Transcript Highlights:

• We'll take up first our consent calendar, proposed consent items.
• And then also they have options to bring their ballots to the ballot boxes and then also the voting booth
• Once I vote, it should go to the registrar of voters and they tabulate who the ballot, I mean, the ballot
• So you're referring mainly to ballot measures.
• SB 1225, SB 1225 transfers the responsibility for preparing ballot titles and summaries for proposed

Summary: The Senate Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments heard several election-related measures. SB 884 by Senator Umberg proposed expanding polling-place buffer zones, limiting certain law enforcement activity near polling sites, increasing ballot drop boxes and vote center access, and extending the vote-by-mail receipt deadline; supporters said it would protect voters from intimidation, while county election officials opposed it as operationally difficult and costly. The bill was amended in committee to allow county supervisors discretion over expanding the buffer zone and to permit law enforcement entry for crimes against persons or property. It was ultimately passed out of committee on a 4-1 vote after members’ roll calls were completed later in the day. SB 1164 by Senator Cervantes would expand California voting-rights protections by codifying and broadening anti-dilution and anti-suppression rules, adding preclearance for some jurisdictions, and directing courts to favor voting access; it drew strong support from civil rights and voting-rights groups, while one city raised concerns about effects on pending litigation. The committee advanced the bill to Judiciary on a 4-1 vote after later roll call completion. The committee also considered SB 900 by Senator McNerney, which would streamline political advertisement disclosures by shortening required disclaimer language, allowing standard abbreviations, and increasing the number of top funders disclosed on political mailers from three to five. Supporters from the outdoor advertising industry and campaign finance reform groups said the bill would preserve transparency while making disclosures more readable; it passed unanimously and was sent to Appropriations. In contrast, SB 1225 and its companion SCA 3 by Senator Niello would transfer responsibility for drafting ballot titles and summaries for initiatives and referenda from the Attorney General to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Supporters argued this would improve neutrality and public trust, while opponents said the current elected Attorney General system is accountable and efficient; both measures were advanced on narrow votes after roll calls were completed later. Finally, SB 1360 by Senator Cervantes, part of the California Voting Rights Act of 2026 package, would expand language-access requirements for election materials by lowering the threshold for coverage, adding a petition process, and extending protections beyond current federal language categories. Voting-rights and immigrant-advocacy groups strongly supported the bill, while county election officials opposed it unless amended, citing concerns about the precinct-based determination model and implementation details. The committee passed SB 1360 to Appropriations on a 5-0 vote after the later roll call. The committee also approved a consent calendar of seven measures at the start of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Delete the proposed criminal penalties in proposed Section 1507 of the Elections Code.
• To protect the evidentiary use of those ballots, existing law is clear that these ballots should not
• In April, he told the press that he would gladly seize ballots again, including the ballots from the
• Or that ballots have... ...ineligible voters prior to the midterm elections, or that ballots have already
• The ballot— The ballot should never leave the custody of the elections official.

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on May 6, 2026, with a quorum present and heard one bill, SB 73. The author described the measure as a response to perceived threats to California elections, including restrictions on armed or non-uniformed personnel at polling places, protections for ballots and voting equipment, and limits on law enforcement access to election materials without a court order. The chair reviewed a set of agreed amendments, including removing a section conflicting with AB 1664, deleting proposed criminal penalties, clarifying the role of the Attorney General and Secretary of State, and refining language on signature challenges, law enforcement support, and certified voting technology. Supporters, including AAPI Force, CHIRLA, the League of Women Voters of California, and Common Cause, argued the bill would protect voters from intimidation and preserve election integrity. Opponents from CALA argued the bill was unnecessary, would hinder legitimate investigations, and reflected distrust of law enforcement and federal oversight. Committee discussion focused heavily on whether the bill was responding to real-world threats and on the ballot seizure in Riverside County. Members questioned how the measure would affect signature challenges, chain of custody, and investigations into possible fraud. The author and supporters said ballots should remain in election officials’ custody and that federal or local agents should not be able to interfere with election materials or intimidate voters. The chair and other members also discussed the urgency clause and the need to move the bill quickly despite the proximity of the June election. The committee voted to do pass and re-refer SB 73 to the Committee on Public Safety. The roll call initially showed the bill passing 5-1, then after the absent member arrived, the final vote was 6-2, and the bill was reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Three bills are proposed for consent.
• Californians like using mail-in ballots, even Republican voters like mail-in ballots.
• For process purposes, ballot envelopes are proposed...
• Fresno County has holes in their ballot; you can't see Fresno County has holes in their ballot.
• ballot in increases.

