BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 361
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 30, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 361 (Padilla) - As Amended: August 26, 2013
Policy Committee: ElectionsVote:5-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill requires the DMV, the California Community Colleges
(CCC), the California State University, and voter registration
agencies as designated by the National Voter Registration Act of
1993 (NVRA) -one year after the Secretary of State (SOS)
certifies that the state has a statewide voter registration
database (VoteCal) in compliance with the federal Help America
Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA)- to allow customers, students, and
clients, respectively, to submit voter registration forms
electronically to the SOS. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the DMV to ensure that a system allowing a person to
electronically submit an application for a new or renewal
driver's license or change of address for a driver's license,
and also affords the applicant an opportunity to
electronically submit a voter registration affidavit or update
his or her voter registration information. The DMV must
electronically transmit the voter registration information to
the Secretary of State (SOS) in a format prescribed by the S0S
and in a manner that does not require the applicant to
duplicate or re-enter information provided on the driver's
license application.
2)Requires voter registration agencies, under the NVRA, to
provide the same voter registration capability as in (1).
3)Requires the SOS, in the written form currently provided to
high school and college students describing voter registration
eligibility and procedures, to inform each student that he or
she may complete and submit the voter registration application
electronically on the SOS's website.
SB 361
Page 2
4)Requires CSU and CCC campuses that operate automated class
registration systems to allow students, during class
registration, to elect to apply to register to vote online, as
provided under current law, and encourages UC to comply with
this requirement.
5)Requires CSU and CCC campuses to provide the same voter
registration capability as in (1) during the online voter
registration process, and encourages UC to comply with this
requirement.
6)Requires the CCC or CSU campus, at the start of each academic
term, to send an email notice to each student that exclusively
conveys voter registration information, as specified, and
encourages UC to comply with this requirement.
7)Requires the SOS website, upon certification of VoteCal to
allow a voter to:
a) Check his or her voter registration status and review
his or her voter registration information.
b) Locate his or her polling place or the polling place
location for any residence in the state within 30 days
before an election.
c) Determine whether his or her vote-by-mail ballot was
counted.
d) Determine whether his or her provisional ballot was
counted.
e) Opt out of receiving his or her voter pamphlet by mail
and instead receive electronically.
FISCAL EFFECT
One-time General Fund costs of around $18 million and ongoing
General Fund costs of around $1 million, with ongoing savings
exceeding $1 million.
1)SOS Costs . The bill requires the SOS to work with colleges and
universities, NVRA agencies, and the DMV to establish online
links to the SOS's online voter registration system such that
an applicant is not required to duplicate or re-enter
information already provided by the applicant to the entity.
This provision is to be operative one year after the online
system (VoteCal) is certified as operational, which is
expected in July 2016.
SB 361
Page 3
The SOS is currently developing a system with Rock the Vote
whereby that organization may direct applicants to the SOS's
online voter registration website and pre-populate data fields
with information already collected from the applicant, such as
name and address. Once this application is operational, other
entities such as colleges and NVRA agencies may be able create
similar applications and connect to the online voter
registration system.
The SOS estimates its costs-for IT staff time to ensure that
systems are securely connected and operating correctly-would
be $10,000, but this does not include the larger cost, likely
in the tens of thousands of dollars, for each entity to
develop the application for their legacy computer systems.The
SOS indicates that, since there may be some duplication of
tasks stemming from connecting to data systems that are
virtually the same, its cost per site may be 25% less.
a) For Colleges and Universities . Using the above cost
factor, total costs for 72 community college districts, 23
CSU campuses, and 10 UC campuses would be about $800,000.
b) For NVRA agencies . Total costs for 603 agencies would be
$4.6 million.
c) For the DMV . Due to security requirements, the SOS
estimates a one-time cost of around $50,000.
The requirements in (7) above will be incorporated into the
VoteCal system.
The SOS also anticipates annual costs of $125,000 for an IT
position to provide ongoing support with the hundreds of sites
described above.
2)Colleges and Universities . Initial costs are estimated at
$700,000 for the community college-about 80% of the 72
districts use one of three systems and the other 20% have
legacy system that will require a unique application--$500,000
at CSU, and $500,000 at UC. Ongoing costs for the three
segments would be around $500,000.
3)NRA agencies . Initial costs would depend on the extent to
which these agencies have common data systems. For example,
SB 361
Page 4
the 58 counties use one of three systems. Using the SOS's
assumption of 25% redundancy, initial costs, assuming $20,000
per site, would total $9 million.
4)DMV would incur one-time costs in the low millions of dollars.
(The bill only requires the DMV to implement the voter
registration requirements if it develops an online driver's
license application system.) The DMV indicates that it could
not use Motor Vehicle Account funds for this activity.
5)Savings . County elections offices that currently manually
enter voter registration information into their systems will
realize significant ongoing saving from the expansion of
paperless registration. Statewide these savings are unknown,
but would likely exceed $1 million annually.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . According to the author, "California has fallen
behind other states in the adoption of election information
technology that can expand voter participation and ensure
every vote is counted? In February of this year, the Pew
Center on the States released the Election Performance Index
which measures 17 indicators of effective election
administration. California ranks 48th, right below West
Virginia and just above Alabama and Mississippi.
"A paperless system that allows for the electronic
transmission of voter registration applications to election
officials and to the statewide registration database reduces
both data entry costs and the costs associated with clerical
errors. Paperless registration in Arizona has reduced voter
registration costs to three cents per application from 83
cents for paper applications."
2)Background . According to the Brennan Center's 2010 report,
"Voter Registration in a Digital Age," seven states - Arizona,
Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and
Washington - currently have fully automated or paperless voter
registration systems with their motor vehicle agencies. The
report defines automated voter registration as one in which
the government offices, including DMV or social service
offices, collect and transfer voter registrations to elections
officials without using separate paper forms. According to
the report, these offices enter registration data into their
SB 361
Page 5
computers and transfer them electronically in a format that
the elections official can securely review and upload directly
into their voter registration database systems. Additionally,
the report states that at least ten states - Arkansas,
California, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, New Jersey, North
Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas - have DMV
registrations that are partially automated.
3)National Voter Registration Act . The NVRA was enacted by
Congress in 1993 and took effect in 1995. Also known as the
"Motor Voter Act," the enactment of the NVRA was intended to
enhance and increase voting opportunities for eligible voters
to register to vote and maintain their registration. In
addition to other methods of voter registration states offer,
the NVRA requires states to provide the opportunity to apply
to register to vote for federal elections through various
methods.
In California, the following state and local offices are NVRA
voter registration agencies: DMV, public assistance agencies,
including county human service agencies and community-based
nonprofit organizations under contract to administer the
Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, state-funded
agencies primarily serving persons with disabilities, armed
Forces Recruitment offices, Franchise Tax Board offices
offering forms, instruction, and assistance to the public, and
Board of Equalization offices serving the public. There are an
estimated 600 NVRA voter registration agencies in the state.
4)Related Legislation . AB 1122 (Levine), which required the DMV,
to the extent the state's plan for implementation of the NVRA
is inconsistent with the NVRA, to take additional steps to
fully implement and further comply with the NVRA, was held
this committee's Suspense file.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081