil and criminal penalties, while preserving First Amendment rights for public employees acting in their personal capacities. Much of the discussion focused on whether the bill should be limited to school districts or broadened to cover other public entities, and on how to define terms such as “advocating in impartial terms.” Members raised concerns about possible effects on county and city lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, on legitimate factual explanations by public officials, and on whether the bill could unintentionally restrict needed representation for local governments. The sponsors said the measure was intended to be narrow, would be vetted further, and would not bar individuals from speaking on their own behalf. Several members suggested revisions. Representative Lockett asked that schools and school employees be specifically named, and suggested separating the lobbying restrictions from the ballot-measure provisions into different bills. Representative Layman questioned the meaning of the bill’s language and whether it would cover factual testimony by officials. Representative Heen asked about a Jefferson County example involving legal fees used to challenge petition signatures; counsel said that situation would likely be allowable under the bill as drafted, though some members thought it should be covered. No final vote was taken on BR 25 during this discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I quite frankly believe that we should treat JPs as elected officials.
• And I quite frankly believe that we should treat JPs as elected officials and not as employees, which
• And I quite frankly believe that we should treat JPs as elected officials. and I quite frankly believe
• that we should treat JPs as elected officials and not as employees which is the reason why I'm bringing
• Second, my ability to manage the court as an accountable elected official was materially diminished.

Committee: House House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2663, which expands military leave protections by aligning state law language with federal military orders and clarifying that state and non-state employees called to service or training are covered. Representative Pena said the bill was intended to remove confusion and had no material impact on benefits. After brief supportive discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to give HB 2663 a do pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2976, a bill establishing due process requirements before state or county entities can alter a justice of the peace’s statutory authority and clarifying the limits of administrative control over justice courts. Representative Hernandez and two Pima County justices of the peace testified in support, describing administrative orders that had removed local control without notice, findings, or a clear path to restoration. Leanna Garcia of the Arizona Supreme Court opposed the bill, arguing it conflicted with the Constitution’s grant of administrative supervision to the Supreme Court and that the court already uses complaint-driven oversight, education, and intervention when needed. After extensive debate over constitutional authority, due process, and the role of elected JPs, the committee voted 6-1 to recommend HB 2976 do pass. Next, the committee considered HB 2406, which directs the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to study veterans’ awareness of available state, local, and federal benefits and report recommendations to improve outreach. Supporters said many veterans do not know the full range of benefits and that the study could identify gaps in awareness and help guide future outreach. Members questioned what exactly would be studied and whether a study was necessary, but several said the testimony clarified the bill’s purpose. The committee approved HB 2406 with a 5-1-1 vote. Finally, the committee heard HB 2226, which requires courts at initial appearance to ask whether a defendant is a veteran so eligible cases can be referred to veterans programs or treatment/diversion options. Testimony in support said the inquiry would help identify veterans early and connect them to services at no cost. A member raised a Fifth Amendment concern that veteran status could be incriminating in some cases; the bill’s supporter agreed to an amendment clarifying that the answer could not be used against the defendant in later proceedings. The transcript ends during discussion of that proposed amendment, before a final committee vote on HB 2226 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• that we should treat JPs as elected officials and not as employees, which is the reason why I'm bringing
• And I quite frankly believe that we should treat JPs as elected officials. and I quite frankly believe
• that we should treat JPs as elected officials and not as employees which is the reason why I'm bringing
• Second, my ability to manage the court as an accountable elected official was materially diminished.
• But I think, as elected officials, there's got to be some bifurcation of the system if we're going to

Bills: HB2226 , HB2406 , HB2663 , HB2695 , HB2805 , HB2976

Committees: House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections , House House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee of Reference

Keywords: veteran status, veterans court, treatment court, diversion program, initial appearance, arrestee processing, criminal procedure, DD-214, Department of Veterans' Services, prosecuting agency, court notification, military service, armed forces, veterans benefits, reentry, mental health court, drug court, specialty court, Arizona criminal law, pretrial hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• Moreno was first elected to the Texas House in 1966.
• You served as the first elected official in Uvalde to show up at Robb Elementary that tragic day, did
• front of the Committee on Elections.
• SB 2216 by Hughes relating to the security of election system equipment for the Committee on Elections
• Elections.

