BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, REAPPORTIONMENT AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
BILL NO: AB 6 HEARING DATE: 7/7/09
AUTHOR: SALDANA ANALYSIS BY: Frances Tibon
Estoista
AMENDED: 4/28/09
FISCAL: YES
SUBJECT
Initiatives: paid circulators
DESCRIPTION
Existing law establishes a process for proposing initiative
measures submitted to voters in California and sets forth
qualifications for persons who circulate initiative
petitions.
Existing law provides that a person who is a voter or who
is qualified to register to vote in this state may
circulate an initiative or referendum petition anywhere
within the state.
Existing law provides that only proponents of an initiative
may file petitions.
This bill requires professional petition firms to register
with the Secretary of State (SOS) and pay a registration
fee established by the SOS. Requires the SOS to use the
fees collected to maintain an online directory of
professional firms.
Specifically, this bill :
1. Defines the term, "professional petition firm" as an
entity that pays individuals to circulate petitions and
gather signatures for the purpose of qualifying an
initiative on a state or local election ballot.
2. Requires a professional petition firm to register
annually with the SOS in order to pay individuals to
circulate petitions and collect signatures to qualify an
initiative on a state or local election ballot.
3. Requires the registration to include the full name,
address, and partners, owners, or officers of the firm
and to be accompanied by a registration fee to be
established by the SOS.
4. Requires the SOS to use the fee revenues to maintain on
its Internet web site a directory of professional
petition firms and defray any other associated costs
with the requirements of this bill.
5. Requires a member of a professional petition firm to
review the law relating to obtaining petition signatures
with each paid petition circulator as a condition of the
circulator's hiring.
6. Requires a copy of the training materials provided to
the prospective petition firm employees to be submitted
by the firm to the SOS. Requires the firm to submit a
statement to the SOS for each circulator, signed by the
circulator and the individual conducting the review,
that the circulator has received the review.
BACKGROUND
It's reasonable to say that any proponent with a million
dollars can easily qualify a ballot measure. This allows
well-financed proponents to circumvent the screening
mechanisms designed by the drafters of the initiative
process to ensure that initiatives reach the ballot with
broad public support. The extent of fraudulent signature
gathering in California is unknown. According to a 2008
report issued by the Center for Governmental Studies, there
are no known cases in the state of volunteer signature
gatherers submitting fraudulent signatures. However, since
2000, there have been 13 convictions on charges of
falsified petitions in California, with the most recent
occurring in August 2006 when a solicitor signed 14
fictitious signatures for a measure that qualified for the
November 2004 ballot.
COMMENTS
1.According to the author : Over the decades California has
AB 6 (SALDANA) Page
2
seen the initiative process shift from what was
originally envisioned to be a volunteer-based effort to a
system where increasingly large sums of money are
required in order to qualify a measure for the ballot.
Qualifying an initiative for the ballot now necessitates
the use of paid signature gathers (usually employed by a
professional petition firm, at a typical cost of between
$1 million and $3 million per petition), yet
unfortunately, the state lacks a mechanism to verify
whether or not these individuals are provided with
sufficient understanding of the laws that regulate this
activity, including what constitutes fraud. This bill
seeks to create a proactive requirement that better
ensures that proper training of these laws is provided.
2.National Efforts to Curb Signature Gathering Fraud : On
May 15, 2009, the Governor of Colorado signed House Bill
1326, which will require signature-gathering firms to be
licensed by the state and would prohibit them from paying
petition circulators by the signature. The bill will
also impose several new accountability measures such as
tougher rules for petition notarization and will create a
system by which a circulator's signatures could be
invalidated if certain requirements are not met.
In Oregon, Secretary of State Kate Brown sponsored House
Bill 2005, a bill that will make substantial changes to
the state's current initiative process. This bill was
signed into law on June 25, 2009, and will among other
things increase the time allowed for background checks of
prospective signature gatherers from three days to five,
give the state Elections Division access to state police
databases, and authorize the Secretary of State to
invalidate signatures gathered by anyone convicted of
fraud, forgery or identity theft and signatures gathered
by circulators who are not properly registered with the
state or who have been found liable for certain civil or
criminal election law offenses. The bill will also make
chief petitioners or petition gathering firms liable in
cases where they should have known that a circulator
broke the law and require those chief petitioners to turn
in signature sheets once a month and authorize the
secretary of state to begin verifying signatures once a
petition has reached 50 percent of the signatures
AB 6 (SALDANA) Page
3
required to qualify for the ballot. The bill also
prohibits circulators from simultaneously gathering
signatures as a volunteer and as a paid circulator.
3.Related Legislation : SB 34 (Corbett), which is scheduled
for hearing in the Assembly Elections and Redistricting
Committee, makes it a misdemeanor for a person to pay or
to receive money or any other thing of value based on the
number of signatures collected on a state or local
initiative, referendum, or recall petition.
SB 1686 (Denham) of 2008 would have made it a misdemeanor,
punishable by a fine not exceeding $5,000, by
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or
by both the fine and imprisonment, for a person, company,
organization, company official, or other organizational
officer in charge of a person who circulates an
initiative, referendum, or recall petition to knowingly
direct or permit the person to make a false affidavit
concerning the initiative, referendum, or recall
petition. SB 1686 was vetoed by the Governor, though the
Governor did not express any policy objections to the
bill. Instead the bill was one of 136 bills that
received the same veto message. That veto message
stated:
The historic delay in passing the 2008-2009 State Budget
has forced me to prioritize the bills sent to my desk at
the end of the year's legislative session. Given the
delay, I am only signing bills that are the highest
priority for California. This bill does not meet that
standard and I cannot sign it at this time.
4.Establishing Registration Fees . The Assembly
Appropriations Committee analysis notes the following in
its fiscal assessment of AB 6: Likely minor costs to the
SOS to establish and maintain the registration system, at
least partially offset by fees paid by registrants. The
SOS indicates that there are currently less than 20
petition firms operating in the state.
The Committee notes that while the intent of this bill is
to continue to ensure a fair and regulated initiative
signature gathering process, there is no explanation as
AB 6 (SALDANA) Page
4
to how the SOS is planning to formulate registration
fees, nor are limits set forth as to how high fees can be
established including if they will ever be raised in the
future to keep in line with inflation etc.
PRIOR ACTION
Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee: 5-2
Assembly Appropriations Committee: 11-5
Assembly Floor: 49-28
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Secretary of State
Oppose: California Family Council
Capitol Resource Family Impact
Crusade for Life, Inc.
Life Priority Network
AB 6 (SALDANA) Page
5