Committee hears bill to let active-duty military, spouses serve as poll workers despite nonresident registration

The House Committee on Elections heard testimony on House Bill 2018, a bill that would prevent the secretary of state or any county election officer from disqualifying an individual from serving as a poll worker on the basis of residency or registered‑voter status if the person is a U.S. citizen and an active military member, spouse or dependent.

The reviser summarized the bill by noting it “relates to the qualification of poll workers” and that existing statute already allows 16‑year‑olds to serve. The reviser said the bill “provides that the secretary of state nor any county election officer shall disqualify any an individual from serving as a poll worker... if the individual is a citizen of The United States and an active military member or spouse or other dependent.”

Proponents said the change would address a practical barrier for military families who are stationed in Kansas but maintain legal residency elsewhere. Kim Borchers, a proponent who leads a civic engagement program for military families, said the bill would let spouses who maintain out‑of‑state legal residency nonetheless volunteer locally: “If we let 16 year olds be poll workers, I think this is just kind of a common sense solution,” she said, adding that military families are a recruitment pool for younger poll workers. Mike Kelly of the Kansas Council of Chapters of the Military Officers Association of America argued the bill would help military spouses build local ties and employment pathways.

Sarah Strider, testifying by WebEx for the Secure Families Initiative, said Kansas could be the first state to remove this particular residency barrier and offered possible guardrails: requiring demonstration of military orders showing local stationing, or exempting spouses from residency restrictions while preserving other safeguards. She added that Department of Defense rules already limit active duty participation in official capacities and that spouses act as private citizens when volunteering.

Neutral testimony came from Clay Barker, general counsel for the Kansas Secretary of State, who supported county implementation but asked that language referring to the secretary of state be removed because “only county election officers have authority over appointing poll workers” and the secretary lacks regulatory authority over poll worker appointments.

Opponents voiced operational and security concerns. Missy Levitt said she appreciated military service but asked for clearer definitions of “dependent,” clearer documentary standards for eligibility and cautioned against unintended consequences; she also noted available high‑school and college poll worker volunteers in some counties. Committee members discussed practical questions about county boundaries, whether poll workers must reside in a precinct that feeds a polling place and possible amendments to require proof of military orders or limit eligibility to residents of a county or adjacent counties.

The chair closed the hearing and directed members to review written testimony filed with the committee. No committee vote or final action on HB2018 was recorded at this meeting.

Why it matters: The bill would change who is eligible to serve as poll workers in counties with active‑duty populations, potentially expanding the volunteer pool at polling places located near military installations and affecting local election staffing practices.

What’s next: Committee members flagged options for amendments (for example, requiring demonstration of military orders or removing secretary of state references) and requested follow‑up on written testimony; no vote was taken at this meeting.