Committee orders drafting of Secretary of State budget amendments after review of fiscal notes for election outreach and website notices

The Appropriations - Education and Environment Division voted to have amendments to the Secretary of State’s base budget drafted and returned to the committee for review after a departmental briefing that identified fiscal impacts tied to pending legislation.

Secretary of State staff briefed the committee on bills they are tracking that carry fiscal notes, including a senator-sponsored bill that would require the office to mail explanatory materials to all active voters for statewide ballot questions and a Public Service Commission proposal to post public notices on the Secretary of State’s website. Liz Parent, fiscal director for the office, joined the secretary in answering committee questions.

The senator-authored measure — described to the committee by the secretary as coming from “Senator Bearden” — includes a roughly $600,000 fiscal note for mailing explanatory materials to every active voter in the central voter file. The office said the proposal follows a model used by the State of Colorado and, as written, would require a mailing 45 days before Election Day explaining “what a yes vote means, what a no vote means, any fiscal notes.” The secretary told the committee the $600,000 figure reflects postage and paper costs to reach every active voter.

The office also identified a separate bill from the Public Service Commission that would move broader public notices onto the Secretary of State’s website. That proposal, the office estimated, would require a significant overhaul of the agency’s current public-meeting website and carries a fiscal estimate near $100,000.

The committee chair invited public comment on House Bill 1002; the transcript records the chair asking whether anyone wished to express support or opposition, but no public-testimony details were recorded in the transcript excerpt reviewed.

Representative Mark Martinson moved that the committee proceed with drafting amendments to adopt changes to the base budget and return those draft amendments for committee review. “I don’t see any reason why we should sit on this. I think we should just recommend the due pass,” Martinson said before making the motion. A second was entered (speaker not identified in the transcript). During the roll call, the clerk recorded Vice Chair Swiatek, Representative Louser, Martinson and Richter voting yes; the clerk then declared the motion carried. The transcript does not record vote names for other members or a full tally.

The committee closed the hearing and scheduled to reconvene the following morning at 9 a.m. for the next subject on the agenda.

Why it matters: The two pieces of legislation flagged by the Secretary of State’s office would increase the agency’s spending and could change how voters receive information about ballot questions and how public notices are published statewide. Drafting and adopting budget amendments would determine whether the costs are absorbed in the agency’s base budget or require new appropriations.