BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2054|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2054
Author: Fong (D)
Amended: 8/13/12 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONSTITUT. AMEND. COMM. : 2-2, 7/3/12
(FAIL)
AYES: Correa, Lieu
NOES: La Malfa, Gaines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Yee
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONSTITUT. AMEND. COMM. : 3-2, 7/6/12
AYES: Correa, Lieu, Yee
NOES: La Malfa, Gaines
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 47-27, 5/3/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Elections: vote by mail ballots
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill allows a vote by mail (VBM) voter to
return his or her ballot to any polling place within the
state, instead of being limited to polling places within
the jurisdiction of the elections official who issued the
ballot.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/13/12 prevent chaptering
CONTINUED
AB 2054
Page
2
issues with AB 2080 (Gordon).
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Requires all VBM ballots to be cast on or before the day
of the election. Provides that after marking the ballot,
the VBM voter must do either of the following:
A. Return the ballot by mail or in person to the
elections official from whom it came; or,
B. Return the ballot in person to any member of a
precinct board at any polling place within the
jurisdiction of the elections official who issued the
ballot.
1.Provides that every VBM ballot must be received by either
the elections official from whom it came or a precinct
board within the jurisdiction before the close of the
polls on election day.
2.Requires an elections official to establish procedures to
ensure the secrecy of any ballot returned to a precinct
polling place and the security, confidentiality, and
integrity of any personal information collected, stored,
or otherwise used.
3.Requires VBM ballots that are returned to the elections
office and to the polls on election day and that are not
included in the semifinal official canvass to be
processed and counted during the official canvass.
This bill:
1.Permits a properly cast VBM ballot to be returned in
person to any member of a precinct board at any polling
place within the state, instead of being limited to
polling places within the jurisdiction of the elections
official who issued the ballot.
2.Provides that if a VBM ballot is returned to a precinct
board of a polling place located in a county other than
the county from which the ballot was issued, the
elections official responsible for that polling place
CONTINUED
AB 2054
Page
3
shall forward the ballot to the elections official who
issued it.
3.Provides that VBM ballots that are forwarded pursuant to
this bill to the jurisdiction of issuance that are not
included in the semifinal official canvass phase of the
election shall be processed and counted during the
official canvass.
This bill is double-jointed with AB 2080 (Gordon).
Prior Legislation
SB 199 (Correa) of 2011, which was substantially similar to
this bill, was vetoed by Governor Brown. In his veto
message, the Governor argued that "Ýa]llowing voters to
return their vote-by-mail ballot at any polling location in
the state will add complexity to the voting and election
process without commensurate benefit. California has
liberal registration and vote-by-mail law that are
sufficient to allow the timely return of a vote-by-mail
ballot." However, the Governor vetoed this bill before
there was widespread attention and knowledge about the
impacts of the United States Postal Service closures.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor
annual reimbursable costs for each county to collect and
return other (probably mostly neighboring) counties'
ballots. Assuming $1,000 per county, total costs would be
$58,000.
(The Governor's proposed 2012-13 Budget would continue the
current-year suspension of all six elections-related
mandates, including requirements for counties to allow any
voter to become a permanent VBM voter and to tabulate VBM
ballots by precinct.)
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/13/12)
Secretary of State Debra Bowen
Service Employees International Union of California
CONTINUED
AB 2054
Page
4
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/13/12)
Department of Finance
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, "earlier
this year, the Assembly Elections and Redistricting
Committee and the Senate Elections and Constitutional
Amendments Committee held a joint oversight hearing to
discuss the United States Postal Service closures and the
impact on voters and the upcoming presidential elections.
During the hearing, five county elections officials
testified to the impact that recent post office and
processing facility closures were having on their
jurisdictions as well as the anticipated challenges they
saw ahead with more closures expected.
"One of the major impacts affecting the counties is mail
delivery time delays. Some counties experienced mail
delivery time delays of up to 5-7 days as opposed to the
usual 1-3 day mail delivery time.
"The Postal Service has 15 more processing facilities
proposed for closure in California.
"The new circumstances surrounding the elections will
present new challenges for voters, especially those who
vote by mail, particularly in light of the increase in
voting by mail.
"Voters who mail their ballots within a reasonable
timeframe could, through no fault of their own, find
themselves disenfranchised due to the mail delivery time
delays.
"AB 2054 helps protect vote by mail voters by providing
them with the option to drop off their voted ballot to any
county elections official or polling place within the state
by the close of the polls on election day."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Department of Finance is
opposed to this bill because of potential significant
General Fund costs in the form of reimbursement state
mandate, and also that vote by mail voters have several
CONTINUED
AB 2054
Page
5
options for which to return ballots making this bill
unnecessary.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 47-27, 5/3/12
AYES: Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Block,
Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Butler,
Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro,
Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Galgiani,
Gordon, Hayashi, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Lara,
Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Pan,
Perea, V. Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Skinner, Solorio,
Swanson, Torres, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A.
Pérez
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly,
Beth Gaines, Garrick, Gatto, Gorell, Grove, Hagman,
Halderman, Harkey, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Logue,
Mansoor, Miller, Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby,
Olsen, Silva, Valadao, Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bonilla, Fletcher, Furutani, Hall, Roger
Hernández, Smyth
DLW:nl 8/14/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED