Our View: Make election integrity top reform priority
Politicians, who are focused on getting reelected would seem to be the last people who should have the power to hire and fire the county registrar of voters.
But that is what Kern County supervisors are proposing in their reform of local elections.
Conflicts and appearances aside, the fact is that the complexity of conducting elections is no longer a part-time job handled as just a department head's added responsibility.
It requires a registrar who is focused on ever-changing election laws and assuring voting is easy and accessible for all citizens. It requires a full-time registrar of voters.
But for public confidence in elections to be maintained requires transparency. The process used by supervisors to recruit and hire a new registrar of voters must be vigorous and transparent.
The new registrar that supervisors hire must not be a politically-connected partisan. Rather, he or she must have proven abilities to conduct elections in a fair, unbiased and efficient manner.
The registrar must be required to report regularly to the public about the election process. The appointment of a bipartisan oversight committee could help build public confidence in the system.
Presently the registrar of voters is just one of many jobs assigned to Kern's elected Auditor-Controller-County Clerk.
Beginning in the 1990s, the Board of Supervisors consolidated county departments. Sold as a way to save money, it also was a way to eliminate some pesky elected department heads.
With a few exceptions, state law requires elected county clerks to oversee elections — for the same reasons noted in this Californian editorial.
Exceptions include some charter counties that are empowered to somewhat set their own rules. And in recent years, the state Legislature has passed laws to exempt a few, mostly small counties from the requirement.
Last year, the Legislature added Sonoma County, which has a population of about half of Kern's, to the list of exempted counties.
Sonoma County officials have started the process of moving the registrar of voters' responsibilities to the Board of Supervisors.
'The task of administering elections has become increasingly challenging in the past decade, to the point it has become a full-time assignment for a department head,' Sonoma's Board Chairwoman Lynda Hopkins said as she promised to conduct a nationwide search for a new registrar of voters.
In addition to conducting elections, registrars participate in Homeland Security Department audits, meet regularly with the FBI about cybersecurity and with the Secretary of State about election issues, and coordinate election security with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies.
Of the proposal to hire a full-time registrar for Kern, District 3 Supervisor Jeff Flores said, 'Our board is committed to ensuring that our local elections are not simply conducted in line with California state law, but truly exceed the baseline requirements for transparency and accountability.'
But first, county supervisors must convince the state Legislature to add Kern to the list of counties that are allowed to have an appointed, rather than elected, registrar of voters.
Kern has until Feb. 21, the last day bills can be introduced by lawmakers, to begin the legislative process.
And because Kern County Auditor-Controller-Clerk Amy Espinoza's term does not end until 2027, the board's hiring of a full-time registrar of voters to oversee local elections may be at least two years away.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
This pay dispute is turning into a public safety crisis
Advertisement Indeed, what started as a pay dispute is now a real threat to public safety. People accused of crimes are entitled to a lawyer under the US Constitution. Most can't afford one, so the state provides them. Massachusetts is one of a handful of states that often contracts that work out to a bar advocate — a private attorney hired by the state to represent indigent defendants. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up But their pay is so low — $65 an hour, far lower than in neighboring states — that a large group of bar advocates have stopped taking new cases. If the state's rate were actually competitive, you might expect to see other lawyers hungry for work rushing to fill the void. Notably, they're not. Advertisement Now judges have no choice but to free some defendants. Earlier this month, a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court Legislative leaders have complained that the bar advocates didn't give them proper warning, and that they don't like being pressured by the work stoppage. Representative Aaron Michlewitz (D-Boston), chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, But legislative pique is not a good enough reason to let this dangerous situation drag on. And anyway, lawmakers knew or should have known that pay was a serious and legitimate issue for those court-appointed lawyers — and that the consequences for ignoring it could be grave. At a hearing last March before the House and Senate Ways and Means Committee, Anthony J. Benedetti, chief counsel for the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) — which administers the appointment of attorneys — made the case for modest increases in their hourly wage. Advertisement And bar advocates said as early as That should have been more than enough time to reach a deal. While the $35 per hour increase that bar advocates are said to be seeking may be too high, there should have been — should still be — some way to reach a compromise. After all, that's what lawyers do all the time. (Lawmakers have said meeting the demand would cost about State Senator Lydia Edwards (D-Boston), who cochairs the Judiciary Committee, told the editorial board that bar advocates should go back to work with a commitment from the Legislature to work on an increase on their wages. 