BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1873|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1873
Author: Gonzalez (D) and Mullin (D)
Amended: 5/28/14 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONST. AMEND. COMM. : 5-0, 6/24/14
AYES: Padilla, Anderson, Hancock, Jackson, Pavley
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 44-32, 5/29/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Mail ballot elections
SOURCE : County of San Diego
DIGEST : This bill, until January 1, 2020, allows special
elections to fill vacancies in the California Legislature
(Legislature) and the United States Congress (Congress) to be
conducted by mailed ballot.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Permits an election to be conducted wholly by mail if the
governing body authorizes the use of mailed ballots for the
election, the election occurs on an established mailed ballot
election date, and the election is one of the following:
A. An election in which no more than 1,000 registered
voters are eligible to participate;
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
2
B. An election in a city, county, or district with 5,000 or
fewer registered voters that is restricted to the
imposition of special taxes, expenditure limitation
overrides, or both;
C. An election on the issuance of a general obligation
water bond;
D. An election in one of four specifically enumerated water
districts; or
E. An election or assessment ballot proceeding required or
authorized by the state constitution under Proposition 218.
1.Authorizes a school district or city with a population of
100,000 or less to conduct an all-mail ballot election to fill
a vacancy in a special election.
2.Authorizes a district to conduct any election as an all-mailed
ballot election on any date other than an established election
date.
3.Provides that whenever there are 250 or fewer people
registered to vote in any precinct, the elections official may
deem the precinct as an all-mail ballot precinct, and provides
that no precinct may be divided solely in order to create an
all-mail precinct.
4.Provides that once a legislative or congressional vacancy
occurs, the Governor has 14 days to issue a proclamation
declaring the date of the special election. Requires the
special run-off election to occur between 126 and 140 days
after the date of the proclamation with the special primary
election occurring the ninth Tuesday preceding the special
run-off, except as specified. Permits the special runoff
election to be held up to 180 days after the date of the
Governor's proclamation if it will allow either the special
runoff or special primary to coincide with an existing state
or local election involving at least half the voters in the
affected jurisdiction.
5.Permits Yolo County, as part of a pilot program lasting
through January 1, 2018, to conduct elections on up to three
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
3
dates as all-mailed ballot elections, subject to certain
conditions and reporting requirements.
6.Provides that a vote by mail (VBM) ballot must be received by
the elections official from whom it was obtained, or by a
precinct board in that jurisdiction, no later than the close
of polls on Election Day in order for that ballot to be
counted.
This bill:
1.Permits a special election held to fill a vacancy in the
Legislature or in Congress to be conducted entirely by mailed
ballot subject to all of the following conditions:
A. The board of supervisors of each affected county
authorizes the use of mailed ballots.
B. The election does not occur on the same date as a
statewide direct primary election, statewide general
election, or any other election conducted in an overlapping
jurisdiction that is not consolidated and conducted wholly
by mail.
C. At least one ballot drop-off location is provided per
city, and at least one drop-off location is provided in
unincorporated areas for every 100,000 registered voters,
and such locations are open during business hours to
receive voted ballots beginning not less than seven days
before the election.
D. The elections official provides for at least six hours
of voting at a satellite location within the congressional
or legislative district on at least one Saturday and Sunday
after the ballots are delivered to voters.
E. At least one polling place is provided per city or the
polling places are fixed in a manner so that there is one
polling place for every 10,000 registered voters within the
district, as specified, whichever results in more polling
places. Provides that a polling place shall allow voters
to request a ballot between 7 a.m. and 8 p.m. on the day of
the election if they need replacement ballots for any
reason.
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
4
F. Polling places are established in accordance with
existing state and federal accessibility requirements, and
are evenly distributed throughout the congressional or
legislative district.
G. Each voter receives all supplies necessary for the use
and return of the mail ballot, including a return envelope
for the voted ballot with postage prepaid.
H. Each voter receives all of the following from the
elections official:
(1) A notice indicating that the election is being
conducted wholly by mail and that each eligible voter
will receive a ballot by mail,
(2) A list of the ballot drop-off and polling place
locations, and that list is posted on the Internet Web
site of the county elections office, and
(3) A statement informing voters that the voting
materials, including the official ballot and the
facsimile ballot, are available in all languages required
by state and federal law.
A. Provides that a ballot is timely cast if it is received
by the voter's elections official no later than three days
after election day and either of the following is
satisfied:
(1) The ballot is postmarked or is time stamped or date
stamped by a bona fide private mail delivery company on
or before election day; or
(2) If the ballot has no postmark, a postmark with no
date, or an illegible postmark, the ballot identification
envelope is signed and dated on or before Election Day.
A. Allows jurisdictions that have the necessary computer
capability to begin processing VBM ballots on the 10th
business day prior to the election, instead of the seventh
business day prior to the election.
