An act to amend Section 2166.9 of the Elections Code, relating to elections.
Summary
AB 2573 revises California Elections Code Section 2166.9 governing the confidentiality of voter registration information for elected officials and candidates. The bill allows a federal, state, or local elected official, or a candidate who has qualified to appear on the ballot, to request that their residence address, telephone number, and email address be kept confidential by submitting a written request to the county elections official. It also extends the confidentiality option to an elected official’s immediate family member living at the same residence, if that family member signs a statement acknowledging the confidentiality status and the related voting limitations.
The bill sets out when confidentiality begins and ends for officeholders and candidates, including special rules for primary elections, general elections, local special elections, and officials who move between counties. It requires county elections officials to update voter registration records within five business days, notify the Secretary of State for state and federal officials and candidates, and coordinate with other county officials as needed. It also preserves limited disclosure of confidential information for bona fide journalistic or governmental purposes, with documentation requirements for media requests, and states that the program does not override court-ordered confidentiality or other existing confidentiality protections.
Impact
AB 2573 would amend Elections Code Section 2166.9 by replacing and expanding the current confidential voter program for elected officials and candidates. It would impose new administrative duties on county elections officials and the Secretary of State, including ballot-qualification tracking, record updates, inter-county notifications, and procedures for handling confidentiality requests and disclosures. The bill also creates a state-mandated local program to the extent local election offices incur additional duties, and provides for reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates determines the bill imposes reimbursable state-mandated costs.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill has received favorable committee support, passing its April 15 committee vote 8-0 on a do-pass motion with re-referral to Appropriations. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to indicate broader public controversy in the materials supplied. Overall, the bill appears to have been treated as a technical but policy-relevant elections measure with bipartisan or at least unanimous committee support at the stage reflected here.
Contention
The main policy tension in AB 2573 is between privacy and public access. Supporters are likely to view the bill as strengthening safety and privacy protections for officeholders, candidates, and their household members by making confidentiality more structured and easier to administer. Potential concerns center on the added administrative burden for county elections officials, the need for system changes in the statewide voter database and county election management systems, and the limits placed on in-person voting for immediate family members who opt into confidentiality. Another possible point of contention is the bill’s continued allowance for disclosure to journalists and government users, which preserves transparency interests while still restricting access.