WELCOME, EVERYBODY. NICE TO SEE
YOU. IT IS APRIL 22ND, 2024.
THIS IS THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON
ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS COMING TO ORDER. WE
HAVE THREE BILLS ON OUR AGENDA
BEFORE WE HEAR PRESENTATION ON
THE BILL, LET'S ESTABLISH A
QUORUM. SO, ASSISTANT, WILL YOU
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? BLAKE
SPEER, PRESENT SHAKESPEARE.
PRESENT ONE HERE, ONE HERE.
LIMÓN MENGIBAR. NEWMAN. HERE.
NEWMAN. HERE PORTANTINO.
PORTANTINO. HERE. UMBERG HERE.
UMBERG. HERE OKAY. THANK YOU. WE
HAVE ESTABLISHED A QUORUM. SO
FIRST, LET'S TAKE UP OUR CONSENT
CALENDAR. PROPOSED FOR CONSENT
IS SB 1111 BY MIN. THANK YOU. WE
HAVE A MOTION ON BY PORTANTINO.
SO PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. BLAKE
SPEER. YES YES. WHEN I, WHEN I
LIMÓN MENGIBAR NEWMAN A NEWMAN,
I PORTANTINO I PORTANTINO I
UMBERG I UMBERG I. OKAY. IT'S
FIVE ZERO AND THAT WILL BE ON
CALL. SO WE HAVE TWO OTHER BILLS
AND I DO NOT SEE EITHER AUTHOR,
WE HAVE, SENATE BILL 1181 BY
GLAZER AND WE HAVE SENATE BILL
1294 BY OCHOA BOGH. SO MAYBE WE
SHOULD TRY TO GET THEM IN HERE.
NICE TO SEE YOU, SENATOR GLAZER.
WE INVITE YOU TO COME FORWARD
AND PRESENT YOUR BILL, WHICH IS
SB 1181.
THAT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS, I WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR ALLOWING ME TO
PRESENT THIS BILL, AND I WOULD
HAPPY TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS. LAST YEAR,
THE LEGISLATURE PASSED, ARGUABLY
ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT
REFORMS IN THE LAST 50 YEARS.
POLITICAL REFORMS. SP 1439,
WHICH PROHIBITED PARTIES SEEKING
CONTRACTS, PERMITS OR LICENSING
WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT FROM
MAKING POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS
OVER $250 TO ELECTED OFFICIALS
WHO HAVE AUTHORITY OVER THOSE
DECISIONS. THIS BILL WOULD
REQUIRE THAT ANY PARTY INVOLVED
IN A PROCEEDING BEFORE AN AGENCY
PARTICULARLY RELATED TO
CONTRACTS, LICENSES AND PERMITS,
DISCLOSE ANY CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTIONS THAT EXCEED $250
TO THE AGENCY BEFORE THE FINAL
DECISION IS MADE IN THE
PROCEEDING, REQUIRING SUCH
NOTICE, WITH FURTHER FACILITATE
PROPER CONFORMANCE WITH OUR
CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAW. I'D
ALSO LIKE TO MENTION THAT THIS
MEASURE CURRENTLY CONTAINS
PLACEHOLDER LANGUAGE TO ALLOW
FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE
LEVINE ACT RELATING TO CONFLICT
OF INTEREST. I'VE RECEIVED A
NUMBER OF SUGGESTIONS FOR
ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN THAT
MEASURE, AND I'LL CONTINUE TO
CONSIDER THEM AS IF AND WHEN
THIS BILL CONTINUES TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT IS LAUREL BRODZINSKY
FROM COMMON CAUSE. WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE
AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK
YOU, SENATOR GLAZER. SO LET'S
MOVE TO YOUR LEAD WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. AGAIN, I'M LAUREL
BRODZINSKY ON BEHALF OF
CALIFORNIA COMMON CAUSE. WE WERE
A STRONG SUPPORTER OF SB 1439 IN
2022. AND SENATOR GLAZER
AUTHORED IT. AND AS HE
MENTIONED, IT'S REALLY BEEN A
LANDMARK CHANGE FOR PREVENTING
CORRUPTION AND THE PERCEPTION
THEREOF FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OFFICIALS. BUT OF COURSE, WITH
THE ROLLOUT OF ANY VERY LARGE
POLICY CHANGE, AS WE'VE SEEN
WITH IMPLEMENTATION, THERE HAVE
BEEN, YOU KNOW, ISSUES THAT COME
UP AS IT STARTED TO BE
IMPLEMENTED. AND SO THE IDEA OF
HAVING A NOTICE ON THE AGENDA
FOR BOTH OFFICIALS AND PARTIES
TO THE PROCEEDINGS TO HAVE A
LITTLE BIT OF NOTICE OF THEIR
OBLIGATIONS IS ONE THAT ACTUALLY
CAME FROM, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND
WE THOUGHT WAS A REALLY GREAT
STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. AND
WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO
CONTINUED CONVERSATIONS ON HOW
TO HAVE REASONABLE, REDUCTIONS
IN OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION
FOR THEM. WHILE STILL PRESERVING
REALLY THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE,
WHICH IS TO PREVENT ANY UNDUE
INFLUENCE OF OFFICIALS WHILE
THEY'RE MAKING DECISIONS. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT WHO
WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TODAY?
SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE TO
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. DO WE
HAVE ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
? SEEING NONE. DO WE HAVE ANYONE
ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION? I DO NOT SEE ANY. SO
WE'LL GO TO, MEMBERS WHO MAY
HAVE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, AND
I'LL JUST START OUT WITH A QUICK
COMMENT THAT I APPRECIATE, THE,
SPIRIT BEHIND THIS, WHICH IS TO
MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE
PARTICIPATING IN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT BY WATCHING IT OR ARE
SITTING UP ON THE DÍAS OF A CITY
COUNCIL, HAVE ON THE AGENDA THE,
WHAT THE LAW IS SO THAT THEY'RE
ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO
ME AS THE CHAIR IS THAT WE DO
NOT REPEAT LANGUAGE ON AGENDAS
THAT IS ESSENTIALLY
INCOMPREHENSIBLE TO AVERAGE
PEOPLE BECAUSE IT'S OUT OF
CONTEXT OR THINGS ARE WRITTEN IN
SUCH A BUREAUCRATIC WAY THAT
THEY'RE NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO
DECIPHER. AND SO ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON
TOGETHER WITH THE COMMITTEE
CONSULTANT STAFF WHO'VE BEEN
VERY HELPFUL AND WITH YOUR STAFF
, IS TO TRANSLATE IT INTO
LAYMAN'S LANGUAGE. SO THAT IT
COULD BE WELL UNDERSTOOD IF
SOMEBODY JUST SAT THERE AND READ
THE PARAGRAPH. SO I JUST WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WHEN YOU SAID YOU
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS,
BUT YOU'RE STILL WORKING ON THE
LANGUAGE THAT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS, ARE SEVERAL
SENTENCES THAT ARE A SUMMARY OF
THE LAW, BUT NOT TAKING THE
ORDINANCE OR THE, NOT TAKING THE
LAW AS IT WAS PASSED. EXACTLY.
AND PUTTING IT ONTO THE AGENDA.
SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT'S CLEAR. YEAH. NO, I, I WAS
REFERENCING SOME OTHER
SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE COME IN
FROM OTHER QUARTERS ABOUT WAYS
TO HELP IMPLEMENT THE LAW, NOT
SPEAKING TO THOSE AMENDMENTS
SPECIFICALLY. SO THANK YOU FOR
THAT CLARIFICATION. OKAY. GREAT.
SO I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE
SUMMARY OF IT IS ACCEPTABLE
BECAUSE IT'S MUCH, I THINK,
CLEARER TO UNDERSTAND. OKAY NOW
LOOKING TO MY COLLEAGUES,
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS THEY WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? SENATOR GLAZER, THANK YOU
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND FOR
THOSE WHO MAY NOT BE HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM, BUT LISTENING, WE
ARE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE
SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE COME IN
ABOUT THE PREVIOUS BILL. I'M
WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE FAIR
POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION.
THEIR NEW CHAIR AND STAFF, AS
WELL AS STAKEHOLDERS SUCH AS
COMMON CAUSE TO, TRY TO IF
THERE'S WAYS TO IMPROVE THE
LANGUAGE, THE LAW THAT WE LOOK
FOR THOSE OPPORTUNITIES. IF THIS
BILL MOVES FORWARD TODAY WITH
THAT RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I WOULD
ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS.
OKAY. THANK YOU. SENATOR UMBERG
HAS MOVED. SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND
CALL THE ROLL. MOTION IS DO PASS
AS AMENDED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. AS SHAKESPEARE
I, I 1I1I LIMÓN MENGIBAR NEWMAN
A NEWMAN I PORTANTINO A
PORTANTINO I UMBERG I UMBERG I.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL.
IT'S 5 TO 0 AND WE WILL LEAVE IT
ON CALL. THANK YOU. AND NEXT WE
HAVE SB 1294 BY SENATOR OCHOA.
BOGH IF SHE'S RIGHT OUTSIDE. OH
SHE'S PRESENTING NEXT DOOR.
OKAY. WELL, SHOULD WE GO INTO A
SHORT RECESS TILL SHE COMES? WE
ALREADY VOTED ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. OKAY. WELL, LET'S GO
INTO A SHORT RECESS
OKAY. THE SENATE WILL RECONVENE
IN 30S, NOT THE SENATE. THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS
AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
WILL RECONVENE IN 30S. AND WE
WILL INVITE SENATOR OCHOA BOGH
TO COME FORWARD.
OKAY. WE ARE BACK IN. COME. COME
BACK TO ORDER. THANK YOU. SO
NEXT WE WILL HEAR SB 1294 BY
SENATOR OCHOA. BOGH SO, SENATOR,
YOU MAY PRESENT YOUR BILL. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM CHAIR. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. SENATE BILL 1294 WOULD
CODIFY THE ABILITY TO RECALL
PROPONENTS TO FILE A NOTICE OF
WITHDRAWAL. ALL RECALLS BEGIN
WITH THE NOTICE OF INTENTION.
ONCE THE ELECTION OFFICER'S
OFFICE OFFICIAL HAS ACCEPTED THE
NOTICE OF INTENTION, PROPONENTS
MUST PREPARE A DRAFT OF THE
RECALL PETITION FOR APPROVAL. IF
A PETITION IS APPROVED BY THE
ELECTION'S OFFICIAL, PROPONENTS
MAY BEGIN COLLECTING THE
SIGNATURES NEEDED TO MEET THE
THRESHOLD FOR QUALIFICATION.
DURING THE REVIEW PERIOD OF THE
RECALL PETITION, ANY VOTER OR
THE ELECTIONS OFFICIAL MAY SEEK
A WRIT OF MANDATE, WHICH
REQUIRES THE COURT TO REVIEW THE
STATEMENT FOR REASONS OF REASONS
TO DETERMINE IF THE CONTENTS ARE
FALSE OR MISLEADING. IN MAY
2023, RECALL PROPONENTS IN
YUCAIPA SUBMITTED A RECALL
PETITION THAT WAS APPROVED BY
THE CITY CLERK. AT THE SAME
TIME, THE CLERK FILED A WRIT OF
MANDATE CHALLENGING THE
INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE
PROPONENTS STATEMENT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE RULING OF THE
WRIT OF MANDATE WENT BEYOND THE
AMOUNT OF TIME ALLOCATED TO
GATHER THE SIGNATURES WHICH
MEANT THE PROPONENTS WERE UNABLE
TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RECALL
PETITION. THE DELAY IN THE
RULING CAUSED A DELAY IN TIMING
WITH REGARD TO SIGNATURE
GATHERING. WHILE THIS MAY BE AN
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF THE
LAW, THE PROPONENTS COULD NOT
MOVE FORWARD, NOR COULD THEY
WITHDRAW THE PETITION BECAUSE
THE LAW IS SILENT ON THIS ISSUE,
SB 1294 WOULD SIMPLY ALLOW THE
PROPONENTS TO FILE A NOTICE OF
WITHDRAWAL HERE TO TESTIFY AS
CHRIS ROBLESS, A RECALL
ELECTIONS CONSULTANT FROM
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU.
WELL, IF YOU'RE A LEAD WITNESS
IN SUPPORT, YOU MAY PROCEED.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS CHRIS
ROBLESS AND I RESIDE IN ONTARIO,
CALIFORNIA. I AM A CAMPAIGN
CONSULTANT AND I'VE WORKED ON
EIGHT LOCAL RECALLS AS IT IS
FROM THAT EXPERIENCE AND MY
RECENT WORK ON THE RECALL IN
YUCAIPA, THAT I COME HERE TODAY
IN SUPPORT OF SB 1294, WITH THE
RECENT CHANGES IN THE RECALL
PROCESS REGARDING A WRIT OF
MANDATE AND WITHOUT SET
GUIDELINES IN CODE OR BY THE
SECRETARY OF STATE'S
REGULATIONS, THE PROVISION TO
ALLOW A WRIT OF MANDATE
CHALLENGING THE STATEMENT OF
REASONS IS LEADING TO SOME
SERIOUS CONFUSION OUT THERE, AND
DELAYS IN THE PROCESS, AND AN
EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY
BY BY BOTH THE CITY AND RECALL
PROPONENTS. UNFORTUNATELY IF AN
ELECTIONS OFFICIAL OR A VOTER
WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
QUESTIONS THE LANGUAGE IN THAT
STATEMENT OF REASONS, IT CAN'T
BE RESOLVED THROUGH A PROCESS OF
EDITS OR CHANGES, IT ONLY CAN BE
RESOLVED IN THE COURTS. SB 1294
SIMPLY GIVES RECALL PROPONENTS.
ANOTHER WAY TO END THE RECALL
PETITION PROCESS, MAKING THE
CHALLENGE TO THE STATEMENT OF
REASONS MOOT. IN ADDITION, IT
ALLOWS ANY VOTER TO START
ANOTHER RECALL PROCESS USING
DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, GRANTING
RECALL PROPONENTS THE OPTION TO
WITHDRAW THE RECALL PETITION
WOULD EASE THE CONCERNS OF THE
PUBLIC ELECTIONS OFFICIAL AND
THE OFFICER BEING RECALLED, AND
BY SPARING THEM THE PROLONGED
ANTICIPATION OF THE DEADLINE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY,
AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS
THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE ROOM
WISHING TO EXPRESS SUPPORT?
SEEING NONE, ARE THERE ANY
OPPOSITION LEAD OPPOSITION
WITNESSES? SEEING NONE. ANYONE
ELSE WISHING TO EXPRESS
OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM? SEEING
NONE. WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE. YES, SENATOR
NEWMAN. MR. Ó, IT'S GOOD TO SEE
YOU. THANK YOU. YOU TOO, A
COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR EITHER
THE AUDITOR OR THE WITNESS, I'M
SEMI FAMILIAR WITH THE SITUATION
. YUCAIPA, WHERE THE WRIT OF
MANDATE, IS MESSED UP. THE
TIMING, RIGHT? OR IT MESSED UP
THE CLOCK. SO WHAT WAS
CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO SIMPLY
DEVISING A BASIS FOR A TIMEOUT
IN THAT EVENTUALLY? LIKE WHY
HAVE IT START OVER. LET ME ASK
MY SECOND QUESTION, WHICH IS HOW
DO YOU PREVENT THIS PROCESS FROM
BEING GAMED BY SOMEBODY WHO OR
Ã PARTIES WHO WOULD OTHERWISE
CONTINUALLY TAKE OUT A PETITION,
WITHDRAW IT, START AGAIN, START
AGAIN? I CAN SEE WHERE THAT
WOULD HAVE AN EFFECT MORE
ADVERSE THAN THE STATUS QUO,
FRANKLY, I THINK IT GOT GAMED
THE OTHER WAY BY THE CITY
BECAUSE THEY HAVE ENDLESS
RESOURCES. SO MOST OF THE LOCAL
RECALLS DON'T. IT'S SO DIFFICULT
TO DO A RECALL THAT AND NOW IT
REQUIRES NOT 20 SIGNATURES TO ON
ON THE NOTICE OF INTENTION. IT'S
60. SO IT'S REALLY A DIFFICULT
THING. MOST PEOPLE DON'T TAKE IT
UP LIGHTLY. IT'S THEY'RE NOT
WELL FUNDED. IT'S USUALLY A
GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT. AND SO I, I
UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN WHERE
SOMEBODY COULD IN A SENSE
TORTURE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL THAT
WAY. AND HONESTLY, YOU KNOW, IN
THEORY IT COULD HAVE HAPPENED
BEFORE THE WRIT OF MANDATE
PROCESS. ANYWAY, THE, THE I'VE
NEVER REALLY SEEN IT USED LIKE
THAT IN 24 YEARS AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL. YOU'VE USUALLY WHAT
HAPPENS IS, RECALL PROPONENTS
COME TOGETHER AND THEY TRY AND
PUT TOGETHER SOME KIND OF A
CAMPAIGN BECAUSE OF SOME POLICY
PROBLEM. OR WE'VE ACTUALLY I'VE
BEEN PART OF A RECALL WHERE
SOMEBODY HID THE FACT THAT THEY
WERE A CONVICTED FELON AND WERE
ELECTED, AND IT'S THE ONLY
RECOURSE THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO
MAKE A CHANGE BEFORE THE ACTUAL
ELECTION. AND THEN TO FURTHER
ANSWER THE POINT THAT I MADE
ABOUT IT BEING GAMED THE OTHER
WAY IN YUCAIPA, THE CITY CITY
CLERKS ARE THE ELECTION OFFICIAL
AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. THEY DON'T
HAVE A BUDGET FOR AN ATTORNEY.
THEY DON'T HAVE A BUDGET THAT
THEY CAN JUST EXPEND SO THAT
MEANT THE RECALL. THE MAJORITY
THAT WERE ON THE COUNCIL,
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT HAD THE
MONEY. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT
HIRED THE ATTORNEY. IT WAS ALL
DONE VERY QUIETLY, SECRETIVELY.
THERE WAS NO VOTE OF THE COUNCIL
TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY, AN OUTSIDE
COUNSEL FOR THIS. WE STILL TO
THIS DAY, THE RESIDENTS, I
SHOULD SAY, BECAUSE I DON'T LIVE
IN YUCAIPA, BUT THE RESIDENTS TO
THIS DAY STILL DON'T KNOW HOW
THE CITY FUNDED THIS ATTORNEY.
AND THEY NOT ONLY DID THE
ATTORNEY FILE, BUT THEY FILED
AGAINST. SO WE HAD THREE
RECALLS. THERE WERE, 60
SIGNATURES ON EACH. THAT MEANT
THEY ACTUALLY FILED AGAINST ALL
60 ON EACH ONE. IT WAS OVER 197
PEOPLE INDIVIDUALLY, SOME OF
THEM SENIORS, AND THEY ALL HAD
TO FIND LEGAL REPRESENTATION.
THEY DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR THAT.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE FUNDS FOR
THAT. MANY ARE ON FIXED INCOMES.
SO THE CITY WITH UNLIMITED
RESOURCES WAS ABLE TO
EFFECTIVELY PUNISH PEOPLE FOR
EXERCISING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT TO A RECALL. THERE THEN
THE PROCESS WAS DRAWN OUT
BECAUSE OF THE COURTS. THE
REALITY OF THE COURT SYSTEM. AND
THEN ONCE THE 90 DAYS THAT WE
HAD FOR COLLECTING SIGNATURES
ELAPSED, IT BECAME MOOT. AT THAT
COURT, I WAS PRESENT FOR ALL THE
COURT HEARINGS AT THAT COURT
HEARING, THE JUDGE SAID, YOU'VE
SEEN MY SCHEDULE. YOU'VE SEEN
HOW IMPACTED THE COURTS ARE.
WHAT DO YOU SAY ABOUT THE FACT
THAT THIS IS NOW MOOT? AND HE
SAID THE ATTORNEY SAID THAT THE
CITY CLERK DOESN'T WANT TO DROP
IT. I MEAN, IT WAS PRETTY
OBVIOUS THAT THEY WANTED TO
CONTINUE IT AND CONTINUE TO
EXHAUST THE TIME, MONEY AND THE
PATIENCE OF. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ANSWER, SENATOR NEWMAN. WAS
THAT, YEAH. I GUESS I MEAN, THE
THING THAT I GUESS SORT OF
PUZZLES OR TROUBLES ME HERE IS,
IS WE MADE THAT CHANGE RECENTLY,
AND YOU TOUCHED ON IT TO RAISE
THE THRESHOLD FOR AND TO BE
CLEAR, IT'S THE NUMBER OF
SIGNATURES NEEDED TO START A
RECALL PROCESS. RIGHT. THERE'S
ACTUALLY TWO PETITIONS, RIGHT?
THERE'S THE THERE'S THE INITIAL
SORT OF TAKING OUT OF PAPERS.
THEN THERE'S THE SIGNATURES
GATHERED, GATHERED DURING THE
QUALIFICATION PERIOD. AND I DO
WORRY THE REASON WE MADE THAT
CHANGE WAS, WAS PRECISELY
BECAUSE THE THREAT OF RECALL OR
THE CLOUD HANGING OVER THE LOCAL
ELECTED OFFICIAL IS IN MANY WAYS
AS DAMAGING OR PREOCCUPYING AS
THE, YOU KNOW, THE ACTUAL THREAT
OF A VOTE. AND I WORRY ABOUT
GIVING FOLKS A CHANCE TO EXTEND
THAT LEVERAGE BY WILLFULLY
STARTING AND STOPPING, YOU KNOW,
THIS PROCESS, RIGHT? SO THAT IS
A CONCERN. I THINK IF YOU CAN
IDENTIFY, AN OPPORTUNITY TO GAME
A SYSTEM GENERALLY SPEAKING,
SOMEBODY WILL USE THAT, LOOPHOLE
TO GAME THAT SYSTEM. AND SO I
REALLY AM I MEAN, I WOULD HOPE
AS THIS MOVES FORWARD, YOU'D
GIVE SOME CONSIDERATION TO
PUTTING SOME GUARDRAILS AROUND
THAT, BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT SEEMS
IT SEEMS FAIRLY VULNERABLE TO
THAT KIND OF GAMING. WELL, IN
SOME RESPECTS, IF YOU LET THE
TIME, WHICH IS THE WAY IT IS
NOW, YOU LET THE TIME FRAME
ELAPSE. YOU CAN START ANOTHER
RECALL RIGHT AFTER THAT. SO I
APPRECIATE THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW,
THERE'S SOMETHING ALMOST
TANTALIZING LI, YOU KNOW, I
DON'T KNOW, SORT OF
IRRESISTIBLE, LIKE YOU KNOW, IF
YOU WERE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, I
HAD A GRIPE WITH YOU, AND I HAD
ENOUGH INFLUENCE TO DO THAT. YOU
KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING TO STOP ME
FROM TORTURING YOU THAT WAY. AND
YOU KNOW, LOCAL RECALLS HAPPEN
MORE OFTEN THAN STATE RECALLS.
RIGHT I HAVE SOME FAMILIARITY
WITH THIS THING. BUT AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL, YOU KNOW, QUITE
OFTEN IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT THE
VOTE. IT'S ABOUT MAKING THE
POINT. AND YOU AND YOU CAN MAKE
THAT POINT IN A WAY THAT I FIND
REALLY TROUBLING. IF THE
PROPONENTS OF A RECALL COULD
CONTINUALLY START AND RE STOP
IT, YOU KNOW, CHARLIE BROWN AND
THE FOOTBALL KIND OF THING, SO
AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE INTENT
OF THIS LEGISLATION, BUT I WORRY
ABOUT THAT THAT POSSIBLE
LOOPHOLE. THANK YOU. I HE
ANSWERED HIS QUESTIONS, ANSWERED
A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I
HAD, ANOTHER I DO HAVE ONE MORE,
DO YOU THINK IT MAKES ANY SENSE
THAT THE DEADLINE TO PROVE THE
PETITION IS THE SAME AS THE
DEADLINE FOR THE TO FILE THE
WRIT OF MANDATE? IT IT DOESN'T
MAKE SENSE IN THIS REGARD. WHEN
YOU FILE THE NOTICE OF INTENT,
IT'S REALLY A LETTER WITH A
BUNCH OF SIGNATURES. SO IT'S
KIND OF LIKE THAT KIND OF A
PETITION. IT'S NOT THE OFFICIAL
KIND YOU GET AT THE SUPERMARKET.
RIGHT. AND YOU SERVE IT ON THE
ELECTED OFFICIALS FIRST, AND
THEN ON WHAT REALLY STARTS THE
CLOCK IS WHEN YOU TAKE IT TO THE
ELECTIONS OFFICIAL, AND THAT
STARTS THE CLOCK. BUT BY THAT
TIME, IT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION.
THE NEXT STEP IS THAT YOU PRINT
IT IN THE NEWSPAPER. SO WHAT
WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE IS MAKE
THE CORRECTIONS AT THAT TIME,
NOT AT THE TIME WHEN. SO HERE'S
WHAT HAPPENED IN YUCAIPA. WE GOT
A LETTER FROM THE CLERK
AUTHORIZED MOVING FORWARD WITH
THE PETITION BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO
COMPLY WITH THE WITH THE CODE.
RIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT PERMISSION
TO MOVE FORWARD. AND AT THE SAME
TIME, I'M SUING YOU ALL 197
RESIDENTS AND IF AND IN THE
LETTER, IT SAID, IF YOU PROCEED
GATHERING SIGNATURES AND IT'S
FOUND TO BE THAT, THAT THE
LANGUAGE CHANGES THAT CHANGES
THE PETITION. AND WE'VE ALREADY
CIRCULATED IT WITH HER
PERMISSION. AND NOW IT'S ALL
MOOT. ALL THAT WORK FOR NOTHING.
WHAT WOULD MAKES SENSE IS TO DO
IT PRIOR TO THE PETITION IS TO
GET THE L®NG. IF THE LANGUAGE
NEEDS TO BE ALTERED, CHANGED,
WITHDRAWN, DO THAT IN ADVANCE
BEFORE YOU GO THROUGH ALL THE
OTHER EXPENSE AND THE TIME OF
CIRCULATION OF THE ACTUAL
PETITION. BECAUSE IT'S ON THE
PETITION, IT'S REALLY ONE ONE
BLOCK. IT'S 200 WORDS OR LESS.
THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY,
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? ANY
WITNESSES? LEAD WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION. ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION, ACTUALLY, WE DID
THAT ALREADY? OKAY. NEVER MIND.
I'M SORRY. OKAY. THERE YOU GO,
OKAY, I'M GOING TO HAND OVER THE
GAVEL TO YOU BECAUSE I WOULD
LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION. I CAN'T
DO IT AS CHAIR UNLESS SENATOR
NEWMAN IS GRACIOUSLY MOVING THE
BILL GRACIOUSLY. MAKE THAT
MOTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. PLEASE
STOP ME. THIS IS Dð PASS. Dð
PASS. THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATION. THE MEASURE HAS
BEEN MOVED BY. I'M SORRY,
SENATOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? YES. THANK YOU, LET ME
JUST SAY THAT WE WOULD BE HAPPY
TO AMEND THE BILL IF IT GAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CURE. THAT WOULD
ALSO BE, I THINK, A COMPONENT
THAT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HELPFUL
IN THIS SCENARIO, ON THAT END.