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
5
1.Contains a January 1, 2020 sunset date.
Background
Several California counties have conducted all-mail ballot
elections. Monterey conducted one of the first vote-by-mail
elections ever held in the United States in 1977 on a flood
control measure. Alpine County conducted its first all-mail
election in November 1993 for a countywide special election.
San Diego used all-mail balloting in May 1981 for a measure
proposing to build a $224 million convention center. Stanislaus
County conducted its first all-mail ballot election in 1987 for
the Modesto City Charter.
In 1992, the Legislature approved a pilot project in Stanislaus
and Placer counties. The counties were allowed to conduct
all-mail ballot elections. Placer County did not utilize this
pilot project but Stanislaus County conducted the 1993 Statewide
Special Election as an all-mail ballot election.
All-mail ballot elections conducted in California as well as
other states have generally shown increases in voter turnout and
significant decreases in the cost of conducting elections.
During Stanislaus County's all-mail ballot pilot project, the
County saved almost half of its usual election expenditures.
Stanislaus County generally reported turnout levels at six to
eight percentage points below the state's average. During the
1993 Statewide Special Election, the County's turnout was 6.8%
higher than the statewide average during that election. It
should be noted however, that with few exceptions, prior
all-mail elections have been limited to local elections only.
Oregon has been conducting all-mail ballot elections for
non-partisan and ballot measure elections for 20 years. In 1998
the voters passed an initiative expanding VBM to primary and
general elections. The State of Washington has also recently
adopted statewide all-mail ballot elections.
Yolo County Pilot Project: In 2011, the Legislature approved
and the Governor signed AB 413 (Yamada, Chapter 187, Statutes of
2011), which created a pilot program allowing Yolo County to
conduct local elections on not more than three dates as
all-mailed ballot elections. AB 413 was intended to serve as a
pilot project to evaluate the desirability of further expanding
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
6
the circumstances under which elections are permitted to be
conducted as all-mailed ballot elections. Yolo County conducted
all-mailed ballot elections last March in the City of Davis and
the Washington Unified School District as permitted by AB 413,
and submitted its report on those elections last December. The
pilot project in Yolo County was authorized following a prior
pilot project in Monterey County that failed to provide useful
information about the impacts of all-mailed ballot elections
because the report filed by Monterey County as part of the pilot
project lacked much of the information that was necessary to
evaluate the impacts of the pilot project.
The report prepared in connection with the first two elections
conducted in Yolo County under the pilot project found that
turnout at the all-mailed ballot elections conducted as part of
the pilot project was not significantly different than similar
polling place elections held in the two jurisdictions in prior
years. The study also found that turnout rates broken down by
age, ethnic background, party preference, and permanent VBM
status was consistent and similar between the polling place and
the all-mailed ballot elections. The study found that data
provided on the cost to conduct all-mailed ballot elections was
inconclusive in determining whether there are significant
savings to moving to all-mailed ballot elections. However, the
study also cautioned that Davis - one of the jurisdictions in
which the pilot was conducted - "is a relatively affluent,
homogenous community with a higher level of educational
achievement than most other areas of the state" and so the
results "are not necessarily applicable to other, dissimilar
communities." The report also noted that the effects of
all-mailed ballot elections on turnout would not necessarily be
similar in general elections.
Yolo County is permitted to conduct local elections as
all-mailed ballot elections on two additional dates before the
conclusion of the pilot project.
VBM and Permanent VBM Voting: Under state law, any voter can
request a VBM ballot for any election, and any voter can become
a permanent VBM voter. Permanent VBM voters automatically
receive a ballot in the mail for every election, without the
need to re-apply for a VBM ballot. As such, any voter who
prefers to vote by mail has the ability to do so under existing
law.
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
7
Among the arguments that supporters of all-mailed ballot
elections frequently make in support of such elections is that
all-mailed ballot elections are more convenient for voters.
However, it is not clear whether this is the case. Any voter
who finds it more convenient to VBM has the option to do so
under existing law, and voters who want to VBM at every election
can sign up for permanent VBM status. Some voters, due to
physical disability or language issues, may prefer to vote at
the polls in order to take advantage of access or help provided
by electronic voting machines or bilingual poll workers.
Related Legislation
AB 2028 (Mullin) authorizes San Mateo County to participate in
the ongoing all-mailed ballot pilot project that is being
conducted in Yolo County, as described.
SCA 16 (Steinberg) permits the Governor to fill a legislative
vacancy by appointment, as specified.
AB 2273 (Ridley-Thomas) requires the state to reimburse counties
for the costs of special elections held to fill vacancies in
Congress and the Legislature, for all elections held on or after
January 1, 2013.