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on March 25, 2026, with nine measures on the agenda and three bills taken on consent. The committee approved the consent calendar for AB 1736, AB 1853, and AB 2153. The committee also heard several election-related bills, including AB 1993 on ballot-envelope privacy, AB 1788 on nonprofit disclosure of travel payments for elected officials, AB 1560 on barring people convicted of public corruption from lobbying, AB 1539 on presidential and vice-presidential ballot eligibility certifications, AB 1919 on Santa Cruz Metro local tax initiative procedures, and AB 1562 on county selection of poll workers. The chair also noted membership changes and welcomed new and returning members and staff. AB 1993 drew the most debate. The author argued it was a common-sense safeguard to prevent voters’ choices from being visible through ballot-envelope holes, citing a Sacramento County incident and public concern about ballot privacy. County election officials, the Secretary of State’s office, and Disability Rights California opposed the bill, saying the holes also serve accessibility and processing functions, that existing voter instructions already address privacy, and that the measure would create implementation problems and an unfunded mandate. After extended discussion, the committee voted the bill out on a 2-6 roll call and it failed. AB 1788 was supported by the FPPC and the League of Women Voters and passed as amended to Appropriations, with members emphasizing transparency while seeking to avoid unintended coverage of organizations like NCSL and CSG. AB 1560 passed 6-0 despite the Secretary of State’s implementation concerns about how the office would learn of relevant convictions. AB 1539, which would require party representatives to certify presidential and vice-presidential nominees’ constitutional eligibility, passed 7-0 as amended. AB 1919, which would clarify procedures for a Santa Cruz Metro voter initiative to place a transit tax on the ballot, passed 6-2, and AB 1562, which would allow counties to randomly select poll workers, passed 7-1 after discussion about civic engagement, guardrails, and election administration. The committee then completed roll-call adjustments for absent members and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> up on the ballot. up on the ballot.
• </c> at the ballot box? at the ballot box?
• </c> ballot title and a deceptive ballot ballot title and a deceptive ballot description<02:33:16.080
• ballot accessessibility and ballot that ballot accessessibility and ballot language<03:53:21.600><c>
• The next ballot initiative, or ballot question, was under the heading proposed law referred by the General

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I haven't seen any proposals from the majority office changing this ballot statement, and I really think
• I haven't seen any proposals from the majority office changing this ballot statement and I really think
• I am presenting the governor's proposal, so I can't speak to why the ballot language is written the way
• Again, I did not write the ballot language. I am presenting this proposal by Governor Ron DeSantis.
• That ballot language was not written by me. I am simply presenting this proposal before you.

Summary: The Senate took up Committee Substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 2F, a proposed constitutional amendment on property tax reform. The measure would increase the homestead exemption in stages, lower the assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and limit county and municipal ad valorem tax revenues to specified uses such as public safety, education, infrastructure, natural resources, debt service, employee benefits, and certain administrative costs. Supporters, led by Senator Avila, argued the proposal would provide meaningful property tax relief and push local governments to rein in spending, while opponents warned it would shift costs to fees, reduce local flexibility, and threaten funding for core services. Several amendments were offered and rejected. Senator Sharief proposed an income-based circuit breaker for property tax relief; Senator Smith offered a sunset clause; and Senator Berman proposed revising the ballot statement to better match the amended proposal and remove outdated references. Each amendment failed on recorded votes. During questioning and debate, senators pressed Avila on the ballot language, the effect on local services, whether the legislature could later restrict local spending by statute, and whether renters would benefit. Avila said the ballot language was not his and repeatedly stated he was presenting the governor’s proposal, while also saying local governments would need to prioritize budgets and that future legislatures could address implementation details. After the amendment votes, the joint resolution was read a third time and moved into final debate. Supporters said the proposal would give homeowners relief and force fiscal discipline at the local level. Opponents, including Senators Nathan, Bracey Davis, Smith, Polsky, and Errington, argued the measure was rushed, lacked a completed fiscal analysis or replacement revenue, and could harm police, fire, libraries, parks, housing, and other local services. They also criticized the ballot summary as misleading, especially regarding the staged homestead exemption increase. The transcript ends during debate, before any final vote on the joint resolution itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• deceased candidate is removed from the general ballot.
• using that electronic ballot portal.
• ballot as well.
• There is one proposed substitute in the books and one amendment to that proposed substitute.
• We're going to be no on this proposal today.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on several bills. HB 2356 would let a homicide victim’s next of kin seek a court injunction to block examination of law enforcement records in homicide cases; staff explained current Public Records Act rules, the sponsor said the bill was intended to protect families and children after especially graphic cases, and open-government testimony opposed the measure as an unnecessary secrecy expansion. HB 2460 and HJR 4212 would change vacancy-filling rules for partisan offices so an appointee must be from the same party only if the former officeholder had declared a party preference; the sponsor said this would address vacancies involving no-party-preference officials and avoid delays or litigation. HB 2631 would create a pilot to extend the governor’s customer-experience initiative to the Secretary of State, Fish and Wildlife, and the Insurance Commissioner, with deadlines for liaisons, metrics, reports, and service-improvement plans; the sponsor and supporters emphasized better service and accessibility, while agency representatives raised concerns about cost, autonomy, and whether participation should be optional. HB 2574 would streamline procedures when a candidate dies before or after ballots are printed, allowing removal from ballots or noncounting of votes based on a death certificate; the sponsor said it would avoid unnecessary recounts and costs. HB 2572 would require county-tribal election meetings and create an electronic ballot return portal for certain voters, including tribal voters on reservations, military and overseas voters, and voters with disabilities; county auditors and election officials supported the tribal outreach and access goals but stressed the need for security testing and careful implementation of the portal. In executive session, the committee considered five bills and adopted amendments on two of them. For HB 2333, which addresses protections against political violence for elected officials, candidates, election officials, and criminal justice participants, the committee adopted amendment Omley 307 to allow P.O. boxes or ACP addresses in campaign-related filings and contributions, then advanced the substitute bill on a 4-3 vote. HB 2462, concerning authority to counter unpiloted aircraft systems, was advanced 5-2. HB 2419, which expands the address confidentiality program to certain administrative law judges and Office of Administrative Hearings employees, was amended to include the chief administrative law judge and then advanced 5-2. HB 2176, exempting collaborative drug therapy agreement information from the Public Records Act, advanced 4-3 after debate over privacy versus transparency. HB 2491, exempting personal information submitted to Washington Technology Solutions for digital experience platform services, also advanced 5-2. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So here's the reality: the ballot summary and the ballot language, it does say that, quote, core services
• The reality is the ballot summary and the ballot language, it does say that, quote, core services will
• Members, I rise today to address a great concern I have over this proposed ballot amendment.
• I say this because this proposal we're being asked to put on the ballot is in strict opposition to those
• There have been proposals.

Summary: The House took up the special order calendar for a proposed constitutional amendment on property taxes, CS/HJR 1F, which would create a new homestead exemption for non-school taxes, lower the annual assessment cap on non-homestead property, and restrict how counties and municipalities may use ad valorem tax revenue. The sponsor, Rep. Overdorf, said the measure would give homeowners tax relief and argued local governments could adjust spending or use other revenue sources. Opponents repeatedly questioned the ballot language, the lack of a fiscal estimate or backfill, and the potential impact on local services, public safety, and debt obligations. The House adopted the special order report and then debated the resolution and a series of amendments. Several amendments were offered to carve out or protect specific services from the tax changes. Rep. Bartleman’s amendment to protect Children’s Services Councils and Children’s Trusts was supported by members who said those entities fund early learning, mental health, aftercare, and other services for children and working families, but it failed 25-74. Rep. Cross offered an amendment to include water management districts in allowable ad valorem uses, warning of impacts on flood control, water quality, Everglades restoration, and water supply; that amendment also failed. Rep. Eskamani offered an amendment requiring the Legislature to backfill public safety funding if local revenues fall, arguing police and fire services, staffing, and response times would be at risk; it failed 25-71. The chamber then rejected Rep. Woodson’s amendment to require state backfill for senior services, with supporters citing Meals on Wheels, transportation, adult day care, and other local senior programs, and opponents saying the proposal was outside the bill’s scope. Finally, Rep. Gant offered an amendment to protect veteran services, saying local governments fund housing, mental health, transition, and family support programs for veterans; debate emphasized the importance of honoring veterans and avoiding cuts to those services. The transcript cuts off during debate on that amendment, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• proposed amendment.
• I am simply proposing or presenting his proposal before you.
• That text does not exist in the proposal, but it's going to say that on the ballot summary.
• Because the governor's property tax relief proposal is comprehensive, the ballot summary we discussed
• Because the governor's property tax relief proposal is comprehensive, the ballot summary we discussed

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, a proposed constitutional amendment to reduce property taxes by lowering assessment caps on non-homestead property, expanding homestead exemptions over time, and allowing local governments to increase exemptions further. The sponsor argued the measure would provide broad property tax relief while requiring revenues to be directed to core services such as public safety, education, infrastructure, and natural resource projects, with a trust fund intended to help local governments transition. Senators raised concerns about the lack of a fiscal score, the effect on counties, cities, school districts, and special districts, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. Several amendments were debated. Senator Polsky’s amendment to explicitly authorize user fees and non-ad valorem assessments to offset lost property tax revenue failed. Senator Avila’s amendment broadening permissible uses of ad valorem revenue to include county constitutional officers and other expenditures approved by local governing bodies was adopted after debate over whether the bill would otherwise underfund essential functions. Senator Smith’s sunset amendment, which would have made the constitutional changes expire after five years, failed. Senator Smith’s amendment to allow tourism development tax revenue to support public safety and education also failed. Senator Graal’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund language was adopted, with supporters arguing the Constitution should not promise an unfunded account. Additional late-file amendments were considered. Senator Berman’s proposal to change the ballot title to more neutrally describe the measure as affecting property taxes and local community service reductions failed. Senator Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal was adopted, preserving school taxes. Senator Smith’s amendment narrowing the non-homestead assessment cap reduction to small businesses only failed. The committee then returned to the bill as amended and continued questioning the sponsor about eligibility, fiscal impacts, and whether the proposal could lead to local governments offsetting lost revenue through special assessments or other charges.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> is the default higher than the proposed is the default higher than the proposed budget?"
• So, if the budget passes as proposed, that's the proposed budget. That's what you get for the year.
• another proposed budget.
• another proposed budget.
• So are you proposing that the ballot article on an SB2 town that has the budget and then the default

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I haven't seen any proposals from the majority office changing this ballot statement, and I really think
• I am presenting the governor's proposal, so I can't speak to why the ballot language is written the way
• Again, I did not write the ballot language. I am presenting this proposal by Governor Ron DeSantis.
• That ballot language was not written by me. I am simply presenting this proposal before you.
• Everything, this is the governor's proposal, the governor's proposal.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The ballot initiative makes two changes, proposes two changes to that apparatus as it currently exists
• The ballot initiative makes two changes, proposes two changes to that apparatus as it currently exists
• There was a slight reduction to 5.85%; it went on the ballot, and the proposal was to reduce that over
• Their arguments mirror what was said the last time a ballot question was proposed to reduce the income
• I am testifying today in opposition to the proposed ballot initiative to reduce the state income tax

Bills: H5006, H5007

Keywords: tax revenue, state surplus, taxpayer refunds, budget growth, Massachusetts General Laws, income tax, tax reduction, state law, personal income tax, tax rates, 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and vote-by-mail ballots.
• and vote-by-mail ballots.
• We're counting your ballot.
• We use ballot tracks, and that notifies you when your ballot gets back to us.
• No ballots were in there.

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from several county supervisors of elections and the Florida Supervisors of Elections Association on the 2024 election cycle and priorities for the 2025 session. They described very high turnout in the presidential election, major operational planning needs, and the heavy reliance on seasonal workers, list maintenance, ballot-on-demand systems, and secure chain-of-custody procedures. They also discussed the impact of recent legislative changes on voter-roll maintenance, including inactive voter removal, and said Florida’s election administration has improved to what they called a “platinum standard.” The supervisors outlined several legislative requests: allowing more than one non-government “wild card” early voting site to improve access and emergency flexibility; requiring newly naturalized citizens to update driver’s license information so voter records match DHSMV data; exempting home addresses of certain election workers and ballot transporters from public records to improve safety and recruitment; restoring a checkbox on vote-by-mail return envelopes so voters can stay on the vote-by-mail list for the next cycle; aligning base salaries for supervisors, property appraisers, and clerks with other constitutional officers; and reducing ballot length by removing precinct committee races from the ballot. They also said they expect a committee bill to carry some of these proposals. Members questioned the panel about ballot transport security, signature verification, vote-by-mail expiration, public records transparency, and the petition process for constitutional amendments. The supervisors said ballots are transported under detailed county plans with tamper-evident seals, chain-of-custody logs, trained workers, and in some cases two-person transport teams. On petitions, they said the process is labor-intensive and expensive, that fraud has occurred in some cases, and that they favor reforms such as requiring more personal identifying information and having initiative sponsors mail petitions to voters rather than making supervisors handle the mailing. They also said signature mismatches can be cured within 72 hours after Election Day and that voters are notified when possible. After the supervisors’ presentation, the committee also heard brief public testimony from Kathleen Griffiths, who urged adoption of commercial-style risk management standards in election systems and referenced several election-related bills her group supports.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we want that ballot summary to appear.
• the ballot language that's proposed and then it goes forward for adjudication.
• because of ballot candy.
• The ballots, that's correct.
• So while some of the stuff in that ballot language proposed by the legislature was technically true,

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 3146, sponsored by Rep. John Simmons, which would expand ballot summary statements from 50 to 100 words and create a process for the Secretary of State and courts to revise ballot language after a challenge. Simmons said the bill largely mirrors last year’s SB 22 but removes the section the Missouri Supreme Court struck down, and he argued the measure is needed to preserve the General Assembly’s intent and improve clarity for voters. Supporters said the longer summary limit and back-and-forth review would give voters more information and keep ballot language with elected officials rather than courts. Opponents argued the bill would politicize ballot language, encourage misleading drafting, and create a process that could run out the clock before challenges are fully resolved. Denise Lieberman of the Missouri Voter Protection Coalition said the courts must remain the final check on whether ballot language is fair and sufficient, and she warned the bill’s timelines are not workable. Other opponents, including the League of Women Voters, Jobs with Justice, and citizen and initiative-petition advocates, said the measure would make it harder for citizens to get initiatives to the ballot and would let misleading language stand longer. Several witnesses and members debated the role of the courts, the Secretary of State, and the legislature in drafting ballot summaries, with supporters emphasizing separation of powers and accountability to voters, and opponents emphasizing judicial review and practical timing concerns. The Secretary of State’s office testified in support, saying the process had worked well in practice and provided transparency. No vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The ballot initiative makes two changes, proposes two changes to that apparatus as it currently exists
• There was a slight reduction to 5.85%; it went on the ballot, and the proposal was to reduce that over
• Their arguments mirror what was said the last time a ballot question was proposed to reduce the income
• I am testifying today in opposition to the proposed ballot initiative to reduce I am testifying today
• in opposition to the proposed ballot initiative to reduce the state income tax from 5 to 4%.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am simply proposing or presenting his proposal before you.
• The ballot summary—this ballot summary, to say that this ballot summary will mislead voters, is not just
• Literally, that text does not exist in the proposal, but it's going to say that on the ballot summary
• Because the governor's property tax relief proposal is comprehensive, the ballot summary we discussed
• Because the governor's property tax relief proposal is comprehensive, the ballot summary we discussed

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The use of a secure electronic ballot return portal would greatly increase the security of ballots being
• But people who use the electronic ballot return portals have to forfeit their right to a secret ballot
• with the paper ballots.
• I think that we need to stop this ballot shopping.
• It's a modest proposal, and it's about integrity.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on six bills. SB 6081 would protect sex designation information and related records from public disclosure, limit sharing of such information by the Department of Licensing and Department of Health, and allow denial of records requests when disclosure could cause harm or disenfranchisement. The sponsor and many supporters, including transgender Washingtonians, privacy advocates, and allied organizations, said the bill would close a privacy gap and reduce doxing, harassment, and targeting; one witness opposed it on grounds of record accuracy, law enforcement, and concerns about sports and public safety. No vote was taken. SB 5902 would update voter notification and address-change procedures by allowing more flexible forms of voter registration updates, reducing mailed notices in some automatic registration situations, and expanding electronic communication options. The sponsor and county auditors said it would improve efficiency, reduce confusion, and save counties money; testimony was generally supportive. The hearing then moved to SB 6034, which would codify the Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs as a cabinet-level agency and require ongoing training and reporting on government-to-government relations with tribes. The sponsor and tribal representatives supported the bill as a technical fix and a commitment to tribal sovereignty, and no action was taken. SB 6035 would require regular county and state meetings with tribes on election access and authorize an electronic ballot return portal for certain voters, including military, overseas, disabled, and some tribal voters. Supporters said it would improve access and collaboration, while the Secretary of State, Verified Voting, and others raised cybersecurity and secret-ballot concerns about the electronic portal; several witnesses also opposed that portion while supporting tribal outreach and drop boxes. SB 5892 would centralize requests for voter registration database records through the Secretary of State and make unauthorized disclosure of protected voter data a felony; supporters framed it as protecting voter privacy and resisting federal overreach, while opponents argued it would hinder voter-roll maintenance and transparency. Finally, SB 5973 would ban pay-per-signature compensation for initiative and referendum signature gathering and require 1,000 supporting signatures before a ballot title is issued; supporters said it would reduce fraud, misleading tactics, and ballot-title shopping, while opponents called it an added barrier to direct democracy. The committee heard extensive testimony on all bills, but the transcript does not show any votes or executive action taken during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Californians like using mail-in ballots; even Republican voters like mail-in ballots.
• For process purposes, ballot envelopes are proposed...
• Fresno County has holes in their ballot. You can't see Fresno County has holes in their ballot.
• to put the ballot in increases.
• to put the ballot in increases.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• An absentee ballot? What things have to be cured on an absentee ballot for the count?
• For requiring a ballot to be cured, an absentee ballot.
• He noted that if a tax proposal fails, current law says it cannot be back on the ballot for six months
• He said that if a proposal fails, the local government should have the ability to get back on a ballot
• So if it expired in 2026 and they proposed it in 2026 and it failed, they could be on the spring ballot

Summary: The Committee on House and Governmental Affairs met on March 18 and first adopted the minutes from its February 21 meeting. The committee then took up HB 250, which would have narrowed financial disclosure requirements for appointed, unpaid board and commission members by exempting immediate family information. Supporters said the bill would reduce burdens and help recruit volunteers, while opponents argued it would weaken ethics enforcement and create opportunities for undisclosed conflicts of interest. After debate and a roll call, the committee deadlocked and HB 250 failed to advance on a 6-6 vote with one abstention. The committee next considered HB 576, which transfers ownership and maintenance responsibility for the Old Governor’s Mansion to the Department of State and codifies its current operational role. Secretary of State Nancy Landry and mansion staff testified in support, describing expanded programming, increased visitors, and the need to align the statute with current practice. The committee adopted technical amendments and then reported HB 576 favorably without objection. The committee also heard HB 117, which recreates the Department of State and its statutory entities through July 1, 2033, and reported it favorably without objection. The major remaining item was HB 842, the annual omnibus elections bill, which makes numerous technical and substantive changes to election law, including voter assistance for people with disabilities, absentee ballot and petition procedures, inactive voter updates, and election contest deadlines. Several members and public witnesses raised concerns about disability documentation, absentee ballot curing, witness requirements, constitutional amendment challenge deadlines, and the scope of authority given to the Secretary of State, while others said the bill clarified existing practice and improved election administration. After adopting amendments and rejecting a motion to defer, the committee reported HB 842 favorably by an 8-5 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> a recount of a ballot proposition. a recount of a ballot proposition.
• a ballot audit.
• </c> recounts, and perform a ballot audit. recounts, and perform a ballot audit.
• , not these simple test ballots.
• clerk's association proposed the clerk's association proposed<01:05:34.160><c> amendments.

Bills: SF0028, SF0030, SF0031, SF0032

Keywords: voting, elections, electronic voting systems, transparency, public testing, voter registration, qualified elector, residency requirements, voting rights, mortgage modification, priority, electronic signatures, real property, financial covenants, 911 services, emergency response, grant funding, next generation technology, government accountability, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• But this measure, which we propose to put on the ballot, does the opposite.
• So it appears that maybe this ballot referral recognizes the ill-advised nature of this proposal because
• us on putting very simple and small proposals to the ballot, because it's going to fill up the ballot
• But now here we are with a proposal that is going to make it harder to drop off those mail-in ballots
• But now here we are with a proposal that is going to make it harder to drop off those mail-in ballots

Keywords: 1182, all