Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Engagement Institutions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves substitute on civic engagement for people in state custody after debate over enforcement and rights language
Summary
A proposed substitute to House Bill 1147 that defines civic engagement duties for state institutions and a civic engagement coordinator was reported out with a due-pass recommendation after members debated whether the measure should establish a private right of action and what enforcement path should apply.
The State Government & Tribal Relations Committee voted to report a proposed substitute to House Bill 1147 (H1092.1) out of committee with a due-pass recommendation after extended discussion about whether the measure should create enforceable individual rights.
Representative Farvar, the bill’s sponsor for the substitute, told the committee the proposal updates a previously heard substitute by removing certain items — such as registering to vote, casting votes and receiving electoral information — from the enumerated list of civic engagement rights. The substitute adds responsibilities to a civic engagement coordinator position, including providing technical assistance to agencies and coordinating civic engagement programming and information. The Office of Equity would be required to coordinate with the Secretary of State to facilitate voting access, and agencies would submit annual reports to the Legislature about civic engagement activities. The bill clarifies it does not apply to local agencies or facilities operated by local agencies.
Two amendments were considered and rejected. Shift 063, offered by Representative Chase, would have removed references to a “right of civic engagement” and instead referenced an individual’s “ability to participate in civic engagement.” Chase said that wording is a better fit with past practice. The committee rejected Shift 063.
Shift 064, moved by Representative Walsh, would have removed the bill’s civil-enforcement specifications — including the standard of judicial review and any requirement that individuals exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit. Walsh said the amendment was intended to limit the risk of litigation between agencies or from private suits; proponents of the bill argued exhaustion requirements are necessary to ensure internal remedies are tried first. The committee rejected Shift 064.
Representative Farvar described the substitute as the product of extensive work with people with lived experience and said it aims to reconnect incarcerated and institutionalized individuals with civic life. Representative Walsh and others expressed concerns about potential litigation and asked for clearer administrative processes before resorting to civil actions.
After debate the committee reported the substitute out by voice vote; staff announced the tally as 4 ayes, 2 nays and 1 excused.
