A proposed bill that would require every Oregon county election office to livestream its vote tabulation processes could improve trust in the state’s elections, its proponents say.

But officials who’d have to implement the bill, which was introduced by a Republican senator, say it would be costly and logistically difficult.

Senate Bill 1054 would require each of Oregon’s 36 county clerks to livestream footage of the rooms in which ballots are counted and from ballot drop sites during election seasons. It would also require those officials to store those recordings for two years.

Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham of The Dalles, chief sponsor of the bill, asserted Monday that requiring those recordings would improve elections transparency and voter trust.

“My bills are designed to combat some of the narrative that exists about election integrity,” Bonham told his fellow members of the Senate Rules Committee during a public hearing on the bill. “And what I would love to do is just shore up these things that people are questioning.”

The bill provides no specific requirements for the placement of livestream cameras, besides stating that any video camera could not be placed in a position to reveal personal details on ballots.

A few county elections offices currently livestream their vote counting process. During the 2024 election, for example, the Tillamook County Clerk’s office livestreamed footage from several rooms in which ballots were being collected, verified and sorted through vote-tabulation machines.

Bonham said requiring similar, more expansive recordings from all county clerks would “give people a window into the room to see this process in an open and transparent way.”

But election officials say the one-page bill fails to address several key details of implementing such a measure. One primary concern, they say, is that the bill does not allocate any more funding to county clerks, many of whom have previously reported inadequate funding and staffing levels.

In written testimony, the Oregon Association of County Clerks also contends that the bill raises security concerns for employees who pick up ballots from drop sites and office workers who would be recorded. The clerks also said they are concerned about the footage being manipulated through artificial intelligence video software.

“We would like to work with the proponents to help make this idea more cost effective, ensure proper security measures are in place and make this concept implementable,” wrote Tess Milio, lobbyist for the county clerks association.

Secretary of State Tobias Read, a Democrat who entered office in January, told The Oregonian/OregonLive he shares the county clerks’ concerns. As secretary of state, Read oversees state elections.

“I’m always interested in ways to make our elections better, but I’m concerned that this bill would be yet another unfunded mandate for our county clerks, who are already stretching every penny to run Oregon’s secure, fair elections,” Read said in a statement. “While well-intentioned, this legislation needs work before it’s ready for prime time.”

Bonham acknowledged the clerks’ concerns and said the bill’s details would have to be sorted out later. “Valid concerns, totally get it,” he said. “And yet I think the one thing that we all hold sacred is the integrity of our elections. We want to affirm to people that their vote matters, that the process is not in any way being manipulated, their votes not being marginalized or ignored. And so anything that we can do to enhance that transparency to the voter I think is important.”

The bill does not appear likely to advance. Only Bonham and Republican Sen. David Brock Smith of Port Orford have sponsored the proposal. And key Democrats, including Senate President Rob Wagner of Lake Oswego and Senate Majority Leader Kayse Jama of Portland, have shown no indication that they would support the bill. Jama, who chairs the Senate Rules Committee, concluded Monday that the public hearing was a “really good discussion.”

Sen. Jeff Golden, a Democrat from Ashland and member of the Rules Committee, said he feels ambivalent about the proposal.

If finding low-cost, efficient ways to implement the proposal could increase Oregonians’ trust in elections, “I would say why not? Maybe it can increase some confidence.” Golden said.

“At the same time,” he said, “I’m really not comfortable with the number of bills around the country that are being introduced on the premise, either explicit or not, that our elections don’t have integrity.”

— Carlos Fuentes covers state politics and government. Reach him at 503-221-5386 or cfuentes@oregonian.com.

Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com/subscribe.