Print
Permanent LinkMeeting Public Comments
Subcommittee meeting and times are as follows:
Attendance at subcommittee meetings by lobbyists and the public is via zoom or in-person. See agenda for zoom details. Only authenticated users are permitted access.
A bill for an act relating to matters under the purview of the department of management, making appropriations, and including applicability provisions.(See SF 307, SF 630.)
Subcommittee members: Guth-CH, Alons, Blake
Date: Wednesday, February 5, 2025
Time: 3:30 PM - 4:00 PM
Location: Room 217 Conference Room
Comments Submitted:
The purpose of comments is to provide information to members of the subcommittee.
Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.
02-05-2025
Lori Stiles [Iowa Canvassing Volunteers]
to the extent that this would decrease transparency of finding any nefarious manipulation of Election related information, I am questioning this bill. While our current Secretary Of State may be honest, you never know who might get elected in the future. Restricting access to oversight is concerning. I would suggest a pause on this bill until further review.
02-05-2025
Sharon Santema
Please vote against SF 1083, which makes all communication concerning cybersecurity between the chief information security officer and other entities confidential and allows the communications to be released only for specific purposes. It seems that this bill would prevent the public from obtaining emails (or other communications) through public records requests, unless they had a "specific purpose," which this bill does not define. Iowa has "cybersecurity" in nearly all aspects of our elections... We have electronic poll books, electronic tabulators, electronic election management systems and electronic voter roll databases. It seems that SF 1083 would greatly hamper public oversight and transparency in our elections as well as in all other government functions which utilize cybersecurity in their computerized electronic systems.
02-05-2025
Jena Newell
Have we learned nothing from the last 4 years? Citizen's want full transparency in their government and in their elections. No more guards at the gate who determine who gets what information and when. There are many citizens who have the expertise to review or observe systems & processes to help identify problems or verify results. Citizen interaction can only enhance the trustworthiness of any government process. Please don't make it harder for people to engage and review legitimate government processes (which we pay for). Participation helps to instill trust in our government!Why can't we just simplify and safeguard all elections with paper ballots, one day voting?
02-05-2025
Cheryl Tillman [Iowa Canvassing]
Per 8.78, Background checks, will the FBI be able to perform background checks of foreign nationals or citizens of other countries who are subcontractors on the project, but may not be subject to U.S. laws?
02-05-2025
Sharon Schiefen
There are a couple of points in this bill that bring up questions. First is the concern of creating more secrecy in what is happening within our government. We actually want less secrecy and more citizen awareness.Second, it appears that if money is not spent in the fiscal year, it remains in the pot to be spent as needed. Does this reduce the amount needed from the taxpayers for the following year? I do not see that addressed.
02-05-2025
Diane Holst
Deeming security incidents and security breaches of our information as confidential is the opposite of the intent of Chapter 22 and does not favor openness. A security breach of OUR information is our concern and information that should be available to the public upon request. Calling this a means of facilitating communications is downplaying the scenario. Do not carve out the power of chapter 22 in this proposed legislation.