Elections: specified local offices: write-in candidate.
Summary
(1) Existing law prohibits an elections official, in any county in which only the incumbent has filed nomination papers for the office of superior court judge, to place the incumbent's name on the ballot unless, within 10 days after the final date for filing nomination papers for the office, a petition indicating that a write-in campaign will be conducted for the office and signed by 100 registered voters qualified to vote with respect to the office is filed with the elections official. This bill would revise the signature requirement for that petition to 0.1% of the registered voters qualified to vote with respect to the office, provided that the petition contains at least 100 signatures but need not contain more than 600 signatures. (2) Existing law requires every person who desires to be a write-in candidate and have his or her name as written on the ballot of an election counted for a particular office to file a statement of write-in candidacy that contains specified information. This bill would require that a statement of write-in candidacy for any of several specified local offices also include a statement that the candidate meets statutory and constitutional requirements for that office as described in a specified statute.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2011
Committee Review
Aug 2011
Assembly Passage
Apr 2011
Senate Passage
Jul 2011
Signed into Law
Sep 2011
Introduced Feb 14, 2011
Signed Sep 6, 2011
Floor votes · Senate Jul 14, 2011 · Assembly Apr 11, 2011
How they voted
22–6
Passed · 3 other
Total votes 31
Jul 14, 2011
D
Democratic20
90% Yea
R
Republican11
54% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
22
Key actions
8
Committee
8
Amendments
1
Sep 6, 2011
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 15, 2011
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 50. Noes 26. Page 2380.).
lower
Jul 14, 2011
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (22-6-3)
senate
Jul 14, 2011
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 12 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Jun 8, 2011
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 8).
upper
Jun 6, 2011
Upper · Passed
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Apr 25, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on E. & C.A.
upper
Apr 11, 2011
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (46-20-3)
assembly
Mar 30, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (March 29).
lower
Mar 15, 2011
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on E. & R.
lower
Feb 24, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on E. & R.
lower
Feb 15, 2011
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 17.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
BL
Bonnie Lowenthal
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 362
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 362. 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