Senator Erich M Fabricius submitted the following report regarding Government Bill 38, "Board of Elections Act", on Wednesday, October 30th 2002, as sponsor to said act , and on behalf of himself and all primary sponsors:

Purpose of Legislation:

The Board of Elections Act seeks to refine the NCSU Board of Elections by removing executive functions from the Elections Commission and placing them in a structure of Elections Supervisors. The Commission is granted additional powers, including rule-making and fining of candidates.

Background Information:

The Senate adopted the Student Body Elections Act, GB 58, last session, that completely rewrote the elections laws. This act created the Board of Elections and the Elections Commission out of the former Elections Board. The act created two classes of duties for the Commission, deliberative and non-deliberative, and gave the chair extra power on non-deliberative matters. Minor non-Commission positions were created, as were specialized offices on the Commission itself.

General Layout:

Bill amends chapter 7 in statute order. Primary clauses involve the modification of the present Art. 2 and Art. 3, which regulate the Board itself. Other clauses modify references and procedures concerning the different Board positions.

In Seriatim Description:

Section 1. Defines the conventions regarding Supervisors.

Section 2. Currently, special elections may operate with the minimum of a commission chair. The new clause would require a minimum of a supervisor, who essentially fills the same role.

Section 3. Replaces several cases which the commission chair is given an executive duty with the supervisor.

Section 4. Replaces several cases which the commission is given an executive duty with the supervisor.

Section 5. Replaces several cases which the commission is given some duty with the supervisors.

Section 6. Replaces several cases which the broad board of elections is given a duty with the specific supervisors of elections.

Section 7. Changes petitions for withdrawal to go through the supervisor.

Section 8. Changes the BoE article to the Supervisor article. An article on the Commission is added later.

Section 9. Provisions dealing with the Commission's duties and membership are struck, replaced with clauses on the Supervisor positions.

Section 9A. Increases the promotional responsibility for the Supervisors.

Section 10. Splits off certification from tabulation and certification. The Supervisors will tabulate, the commission will certify.

Section 11. Inserts an article on the Elections Commission, including both new clauses and clauses moved from the old Art. 2. Specifically grants authority for the Commission to implement new rules to deal with unexpected situations.

Section 12. Empowers the Commission to fine candidates in severe violation of the rules of election.

Section 13. Requires that the Commission issue a warning with a disqualification hearing, allowing it to count in the "three-strikes" policy and permitting fines.

Section 14. Adds rehearing language explicitly for the appeal of fines.

Section 15. Replaces the section on re-hearing of adminstration decisions of the commission with a section on review of supervisor decisions.

Section 16. Assists Sect. 15.

Section 17. Strikes the ban on the Board creating rules.

Notable Changes:

The Board of Elections is split into two groups, the supervisors with the day-to-day duties and the commission with important deliberative powers.

The Board of Elections operates in two modes: the public deliberative body that votes upon issues, and the group of members who execute the election (publicize, prepare ballots and polls, inform candidates of rules, etc). The proposal separates these two functions into two separate groups.

There are numerous advantages to splitting the two types of duties into two organizations:
- Reduction of appearance of conflicts-of-interests. Oftentimes elections appeals allege that something was done materially wrong that was the responsibility of the commission. Currently the Board may be put in the awkward position of hearing a complaint that something they did was wrong. The proposed system dis-involves the commission from the day-to-day operations, so when issues involving the day-to-day arise, there is no appearance of bias or predisposition, actual or not.
- Balanced Commission Membership/Leadership. The chair of the commission is elected by the commission, and is a peer to the other 4 members. This reduces the possibility that the “power figure” of the individually appointed, paid, chairman influences the decisions of the body, or that the President appoints a chairman with the intentions that he or she would do so.
- Empowerment of Commission. Due to the balance of power, the Commission can be granted powers, such as rule making and fining, that the Senate was never comfortable with granting before. Part of the previous problem was that the same people would be setting rules and enforcing them, discouraging the type of distanced legislative process that is fundamental to our organization.
- Easier Recruitment. Currently, students must take all or nothing in regards to duties. Service with only executive or only deliberative duties may be more appealing to a greater number of students, especially experienced retiring officials.

Time Issues:

This bill should be considered a fall semester issue. The President will be making Board appointments for the general election as soon as the spring semester begins.