[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6280478,"mediaKeyId","2615207-6d4252d05db68e466a772a2f6331859b","parentId",2615207,"title","San Joaquin County advisory committee tables bid to remove vote-by-mail and drop‑box requirements after broad public opposition","audioSeconds",381,"startMs",5333000,"endMs",4952000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615207-6d4252d05db68e466a772a2f6331859b&start=5333&end=4952","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615207-6d4252d05db68e466a772a2f6331859b/thumbnail_5333000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6280478/San-Joaquin-County/California/San-Joaquin-County-advisory-committee-tables-bid-to-remove-vote-by-mail-and-dropbox-requirements-after-broad-public-opposition","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280478-36433190463b1cee6249e8b10ac95ff7/orig.mp4?Expires=1777545694&Signature=C9GT0rJXVUg8NXc6OaWg~U9z6py4hEetid3LpRU~NIpV~zBfcuDQm58QmTRYsBHB71oD-mN~Vg3VCrSG8lV1inhoDn7QLqEP75u5mK7lQE9oanVx29Ub7SBBIrey0u2wCRnE4iZ2KW1ywnGWXSJJZ3i5iWHa4uFXCSet6IegwxIYoD8SMEL~7diUTiKSdsUihWkODpAPxS7LXcX48Ggtqrjn8OAJLTay2n9XVyGzT18my06nKwo2HrlDGl4CmSXTWO8KGFLgMkxQz0w8zdxuhrnGVgZWigU0qZc8bln8uXV7r0bf5QJMnsKdUAJ4k5a-c-myeERPNBErhjz~2HIRPA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","San Joaquin County CA","date","2025-03-14T00:19:29Z","article","The San Joaquin County Election Advisory Committee on Thursday opened a heated discussion about whether to recommend that the Board of Supervisors petition the state to remove statutory requirements for vote‑by‑mail and ballot drop‑off locations from the California election code. Dozens of residents and local organizations urged the committee to keep existing mail‑in voting options, drop boxes and same‑day registration in place, and warned that added ID requirements or rollbacks would disenfranchise voters.

The discussion item under consideration asked the committee to \"discuss vote by mail and ballot drop off location requirements and recommend that the Board of Supervisors advocate for the removal of these requirements from the California election code.\" Chairperson Amador opened the item and Committee members, county supervisors and the Registrar of Voters all participated in the debate.

Why it matters: Residents and civic groups said any move to limit mail balloting, drop boxes or same‑day registration would make voting harder for elderly, working families, students and other groups that rely on the conveniences created during and after the COVID‑19 period. Local officials raised fiscal questions about the county’s ability to pay for expanded services without state reimbursement.

Public commenters from across the county criticized the committee’s prior letters and proposed changes. Andrea Sanji of Lodi said the committee had become \"a platform for people to share falsehoods, dishonest statements, and outright lies not backed by any verifiable information.\" Attorney Andrew Dedacevich told the committee it was \"turning into a voter suppression advisory committee\" and urged members to \"stop trying to disenfranchise your voters.\" Bobby Bivens, president of the local NAACP chapter, said his organization was \"opposed to any form of voter suppression.\" The League of Women Voters of San Joaquin County also spoke against additional restrictions, warning such rules would disproportionately affect marginalized groups.

Several speakers emphasized specific consequences. Andrea Sanji said same‑day registration and conditional ballots resolved routine problems at polling places and represented a large share of in‑person votes. Other commenters warned that stricter ID requirements used in other states had led to ballots being rejected for clerical mismatches and would slow results and increase costs.

Supervisor Michael (last name not specified in transcript) Dean framed the issue historically and fiscally. He told the committee the county created the advisory body in response to past indictments for ballot handling and to protect the privacy and integrity of voters. Dean said the county must weigh the right to vote against the real budgetary costs of running expanded mail‑ballot programs and drop‑box networks. \"My number one…is the safety of my constituents, and number two is to protect the checkbook,\" Dean said, adding that past expansions had not been fully reimbursed by state or federal sources.

Registrar of Voters Olivia (last name not provided) told the committee staff would need time to prepare financial and procedural backup before a policy recommendation could be made. Olivia also described existing legal and operational safeguards governing drop boxes, accessibility, security and retrieval procedures.

Committee action and next steps: The committee accepted 14 written public comments into the record by unanimous vote after a motion by member Patricia (last name not provided). The chair and members then agreed there was insufficient information to forward the proposed recommendation as written. Members voted to table the agenda item and requested that county elections staff return with a financial analysis and additional backup material at the committee’s next meeting. The Registrar said staff would provide the requested fiscal and process details.

The committee also agreed to schedule a follow‑up meeting to continue the discussion; the next meeting date was set for April 10. The chair said the committee will collect and consider the additional material before making any recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.

