San Diego Superior Court judgesNo Superior Court judge contest appears on the county's certified candidate list
6/6
6/6
4/4
Orange
Orange County AssessorDecided in June (Parrish, 73.30%)
Orange County Auditor-ControllerDecided in June (Hamilton, unopposed)
Orange County Clerk-RecorderDecided in June (Nguyen, 72.00%)
Orange County Treasurer-Tax CollectorDecided in June (Freidenrich, 70.77%)
Orange County Supervisor District 2Decided in June (Sarmiento, 65.89%)
Orange County Judge Office 13Decided in June, per the county's certified canvass
Orange County Judge Office 41Decided in June, per the county's certified canvass
2/2
2/2
2/2
Riverside
Riverside County Superintendent of SchoolsRETRACTED 2026-08-31: not a real gap. The 'no majority — Scott 46.29%, Williamson 31.61%, Unaka 22.10%' finding this row previously carried was a misreading of the county's own certified June primary summary PDF, which has a documented contest-header/candidate-block shift bug (already flagged elsewhere in this file for Judge Office #10, where the printed header sits over the wrong race's candidates). Applying that same bug here: the 'County Supt of Schools' header actually sits over the Board of Education Trustee Area 1 candidate block (Scott/Williamson/Unaka), while the true County Superintendent contest — Edwin Gomez, unopposed, 100% — is the block one header up, mislabeled 'State Supt of Public Instruction' in the same document. Independently confirmed three ways: (1) Ballotpedia categorizes Scott, Williamson, and Unaka as 'Riverside County Board of Education candidate, 2026,' never Superintendent, and separately confirms 'Edwin Gomez... Gomez won outright in the primary on June 2, 2026, after the general election was canceled'; (2) the Press-Enterprise (Allyson Vergara, June 10 2026, via MSN) reports this explicitly as the 'Trustee Area 1' race, and separately reports Ben Johnson II's real, different race as 'Trustee Area 2' -- both consistent with a one-header shift in the county PDF, not with the county's own labels; (3) most decisively, RCOE's own current, live Board of Education roster page (rcoe.us/about-us/board-of-education) already lists Michael Martinez Scott, Ph.D. as the sitting Trustee Area 1 member with a term expiring 2030 -- meaning the seat was already decided outright in the June 2026 primary (county Board of Education trustee races are plurality-decided, no majority-or-runoff mechanism, unlike County Superintendent). There is no pending November 2026 contest here under any name. Riverside's only remaining county-section contest is Judge of the Superior Court Office #10 (already built); countySectionContests below corrected from 2 to 1 accordingly.
1/1
1/1
1/1
San Bernardino
San Bernardino SheriffDecided in June (two-candidate race)
San Bernardino Auditor-ControllerDecided in June (two-candidate race)
2/2
2/2
1/1
Santa Clara
Enumerated from the county's official 'List of Offices' document: no county-section contest in November — every row office, Supervisor seat, and judgeship was decided outright in the June 2026 primary.
Santa Clara District AttorneyDecided in June (Rosen, two-candidate race)
—
—
—
Alameda
Enumerated from the county's own candidate-list API (all 134 November 2026 races, in 5 categories, none county-level): no county-section contest. Also completes the city census note below — the county's own data names the 2 previously-unnamed cities among its 8 mayoral races: Dublin and Oakland.
—
—
—
Sacramento
Sacramento County AssessorDecided in June (Wynn, unopposed)
1/1
1/1
1/1
Contra Costa
3/3
3/3
—
Fresno
4/4
4/4
4/4
Kern
2/2
2/2
—
Ventura
3/3
3/3
1/1
San Francisco
10/10
10/10
3/3
San Joaquin
Resolved 2026-08-29: the county's own June 2026 Notice of Election lists 9 Superior Court Judge seats, 2 Supervisor seats, 4 row offices, and 2 Board of Education trustee areas as the full county-nonpartisan slate. Only 2 of the 9 judge seats needed a ballot line (both unopposed); every other seat was either won outright in June or (7 judge seats, 2 BOE seats) resolved via unopposed declaration with no ballot appearance in either election.
—
—
—
San Mateo
2/2
2/2
—
Stanislaus
Enumerated from the county's official 'Unofficial Candidate List' (2026-08-28): no county-section contest section appears at all, alongside full state/city/school/special-district coverage. Moderate confidence — inferred from absence, not an explicit June-decided statement.
—
—
—
Sonoma
2/2
2/2
—
Tulare
2/2
2/2
0/1
Solano
2/2
2/2
1/1
Santa Barbara
3/3
3/3
0/1
Monterey
4/4
4/4
—
Placer
1/1
1/1
—
Merced
3/3
3/3
1/1
San Luis Obispo
Enumerated from the county's official Unofficial Candidates List, posted since the last pass: zero county row-office contests — only community-college, school, and special-district races.
—
—
—
Santa Cruz
Enumerated from the county's ballot-contest list: no county-section contest in November
—
—
—
Marin
Enumerated from the county's official candidate-status document: no county row office, Supervisor, or judge contest anywhere on it.
—
—
—
Yolo
1/1
1/1
0/1
Butte
Resolved 2026-08-29: the county's own June 2026 certified canvass shows every row office, both Supervisor seats, and County Superintendent of Schools were decided outright (Treasurer-Tax Collector independently confirmed unopposed via Ballotpedia). The 4 County Board of Education trustee areas named in an earlier filing notice are all marked 'On Ballot: No' (uncontested) on the county's own November candidate document.
—
—
—
El Dorado
2/2
2/2
—
Shasta
3/3
3/3
0/1
Imperial
2/2
2/2
0/2
Madera
1/1
1/1
0/1
Kings
Enumerated from the county's official candidate list: its only two County Board of Education seats are explicitly marked NOT ON BALLOT (uncontested); no other county-section contest appears.
—
—
—
Napa
Resolved 2026-09-02, revising the original 3-contest estimate down to 0: the county's official Candidate Information Guide correctly identified County Board of Education Areas 1, 2, and 4 as the only county-section offices up in November (Auditor-Controller, Assessor-Recorder-County Clerk, Treasurer-Tax Collector, District Attorney, and Sheriff-Coroner all moved to March 2028), but that guide is a pre-filing document and does not settle whether any of the three actually reach the ballot. Napa County's own certified Roster of Candidates (CFMR037, 'Qualified Candidates Only,' print date 2026-08-13, fetched and read directly -- the same document already on file for Napa city, American Canyon, St. Helena, and Yountville elsewhere in this tracker) resolves it: Contest 3110 (Area 1, incumbent Don J Huffman), Contest 3120 (Area 2, incumbent Janna Waldinger), and Contest 3140 (Area 4, appointed incumbent Nadine Wade) each drew exactly one qualified candidate and are each individually flagged 'On Ballot: No' -- a genuine Elections Code Section 10229 cancellation for all three, the same pattern already confirmed for Imperial County's Board of Education Areas I/II and Kings County's two Board of Education seats elsewhere in this tracker. All three incumbents are deemed elected without appearing on the printed November ballot; nothing is missing here, not a live gap.
