BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Senator Norma J. Torres, Chair BILL NO: AB 882 HEARING DATE: 6/4/2013 AUTHOR: GORDON ANALYSIS BY: Frances Tibon Estoista AMENDED: AS INTRODUCED FISCAL: YES SUBJECT Recall elections: state officers: signature verification DESCRIPTION Existing law establishes a procedure for the recall of state officers. Existing law 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. Existing law provides that, upon each submission of a section of a petition for the recall of a state officer to a county elections official, the official shall count the number of signatures on the section and submit those results to the Secretary of State. 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. Existing law 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. Existing law 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 signatures or five percent of the signatures, whichever is greater. Existing law 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. Existing law 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. 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 . BACKGROUND 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 AB 882 (GORDON) Page 2 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 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 a 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. COMMENTS 1. According to the author : Under existing law, the various provisions addressing requirements for qualifying a recall for a ballot are inconsistent. If AB 882 (GORDON) Page 3 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. 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. 2. Similar legislation : AB 2080 (Gordon) 2012 was identical to this bill however that bill was later amended to address an issue related to vote-by-mail ballots. 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. PRIOR ACTION Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee: 7-0 Assembly Appropriations Committee: 17-0 Assembly Floor: 76-0 POSITIONS Sponsor: Secretary of State Support: None received Oppose: None received AB 882 (GORDON) Page 4