The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 05062003 - D4 .................................................. ,TO- ' BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FROM: Stephen L. Weir, County Clerk-Recorder DATE: April 10, 2003 SUBJECT: AB 1531 (LONGVILLE)—OPPOSE SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)AND BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION(S): 1 OPPOSE unless amended AB 1531 (Longville), which would designate June for the statewide primary and a separate March Presidential primary during the Presidential election cycle. Oppose unless amended to combine the statewide primary with the Presidential primary. 2. REQUEST the County Lobbyist to appropriately communicate the Board's position on AB 1531. BACKGROUNDIREASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDATION(S): Current state law requires that the statewide primary election be held on the first Tuesday in March in each even-numbered year. State law also requires that in Presidential election years, the statewide primary be consolidated with the Presidential primary on the first Tuesday in March. AB 1531 would require that the statewide primary be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June of each even-numbered year. The measure additionally requires that the Presidential primary election be held on the first Tuesday in March but continues to provide forthe statewide primary in June, thus requiring election officials to conduct two primaries in Presidential election years. In an attempt to have greater influence in deciding Presidential elections, California moved its June Presidential primary to March and then consolidated the statewide primary with the Presidential primary. According to critics,the March statewide primary is responsible for increased voter apathy and low voter turnout. Proponents of disconnecting the statewide primary from the Presidential primary and holding it later in the year believe that this action would: CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: E Yes SIGNATURE: _L,-O-E'COMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE -4kPPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION ON B(j(AON May 6, 2003 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER .W SPEAKER: :Ralph Hoffman, Friends of Ralph Hoffman for District III BOS, 60 Saint Timothy Court, Danville VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT: None I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ***DISTRICT III SEAT VACANT*** ATTESTED: May 6, 2003 HN SWEETEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR EPUTO BY: cc: Elections Office ................... B ARD OF SUPERVISORS April 10, 2003 Page 2 • Promote greater competition in the primaries by providing potential candidates more time to decide if they want to run for office. • Lower the cost to run for office because the campaign cycle would be shortened. • Allow elected officials to focus on state issues rather than lengthy reelections. • Deep campaign volunteers involved throughout election cycle. • Increase accountability for statements made by candidates during the primaries. County election officials, however, are concerned about the increased cost burdens created by the additional primary election during Presidential election years and are very concerned about the administrative burdens this bill creates by requiring two primaries within 90 days of one another. Many election officials believe that the solution to problems raised by Assemblymember Longville would be for California to return to a consolidated June primary or to consolidate the statewide and Presidential primaries any time between April and June. Critics argue that the March primary has been relatively ineffective in increasing California's influence over Presidential elections since most other states also moved up their primaries. This measure is estimated to increase the County's election cost by $1,625,000 in Presidential election years. It is noteworthy that this bill creates a $50 million reimbursable state mandate at a time when the State is deferring payment of all mandates. This deferral requires Contra Costa County to front over $15 million in outstanding and unpaid claims to cover the costs of State mandates. The County is estimating our claim to be $4.8 million for 2003/2004 and then would drive our total unpaid claim to $21.5 million by the end of FY 200312004. ORGANIZATION POSITIONS: This measure is opposed by both the California Association of Counties (CSAC) and California Association of Clerks and Election Officials (CACEO)organizations. SLW:ceb r:Efections/correspondence/AB 1531.BO8 ................................................................... TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FROM: Stephen L. Weir, County Clerk-Recorder DATE: April 10, 2003 011 WA SUBJECT: SB 430 (JOHNSON)—OPPOSE SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)AND BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION(S): 1 OPPOSE SB 430 (Johnson), which would designate September for the statewide primary and a separate March Presidential primary during the Presidential election cycle. 