North Carolina voting, election boards changes move closer to consideration by the full state Senate

RALEIGH, N.C. (WGHP) – The two bills that would make significant changes in how boards of elections are filled and some of the rules by which they would manage voting on both the state and local levels are nearing a floor vote in the North Carolina Senate.

The Senate Redistricting and Elections Committee on Thursday morning approved by voice vote amended versions of SB 747 and SB 749, which Republicans have introduced with considerable complaint from Democrats.

SB 749 – titled “No Partisan Advantage in Elections” – would change the make-up of state and county boards of election by removing appointments by the governor and providing what GOP senators have described as a more balanced control.

SB 747 – called “Election Law Changes” – proposes changes in voting processes, particularly regarding absentee ballots and same-day voter registration.

Democrats have called the two-bill combo – discussed at length on Wednesday — “power grabs” that were influenced by attorney Cleta Mitchell and her election-reform organization. Mitchell, who supported former President Donald Trump’s unfounded claims of voter fraud as he tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election he lost to President Joe Biden, consulted and met with GOP about the bills that some say were copied from her proposals.

And two members of North Carolina Election Integrity – which is a group affiliated with Mitchell – participated in public comments at both hearings held by the committee. On Thursday they reaffirmed how numerous elements in the bill matched the goals of Mitchell’s group and the conservative Heritage Foundation.

There also are issues with whether the General Assembly is adequately funding boards of election to deal with these specific requirements while also implementing the voter ID law that was reinstated in April by the North Carolina Supreme Court. And there are questions about constitutionality, given prior court decisions and the public’s defeat of a similar amendment in 2018.

Despite those controversies, the bills were approved to move to the Senate Rules Committee, which would be the last stop before a floor vote. It’s unclear when either of those events might occur, but they likely would be next week.

The House has not announced any proposed election changes, but committee leaders have indicated that leadership in the two chambers have been discussing how the Senate’s bill might be received in the House.

Amendments to SB 747

Sen. Warren Daniel (R-Buncombe), in pitching SB 747, had staff members discuss an amendment, which Sen. Paul Newton (R-Cabarrus), a cosponsor and committee chair, said was based on suggestions that “came in overnight.”

That amendment, in general terms, clarified concerns about documentation for same-day voter registration that could be used to ensure the vote was counted rather than provisional, adjusted dates when presidential electors would meet to cast their ballots, clarified the jury-duty/citizenship list required to be developed and shared and made new mandates for information to be distributed about voter ID requirements. It was approved.

A second amendment proposed by Sen. Mujtaba A. Mohammed (D-Mecklenburg) addressed various issues, such as the allowance of in-kind donations of a voting site to be allowed under the no-outside-money provision, specifics about who can help voters at a booth, including deadlines for absentee voting on distributed information, removing the signature verification requirement, changing the frequency of the updated jury disqualification lists and to establish a 10-county pilot program to evaluate the signature verification software and its costs.

After “standing at ease” for a few minutes, the committee decided to refer this amendment for presentation on the Senate floor.

Sen. Joyce Krawiec (R-Forsyth) also addressed an issue that had generated significant discussion on Wednesday: the elimination of the 3-day window after election day to receive mail-in ballots. She cited how the post office no longer postmarked every piece of mail and wondered how a ballot received in the three days could be valid without a postmark (which has been required by election day).

Amendment to SB 749

Daniels also asked the staff to explain an amendment to SB 749, and it mostly was technical. But it did clarify that, because the county election boards are appointed in odd-number years and the bill specifies the new appointment process would take effect in 2024, the first county board seated under this bill would serve a 3-year term, until 2027, when the odd-year rotation would resume.

Sen. Julie Mayfield (D-Buncombe) questioned how the General Assembly would go about the process of filling county board vacancies, which she said occurred every month. What would happen if the General Assembly was in recess, for instance?

Staff members said that the appointments would require the approval of the full General Assembly – not just the leadership named in the bill to make those choices – and that if a vacancy occurred while lawmakers were on hiatus, that position would remain vacant until they could act.

Mohammed said this sounded like an error, and Sen. Ralph Hise (R-Alleghany), another vice chair and sponsor, said this is an “error we haven’t discussed yet, I would say.”

Newton said that “most of the noise I’m hearing is about local boards of election. We are open to suggestions.”

Mayfield said she continues “to be worried it [an even-numbered board] will lead to bipartisan gridlock. … What would happen if a local board can’t come to a decision on anything?”

She mentioned early voting and what would happen if a local board deadlocked on hours/sites etc. “The remedy is that there would be only one voting site in an entire county?” she asked.

Early voting plans in each county by statute must be approved unanimously by those boards, staff members said, otherwise that plan does revert to one site in a county.

“It could be a huge incentive for the minority party not to agree to early voting and thereby limit early voting for everyone,” Mayfield said. “I know your intent is to drive away from partisan decision-making, but there is a huge opportunity in this issue.”

Staffers reminded that under statute in that situation, any member of a county board can petition the state board to approve an alternative plan and that nothing in this bill changes that.

More public comments

About half of the half-dozen public comments were from the same individuals who spoke Wednesday, but there were two notable newcomers.

Dallas Woodhouse, a longtime GOP activist and official, opposed some details in the bills but also used his 2 minutes to criticize the comments from Gov. Roy Cooper, who said the bills were “a way to rig elections.” Woodhouse said that was “false, Trumpian and disgusting.”

Kimberly Hardy, a vice chair with the NC Democratic Party, said that “no one has asked for these [bills].” She said she didn’t like the appointment power being taken away from the governor. “There is no substantive evidence that either of these bills are necessary.”

What’s in SB 747?

• Stipulates all ballots except overseas and military ballots must be received by 7:30 p.m. on General Election Day to be counted.
• Requires local elections boards to employ signature verification software for absentee ballots and to have two signatures for verification on mail-in ballots.
• Alters rules for same-day voter registration by saying ballots will be provisional unless ID requirements are met.
• Bans counties from receiving grants to help pay for election expenses.
• Makes it easier for a person to accuse someone of voter fraud.
• Requires the courts to provide lists of excused jurors so voter rolls can be scrubbed of anyone who “claimed they aren’t a citizen to get out of jury duty.”

What’s in SB 749?

• Expands the makeup of the state Board of Elections from five to eight members and includes equal appointments from both chambers of the General Assembly and both parties. Previously the governor appointed members and controlled the partisan balance. Senate Leader Phil Berger (R-Rockingham), House Speaker Tim Moore (R-Cleveland) and the minority leaders in each chamber – currently Sen. Dan Blue (D-Wake) and Rep. Robert Reives II (D-Randolph) – would review names suggested by party leaders and choose four representatives from each.
• The eight would be named and seated as soon as the bill were to become law, and they could include current members of the state BOE – which are three Democrats and two Republicans appointed through 2027.
• Stipulates that one of those eight would be elected BOE chair.
• The board would continue to hire the state executive director. Karen Brinson Bell, who has held that post since 2019, recently was retained until May 15, 2025.
• The board would be moved administratively under the Secretary of State’s office.
• Terms are 4 years, effective on May 1 after the Council of State election (which would be 2024), and as is the case now, no person can serve more than two consecutive terms.
• County boards of elections would reduce from five members to four who would serve 2-year terms and would be appointed by the General Assembly in the same manner as the state board. Each county board would elect a chair each year. This would take effect in January 2024.

Source: Fox 8 News Channel