—
—
—
Humboldt
Enumerated from two official county documents: no county row office, Supervisor, or judge contest anywhere on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Nevada
Enumerated from the county's finalized local candidate list: no county-section contest in November
—
—
—
Sutter
Resolved 2026-09-03, revising the estimate down to 0: both flagged questions are now closed, and neither produces a real November contest. A live browser session reached county document 9811 -- the post-primary 'candidates going to November' document, unreachable in every prior pass -- via same-origin fetch() plus pdf.js, the same technique that unlocked this document for Live Oak's city contest earlier this session. It is the county's own 'SUTTER COUNTY CANDIDATES FOR THE NOVEMBER 2026 GENERAL ELECTION' list (as of 8/12/2026, the close of the filing-extension period): Board of Education Trustee Area 3 drew exactly one qualified candidate (Kash Gill, incumbent) and Trustee Area 4 drew exactly one (Kathy Walker, non-incumbent) -- single filers, the same no-contest pattern already confirmed dataset-wide (e.g. Napa, Kings). Board of Supervisors Districts 2 and 3 are resolved separately, from the county's own June 2, 2026 Statement of Votes Cast (also reached this pass, same technique): each district's primary ballot carried exactly one candidate's name in the county's own precinct-by-precinct tally -- Dan Flores for District 2, Michael Ziegenmeyer for District 3 -- with no 'Qualified Write-In' entry recorded for either contest (unlike several statewide races on the same document, which do carry qualified write-ins). Both were the sole candidate on the June primary ballot and are elected outright without a November race. All four previously open questions are now closed: nothing is missing here, not a live gap.
—
—
—
Mendocino
2/2
2/2
—
Yuba
Enumerated from the county's official election page (no county-office/Supervisor section), corroborated by local news of outright June primary wins.
—
—
—
Lake
Enumerated from the county's official 'Offices on the Ballot' document, cross-checked against its June primary results page: every county-section office up this cycle was decided outright in June.
—
—
—
San Benito
2/2
2/2
—
Tehama
Enumerated from two official county documents (an earlier automated read of the same PDF had hallucinated a fictitious list; a direct re-extraction confirmed the real content): no county-section contest in November.
—
—
—
Tuolumne
2/2
2/2
—
Calaveras
1/1
1/1
1/1
Siskiyou
2/2
2/2
1/1
Amador
Enumerated from two official county documents, corroborated by local news: no county-section contest in November — both Board of Supervisors seats up this cycle were decided outright in the June 2026 primary.
—
—
—
Lassen
Enumerated from two independent lines of the county's own official data (June primary results and its November notice of election): every county-section office up this cycle was decided outright in June.
—
—
—
Glenn
Resolved 2026-08-29: the county's own June 2026 certified canvass shows all 4 county officer races (Superintendent, Supervisor 2nd, Supervisor 4th, Assessor-Clerk-Recorder) were unopposed. Up to 3 County Board of Education seats (Trustee Areas B, C, D) remain a genuinely open question — no real November document was found for them — not counted here.
—
—
—
Del Norte
Enumerated from the county's official current-Board-of-Supervisors page, corroborated by local news of outright June 2026 primary wins for both Supervisor races up this cycle. Good-but-not-airtight confidence — no official November notice of election was found.
—
—
—
Colusa
Enumerated from the county's own official Notice of Election: no county-section contest in November — including its three County Board of Education seats, each confirmed to have exactly one unopposed incumbent filer.
—
—
—
Plumas
No November notice or candidate list posted yet; corroborated by local news of outright June 2026 primary wins for every county-section race up this cycle. Moderate confidence — recheck once the county posts its own November document.
—
—
—
Inyo
1/1
1/1
0/1
Mariposa
1/1
1/1
1/1
Trinity
Enumerated from the county's official Certified List of Candidates (School & Special Districts only — no dedicated county-offices document was found), corroborated by local news of an outright June 2026 primary win for the county's one contested Supervisor race. Medium confidence — recheck if a dedicated county-offices document surfaces.
—
—
—
Mono
1/1
1/1
—
Modoc
Enumerated from the county's official current-elections page and Extended Filing Notice, corroborated by local news of an outright June 2026 Supervisor primary win: no county-section contest in November.
—
—
—
Sierra
1/1
1/1
—
Alpine
Enumerated from the county's official June 2026 primary canvass results, confirmed two ways: no county-section contest reaches November.
