Kern supervisors approve committee recommendations, direct staff to pursue separate appointed registrar of voters

The Kern County Board of Supervisors on Wednesday approved recommendations from its Finance and Administration standing committee to pursue state legislative changes that would allow the county to create a separate, appointed registrar of voters and to pursue a set of process improvements for the Registrar of Voters (ROV) function.

The action returned several recommendations from a committee chaired by Supervisor David Couch and directed county staff to pursue legislative language and to refer recommended state/federal law changes to the board's Legislative Program Committee. The board voted to pursue the option of creating an appointed registrar of voters (what staff presented as "option 3") and approved a package of process improvements and requests that the current Auditor-Controller/County Clerk/Registrar of Voters respond in a public presentation. The motion passed unanimously, "All ayes."

Why it matters: Residents and several speakers at the meeting said errors in past elections and a growing workload argue for organizational change and clearer accountability. County staff told supervisors that California's election processes have become more complex and that a dedicated official focused on elections would provide ongoing attention to the workload, mapping and mail-ballot processes that the committee found vulnerable to error.

What the board approved and asked staff to do: Elsa Martinez, the county CFO and staff to the committee, summarized three organizational options (separate the county clerk as an independent elected office by ordinance; make the county clerk an appointed department head via ballot measure; or create a separately appointed registrar of voters subject to state law change). Martinez told the board that pursuing an appointed registrar would require legislative action to amend Government Code Section 26802.5 and that timing is constrained by state legislative deadlines.

Kern County Auditor-Controller/County Clerk/Registrar of Voters Amy Espinosa answered detailed questions at the meeting and provided status updates on a number of operational items the committee had raised. Espinosa said the office sent letters on Dec. 13 to 204 voters whose records had a placeholder birth date of Jan. 1, 1900; of those, 4 were found to be deceased and removed, 8 returned corrected forms, 3 updated online, and 23 letters were returned undeliverable and moved to inactive status. She also said the office removed 34,617 change-of-address registrations on Aug. 5, 2024, and that another 30,510 were scheduled to be canceled on Feb. 12 unless the voters contacted the office. Espinosa noted these removals follow state procedures and blackout periods around elections.

Public comments: Dozens of members of the public urged structural change. Concerned citizens including Charles Shinn, who identified himself as a retired Marine and concerned citizen, and others asked that the board rescind Ordinance G6050 (1994) that combines the Auditor-Controller and County Clerk/Registrar roles. Speakers cited election-material errors, slow reporting times, staff turnover and lawsuits as reasons for separation. Several speakers asked for greater transparency on the voter-roll maintenance and for the committee's five-year removals report.

Operational details discussed: Staff described the technical and manual steps required to align district boundary GIS shapefiles with the elections precinct database and addresses. Martinez said map updates require cross-referencing GIS shape files, county road data, Google Maps and the elections management system. Espinosa said mail-ballot processing and signature cures are governed by state law, including new timelines that extended the signature-cure period (a factor in when counties can certify results). Espinosa also said ballot-package production involves many vendors and more than 300 ballot layouts in some elections.

Next steps and board direction: The board directed staff to pursue the legislative route for option 3 (seeking authority to appoint a registrar of voters) and to refer recommended legislative items to the Legislative Program Committee for refinement and action. Supervisors also asked staff to schedule a public tour of the elections office for supervisors and interested parties outside of an active election cycle. Martinez and Espinosa said any structural change could not be implemented in the middle of an incumbent's current term and that timelines must respect filing periods if the board chooses option 1 or 3.

"This process is full of tension, is full of excitement," Supervisor Leticia Perez said in opening the item, and the board concluded with a unanimous vote to move forward on the committee's recommendations.

Ending note: Supervisors said they expect follow-up at future meetings and a committee meeting is scheduled for February 10 to refine options and next steps.