BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �





                                                                  AB 293

                                                                  Page  1


          GOVERNOR'S VETO
          AB 293 (Hill)
          As Introduced  February 9, 2011
          2/3 vote
           
          ELECTIONS           7-0         APPROPRIATIONS      15-1        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Fong, Logue, Bonilla,     |Ayes:|Fuentes, Harkey,          |
          |     |Hall, Mendoza, Swanson,   |     |Blumenfield, Bradford,    |
          |     |Valadao                   |     |Charles Calderon, Campos, |
          |     |                          |     |Davis, Donnelly, Gatto,   |
          |     |                          |     |Hill, Lara, Mitchell,     |
          |     |                          |     |Nielsen, Solorio, Wagner  |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |     |                          |Nays:|Norby                     |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |75-0 |(April 11,      |SENATE: |35-3 |(August 18,    |
          |           |     |2011)           |        |     |2011)          |
          |           |     |                |        |     |               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
          SUMMARY  :  Requires elections officials to establish a free 
          access system that allows a vote by mail (VBM) voter to find out 
          whether his or her ballot was counted and, if not, the reason 
          why the ballot was not counted.  

           EXISTING LAW :

          1)Requires elections officials to compare the signature on a VBM 
            ballot envelope with that appearing on the voter's affidavit 
            of registration.  Provides that if the ballot is rejected, the 
            envelope shall not be opened and the ballot shall not be 
            counted.  Requires the cause of the rejection to be written on 
            the face of the identification envelope.

          2)Requires elections officials to establish procedures to track 










                                                                  AB 293

                                                                  Page  2


            and confirm the receipt of VBM ballots and to make this 
            information available by means of online access using the 
            county's elections division Internet Web site.  Provides that 
            if the county does not have an elections division Internet Web 
            site, the elections official shall establish a toll-free 
            telephone number that may be used to confirm the date a voted 
            VBM ballot was received. 

          3)Requires the Secretary of State (SOS) to establish a free 
            access system to allow any voter who casts a provisional 
            ballot to discover whether his or her provisional ballot was 
            counted and, if not, the reason why it was not counted. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations 
          Committee, given that similar notifications are already required 
          for provisional ballots and that VBM voters may already obtain 
          information regarding whether their ballots was received, any 
          additional reimbursable costs to comply with this bill's 
          provision should be minor.

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "AB 293 seeks to provide the 
          ever increasing number of vote-by-mail voters the opportunity to 
          determine if their ballot was counted and, if not, the reason it 
          was rejected?As greater and greater numbers of California voters 
          utilize and rely upon vote-by-mail ballots to have their voices 
          heard in elections, transparency in the process and 
          piece-of-mind that their ballot was included are more important 
          than ever."

          Historically, there have been two primary reasons why a VBM 
          ballot that was completed and returned to the elections 
          officials may not be counted.  One of the most common reasons is 
          that many ballots are received by the elections office after 
          Election Day, and state law requires that VBM ballots be 
          received by the close of polls on Election Day in order to be 
          counted.  A voter who was under the mistaken impression that his 
          or her ballot would be counted as long as the envelope was 
          postmarked by Election Day could repeatedly have his or her 
          ballot not counted, if that voter regularly waited until 
          Election Day to put the VBM ballot in the mail.











                                                                  AB 293

                                                                  Page  3


          The other primary reason why a VBM ballot might not be counted 
          is that the signature on the identification envelope does not 
          match the one on the voter's affidavit of registration.  Illness 
          and age can be factors that contribute to a signature changing 
          over time.  For example, many older voters do not realize that 
          the signature on file with the registrar of voters no longer 
          matches their current signature, and as a result, their VBM 
          ballot may not be counted.  This bill provides a mechanism for 
          voters to verify if their ballot has been counted and, if not, a 
          reason why it was not counted.  Voters whose ballots were not 
          counted would be able to take appropriate steps to ensure their 
          VBM ballots are counted in the future.

          In 2002, the federal government passed the Help America Vote Act 
          (HAVA) of 2002 (116 STAT. 1666, Public Law 107-252), which, 
          among other things, required every state to implement a single, 
          computerized statewide voter registration list.  The SOS has 
          begun the procurement process for the implementation of 
          California's statewide database, to be known as VoteCal, as 
          required under HAVA.  Once VoteCal is fully deployed, it will 
          include a feature to allow a VBM voter to track the status of 
          their VBM ballot and verify whether or not it was counted, and 
          if not, the reason why it was not counted. 

          AB 2616 (Hill) of 2010, which was substantially similar to this 
          bill, was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger, who wrote in his 
          veto message; "I cannot support mandating additional costs in 
          this time of fiscal crisis.  Nothing in current law prohibits 
          county elections officials from providing this information and I 
          would encourage them to do so as resources allow."  

           GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE  :  "This bill requires county elections 
          officials to establish a free access system where vote-by-mail 
          voters can find out whether their ballot was counted, and if it 
          was not counted, the reason why.

          "I support the author's goal of informing vote-by-mail voters of 
          the status of their ballot, but, in view of California's sever 
          fiscal challenges, I believe restraint must be exercised with 
          regard to any new state mandates.  Under existing law, local 
          governments can implement this type of database on their own.  










                                                                  AB 293

                                                                 Page  4


          In fact, many counties have done so."



           Analysis Prepared by:     Ethan Jones and Maria Garcia / E. & R. 
          / (916) 319-2094 



                                                                FN: 0002778