—
—
—
100.00%Subtotal
80/80
80/80
27/35
City
Authored
Financials
Primary
Los Angeles
4/4
4/4
4/4
Alhambra
3/3
3/3
—
Arcadia
3/3
3/3
—
Claremont
3/3
3/3
—
Inglewood
3/3
3/3
—
Monrovia
4/4
4/4
—
Santa Clarita
3/3
3/3
—
Lawndale
3/3
3/3
—
Palmdale
3/3
3/3
—
Montebello
4/4
4/4
—
South Gate
3/3
3/3
—
La Verne
3/3
3/3
—
Compton
2/2
2/2
2/2
Pomona
1/1
1/1
1/1
Downey
2/2
2/2
—
Glendora
2/2
2/2
—
Diamond Bar
3/3
3/3
—
Azusa
2/2
2/2
—
Monterey Park
2/2
2/2
—
Baldwin Park
1/1
1/1
—
Artesia
1/1
1/1
—
Burbank
3/3
3/3
—
Carson
4/4
4/4
—
Culver City
1/1
1/1
—
West Covina
5/5
5/5
—
Huntington Park
3/3
3/3
—
Cudahy
1/1
1/1
—
Duarte
1/1
1/1
—
Bellflower
1/1
1/1
—
Norwalk
1/1
1/1
—
El Monte
6/6
6/6
—
Hawaiian Gardens
1/1
1/1
—
El Segundo
1/1
1/1
—
Irwindale
1/1
1/1
—
Malibu
1/1
1/1
—
Manhattan Beach
1/1
1/1
—
Hermosa Beach
1/1
1/1
—
Lynwood
1/1
1/1
—
Pico Rivera
1/1
1/1
—
Palos Verdes Estates
1/1
1/1
—
San Marino
1/1
1/1
—
Maywood
1/1
1/1
—
Rolling Hills
1/1
1/1
—
San Gabriel
3/3
3/3
—
Rancho Palos Verdes
1/1
1/1
—
Rosemead
1/1
1/1
—
South El Monte
1/1
1/1
—
Bell Gardens
1/1
1/1
—
Hawthorne
3/3
3/3
—
Santa Fe Springs
1/1
1/1
—
Santa Monica
1/1
1/1
—
South Pasadena
1/1
1/1
—
Walnut
1/1
1/1
—
West Hollywood
1/1
1/1
—
Commerce
1/1
1/1
—
Long Beach
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Pasadena
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Glendale
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Lancaster
No November city race this cycle
—
—
—
Torrance
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Redondo Beach
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Cerritos
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Beverly Hills
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Bell
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Vernon
Full city slate decided outright in June
—
—
—
Whittier
Municipal elections held in April of even years, not November
—
—
—
Gardena
All 5 elected offices decided outright in the June 2026 primary
—
—
—
Covina
Municipal election consolidated with the June 2026 primary, not November
—
—
—
Bradbury
Election canceled 2026-08-18 — both incumbents ran unopposed
—
—
—
Hidden Hills
Election canceled 2026-08-19
—
—
—
Industry
No municipal election scheduled for 2026
—
—
—
La Canada Flintridge
Municipal election held June 2, 2026, not November
—
—
—
La Habra Heights
Election canceled 2026-08-17
—
—
—
La Mirada
June 2026 contest canceled 2026-03-17 (unopposed); not on the November ballot
—
—
—
La Puente
Election canceled 2026-08-19
—
—
—
Lakewood
June 2026 council contests canceled/decided; not on the November ballot
—
—
—
Lomita
Election canceled 2026-08-19
—
—
—
Paramount
Council election held June 2, 2026; only a tax measure on November's ballot
—
—
—
Rolling Hills Estates
Election canceled 2026-08-20
—
—
—
San Dimas
June 2026 election canceled 2026-03-19 (all unopposed); no November contest
—
—
—
San Fernando
Municipal election held June 2, 2026, not November
—
—
—
Sierra Madre
Election canceled 2026-08-19
—
—
—
Signal Hill
Re-checked 2026-08-31 against the city's own primary records: not a Nov 2026 ballot contest, so nothing to author. The queue's original enumeration (1 contest, 2 incumbents, uncontested) undercounted the real office list and missed that the election was headed for cancellation. The City Clerk's own Election Information page (cityofsignalhill.org/481/Election-Information) shows FOUR November 3, 2026 offices, not one -- two at-large City Council seats, City Clerk, and City Treasurer, each a full 4-year term -- and its own qualified-candidate table (Issued/Submitted/Qualified dates plus office, current through the Aug. 7, 2026 filing deadline) lists exactly one candidate per office, each marked '*Incumbent': Tina L. Hansen and Keir Jones for the two Council seats, Daritza Perez for City Clerk, David Hopper for City Treasurer. No office drew a challenger. The city's own Aug. 19, 2026 City Council agenda packet (cityofsignalhill.org/DocumentCenter/View/22073) carries the standard Elections Code 10515 finding that 'the City Council may either appoint the nominated candidate(s) and cancel the election or direct that the election nonetheless be held' and an item directing the City Clerk to swear the appointee(s) into office -- independently corroborated by Citizen Portal AI's report that the council adopted a resolution canceling the election and appointed all four (Hansen, Jones, Perez, Hopper) to four-year terms in a 3-0 vote with two members absent. All four incumbents take office by council appointment, not by a November vote.
—
—
—
Temple City
Municipal election held March 3, 2026, not November
—
—
—
Avalon
Municipal election held June 2, 2026, not November
—
—
—
Calabasas
Election canceled 2026-08-19 (a tax measure remains on the ballot)
—
—
—
Agoura Hills
Election canceled 2026-08-19
—
—
—
Westlake Village
Election canceled 2026-08-19
—
—
—
San Diego
4/4
4/4
4/4
Carlsbad
5/5
5/5
—
Imperial Beach
3/3
3/3
—
Chula Vista
4/4
4/4
3/3
Escondido
3/3
3/3
—
National City
3/3
3/3
—
Encinitas
3/3
3/3
—
Poway
3/3
3/3
—
Santee
2/2
2/2
—
San Marcos
3/3
3/3
—
El Cajon
2/2
2/2
—
Vista
3/3
3/3
—
Oceanside
2/2
2/2
—
Solana Beach
2/2
2/2
—
Coronado
1/1
1/1
—
Del Mar
1/1
1/1
—
La Mesa
3/3
3/3
—
Lemon Grove
2/2
2/2
—
Anaheim
4/4
4/4
—
Irvine
4/4
4/4
—
Costa Mesa
4/4
4/4
—
Cypress
3/3
3/3
—
Mission Viejo
5/5
5/5
—
Garden Grove
4/4
4/4
—
Newport Beach
4/4
4/4
—
Orange
4/4
4/4
—
Santa Ana
4/4
4/4
—
Huntington Beach
2/2
2/2
—
Lake Forest
3/3
3/3
—
Buena Park
2/2
2/2
—
Westminster
3/3
3/3
—
Aliso Viejo
2/2
2/2
—
Rancho Santa Margarita
3/3
3/3
—
San Clemente
3/3
3/3
—
San Juan Capistrano
1/1
1/1
—
Fullerton
2/2
2/2
—
La Palma
2/2
2/2
—
Los Alamitos
2/2
2/2
—
Placentia
2/2
2/2
—
Stanton
2/2
2/2
—
Tustin
2/2
2/2
—
Brea
1/1
1/1
—
Fountain Valley
1/1
1/1
—
La Habra
1/1
1/1
—
Laguna Woods
1/1
1/1
—
Laguna Beach
1/1
1/1
—
Laguna Hills
2/2
2/2
—
Seal Beach
1/1
1/1
—
Yorba Linda
1/1
1/1
—
Dana Point
No city race on the county's Nov 2026 candidate list this cycle
—
—
—
Laguna Niguel
No city race on the county's Nov 2026 candidate list this cycle
—
—
—
Villa Park
No city race on the county's Nov 2026 candidate list this cycle
—
—
—
Blythe
3/3
3/3
—
Corona
3/3
3/3
—
Beaumont
2/2
2/2
—
Cathedral City
4/4
4/4
—
Hemet
3/3
3/3
—
Jurupa Valley
3/3
3/3
—
Lake Elsinore
3/3
3/3
—
Indio
3/3
3/3
—
Eastvale
3/3
3/3
—
Perris