2. REQUEST the County Lobbyist to appropriately communicate the Board's position on SB 430. BACKGROUND/REASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDATION(S): Current state law requires that the statewide primary election be held on the first Tuesday in March in each even-numbered year. State law also requires that in Presidential election years, the statewide primary be consolidated with the Presidential primary on the first Tuesday in March. SB 430 would require that the statewide primary be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in September of each even-numbered year. The measure additionally requires that the Presidential primary election be'held on the first Tuesday in March but continues to provide forthe statewide primary in September, thus requiring election officials to conduct two primaries in Presidential election years. In an attempt to have greater influence in deciding Presidential elections, California moved its June primary to March. According to critics,the March primary is responsible for increased voter apathy and low voter turnout. Proponents of SB 430 argue that dozens of other states, including New York, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts and Michigan, hold statewide primaries in August or September and that California should be able to also. By moving the statewide primary to September, proponents state that this measure would: CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: Z Yes SIGNATUR K .,- RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE 1-1kP-PROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ✓ ACTION ON B ON May 6, 2003 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER SPEAKER: Ralph Hoffman, Friends of Ralph Hoffman for District III BOS 60 Saint Timothy Court, Danville VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT: None I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ***DISTRICT III SEAT VACANT*** ATTESTED: May 6,2003 JOHN SWEETEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY: cc: Elections Office 30ARD OF SUPERVISORS April 10, 2003 Page 2 • Promote greater competition in the primaries by providing potential candidates more time to decide if they want to run for office. • Lower the cost to run for office because the campaign cycle would be shortened. • Allow elected officials to focus on state issues rather than lengthy reelections. • Keep campaign volunteers involved throughout election cycle. • Increase accountability for statements made by candidates during the primaries. County election officials, however, are concerned about the increased cost burdens created by the additional primary election during Presidential election years and are very concerned about the administrative burdens this bill creates by shortening the time between elections from approximately 240 days to 60 days. Election officials express concern over the ability to conduct, canvass and certify election results and still allow time for recounts or legal challenges while they prepare for the general election in just 60 days. Election officials have also expressed concern with out-of-county and overseas voters, many of them military members, having adequate time to receive absentee ballots and return them in time to accommodate the shortened election cycle. It should be noted that while ballot-marking issues received the lion's share of attention in the post- November 2000 Presidential Florida debacle, the problems created by the short time available for canvassing and certifying results was responsible for much of the litigation that surrounded those election results. Many election officials believe that the solution to problems raised by Senator Johnson would be for California to return to a consolidated June primary or to a consolidated election held any time between April and June. Critics of the March primary argue that it has been relatively ineffective in increasing California's influence over Presidential elections since most other states also moved up their primaries. To make a September primary work, election officials believe significant reforms to the election process would have to occur, including eliminating the requirement to provide sample ballots. These necessary reforms may, in fact, work against the goal of SB 430, which is to increase voter turnout. In virtually every case where elections are held that are supplementary to consolidated elections, i.e. special elections, city "stand alone" elections, etc., voter turnout suffers. Consistently voters complain about such elections not being incorporated (consolidated) with other scheduled elections. They cite costs and inconvenience regularly in these criticisms. This measure is estimated to increase the County's election cost by $1,625,000 in Presidential election years. It is noteworthy that this bill creates a $50 million reimbursable state mandate at a time when the State is deferring payment of all mandates. This deferral requires Contra Costa County to front over $15 million in outstanding and unpaid claims to cover the costs of State mandates. The County is estimating our claim to be $4.8 million for 2003/2004 and then would drive our total unpaid claim to $21.5 million by the end of FY 2003/2004. ORGANIZATION POSITIONS: Both the California Association of Counties (CSAC) and California Association of Clerks and Election Officials (CACEO) organizations oppose this measure. SLW:ceb r:Elections/correspondence/W 430.805 _ ..........._........... _ _............_..........._.............__ ...................... F ; AqL ONS F F%F.r✓ !..'rrr`{l� o{{y Ff !Jl W, { � {[} Ff b � - Yw�f'�CFF�� i H f{.•: FF:fFiFF f ? 'X > F f .. r$ /rbf? 1 �,$y{l� .:,�� $ F f{�i'%? ;i 'i' F l•. ray„/�Fr;�f{/fFF� �� r lr - _ y . r l v: f'.;t.}:?.::.:: of �•' lifw . ffr f v+r• ri x. 4{T r Mg IL ; } fPli wl 73 w IN {T s .X { h W : r aw }f f' yf •} .r} .: aw '"•'"v.:�::is n :. } x to •wrl.•{$rY :` ...... AIMS ............. ot {fn y }} • s f s N. t h svrh : Tv.. Y r , n n f' { N n •yr,� rWf.,fr { 4, ri{ r Y yr • fir•'}:;}; $ rf r�" f r rs : AL LO IWIF ti is r •S'. ''�.y f W IWIF {. {., a ! q :rr KEE :+rr • n. s r: f r} t f ::::........ % inONvn.L m-awLoA :.... r - ' s 01.�}loMAI,r�r:c .7F,r r r r r r rr ' r r r r r r . r, r rr frr fy rr r r f - r "�� r rr l�r� �, :;::"f:Y•r,:r rr/ rrry�..1 .,rr. �t � f:cG !rl.• ..':f r . ..: � �. .x .;.. r/ ys' /rl/� '`i r/;' fr:✓frf,i r r} /, r r , r f fr�r' NO >,"� �.��.r i ..¢'r ,+i,..;�/ r n? -. � r.: : r� : ✓ F x{.rrr;rrrr f%,l $�rr �r��" �r r f ..:� ,..f•.r r r ,� '? }r•r C � �f',� � "1:.. % r r r r '.:y; fr ',�� fry rrr r �f',�✓,!� ,�{ 3> rr f tf/� �/rrr r rrr f�:r� x, ar'y y ,rfi fr ILA ------------------------------- .. .. .., :. :.. :... : ... r r i"