Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorneys say Compton can use all‑mail ballots; residents press for answers about June 2 election and city survey
Summary
City special counsel explained why Compton's charter and adopted resolutions authorize all‑mail ballots but noted consolidation with the county and state requires voting centers. Several residents told council they received multiple or no ballots, alleged irregularities in the June 2 election and asked for vendor, procurement and ballot‑handling records.
Pam Lee, equity partner at the law firm that serves as special counsel to the City of Compton, told the council on July 14 that Compton is a charter city and therefore may authorize all‑mail ballot municipal elections under the city's charter and municipal code, but that consolidation with county or state elections triggers county and state procedures including required voting centers and drop‑off options.
"The resolution under 26‑3‑63 is authorized and correctly does allow for all mail ballots," Lee said, explaining the interplay among the city charter, municipal code and the Elections Code. Associate attorney Jessica Santiago walked council through Elections Code sections the city relied on and explained why the city does not meet some statutory conditions for a fully stand‑alone all‑mail ballot election (citing Elections Code sections discussed during the presentation). They reiterated that even where mailed ballots are used, voters still have options to return ballots in person or at drop‑off locations as specified in statute.
Why it matters: residents raised procedural and transparency questions that the presentation did not answer for many in the audience. Several public commenters said they received no survey or only some neighbors received it, and multiple speakers alleged mail‑ballot problems during the June 2 primary.
Resident Lynn Boone urged the council to go beyond statutory explanations and address what actually happened during the June 2 election: "We had ballots mailed out, but if you had ballots come to your home, yeah, there were 15 ballots that came to our house," she said, adding concerns about whether those ballots were received and counted correctly.
Other residents echoed demands for records and vendor details. Rodney Lester asked staff to disclose "how that vendor was selected" and the funding source for a recent community survey that many neighbors said they did not receive. Vanessa (public commenter) and others alleged historic local problems with election integrity and urged more transparency ahead of the November election.
City response and next steps: presenters said county officials administer consolidated elections and handle voting‑center operations; complaints about machines or procedures should be directed to the Los Angeles County Registrar, and alleged illegal activity can be reported to the California Secretary of State. The city manager and staff agreed to provide more detailed information, including procurement and vendor selection records for the survey and contacts for county complaint processes.
What remains unresolved: residents repeatedly requested specific documentation — procurement records for the survey vendor, counts of ballots mailed/received at particular addresses, and any post‑election audits or follow‑up — that was not produced at the meeting. Council members asked staff to return with additional information and outreach plans before the November election.