'Call it a win. Be better organized now. Set out a realistic increase that this Legislature can meet now,' she said. But that would require bar advocates to give up leverage in the hope that lawmakers are acting in good faith — a tough sell, given the lack of respect shown for earlier pay raise requests. Meanwhile, from the office of Governor Maura Healey comes this statement: 'Bar advocates do incredibly important work to make sure that everyone has their due process rights protected, and they deserve to be paid a fair wage. Governor Healey is concerned about the negative public safety impacts of this work stoppage. She urges all those impacted to work together to reach a resolution and ensure that all defendants receive the representation to which they are entitled.' Advertisement The governor has also said she'll do 'everything' she can to end the impasse. But there still appears to be no end in sight, and it's only a matter of time before the dispute leads to consequences much more dire than a broken cannon. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kotek calls for special legislative session amid ODOT layoffs, transportation crisis
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – Nearly one month after Oregon's legislative session ended, Gov. Tina Kotek is calling on lawmakers to reconvene in Salem amid a shortfall in transportation funding, leading to historic layoffs in the state. On Tuesday, the governor called for a special session on Aug. 29, asking lawmakers to restore funds for basic road maintenance operations at the Oregon Department of Transportation along with other funding needs for local governments and transit districts. The call from the governor comes after Oregon's legislative session ended with the death of House Bill 3402 on the House floor, which aimed to bridge ODOT's $350 million funding shortfall and aimed to avert layoffs at the agency. CNBC ranks Oregon among most expensive states. Here's why 'In the weeks since the adjournment of the legislative session, my team and I have worked every day with legislators, local partners, and key stakeholders to zero in on a solution and a timeline for the legislature to come back together and address the state's most immediate transportation needs. Oregonians rely on these basic services, from brush clearing to prevent wildfires to snow plowing in winter weather, and they are counting on their elected representatives to deliver adequate and stable funding,' Kotek said in a statement on Tuesday. 'At the same time, ODOT acted prudently in the absence of this funding, initiating a first wave of layoffs on July 7 while also working to reduce the impact to basic services as much as possible. Subsequently, with the agreement of legislative leadership and with a plan for a special session now in place, I have directed ODOT to postpone the start date of layoffs for an additional 45 days, allowing impacted staff more time to make contingency plans for their livelihoods and their families,' the governor added. Kotek concluded 'I am confident that lawmakers will step up next month to avert these layoffs by approving the necessary funding for the state's transportation needs. I appreciate their partnership and am eager to be on the other side of this crisis.' Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now The governor is aiming to bring more funding to the state highway trust fund for the 2025-27 biennium along with funds for the Statewide Transportation Fund. Kotek argues that funding ODOT will stop pending layoffs while also allowing the agency to maintain operations at facilities scheduled for closure. 'The special session will be focused on critical near-term solutions to stabilize basic functions at ODOT and local governments,' Kotek continued. 'This is just the first step of many that must be taken to meet our state's long-term transportation needs.' Portland-area residents flock from Washington, California ODOT has laid off over 480 employees out of an estimated 600-700 total layoffs, according to the governor's office, previously stating this marks the largest government layoffs in state history. Without action from state lawmakers – and depending on unpredictable winter weather – a second round of layoffs is expected in early 2026, the governor's office said. In response to the governor convening a special session, House Republican Leader Christine Drazan (R-Canby) said, 'This could have been prevented if Democrats had come to the table and considered House Republicans' alternative plan to fund ODOT by refocusing existing revenue instead of adding billions of dollars in new taxes on struggling Oregonians.' VIDEO: ClackCo deputies punched mentally disabled inmate 7 times, lawsuit claims The Republican leader added, 'This could still be prevented today, without a special session, if Democrats made the decision to use existing revenue from the emergency board. We can still protect these jobs without raising taxes — and we should. Republicans have represented the voices of the people and fought hard to find solutions that don't add new taxes. It's now time for Democrats to do the same. We invite Democrats to join us in funding essential services without raising taxes, to stand with Oregonians who cannot afford to shoulder more costs.' Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham (R-The Dalles) furthered, ' 'Just weeks after the Legislature rejected the largest tax increase in Oregon history, the Governor is calling us back to Salem to try again, this time with less notice and less transparency. Republicans offered a common-sense plan to get ODOT focused back on its core mission, protect critical maintenance jobs, restore accountability, and avoid raising costs on hardworking Oregonians. Democrats didn't even give it a glance.' 3 Portland spots included in Yelp Elite's roundup of the nation's best fried chicken Bonham added, 'If Governor Kotek were serious about fixing our transportation system, she would start by repealing her executive order on project labor agreements. That one decision alone adds 20 to 30 percent to the cost of every project. Her concern over budget shortfalls rings completely hollow when she's knowingly forcing taxpayers to overpay by millions. Instead, she's playing politics with frontline workers to pressure lawmakers into voting for higher taxes.' The Senate Republican leader concluded, 'For decades, Governor Kotek and her party have prioritized spending on programs that line the pockets of special interests, such as costly housing initiatives that haven't delivered real results, while neglecting critical infrastructure needs. This mismanagement has directly contributed to the crisis we face today. Oregonians deserve roads that work, bridges that last, and a government that puts them first, not more status quo policies and backroom deals to reward special interests.' While discussing an amendment for HB 3402 — which included a bump to registration and titling fees with a 3-cent increase to the gas tax, allowing that money to go to ODOT — House Republicans argued that working Oregonians don't want more taxes. Meanwhile, Kotek said during the amendment's public hearing that not passing it would be catastrophic for Oregonians, noting possible ODOT job cuts could include roles for incident response teams and maintenance crews, which would be 'unacceptable' for Oregonians. House Minority Leader Drazan echoed the sentiments of her Republican colleagues, previously stating, 'It's really, really simple for us. Oregonians themselves have said our number one issue is affordability, and this is tone-deaf. It flies in the face of what Oregonians are telling us as policymakers that they need right now.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Fox News
20 hours ago
- Fox News
San Francisco close to taking new step to fight homelessness
San Francisco is set to crack down on homeless people living in RVs with its Board of Supervisors preparing to vote on strict new parking limits. A proposal that would enact a two-hour parking limit citywide for all RVs and oversized vehicles longer than 22 feet or higher than 7 feet -- regardless of whether they are being used as housing -- is up for final approval Tuesday. Mayor Daniel Lurie and supporters of the policy say motor homes are not suitable for long-term living and the city has a duty to both provide shelter to those in need and clean up the streets. Under an accompanying permit program, RV residents registered with the city as of May are exempt from the parking limits. In exchange, they must accept San Francisco's offer of temporary or longer-term housing and get rid of their RV when it's time to move. The city has budgeted more than half a million dollars to buy RVs from residents at $175 per foot. "We absolutely want to serve those families, those who are in crisis across San Francisco," Chief of Health & Human Services Kunal Modi told The Associated Press. "We feel the responsibility to help them get to a stable solution. And at the same time, we want to make sure that that stability is somewhere indoors and not exposed in the public roadway." The permits would last for six months. People in RVs who arrive after May will not be eligible for the permit program and must abide by the two-hour rule. The proposal, which targets at least 400 RVs, first cleared the Board of Supervisors last week with two of 11 supervisors voting "no." RV dwellers say San Francisco should open a safe parking lot where residents could empty trash and access electricity. However, city officials shuttered an RV lot in April, saying it cost about $4 million a year to service three dozen large vehicles and it failed to transition people to more stable housing, the AP reported. The mayor's new proposal comes with more money for beefed-up RV parking enforcement — but also an additional $11 million, largely for a small number of households to move to subsidized housing for a few years. Officials acknowledge that may not be sufficient to house all RV dwellers, but note that the city also has hotel vouchers and other housing subsidies.
