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