3/3
3/3
—
Murrieta
3/3
3/3
—
Temecula
1/1
1/1
—
Palm Springs
3/3
3/3
—
Moreno Valley
3/3
3/3
—
Wildomar
1/1
1/1
—
Desert Hot Springs
2/2
2/2
—
Menifee
2/2
2/2
—
Coachella
2/2
2/2
—
Banning
2/2
2/2
—
Canyon Lake
1/1
1/1
—
Indian Wells
1/1
1/1
—
Riverside
2/2
2/2
2/2
Palm Desert
2/2
2/2
—
San Jacinto
1/1
1/1
—
Norco
1/1
1/1
—
Rancho Mirage
1/1
1/1
—
La Quinta
2/2
2/2
—
Calimesa
Re-checked 2026-08-31 against the city's own primary records: not a Nov 2026 ballot contest, so nothing to author. The queue's original enumeration (1 contest, guessed from a supplemental source) undercounted the real office list and missed that the election was headed for cancellation -- the same pattern that undid the queue's counts for several other Riverside County cities in this pass (Temecula, Wildomar). The city's own Notice of Election (calimesa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2340, pursuant to Elections Code Section 10224.5) shows the true office list: TWO at-large City Council seats, each a full 4-year term -- not one -- with a July 13-August 6, 2026 filing period. Exactly two people filed, one for each open seat: sitting Mayor Jeff Cervantez and Mayor Pro Tem John Manly, both incumbents (the city's own Candidate List, calimesa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2342, gives each candidate's pull/file/qualify dates -- both qualified August 3, 2026). Because the number of nominees exactly equaled the number of open seats, the City Clerk's own certification (calimesa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2349, per Elections Code Section 10229) triggered the standard uncontested-office procedure, and the City Council voted 5-0 (Cervantez, Cundieff, Garcia, Manly, and Molina all voting aye) to adopt Resolution No. 2026-48 (calimesa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2355) on August 17, 2026, appointing both Cervantez and Manly directly to new 4-year terms (through 2030) and formally cancelling the November 3, 2026 election. Calimesa is a general-law, council-manager city with a 5-member at-large City Council (no districts) serving staggered 4-year terms; the city's own City Council page (calimesa.gov/162/City-Council) confirms the Mayor is 'elected annually by a vote of the Council' among its own sitting members, not a separately elected office, and names no separately elected City Clerk or City Treasurer either. With both open seats filled by appointment before the ballot was set, there is no Calimesa race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Chino Hills
3/3
3/3
—
Apple Valley
3/3
3/3
—
Big Bear Lake
3/3
3/3
—
Fontana
5/5
5/5
—
Colton
3/3
3/3
—
Redlands
3/3
3/3
—
Rancho Cucamonga
3/3
3/3
—
Twentynine Palms
3/3
3/3
—
Hesperia
3/3
3/3
—
Ontario
3/3
3/3
—
Yucca Valley
1/1
1/1
—
Chino
2/2
2/2
—
Upland
3/3
3/3
—
Adelanto
2/2
2/2
—
Needles
2/2
2/2
—
Highland
2/2
2/2
—
Grand Terrace
2/2
2/2
—
Montclair
2/2
2/2
—
Victorville
2/2
2/2
—
Rialto
1/1
1/1
—
Yucaipa
1/1
1/1
—
San Bernardino
No council seat up this cycle, per the county's own Nov 2026 candidate document
—
—
—
Loma Linda
No council seat up this cycle, per the county's own Nov 2026 candidate document
—
—
—
Barstow
Re-checked 2026-08-31 against the city's own primary records: not a Nov 2026 ballot contest, so nothing to author. The queue's original enumeration (2 contests, 'solid') came from the county's own "Offices Up for Election" document, which does list City of Barstow Council Districts 1 and 2 as expiring 4-year seats -- but the county's companion, actually-authoritative "Report_CandidateList.pdf" (retrieved fresh 2026-08-31, last updated by the county 2026-08-28) has NO City of Barstow section at all, a genuine anomaly verified by scanning the full 249-page document for every occurrence of "Barstow" and confirming the gap falls exactly where a Barstow section would sort alphabetically (between Apple Valley and Big Bear Lake). The explanation is a cancelled election, the same pattern this pass already documented for Calimesa and Temecula in Riverside County: Barstow's own City Council meeting portal (barstowcityca.iqm2.com, reachable directly) shows a City Council Special Meeting on August 18, 2026 whose sole business item was "Consideration of Appointment of Qualified Candidates to City Council Districts 1 and 2 in Lieu of Election Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10229," with an attached draft resolution reciting that the regular nomination period (closed August 7, 2026) drew no filing from the sitting District 1 incumbent, triggering a statutory extension to August 12, 2026, after which the City elections official certified exactly one qualified nominee per seat: Sonia Compton Reay for District 1 (a new name -- the sitting incumbent, Carmen M. Hernandez, evidently did not refile) and James Noble for District 2 (the sitting incumbent, reappointed). The draft resolution would appoint both directly "to qualify, take office, and serve exactly as if elected at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election" and directs the City Clerk to notify the County Registrar of Voters -- which lines up with why the county's candidate list, current as of ten days after that meeting, carries no Barstow section at all. This dataset could not locate separately published minutes with a recorded vote confirming final adoption (the next posted agenda, September 1, 2026, approves minutes only through the August 4 meeting), so the specific pass/fail vote tally is not independently confirmed -- but the meeting was convened for exactly this single, routine, non-discretionary purpose, already occurred, and the county's own subsequent records are fully consistent with the appointment having gone through. Independently corroborating context: the county's own "Elected Officials & Candidates" municipal roster (elections.sbcounty.gov/elected-officials-candidates/municipal/) and the city's own City Council Members page both show Hernandez as the pre-appointment District 1 incumbent and Noble as the pre-appointment District 2 incumbent, matching the resolution's recitals; the Victor Valley Daily Press (successor to the Desert Dispatch, Barstow's paper of record) has no 2026-cycle election story despite a dedicated site search, but its archive shows this is a recurring practice for this specific city -- a 2016 story is headlined, in so many words, "City of Barstow election canceled." With both open seats headed for appointment rather than a ballot, there is no Barstow race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
