House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB366 - Committee on Federal and State Affairs
Short Title
Requiring that county election officers receive a request for an application for an advance voting ballot from a voter before mailing such application to such voter.
Minutes Content for Wed, Jan 24, 2024
Jason Long, Office of the Revisor of Statutes, gave an overview of the bill. SB366, amends statute to provide that advance voting ballot applications can only be mailed from a county election office to a voter if the voter has requested an application, and no portion of the application can be completed prior to being mailed.
The Chairman called for proponent testimony.
Proponent Oral Testimony
Charlotte O'Hara, a Johnson County Commissioner, testified as a private citizen and proponent of the bill. She stated last year 417,856 advance ballot requests were sent out by the election commissioner of Johnson County. Printing of these mailers cost $65,417, and postage cost $65,638, for a total cost of $131,055. Ms. O'Hara was concerned about security of addressee's personal information, and also for ballot security, because mail floats around for many days and mail-in ballots are the weakest link in election security. She stated the mass mailing took place without consulting with, or receiving permission from the Secretary of State. (Attachment 2)
Kelly Wyer, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated she recently ran for city council, and lost the election by 33 votes, and was behind by 11 votes before the mail in ballots came in. The election commissioner, Fred Sherman, sent out a mailer on card stock that was prepopulated with voter information. She questioned why that was necessary since we have advance voting for days, and election day voting. She stated there are no checks and balances with mail in ballots. (Attachment 3)
Wallace Boersma, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. He stated three members of his family received prefilled applications for mail in ballots that had their names, addresses and dates of birth listed on the applications. He explained this was alarming to them, because they were prior victims of identity theft, and found this action by the county election office to be reckless, as well as costly, and casts doubt on the election results. (Attachment 4)
Kim Gish, private citizen, spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated she is a grassroots volunteer in Sedgwick County. She pays a fee to receive a list of people who have requested advanced ballots, and then will go to the homes listed, to campaign for candidates. She said that over the past several years, she has seen a drastic increase in the number of people requesting advance ballots, the party affiliation is overwhelmingly Democrat, and if we are going to be sending out advance ballot applications, it needs to be fair and secure. (Attachment 5)
Proponent Written Only Testimony
Brett Anderson, private citizen (Attachment 6)
Debbie Detmer, private citizen (Attachment 7)
Karen Gibbons, private citizen (Attachment 8)
Jaime Kissinger, private citizen (Attachment 9)
Vickie Kline, private citizen (Attachment 10)
Nancy Moneymaker, private citizen (Attachment 11)
Jill O'Connor, private citizen (Attachment 12)
Shanxi Omoniyi, private citizen (Attachment 13)
Thad Snider, private citizen (Attachment 14)
David Upsdell, private citizen(Attachment 15)
Mei Upsdell, private citizen (Attachment 16)
Neutral Oral Testimony
Clay Barker, Deputy Secretary of State, General Counsel, spoke as neutral on the bill. He stated whether or not to mail out advance applications is usually a county decision. He also said that Fred Sherman, the Johnson County election officer, didn't break the law in sending out the applications, and as for the privacy concern, date of birth is public record. He said the bill would have no impact on permanent applications for mail in ballots. (Attachment 17)
The Chairman called for opponent testimony.
Opponent Oral Testimony
Davis Hammet, Loud Light Civic Action, spoke as an opponent of the bill. He said SB366 is to coddle Kansans who have fallen victim to election conspiracies in reaction to "misinformation". He considers it a voter suppression bill, which aims to fix a nonexistent problem. (Attachment 18)
Rick Piepho, Harvey County Clerk and Election Officer spoke as an opponent of the bill, stating whether or not to send advance ballot applications is a local control issue. Some counties do this regularly. He said mail-in voting is a way to reduce costs in running an election, it might offset other costs, and filling in the information for the voter helps the election office process the ballot. (Attachment 19)
Erin Woods, private citizen, spoke as an opponent of the bill. She stated the mailer sent by Johnson County was helpful for voter education. She was impressed with the voter guide that came with the application. She said her election offices have sufficient controls in place to make sure elections are secure. (Attachment 20)
Cille King, League of Women Voters, spoke as an opponent of the bill. She said SB366 takes control away from counties on how they run their elections, and thinks the bill is voter suppression. (Attachment 21)
Opponent Written Only Testimony
Rashane Hamby, ACLU of Kansas (Attachment 22)
Corliss Jacobs, private citizen (Attachment 23)
Hillary Junk, private citizen (Attachment 24)
Nathan Madden, Health Forward (Attachment 25)
The Chairman closed the hearing on SB366 and adjourned the meeting at 11:52 am.