Bills: HJR98 , HJR8 , HJR133 , HB23 , HB33 , HB144 , HB 109 , HB 103 , HB148 , HB3809 , HB1686 , HB2217 , HB2156 , HB220 , HB2421 , HB2363 , HB3773 , HB421 , HB2584 , HB2615 , HB2455 , HB3711 , HB2559 , HB3747 , HB2775 , HB2886 , HB3126 , HB3666 , HB3595 , HB3260 , HB3506 , HB1638 , HB3376 , HB3826 , HB3628 , HB1349 , HB3770 , HB1831 , HB1762 , HB2614 , HB3113 , HB267 , HB322 , HB431 , HB869 , HB 1203 , HB 1201 , HB 1244 , HB1875 , HB1950 , HB2152 , HB2290 , HB2341 , HB2436 , HB2809 , HB2856 , HB3012 , HB2954 , HCR56 , HCR102 , HB 107 , HB1587 , HB3684 , HB658 , HJR99 , HB1399 , HJR5 , HJR2 , HJR6 , HJR31 , HB1971 , SJR3 , HB1775 , HJR72 , HB502 , HB3109 , HJR98 , HJR8 , HJR133 , HB 118 , HB388 , HB 114 , HB205 , HB2789 , HB2791 , HB499 , HB2960 , HB3163 , HB3135 , HB2427 , HB1618 , HB1672 , HB1722 , HB1338 , HB787 , HB2618 , HB879 , HB 1126 , HB4134 , HB3513 , HB718 , HB1536 , HB1445 , HB1640 , HB1893 , HB1734 , HB3229 , HB3306 , HB 1276 , HB3272 , HB3276 , HB3516 , HB4145 , HB1585 , HB4810 , HB2989 , HB2558 , HB3014 , HB2742 , HB1695 , HB23 , HB33 , HB144 , HB 109 , HB 103 , HB148 , HB3809 , HB1686 , HB2217 , HB2156 , HB220 , HB2421 , HB2363 , HB3773 , HB421 , HB2584 , HB2615 , HB2455 , HB3711 , HB2559 , HB3747 , HB2775 , HB2886 , HB3126 , HB3666 , HB3595 , HB3260 , HB3506 , HB1638 , HB3376 , HB3826 , HB3628 , HB1349 , HB3770 , HB1831 , HB1762 , HB2614 , HB3113 , HB267 , HB322 , HB431 , HB869 , HB 1203 , HB 1201 , HB 1244 , HB1875 , HB1950 , HB2152 , HB2290 , HB2341 , HB2436 , HB2809 , HB2856 , HB3012 , HB2954 , HCR56 , HCR102

Transcript Highlights:

• to overturn the results of their elections.
• I deal with violence against public officials.
• threats intended to influence their official actions.
• threats intended to influence their official actions.
• This bill would also update your state's post-election procedures to ensure that state officials can

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws

Summary: The Committee on Election Laws held a hearing with three bills on the agenda, though the transcript focuses primarily on House Bill 5086, a measure to reform the handling of presidential electors. Testimony from Public Citizen, the Uniform Law Commission, and Protect Democracy supported the bill, describing it as a way to prevent “faithless electors,” require a pledge of faithfulness, replace any elector who violates that pledge, and ensure Massachusetts meets updated federal Electoral College deadlines. Witnesses also emphasized concerns about political coercion and threats against public officials, and several noted that similar laws have been adopted in many other states. Committee members raised questions about how the bill would interact with Massachusetts’ participation in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Witnesses responded that the bill is intended to be fully compatible with the compact, but suggested a minor amendment to make that clearer and avoid any mistaken reading that the bill weakens or rejects the compact. They also explained that the bill would not change how Massachusetts currently appoints electors under the compact framework, but would protect those electors from pressure or coercion. After questions concluded, the chair noted that testimony had also been heard from Representative Breguire, the Governor’s office on the other two bills, and Representative Hogan. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• to overturn the results of their elections.
• I deal with violence against public officials.
• threats intended to influence their official actions.
• threats intended to influence their official actions.
• This bill would also update your state's post-election procedures to ensure that state officials can

Bills: H5227 , H5129 , H5086

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws

Transcript Highlights:

• to overturn the results of their elections.
• I deal with violence against public officials.
• threats intended to influence their official actions.
• threats intended to influence their official actions.
• This bill would also update your state's post-election procedures to ensure that state officials can

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws

Summary: The Committee on Election Laws held a hearing with House and Senate chairs and several members participating in person and online. The main bill discussed was House Bill 5086, the Electoral Count Reform/Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act, which would require presidential electors in Massachusetts to sign a faithfulness pledge, automatically replace any elector who casts a vote contrary to the state’s popular vote, and update state procedures to meet federal Electoral Count Act deadlines and paperwork requirements. Testimony in support came from Public Citizen, the Uniform Law Commission, and Protect Democracy United. Witnesses argued the bill would protect against coercion, threats, and “faithless electors,” and said it would help ensure Massachusetts’ electoral votes reflect voters’ choices and cannot be rejected on technical grounds. One witness noted the bill is already enacted in many states and has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, and several organizations endorsed the model approach. Members asked about how the bill would interact with Massachusetts’ participation in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The witness said the bill is compatible with the compact and suggested a minor clarifying amendment to avoid any implication that the state is stepping away from it. After testimony and questions, the chair noted that testimony had also been received on the other two bills from Representative Breguire, the governor’s office, and Representative Hogan, and the committee then adjourned without taking a vote in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It mandates anti-hate training for elected officials, not the public, the lawmakers themselves.
• That is what this bill does to elected officials.
• To teach the elected officials chosen, And now you want to retrain them, to teach the elected officials
• And so we just need to make sure elected officials are aware...
• And so we just need to make sure elected officials are aware.

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• It was drafted as elected officials.
• So, decisions that... the idea of an elected official entering the idea of an elected official entering
• </c><00:25:13.840><c> are</c> None of the elected officials are None of the elected officials are signing
• </c> It was drafted as elected officials. It was drafted as elected officials.
• </c><00:25:47.960><c> with</c> elected officials who are elected with elected officials who are elected

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• He did not go into all the details, but the coroner was an elected official.
• After this, it happened as commissioners and the sheriff, the auditor, and others, elected officials
• But since he was an elected official, we didn't have the power to do that.
• After this, it happened as commissioners and the sheriff, the auditor, and others, elected officials
• But since he was an elected official, we didn't have the power to do that.

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee heard briefings and public testimony on several bills. SB 6064 would let qualifying regional fire protection districts or authorities take over administration and enforcement of the International Fire Code within their boundaries, with notice to counties and equivalent jobs for displaced workers; supporters said it would improve consistency and local control, while counties, fire marshals, and builders opposed it as unnecessary and likely to add permitting complexity and delay. SB 6101 would require county coroners to be appointed rather than elected, while preserving appointed medical examiners in larger counties; the sponsor cited the Yakima County coroner controversy as the reason for the bill, and opponents argued it would reduce voter accountability and could increase costs, though some supporters said appointment would professionalize death investigations and improve consistency. SB 6077 would extend from 21 to 28 business days the deadline for assessors and taxpayers to exchange valuation evidence before property tax appeal hearings, with supporters saying the change would give taxpayers a fairer chance to respond and opponents saying the bill should also address long delays in scheduling hearings themselves. The committee also heard SB 5820, which would repeal Clark County-specific Growth Management Act authority allowing freight rail-dependent uses on certain resource lands adjacent to a short-line railroad. The sponsor and supporters said the 2017 law was a poorly written special exemption that threatens agricultural and resource lands and should be repealed; opponents, including the railroad operator, business groups, and local officials, argued the rail overlay supports economic development, jobs, and low-emission freight movement and that the county should retain local control. Testimony on SB 5820 also raised concerns about safety, land-use conflicts, and the meaning of “adjacent,” with some witnesses saying the land is currently underused and others saying it is needed for future industrial and rail-served development. Finally, the committee heard SB 6013, an agency-request bill updating ski-area terminology and safety provisions to include aerial tramways, toes, and conveyors in the state’s ski lift regulations. State Parks supported the measure as a technical update to align safety inspections, insurance requirements, and rider conduct rules with current equipment terminology. The transcript ended before any vote or executive action was taken on these bills, and the chair noted some previously scheduled executive session items were moved to a later date.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> elected officials. elected officials. &gt;&gt; Thank<01:14:18.400><c> you.
• </c><01:20:27.040><c> officials</c> state and county elected officials state and county elected officials
• </c><01:21:04.719><c> officials</c> a prohibition from elected officials a prohibition from elected officials
• c> pledged</c> harm elected officials who have pledged harm elected officials who have pledged not<01
• </c><01:54:32.960><c> officials</c> difficult for those elected officials difficult for those elected

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1525, which would appropriate funds to counties to open more voter service centers for in-person voting, provide money to the Office of Elections to print and mail the voter information guide to all registered voters, and support a public outreach campaign to increase voter participation. The Office of Elections supported the bill and estimated costs of a little over $2 million to print and mail the guide and about $178,000 for outreach, noting it spent about $441,000 on election advertising in 2024. Testimony from advocacy groups including Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action, Common Cause Hawaii, and Indivisible Hawaii strongly supported the measure, emphasizing access for neighbor island voters, people with disabilities, new voters, and voters who need ballot assistance. County election officials from Honolulu, Maui, and Kauai provided comments or testimony that were more cautious. They said additional funding would be welcome, but staffing and logistics remain major constraints, especially for election-day service centers. Honolulu’s city clerk said funding alone would not necessarily solve long lines, while Maui’s county clerk explained that voter service centers require trained seasonal employees, extensive training, and the ability to handle many ballot styles. Maui also described its current pop-up sites, including Hana, as expensive but necessary for remote communities, and said the county is already running at bare minimum staffing. Members asked questions about who decides how many service centers are opened, how staffing is handled, and whether there is a middle-ground model between the old precinct polling places and the current voter service center system. Honolulu explained that county clerks make those decisions under current law and that the county has tried pop-up sites in addition to its main centers. The discussion also noted that in 2024 most voters used vote by mail, while a smaller number used early in-person voting or final-day service centers. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:22:02.320><c> election</c><00:22:02.720><c> officials</c><00:22:03.120><c> here</c><00:22:03.279>
• <c> today</c> officials election officials here today officials election officials here today is<00:22
• It also helps the local election officials when they're processing those ballots because they can see
• <00:35:06.079><c> officials</c><00:35:06.640><c> when</c><00:35:07.079><c> they're</c> election officials
• when they're election officials when they're processing<00:35:07.960><c> those</c><00:35:08.200><c>

Committee: Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs