Elections: write-in candidates.
Summary
Existing law requires that write-in candidates submit a statement to the appropriate elections official containing specified information about their candidacy. This bill would require that a write-in candidate for the office of superior court judge include on the statement his or her compliance with certain eligibility provisions for a judge of a court of record. Existing law requires a petition to be signed by a certain number of qualified registered voters when a write-in campaign will be conducted for the office of superior court judge if only the incumbent files nomination papers. This bill would revise the number of qualified registered voter signatures required to be on these petitions. This bill would also incorporate changes to Section 8600 of the Elections Code made by SB 6, to become operative only if both this bill and SB 6 become operative. Because the bill would change the duties of local elections officials, it would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2009
Committee Review
Aug 2010
Assembly Passage
May 2009
Senate Passage
Aug 2010
Vetoed
Sep 2010
Introduced Feb 27, 2009
Vetoed Sep 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Aug 11, 2010 · Assembly May 18, 2009
How they voted
22–11
Passed · 4 other
Total votes 37
Aug 11, 2010
D
Democratic25
88% Yea
R
Republican12
91% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
24
Key actions
9
Committee
9
Amendments
4
Sep 30, 2010
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Aug 18, 2010
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To enrollment. (Ayes 53. Noes 21. Page 6337.)
lower
Aug 17, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: With recommendation: That Senate amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (August 17).
lower
Aug 12, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on E. & R. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.
lower
Aug 11, 2010
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (22-11-4)
senate
Aug 11, 2010
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 13 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Jun 29, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
upper
Jun 16, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 15).
upper
Jun 9, 2010
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E., R., & C.A.
upper
May 25, 2010
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E., R., & C.A.
upper
Jun 4, 2009
Committee
Referred to Com. on E., R., & C.A.
upper
May 18, 2009
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (66-0-4)
assembly
Apr 30, 2009
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (April 29).
lower
Apr 22, 2009
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 21).
lower
Mar 31, 2009
Committee
Referred to Com. on E. & R.
lower
Mar 1, 2009
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 30.
lower
Feb 27, 2009
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Ted Lieu
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1335
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1335. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline