Kern County Board of Supervisors 2:00 p.m. meeting for Tuesday, November 12, 2024

Summary

In this Board of Supervisors meeting, key topics included the discussion of Assembly Bill 969, which restricts manual ballot counting in larger elections and mandates certified voting machine contracts. The bill, passed as urgency legislation, was a response to Shasta County's decision to manually count ballots after ending its contract with Dominion Voting Systems. Additionally, a cease and desist letter raised legal concerns regarding the conflict between state and federal election laws. Public statements highlighted frustrations with state laws impacting local communities, such as the loss of a park in Derby Acres due to a setback law. The meeting also included procedural matters and public comments on these issues.

Takeaways

• 😀 AB 969 was introduced to address a county's decision to terminate its contract with Dominion and rely solely on manual ballot counting in elections with over 1,000 voters (general elections) or 5,000 voters (special elections).
• 😀 The bill prohibits counties from conducting only manual counts and requires them to have a contract with a certified voting machine company before terminating existing contracts with voting system providers.
• 😀 AB 969 was enacted as urgency legislation, meaning it took immediate effect to ensure compliance before the March primaries, preventing a county from solely relying on hand-counting ballots.
• 😀 Supervisor Flores expressed concern that the legislation passed without adequate input from local governments, highlighting a gap in local authority involvement in state legislative decisions.
• 😀 The California Association of Clerks opposed AB 969, with over 40 comments in opposition, yet the county did not have an opportunity to officially weigh in or take a position.
• 😀 The public raised concerns about the cease and desist letter delivered to the board of supervisors, questioning the chain of custody and the delay in the supervisors' review of the document.
• 😀 Jim Robinson, a public commenter, argued that AB 969 may conflict with federal election law and questioned the urgency status of the legislation, suggesting that it was not a true emergency.
• 😀 The board acknowledged receiving the cease and desist order, and the issue was agendized for a closed-session discussion with legal counsel to address the potential legal threat posed by the letter.
• 😀 The consent agenda, which included routine items, was approved in one motion without any objections or requests for separate consideration from the public or board members.
• 😀 Chairman Couch raised concerns about unintended consequences of state legislation, particularly with respect to the loss of a local park in Derby Acres due to California's setback laws, stressing the need for careful consideration of such laws in the future.

Q & A

What is the primary focus of Assembly Bill 969?

Assembly Bill 969 primarily limits the use of manual ballot counting in elections with more than 1,000 registered voters for general elections and more than 5,000 for special elections. It also prevents counties from terminating contracts with certified voting system vendors unless a new contract is already in place.

Why was Assembly Bill 969 enacted?

AB 969 was enacted in response to a Northern California county's decision to cancel its contract with Dominion Voting Systems and rely solely on manual ballot counting, which was considered problematic. The bill was introduced to ensure that local elections use certified voting systems and prevent issues like manual counting in larger elections.

What is the requirement for counties under AB 969 regarding voting system contracts?

Under AB 969, counties cannot terminate their contract with a certified voting system vendor, such as Dominion, unless they already have a contract in place with another certified company.

What did Supervisor Flores express about the legislation?

Supervisor Flores expressed concern that the county was not consulted about AB 969 before it passed. He highlighted that while the California Association of Clerks weighed in, the bill moved forward despite opposition from several parties.

What issue did Mr. Robinson raise about the cease and desist letter?

Mr. Robinson raised concerns about the delay in reviewing the cease and desist letter, which had been delivered to the Board of Supervisors. He questioned the chain of custody of the letter and the supervisors' delayed response to it.

What legal conflict did Mr. Robinson mention during the meeting?

Mr. Robinson pointed out a conflict between state and federal election laws, specifically regarding AB 969 and the Harbor Act, suggesting that there might be discrepancies that could complicate the enforcement of the legislation.

What was the board's response to the cease and desist letter?

The Board acknowledged the cease and desist letter and took it seriously as a legal threat. It was scheduled for a closed session discussion with legal counsel to assess the matter further.

What actions did the Board take regarding the consent agenda items?

The Board approved several routine items on the consent agenda in one motion, including those related to county operations. No one raised any objections or requested separate consideration of the items.

What issue did a board member raise regarding the unintended consequences of the state setback law?

A board member raised concerns about the unintended consequences of the state setback law, which led to the loss of a park in Derby Acres. The board member noted that this outcome was not the intended effect of the law, but it still impacted the local community.

When is the next meeting of the Board of Supervisors scheduled?

The next meeting of the Board of Supervisors is scheduled for December 3rd, 2024, at 9 a.m.