SO THANK YOU FOR THE MOTION, AS
SENATOR NEWMAN AND FOR THE
QUESTIONS, THAT THE COMMITTEE
MEMBERS HAVE ASKED, WHILE IT'S
IMPORTANT TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHT
TO RECALL AND ELECT AN ELECTED
OFFICIAL, IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT
TO ENSURE THAT IF A WRIT OF
MANDATE IS FILED AND THERE IS
NOT A TIMELY RULING FROM THE
COURT THAT THE PROPONENTS BE
ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW THEIR
PETITION. NOT ALL COUNTIES HAVE
JUDGES SPECIFICALLY ASSIGNED TO
WRIT OF MANDATE. SO FOR SOME
COURTS, YOU CAN HAVE A DECISION
WITHIN 1 TO 2 WEEKS FOR OTHER
COUNTIES THAT DON'T HAVE THESE
SPECIAL OR THESE JUDGES
SPECIALLY ATTENDING TO THE WRIT
OF MANDATE, THEN IT'S TAKING
THEM MONTHS TO BE ABLE TO DO
THAT AND VERY, VERY COSTLY FOR
ALL PARTIES. SO WITH THIS
PARTICULAR BILL, WE'RE TRYING TO
ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. AND I
WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN
AYE VOTE. THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN
MOVED BY SENATOR NEWMAN. DO PASS
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATION. MADAM CLERK,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. BLAKE
SPEER, WHEN I WHEN I LIMÓN
MENGIBAR NEWMAN. PORTANTINO
UMBERG. WILL LEAVE THE CAR OPEN.
AND AT THIS TIME, WE'LL, WE'LL
GO ON RECESS. WE'LL GO ON RECESS
AND ALLOW OTHER MEMBERS TO COME
FORWARD. COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO
ARE ON ELECTION, PLEASE COME IN
SO THAT WE CAN, GET YOUR VOTE ON
THE BILLS. THANK YOU.
OKAY. THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON
ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS IS WILL RECONVENE.
WE'LL GIVE SENATOR TO CATCH YOUR
BREATH, SO WE WILL NOW LIFT THE
CALL ON THE REMAINING ITEMS,
THERE ARE TWO ITEMS. THOSE ARE
ITEMS NUMBER TWO AND NUMBER
THREE, AS WELL AS THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, WHICH WE'LL DO AFTER.
SO, ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON ALL OF THOSE ITEMS. FILE
ITEM NUMBER TWO, SB 1181. MOTION
IS DO PASS, AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. CURRENT VOTE IS
FIVE ZERO. CHAIR VOTED YES. VICE
CHAIR VOTED YES. LIMÓN MENGIBAR
MENGIBAR I. ALL RIGHT. THAT,
ITEM HAS SIX VOTES AND IT IS
OUT. NEXT ITEM, PLEASE, FILE
ITEM THREE, SB 1294. MOTION IS
Dð PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS,
CURRENT VOTE IS 1 TO 0. VICE
CHAIR VOTED AYE. BLAKE SPEAR.
LIMÓN MENGIBAR NEWMAN.
PORTANTINO MENGIBAR. I SORRY,
THIS IS THIS IS ITEM NUMBER
THREE FOR SENATOR CHOBOQ. NÓ.
COMENZÓ. MENGIBAR NO. YES
NEWMAN. PORTANTINO. UMBERG OKAY,
OKAY. THAT VOTE HAS ONE VOTE
FOR, ONE VOTE AGAINST. AND IT IS
DEAD, THE AUTHOR IS NOT HERE TO
ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION. SO
RECONSIDERATION WILL NOT BE
GIVEN, AND LAST, WE HAVE THE
CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOWING THE
CONSENT CALENDAR SB 1111 KERN
VOTES FIVE ZERO. CHAIR VOTED I
VICE CHAIR VOTED AYE. LIMÓN
MENGIBAR MENGIBAR. A CONSENT
CALENDAR HAS SIX VOTES AND IT IS
OUT. THANK YOU, SENATOR MENGIBAR
, THAT THIS THIS CONCLUDES THE
HEARING FOR THE SENATE COMMITTEE
ON ELECTIONS, THANK YOU TO ALL
THE INDIVIDUALS WHO PARTICIPATED
TODAY. IF YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO
TESTIFY TODAY, PLEASE SUBMIT
YOUR COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS IN
WRITING TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE
ON ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS. YOUR COMMENTS AND
SUGGESTIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO US,
AND WE WANT TO INCLUDE YOUR
TESTIMONY IN THE OFFICIAL
HEARING RECORDS. THE SENATE
COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS IS
HEREBY ADJOURNED. BEST.