San Jose
3/3
3/3
3/3
Gilroy
3/3
3/3
—
Campbell
3/3
3/3
—
Milpitas
2/2
2/2
—
Sunnyvale
3/3
3/3
—
Santa Clara
3/3
3/3
—
Morgan Hill
3/3
3/3
—
Cupertino
1/1
1/1
—
Los Altos Hills
1/1
1/1
—
Los Altos
2/2
2/2
—
Los Gatos
1/1
1/1
—
Palo Alto
1/1
1/1
—
Saratoga
1/1
1/1
—
Mountain View
1/1
1/1
—
Oakland
8/8
8/8
—
San Leandro
5/5
5/5
—
Berkeley
7/7
7/7
—
Livermore
1/1
1/1
—
Pleasanton
3/3
3/3
—
Hayward
3/3
3/3
—
Fremont
3/3
3/3
—
Dublin
3/3
3/3
—
Piedmont
1/1
1/1
—
Emeryville
1/1
1/1
—
Union City
3/3
3/3
—
Newark
2/2
2/2
—
Alameda
2/2
2/2
—
Albany
1/1
1/1
—
Citrus Heights
3/3
3/3
—
Elk Grove
1/1
1/1
—
Galt
3/3
3/3
—
Folsom
3/3
3/3
—
Rancho Cordova
2/2
2/2
—
Sacramento
All 4 council seats decided outright in June, read from the county's certified canvass
—
—
—
Isleton
Re-checked 2026-09-01 -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. Sacramento County DOES publish a single unified countywide Nov 2026 candidate document covering every city in the county (elections.saccounty.gov/content/vre/us/en/campaign-services/candidate-report.html), and it is authoritative down to a per-contest 'On Ballot: Yes/No' flag -- verified against known-good City of Galt and City of Folsom council contests, both flagged Yes, confirming the flag genuinely distinguishes real Nov 2026 ballot contests from ones that are not. This county-level finding should save other Sacramento County forks from re-deriving it. The county roster lists exactly the 4 Isleton contests the queue estimated -- Member, City Council (3 candidates: Pamela Bulahan, Terri Hupfer, Paul William Touris), Member, City Council - Short Term (1 candidate: Danny Low), City Clerk - Short Term (1 candidate: Gabriela Garcia), and Treasurer - Short Term (0 candidates) -- but all 4 are flagged On Ballot: No. The city's own site (cityofisleton.com) independently corroborates this with a direct statement: 'The City of Isleton has completed the nomination period for the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election. At the close of the nomination period, the number of candidates nominated for City offices did not exceed the number of offices to be elected,' with the City Council 'to Consider Appointments on August 19, 2026.' That matches the per-contest math exactly: 3 candidates for the regular Council contest and 1 each for the two Short Term contests (Council, City Clerk) means every filed candidate is unopposed and gets seated by appointment/acclamation rather than a printed race, while the Treasurer - Short Term seat drew no candidate at all and is a vacancy the Council fills by appointment -- the same Elections Code Section 10229-style mechanism already documented in this dataset for Barstow and Calimesa. This dataset could not locate a published agenda or resolution for the August 19, 2026 meeting confirming final adoption (civassist.com/district/131, Isleton's agenda portal, renders its listing client-side and did not yield a fetchable document; nearby guessed document IDs on the same host returned unrelated jurisdictions' notices) -- but the meeting was convened for exactly this routine, non-discretionary purpose, the pre-meeting nomination math already fully explains a cancelled/appointed outcome for all 4 seats, and the city's own current City Council roster (cityofisleton.com/council-members: Mayor Aleida Suarez, Vice Mayor Cara Pellegrini, Members Pamela Bulahan and Terri Hupfer, one seat listed Vacant) is consistent with Bulahan and Hupfer being unopposed incumbents awaiting seating and the Vacant seat being the one Danny Low's Short Term contest fills. Isleton is a general-law city with a 5-member at-large City Council serving staggered 4-year terms; the Mayor is 'elected by the City Council' among its own members, not a separately elected office (cityofisleton.com/city-council) -- while City Clerk and Treasurer are shown as departments on the city's own site, the county's own candidate roster independently confirms both are in fact separately elected offices in Isleton, just currently filled via unopposed Short Term contests rather than a ballot line. With all 4 seats headed for appointment/acclamation rather than a ballot, there is no Isleton race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Clayton
1/1
1/1
—
Martinez
1/1
1/1
—
San Ramon
3/3
3/3
—
San Pablo
3/3
3/3
—
Pittsburg
3/3
3/3
—
Brentwood
2/2
2/2
—
Danville
1/1
1/1
—
El Cerrito
1/1
1/1
—
Pinole
1/1
1/1
—
Moraga
1/1
1/1
—
Richmond
1/1
1/1
0/1
Orinda
1/1
1/1
—
Antioch
3/3
3/3
—
Concord
4/4
4/4
—
Pleasant Hill
2/2
2/2
—
Hercules
1/1
1/1
—
Walnut Creek
2/2
2/2
—
Lafayette
Re-checked 2026-09-01 -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. The queue's original enumeration (2 contests, 'solid') came from Contra Costa County's pre-filing "Positions Up for Election" document, which lists Lafayette as "2 Councilmembers" (a regular 4-year-term, 2-seat at-large race) plus "1 Councilmember (2-year term)" (a separate short-term seat, filling a vacancy) -- both genuine offices, not a miscount. The county's own post-filing "Candidate List" summary (cc-candidate-summary-2026, 8-14-26_candidatelist_summary_final.pdf, retrieved 2026-09-01) shows exactly two filers for the 2-seat contest -- Jim Cervantes and Stella Wotherspoon -- and exactly one filer for the 1-seat short-term contest -- Mario DiPrisco -- i.e. the number of qualified candidates equals the number of open seats in both races. The county's later, authoritative "Contest/Candidate Proof List" (cc-candidate-detail-2026, 8-27-26_candidatelist_detail_final.pdf, the post-certification ballot-order-proofing export that this dataset has verified elsewhere only carries genuine multi-candidate on-ballot contests) has NO Lafayette section at all -- confirmed by scanning its full extracted text for every occurrence of "lafayette" -- consistent with both races having been pulled from the printed ballot between the two snapshots. A local outlet, Bay Area Telegraph (bayareatelegraph.com/2026/08/23/48000-saved-as-needless-election-canceled-in-lafayette, part of the same East Bay/Lamorinda-focused publisher as the Lamorinda Plus site), reports the City Council voted August 20, 2026 to