BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2080
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 27, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 2080 (Gordon) - As Introduced: February 23, 2012
SUBJECT : Recall elections: state officers: signature
verification.
SUMMARY : Makes a technical correction to the process governing
the verification of signatures on a recall petition.
Specifically, this bill provides that if 500 or more signatures
are submitted to an elections official on a petition for the
recall of a state officer, the elections official may verify,
using a random sampling technique, either three percent of the
signatures submitted or 500 signatures, whichever is greater,
instead of verifying the lesser of the two amounts.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes a procedure for the recall of state officers.
2)Requires a section of a petition for the recall of a state
officer to be filed with the elections official of the county
for which it was circulated.
3)Provides that, upon each submission of a section of a petition
for the recall of a state officer to a county elections
official, the officials shall count the number of signatures
on the section and submit those results to the Secretary of
State. Provides that if 500 or more signatures are submitted,
the elections official may verify, using a random sampling
technique, either three percent of the signatures submitted,
or 500 signatures, whichever is less.
4)Requires elections officials, when using a random sampling
technique to determine the number of valid signatures on a
petition for the recall of a local officer, to examine at
least 500 signatures or five percent of the signatures,
whichever is greater.
5)Requires elections officials, when using a random sampling
technique to determine the number of valid signatures on the
nomination papers for a candidate who is running using the
independent nomination process, to examine at least 500
AB 2080
Page 2
signatures or five percent of the signatures, whichever is
greater.
6)Requires elections officials, when using a random sampling
technique to determine the number of valid signatures on a
petition for a state initiative or referendum, to examine at
least 500 signatures or three percent of the signatures,
whichever is greater.
7)Requires elections officials, when using a random sampling
technique to determine the number of valid signatures on a
petition for a county, city, or district initiative, to
examine at least 500 signatures or three percent of the
signatures, whichever is greater.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. State-mandated local program; contains
reimbursement direction.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
Under existing law, the various provisions addressing
requirements for qualifying a recall for a ballot are
inconsistent. If fewer than 500 signatures for a
recall petition are submitted to the county elections
official, he or she shall count the number of
signatures and, for state officers, submit those
results to the Secretary of State.
However, if there are 500 or more signatures
submitted, multiple potentially conflicting standards
exist. One sets a threshold of a random sampling of
at least 500 or 3 percent of signatures, whichever is
less, while other provisions set a threshold of a
random sampling of at least 500 or 3 percent of the
signatures, whichever is greater.
Specifically, under Section 11105 of the Elections
Code, which governs the recall of state officers, the
elections official may verify, using a random sampling
technique, either 3 percent of the signatures
submitted, or 500, whichever is less. This is
inconsistent with the test applied by other provisions
AB 2080
Page 3
of the Elections Code. Under Sections 11225, which
governs the recall of local officers, the random
sample is at least 500 or 5 percent, whichever is
greater. Section 9030, the broad provision related to
petitions related to state elections, provides that
the random sample is at least 500 or 3 percent,
whichever is greater. Similarly, the two provisions
of law governing local measures submitted to voters,
Sections 9115 and 9309, also use the random sampling
standard of 500 or 3 percent, whichever is greater.
This bill would reconcile the inconsistency between
standards for random sampling for a state officer's
recall so that it is consistent with the process in
place for local recalls, the general petition
verification law, and local ballot measures.
Specifically, this bill eliminates any conflict and
provides that the random sample to be of whichever is
greater between 500 signatures or 3 percent of the
signatures.
2)Random Sampling : Existing law permits elections officials to
use a random sampling technique when verifying the signatures
on petitions in certain situations where officials are
presented with petitions with large numbers of signatures.
Under this technique, officials select a specified number of
signatures from the petition at random, check the validity of
those signatures, and based on that check of a small number of
signatures, project the total number of valid signatures on
the petition. Because this technique only provides a
projection of the number of valid signatures on the petition,
rather than an actual hard count of the number of valid
signatures, existing law generally provides that the results
of a random sample of signatures can only be substituted for a
full verification of all signatures on the petition when the
projected number of signatures is either significantly above
or significantly below the number of signatures needed. If
the number of signatures that are projected to be valid is
neither significantly more nor significantly less than the
number of signatures required on the petition in question,
elections officials generally are required to determine the
validity of each signature on the petition before making a
final determination whether the petition contains a sufficient
number of signatures. In situations where the random sampling
technique projects that the number of signatures on the
AB 2080
Page 4
petition is significantly higher than the number of signatures
required on the petition, the petition is deemed to have a
sufficient number of signatures without the need for a full
examination, and if the random sampling results in projection
that the number of signatures is significantly lower than the
number needed, the petition is deemed to have an insufficient
number of signatures without the need for a full examination.
By avoiding the need to examine every signature on every
petition filed with an elections official, the random sampling
technique can significantly reduce the time and expense
associated with verifying signatures on petitions.
In almost every case in which existing law provides for a random
sampling process for verifying signatures on petitions, the
law requires the elections official to verify either a certain
number of signatures, or a certain percentage of the total
number of signatures submitted, whichever is larger. As a
general rule, this policy means that petitions with a larger
number of signers will have a larger number of signatures
chosen for verification as part of the random sampling
process.
However, in the case of petitions for the recall of a state
officer, for any petition that has 500 signatures or more,
existing law provides that the elections official must examine
either 500 signatures or three percent of the signatures on
the section of the petition, whichever is less . This is the
only situation in which the Elections Code establishes a
standard where an official using a random sampling technique
would base the number of signatures that needed to be verified
on the lesser of the two numbers. This appears to be a
technical error in the statute. Otherwise, existing law would
require an elections official to verify every signature on a
petition section that contained 499 signatures, but would only
require 15 signatures to be verified on a petition with 500
signatures. Similarly, the existing statute would require an
elections official to examine 500 signatures on a section of a
petition whether that section had 17,000 signatures on it, or
100,000 signatures on it.
This bill corrects this apparent technical error by providing
that elections officials must examine the greater of 500
signatures or three percent of the signatures on the section
of the petition whenever examining a section of a petition for
the recall of a state officer.
AB 2080
Page 5
3)Previous Legislation : Among other provisions, AB 2088 (Adams)
of 2010 contained a provision that was substantively identical
to this bill regarding the use of random sampling to verify
signatures on a petition for the recall of a state officer.
AB 2088 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger due to the
other, unrelated provisions of that bill.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support Opposition
Secretary of State Debra Bowen (sponsor)None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094