SB 942 (Vidak) requires the state to reimburse counties for the
costs of special elections held to fill vacancies in Congress
and the Legislature, for all elections held between January 1,
2008, and December 31, 2014.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/27/14)
County of San Diego (source)
California Association of Clerks and Elections Officials
California State Association of Counties
California State Association of Letter Carriers
County of San Bernardino
Rural County Representatives of California
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors
Sonoma County Board of Supervisors
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
8
Urban Counties Caucus
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/27/14)
American Civil Liberties Union of California
Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Los Angeles
Disability Rights California
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office:
AB 1873, known as the Voting Ought To be Easy (VOTE) Act
for Special Elections, seeks to improve two major
shortcomings with special elections in California - the
widespread non-participation by voters in these low-profile
electoral contests and the costliness of operating a
special election on taxpayers. Together, the apparent
inefficiency of the special election status quo has invited
well-meaning but risky alternatives that undermine the
public's right to an election and our state government's
system of checks and balances.
AB 1873 allows county and local governments the opportunity
to avoid the low participation and high costs involved in
special elections by conducting these special elections
predominantly by mail ballot, a process which has been
shown in practice and academic studies to majorly reduce
costs and increase access to democracy. In exchange, the
county or local government opting in to the predominantly
mail special election process agrees to several measures
that further expands voter access. These conditions
include providing postage-paid envelopes for return ballots
and honoring any ballot received with a postmark by
Election Day, similar to tax forms postmarked by April 15
are still "on time." They also include making available a
limited number of in-person voting locations for early
weekend voting as well as voting on Election Day, ensuring
access for those with disabilities or limited English
proficiency, and developing and conducting plans for voter
outreach and education about electoral participation in
these elections.
?
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
9
Special elections in California notoriously have abysmal
voter turnout levels, sometimes dropping below 10% of
registered voters. For instance, in recent special
elections to fill Assembly seats, AD 52 saw a turnout of
only 8.61%, and AD 54 saw a turnout of only 8.47%. This
can be attributed to special elections often covering fewer
issues than regularly scheduled elections, and generally
being less competitive than statewide general elections,
thus generating less media coverage and voter attention.
Special elections are also typically held on days which
voters may be unable to take off of work or are less
publicized. Severely low turnout in special elections
undercuts our principles of democracy and participation, as
elections are decided by a small amount of voters.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Asian Americans Advancing
Justice-Los Angeles (Advancing Justice-LA), writes, in part:
Advancing Justice-LA supports both legislative and
grassroots efforts to make it easier for voters to vote by
mail (VBM). We are aware that across the state, the
proportion of voters signing up for permanent VBM status
has trended upward over the past decade. However, we
believe it is premature for the state to authorize
jurisdictions to make VBM the primary balloting option for
voters in the absence of information explaining why
California ranks poorly relative to other states with
respect to VBM rejection rates and VBM return rates.
Additionally, although the overall proportion of VBM voters
in the state has increased over time, available data
highlight sizable age, racial and ethnic, and other
disparities between VBM voters and polling place voters, as
well as significant variations by region. For example, a
report by the California Civic Engagement Project at the UC
Davis Center for Regional Change found that in the 2012
general election, the proportion of youth voters (defined
as ages 18-23) who voted by mail was 25 percentage points
lower than the proportion of voters 64 years or older who
voted by mail.
Among racial and ethnic lines, the report found that
statewide, the rate of VBM usage among Latino voters was 14
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
10
percentage points lower than the rate for all voters as a
whole, and that this gap was larger in regions such as
Southern California (encompassing Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties). The
report found that the rate of VBM usage among Asian
American voters was above that of the general population;
however, from voter research that Advancing Justice-LA has
conducted, we know that the rate of VBM usage varies by
Asian American ethnic group. For example, among Los
Angeles County voters during the 2008 general election,
Asian Indian (22%), Cambodian (27%), and Filipino American
(26%) voters used the VBM balloting process at rates near
or below the countywide average (24%).
Advancing Justice-LA's belief is that policymakers should
first consider the potential challenges and disparities in
VBM usage noted above before enacting legislation that
permits jurisdictions to make VBM balloting the primary
option for voters, whether in regularly scheduled elections
or special vacancy elections.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 44-32, 5/29/14
AYES: Ammiano, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford,
Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chesbro, Daly,
Dickinson, Eggman, Frazier, Garcia, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray,
Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Lowenthal, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Pan, Perea,
John A. P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas,
Rodriguez, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams,
Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Ch�vez, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Donnelly, Fong, Fox, Beth Gaines, Gatto,
Gorell, Grove, Hagman, Harkey, Jones, Linder, Logue,
Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Nestande, Olsen, Patterson,
Quirk-Silva, Salas, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk, Yamada
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alejo, Brown, Gomez, Vacancy
RM:e 6/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
AB 1873
Page
11
CONTINUED