cancel both races and adopted Resolution 2026-50 under California Elections Code Section 10229 -- the same direct-appointment mechanism already documented in this dataset for Livermore, Elk Grove, Martinez, Barstow, Calimesa, and Isleton -- appointing Cervantes and Wotherspoon to four-year terms (through 2030) and DiPrisco to the two-year short term (through 2028); the article adds that the nomination period closed August 12, 2026 with no further filers (a fourth prospective candidate, Brian Parsons, pulled papers August 11 but never completed filing), and that outgoing Councilmember Susan Candell -- independently confirmed as a real, twice-serving Lafayette mayor (2021 and 2024) by Lamorinda Weekly's own Dec. 2024 coverage of her handing off the gavel, lamorindaweekly.com/articles/2025/lafayette-mayor-susan-candell-hands-gavel-to-newly-selected-leadership/) -- did not seek another term. Lafayette's own city site (lovelafayette.org) returns HTTP 403 to every fetch attempt this pass (Cloudflare bot protection, no browser session available), so the city's own primary-source posting of the resolution could not be independently pulled; the county's own two candidate-list snapshots bracketing the council's decision, together with the news account's specific, checkable detail (a numbered resolution, an exact vote date, named terms, and a named non-filer), are treated as sufficient corroboration absent a reason to doubt them. Lafayette is a general-law city with no separately elected Mayor, City Clerk, or Treasurer (absent from the county's own office list, and consistent with Lamorinda Weekly's coverage of a council-selected, rotating mayor). With both seats filled by appointment before the ballot was set, there is no Lafayette city race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Coalinga
4/4
4/4
—
Kerman
3/3
3/3
—
Kingsburg
3/3
3/3
—
Clovis
3/3
3/3
—
Parlier
3/3
3/3
—
Sanger
3/3
3/3
—
Selma
3/3
3/3
—
Reedley
3/3
3/3
—
Orange Cove
2/2
2/2
—
Fresno
3/3
3/3
0/3
Firebaugh
1/1
1/1
—
Fowler
1/1
1/1
—
Huron
1/1
1/1
—
Mendota
1/1
1/1
—
San Joaquin
1/1
1/1
—
Wasco
1/1
1/1
—
Mcfarland
4/4
4/4
—
Taft
1/1
1/1
—
California City
4/4
4/4
—
Bakersfield
4/4
4/4
—
Arvin
1/1
1/1
—
Delano
1/1
1/1
—
Maricopa
1/1
1/1
—
Shafter
1/1
1/1
—
Ridgecrest
2/2
2/2
—
Tehachapi
Moved here 2026-09-02 from a standalone gap row after a live-browser session finally reached the one document the prior two passes flagged as unreachable: Kern County's own "Contest/Candidate Proof List" (kernvote.com/home/showpublisheddocument/25735, a 97-page PDF that 403s to curl/WebFetch but is browsable with a real Chrome session, jumping page-by-page via #page=N URL fragments opened in fresh tabs). That document lists every Kern city's council races in strict alphabetical order -- confirmed directly by paging through it: City of Taft's Councilmember contest (5 candidates for 3 seats -- Waldrop, Schertz, Bryant, Gregory, and a fifth) ends on page 78, and the very next contest on that same page 78 is City of Wasco's Council District 1 -- with zero Tehachapi entries anywhere in between, and zero anywhere else in the document (spot-checked pages 74-80 covering the D-through-W city-alphabet range). That is decisive: unlike an uncontested single-candidate race, which this same document does still print with an "ON BALLOT" status when it proceeds to the ballot (see e.g. Mojave Air and Space Port District's 2-candidate short-term race, p.80), Tehachapi's five single-nominee races -- City Council Districts 1, 3 (short term), 4, and 5, plus City Treasurer (short term) -- are entirely absent from the county's own final proof list, meaning none of them were printed to the ballot. This corroborates, from the county's own authoritative post-filing document rather than just the city's pre-adoption paperwork, what the earlier pass could only infer: the City's own "Notice That There Are Not More Candidates Than Offices To Be Elected" (dated Aug. 12, 2026, published Aug. 14 per Elections Code Section 10229) and City Clerk's companion certification (both fetched directly from liveuptehachapi.com this pass, the city's actual domain -- not a .gov as previously guessed) name the same five sole nominees as before: Kim Nixon (District 1), Marianna Gutierrez (District 3, short term), Mayor Joan Pogon-Cord (District 4), Hannah Chung (District 5), and Coty DeArmond (City Treasurer, short term). The City Council's Aug. 19, 2026 special-meeting packet (liveuptehachapi.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_08192026-399, fetched and read in full as a PDF this pass), whose sole substantive item was "ADOPT A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE APPOINTMENT TO THE OFFICES ... THAT WERE TO BE ELECTED," carries the same staff report (citing ~$30,000 in election-cost savings) and a ready-to-adopt draft resolution whose Section 2 reads "The election scheduled to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, is now canceled" -- the same Elections Code Section 10229 direct-appointment mechanism documented dataset-wide (Livermore, Elk Grove, Martinez, Oakley, Lafayette, Barstow, Calimesa, Isleton, Brawley, Fort Jones, Tulelake). One honest limit remains, same as before: the packet's own resolution page is an unsigned pre-meeting template (blank AYES/NOES/ABSENT/ABSTAIN lines), and no separately posted post-meeting minutes or signed resolution could be found -- the city's AgendaCenter listing runs through Aug. 19, 2026 with no September 2026 entries yet posted as of this retrieval, so the vote tally itself is not independently confirmed. But the meeting was convened for no other purpose than adopting this resolution, staff's only recommendation was appointment, every comparable Section 10229 case on record in this dataset resolved the same way, and -- decisively, new this pass -- Kern County's own current official ballot-proofing document, retrieved directly and well after the Aug. 19 meeting date, already shows zero Tehachapi city contests of any kind. With that county-level confirmation now in hand, this is treated as a fully confirmed non-contest rather than a resting-on-pre-adoption-paperwork gap: there is no Tehachapi city race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Camarillo
3/3
3/3
—
Moorpark
3/3
3/3
—
Port Hueneme
1/1
1/1
—
Ojai
4/4
4/4
—
Oxnard
3/3
3/3
—
Santa Paula
3/3
3/3
—