Context and balance: Public testimony at the meeting was overwhelmingly opposed to removing vote‑by‑mail options or drop boxes and strongly opposed requiring photo ID or eliminating same‑day registration. County officials emphasized they must balance accessibility with ongoing fiscal constraints and legal obligations. Committee members repeatedly asked for more detailed cost estimates and clarifying material before voting on any recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.

Ending: The committee left the item open for further review and staff analysis; no formal recommendation to the Board of Supervisors was adopted at Thursday’s meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","San Joaquin County Election Advisory Committee • March 13, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The San Joaquin County Election Advisory Committee on Thursday opened a heated discussion about whether to recommend that the Board of Supervisors ask the state to remove statutory requirements for vote‑by‑mail and ballot drop‑off locations from the California election code.","taxTitle","San Joaquin County, California","taxId",3688,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6280472,"San Joaquin County Registrar reports 48,000 recent voter‑roll updates; ongoing cleanup of anomalies and duplicates",666,5106000,5772000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615207-6d4252d05db68e466a772a2f6331859b&start=5106&end=5772","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615207-6d4252d05db68e466a772a2f6331859b/thumbnail_5106000.jpg","/articles/6280472/San-Joaquin-County/California/San-Joaquin-County-Registrar-reports-48000-recent-voterroll-updates-ongoing-cleanup-of-anomalies-and-duplicates","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280472-4440e19de002e0499d196a6fd4829af6/orig.mp4?Expires=1777545694&Signature=YKAfcEHxajGvCQbafNOTLYFMBV6LfJmFnlrICYoz6PC2iKqDr3iLf0a5Oz-l91lzQD4l14-NRXFvSvtbKtL~Vpmt7qooUFSl0IsTnunKobckT0xcraIhnnhopiWdcu9rKPgEycAYDSxKC4c6E1bWq9V-NXTJa~xN19EzCxcAj8B1x9jwyLIDgXe4Lgrsu05GKfek3yZxiSE2SYJhJKbLRH1e6BKw9TWnIPmXzsAPgJ9JvzsZA~TPWsT01vdig~bo58VchrFEYf4gDiAU3f6VNRzP4lfP5SdBu3ULeqAMaN8zQCAgoF1Vfo6zd14~Qop2dBcUlfqRilBm0OaG8f1YNA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Olivia, the San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters, told the Election Advisory Committee that the county’s voter rolls have seen roughly 48,000 updates — additions, corrections, moves and cancellations — in recent months and that staff are actively pursuing cleanup of anomalous and duplicate records.

In a detailed status update the Registrar said the voter roll is in constant flux and described the sources of updates, including the Department of Motor Vehicles, county agencies, the National Change of Address database and other statewide feeds. Olivia said the county has run additional checks and combined several verification methods to improve roll accuracy, but that legal limits in the Elections Code constrain removals.

Key figures Olivia provided:
- About 48,000 record updates processed between the last certified election and the present reporting window.
- Anomalous birth‑date entries historically included many showing an 1850 birth year; staff reduced those to about 30 remaining records and are continuing verification work.
- A small set of records (12 at the time of the briefing) listed birthdates implying ages over 107 years; staff are investigating and contacting voters when appropriate.
- Duplicate‑registration indicators once exceeded 1,100 across jurisdictions; Olivia reported that the county’s processes have reduced that figure to fewer than 30 active duplicates as of her review.
- The office maintains a daily voter‑maintenance workload performed by roughly six full‑time staff dedicated to roll upkeep.

Olivia described steps the office is taking: enhanced tracking to show additions and removals, use of credit‑reporting sources for voter‑roll maintenance prior to major elections, ongoing coordination with the Secretary of State’s NVRA workgroup, and additional contact efforts for records with missing information. She said the county has changed how it releases certain voter lists: pending voter lists are no longer provided to requesters and public requests for voter files now require statutory criteria and proof of eligibility.

The Registrar emphasized legal constraints: voter registration is considered permanent unless canceled under specific provisions of the Elections Code, and county staff must follow the statutory process before removing a voter from the rolls. Olivia also said the sheriff’s office has assisted the elections division when investigations or outreach were needed.

Committee members asked clarifying questions about specific figures and about how state, county and local rules interact. Patricia and others asked for further documentation and the chair asked that staff include roll‑maintenance cost and process details in the financial analysis requested for the vote‑by‑mail/drop‑box discussion item.

Ending: The Registrar told the committee staff will continue work on the roll cleanup, improve reporting transparency to the committee, and return with requested materials at the next meeting.
","San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Olivia briefed the Election Advisory Committee on voter‑roll maintenance, reporting 48,000 record updates in recent months, progress removing anomalous birthdates and duplicate registrations, and ongoing efforts to improve transparency and interagency coordination.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

San Joaquin County advisory committee tables bid to remove vote-by-mail and drop‑box requirements after broad public opposition

San Joaquin County Registrar reports 48,000 recent voter‑roll updates; ongoing cleanup of anomalies and duplicates