Senate committee hears bill saying state election law supersedes home-rule election ordinances

The Senate State and Local Government Committee opened and heard testimony on House Bill 1307, which would state that county and city home-rule charter provisions pertaining to elections are void if they conflict with state election statutes.

Representative Jim Casper, the bill sponsor, said the measure is driven by a recent Supreme Court ruling and aims to ensure consistent election rules across the state. "Home rule charter... will abide by state law," Casper said, summarizing the bill's effect and noting sections that apply to county and city charters.

The bill’s supporters framed it as a uniformity measure. Michael Howe, North Dakota secretary of state, testified in favor: "This bill provides for uniform election administration across the state, which I believe supports election integrity and helps public understanding and confidence in our elections." Howe cited examples where differing local practices—such as fee-based ballot access, alternative tabulation methods, or local attestation procedures—have raised concerns for statewide consistency.

Opponents said the bill would eliminate locally adopted processes that were approved by voters and could have broader unintended effects. Stephanie Ingebretson, representing the North Dakota League of Cities, said the bill "removes the ability for a city to use home rule authority to regulate local issues regarding elections and provides that any election related ordinance adopted using home rule authority is void." She urged lawmakers to consider narrower language and warned that the bill could strip cities of initiative and referral provisions within their charters.

Terry Efords, representing Fargo, said that many political subdivisions submitted testimony in opposition and that the issue behind the bill often arises from a single city’s voter-driven change to its voting method. He called for continued conversation about whether the bill could be narrowed.

Committee members asked sponsors and witnesses to clarify the bill’s scope, including whether it was intended to address a specific local change or to set a statewide rule about alternative voting methods such as approval voting or ranked-choice voting. Howe and Casper said the intent was statewide uniformity and that the secretary of state’s office should be able to provide a single set of rules to counties and auditors.

The committee closed the hearing on House Bill 1307 without taking a final vote and moved on to other bills. Staff and witnesses indicated potential paths for drafting narrower exceptions to address local petition processes while preserving statewide minimum standards.

Why it matters: The proposal would reduce the ability of home-rule cities and counties to adopt election procedures that differ from state law. Supporters say that prevents confusion and preserves uniform administration; opponents warn it could remove locally adopted procedures voters approved and could eliminate local initiative/ referral mechanisms unless the bill is narrowly drafted.