Thousand Oaks
3/3
3/3
—
Ventura
4/4
4/4
—
Simi Valley
4/4
4/4
—
Fillmore
No city council contest in the county's Nov 2026 candidate document this cycle
—
—
—
San Francisco
A consolidated city-and-county -- its races (Mayor, Board of Supervisors, etc.) are tracked under the County section, not separately here
—
—
—
Manteca
3/3
3/3
—
Lathrop
2/2
2/2
—
Lodi
3/3
3/3
—
Escalon
1/1
1/1
—
Ripon
1/1
1/1
—
Tracy
3/3
3/3
—
Stockton
3/3
3/3
3/3
Mountain House
1/1
1/1
—
South San Francisco
5/5
5/5
—
Burlingame
3/3
3/3
—
Belmont
3/3
3/3
—
Colma
1/1
1/1
—
Half Moon Bay
3/3
3/3
—
Menlo Park
3/3
3/3
—
East Palo Alto
1/1
1/1
—
Redwood City
3/3
3/3
—
San Mateo
3/3
3/3
—
San Bruno
3/3
3/3
—
Pacifica
3/3
3/3
—
Millbrae
3/3
3/3
—
Woodside
2/2
2/2
—
Foster City
2/2
2/2
—
Portola Valley
1/1
1/1
—
Brisbane
1/1
1/1
—
Daly City
1/1
1/1
—
San Carlos
1/1
1/1
—
Atherton
Town Council contest explicitly flagged On Ballot: No in the county's roster -- no Nov 2026 race
—
—
—
Hillsborough
City Council contest explicitly flagged On Ballot: No in the county's roster -- no Nov 2026 race
—
—
—
Modesto
3/3
3/3
—
Patterson
3/3
3/3
—
Newman
2/2
2/2
—
Turlock
3/3
3/3
—
Hughson
2/2
2/2
—
Oakdale
2/2
2/2
—
Ceres
2/2
2/2
—
Riverbank
2/2
2/2
—
Waterford
1/1
1/1
—
Sonoma
1/1
1/1
—
Petaluma
4/4
4/4
—
Santa Rosa
3/3
3/3
—
Windsor
3/3
3/3
—
Rohnert Park
2/2
2/2
—
Healdsburg
2/2
2/2
—
Cloverdale
1/1
1/1
—
Sebastopol
1/1
1/1
—
Tulare
2/2
2/2
—
Exeter
1/1
1/1
—
Porterville
2/2
2/2
—
Visalia
2/2
2/2
—
Lindsay
1/1
1/1
—
Farmersville
1/1
1/1
—
Woodlake
1/1
1/1
—
Dinuba
3/3
3/3
—
Vacaville
4/4
4/4
—
Vallejo
3/3
3/3
—
Dixon
3/3
3/3
—
Fairfield
4/4
4/4
—
Suisun City
2/2
2/2
—
Benicia
1/1
1/1
—
Rio Vista
1/1
1/1
—
Santa Barbara
4/4
4/4
—
Carpinteria
3/3
3/3
—
Buellton
3/3
3/3
—
Guadalupe
3/3
3/3
—
Santa Maria
3/3
3/3
—
Solvang
3/3
3/3
—
Lompoc
3/3
3/3
—
Goleta
2/2
2/2
—
Pacific Grove
5/5
5/5
—
Marina
3/3
3/3
—
Salinas
4/4
4/4
—
Greenfield
3/3
3/3
—
Carmel By The Sea
2/2
2/2
—
Del Rey Oaks
2/2
2/2
—
Monterey
3/3
3/3
—
King City
2/2
2/2
—
Soledad
1/1
1/1
—
Gonzales
4/4
4/4
—
Sand City
2/2
2/2
—
Seaside
2/2
2/2
—
Colfax
1/1
1/1
—
Auburn
1/1
1/1
—
Lincoln
2/2
2/2
—
Rocklin
1/1
1/1
—
Loomis
1/1
1/1
—
Roseville
2/2
2/2
—
Atwater
3/3
3/3
—
Livingston
3/3
3/3
—
Los Banos
5/5
5/5
—
Merced
3/3
3/3
—
Gustine
2/2
2/2
—
Dos Palos
Councilmember race explicitly flagged On Ballot: No in the county's own candidate document -- not on the Nov 2026 ballot
—
—
—
Morro Bay
2/2
2/2
—
Atascadero
3/3
3/3
—
Arroyo Grande
3/3
3/3
—
Grover Beach
3/3
3/3
—
Pismo Beach
2/2
2/2
—
Paso Robles
3/3
3/3
—
San Luis Obispo
2/2
2/2
—
Santa Cruz
1/1
1/1
—
Capitola
1/1
1/1
—
Scotts Valley
1/1
1/1
—
Watsonville
4/4
4/4
—
Novato
3/3
3/3
—
San Rafael
2/2
2/2
—
Belvedere
1/1
1/1
—
Corte Madera
1/1
1/1
—
Fairfax
3/3
3/3
—
Mill Valley
1/1
1/1
—
Tiburon
1/1
1/1
—
Ross
1/1
1/1
—
Sausalito
1/1
1/1
—
San Anselmo
3/3
3/3
—
Larkspur
1/1
1/1
—
Woodland
2/2
2/2
—
West Sacramento
2/2
2/2
—
Winters
1/1
1/1
—
Davis
2/2
2/2
—
Oroville
4/4
4/4
—
Chico
3/3
3/3
—
Paradise
1/1
1/1
—
Gridley
Council race (Contest 4201) exactly 2 qualified candidates for 2 seats -- uncontested, not on the Nov 3, 2026 ballot
—
—
—
Biggs
Absent from Butte County's comprehensive certified local candidate list (110 candidates) while every other Butte city/town appears -- no Nov 2026 race found
—
—
—
Placerville
1/1
1/1
—
South Lake Tahoe
3/3
3/3
—
Anderson
1/1
1/1
—
Redding
2/2
2/2
—
Shasta Lake
1/1
1/1
—
Imperial
1/1
1/1
—
Calexico
1/1
1/1
—
El Centro
1/1
1/1
—
Westmorland
1/1
1/1
—
Calipatria
1/1
1/1
—
Brawley
Checked 2026-09-02 -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. The local-authoring queue's 1-contest estimate ("Enumerated from the county's own Nov 2026 candidate document") turns out to have been headed for cancellation. The City of Brawley's own official site (brawley-ca.gov) 403s every direct fetch this pass -- no path-specific exception found across its root, /government/city-clerk, /government/city-council, or /sitemap.xml, and the Wayback Machine has no snapshot of the domain and is separately unreachable by this session's tooling -- the same bot-wall pattern this dataset has already documented for other jurisdictions' primary sources (e.g. Lafayette's lovelafayette.org, above). Imperial County's own Elections Department site (elections.imperialcounty.org) does not fill the gap either: its "Candidate Filing Documents" page, current through August 2026, itemizes FPPC filings for county offices (Board of Supervisors, Assessor, Auditor, Sheriff, etc.), Superior Court judges, and every local school/water/irrigation district in the county down to Winterhaven Water District -- but carries no City of Brawley section at all, consistent with the city acting as its own FPPC filing officer rather than filing through the county. Two independent, dated, bylined local outlets fill the gap instead and corroborate each other closely: the Calexico Chronicle ("Brawley Appoints Two Electors to City Council," Sophia Gaxiola, Aug. 19, 2026, calexicochronicle.com/2026/08/19/brawley-appoints-two-electors-to-city-council/) and The Desert Review ("Brawley City Council Appoints Next Two Council Members," Lloyd Miller, Aug. 20, 2026, updated Aug. 21, thedesertreview.com/news/brawley-city-council-appoints-next-two-council-members/article_a88693a0-58ef-4fd6-ba4e-ad6231ca9f76.html) both report that a special Brawley City Council meeting on Tuesday, Aug. 18, 2026 adopted Resolution No. 2026-45 by a 3-0 vote (Council members Tim Kelley and John Grass absent) directly appointing Eric Montoya Reyes and Clyde Richard Edgar Jr. to the two City Council seats whose terms expire in December 2026 -- the seats held by Gilbert "Gil" Rebollar and Perry Monita -- under California Elections Code Section 10229, the same no-more-candidates-than-offices mechanism documented dataset-wide (Barstow, Calimesa, Isleton, Lafayette, above). Both articles independently give the same procedural detail: roughly six to seven prospective candidates pulled nomination papers but only Reyes and Edgar completed filing before the Aug. 12, 2026 extended deadline; the appointment path cost the city about $300 in County Registrar fees versus a roughly $50,000 contested-election budget; and the statutory action had to be taken by Aug. 20, 2026 (75 days before the Nov. 3, 2026 general election) -- which the county's own "Current