Elections: ballot label.
Summary
Existing law defines the ballot label as the portion of the ballot containing the names of the candidates or a statement of a measure. For statewide measures, existing law requires the Attorney General to prepare a condensed version of the ballot title and summary, including the fiscal impact summary prepared by the Legislative Analyst that is printed in the state voter information guide. This bill would additionally require the ballot label for statewide measures, and, at the option of a county, the ballot label or similar description on the ballot of county, city, district, and school district measures, to include a listing of nonprofit organizations, businesses, or individuals taken from the signers of ballot arguments printed in the voter information guide that support and oppose the measure or from the signers of the rebuttal arguments to the arguments that support and oppose the measure, as specified. The bill would require a nonprofit organization, business, or individual to meet certain criteria before being listed on the ballot label or similar description of the measure on the ballot. The bill would require the signers of the ballot arguments to submit the lists of supporters and opponents to the Secretary of State or the respective elections official and would require the Secretary of State or respective elections official to provide those lists to county elections officials as part of the ballot label. The bill would make conforming changes and related findings and declarations. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. Because the bill would impose additional duties on local elections officials, and because it would expand the crime of perjury, 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status
in committee
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Dec 2020
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Dec 16, 2020
Last action Feb 1, 2022
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
11
Key actions
2
Committee
1
Amendments
2
Apr 19, 2021
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E. & C.A.
upper
Apr 12, 2021
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E. & C.A.
upper
Jan 28, 2021
Committee
Referred to Com. on E. & C.A.
upper
Dec 16, 2020
Introduced
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 3 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Henry Stern
DDemocratic
Co
Bill Dodd
DDemocratic
Co
Miguel Santiago
DDemocratic
Co
Tom Umberg
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 90
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 90. 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