Election Activities" page independently confirms is the correct November 2026 general-election date for this cycle. The Chronicle's own account is explicit that the two seats will not appear as a contest: "An election will still occur on November 3, 2026, though voters will receive ballots with no contested races." No news source, and neither the city's own site (unreachable) nor the county's own candidate-filing page, turned up any separate Nov 2026 Mayor, City Clerk, or City Treasurer race for Brawley -- a targeted Google News RSS search for Brawley plus each of those office names returned nothing on point, and a Dec. 2024 Desert Review story (found via the same RSS search but not independently re-fetched this pass) refers to "Mayor Joseph Galvan" and a prior council vote installing Gil Rebollar as mayor, consistent with (but not itself confirmed by this pass as definitive proof of) a council-selected rather than directly-elected mayor, as is typical for a general-law city -- this dataset is not asserting that structural fact as confirmed, only noting that no Mayor election was found anywhere. With the only known Nov 2026 Brawley office -- the 2-seat City Council race -- filled by appointment before the ballot was set, and no other city office found up this cycle, there is no Brawley race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Holtville
Checked 2026-09-02, with the neighboring City of Imperial build the same day -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. This confirms and extends what that Imperial pass already found: Imperial County's own "Candidate Status" document (imperial-county-candidatestatus-2026, the county Registrar's official Nov 3, 2026 General Election roster, 13 pages, re-fetched directly this pass) contains exactly one City of Holtville entry anywhere in the whole document -- "City of Holtville - Elect 2" -- tagged "NO ELECTION," with two qualified candidates for the two open seats: Mike Goodsell (incumbent) and Stacy Hoyt Britschgi (Child Care Provider). No separate Holtville Mayor, City Clerk, or City Treasurer entry appears anywhere in the same document (unlike neighboring Imperial, which does carry its own separately elected City Clerk contest) -- a real, checked negative result, not an oversight. The City of Holtville's own official site (holtville.ca.gov, fetched directly this pass) independently confirms why: it is a general-law, Council-Manager city whose five City Council members are elected at-large to 4-year terms, but the Mayor is 'elected by a majority vote of the City Council' among its own sitting members each year (not a separately elected office), and the City Clerk (Yvette Rios) 'is appointed and receives administrative direction from the City Manager' (also not elected) -- so Council is structurally the only office Holtville voters could have had on a Nov 2026 municipal ballot, consistent with the county document showing only one Holtville race. The cancellation itself is independently confirmed three ways: (1) the county's own "NO ELECTION" tag, the same designation this dataset has verified elsewhere means an actual Section 10229 cancellation, not a stale flag; (2) the Imperial Valley Press's own report, "Holtville cancels November election, appoints Goodsell and Britschgi to City Council" (imperial-ivpress-holtvillecancels-2026, already on file in this dataset from the Imperial build); and (3) primary-source city paperwork fetched directly this pass -- the City Clerk's own signed "Certificate of Facts" under Elections Code Section 10229 (dated Aug. 14, 2026, from the packet for a City Council Special Meeting on Aug. 18, 2026, holtville.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/Packet-08-18-Web.pdf), which certifies that exactly two candidates qualified for the two open seats and authorizes the Council to appoint them in lieu of election at a meeting held before Aug. 20, 2026. The city's own subsequent Aug. 24, 2026 regular-meeting agenda (holtville.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/Packet-08-24.pdf) confirms that appointment went through: it refers to Stacy Britschgi in an unrelated agenda item as the "Recently Appointed General Election Candidate" being additionally seated to fill a separate unexpired term left vacant by Councilman John Munger's resignation -- language that only makes sense if her Section 10229 appointment to the regular 4-year council seat had already been finalized by that date. One honest limit: no separately posted minutes for the Aug. 18 special meeting were found (only its agenda/packet), so the exact roll-call vote isn't independently on record -- but between the Clerk's own pre-meeting certification, the Aug. 24 agenda's own after-the-fact confirmation, and the Imperial Valley Press's independent report, this is treated as a confirmed, already-acted-on cancellation rather than a live gap. With the only Nov 2026 Holtville office -- the 2-seat City Council race -- filled by appointment before the ballot was set, and no other Holtville office up this cycle, there is no Holtville race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Chowchilla
3/3
3/3
—
Madera
All 3 council district races uncontested -- none appear on the Nov 3, 2026 ballot, per the county's own candidate document
—
—
—
Avenal
2/2
2/2
—
Corcoran
1/1
1/1
—
Hanford
3/3
3/3
—
Lemoore
2/2
2/2
—
Napa
2/2
2/2
—
American Canyon
1/1
1/1
—
Yountville
2/2
2/2
—
St Helena
2/2
2/2
—
Calistoga
Election canceled -- 3 filers appointed unopposed to the 3 open seats
—
—
—
Eureka
4/4
4/4
—
Ferndale
2/2
2/2
—
Blue Lake
1/1
1/1
—
Rio Dell
1/1
1/1
—
Fortuna
2/2
2/2
—
Arcata
1/1
1/1
—
Trinidad
2/2
2/2
—
Grass Valley
1/1
1/1
—
Truckee
1/1
1/1
—
Nevada City
No Nevada City council race this cycle, per the county's finalized local-candidates list
—
—
—
Live Oak
1/1
1/1
—
Fort Bragg
1/1
1/1
—
Point Arena
1/1
1/1
—
Ukiah
1/1
1/1
—
Willits
1/1
1/1
—
Wheatland
1/1
1/1
—
Marysville
Election canceled 2026-08-20 -- both incumbents appointed unopposed
—
—
—
Clearlake
1/1
1/1
—
Lakeport
1/1
1/1
—
San Juan Bautista
1/1
1/1
—
Hollister
4/4
4/4
—
Corning
2/2
2/2
—
Red Bluff
1/1
1/1
—
Tehama
1/1
1/1
—
Sonora
1/1
1/1
—
Angels Camp
Council race (Contest 3001) resolved as uncontested (elected/appointed) -- not on the Nov 3, 2026 ballot
—
—
—
Etna
1/1
1/1
—
Dunsmuir
1/1
1/1
—
Dorris
1/1
1/1
—
Mount Shasta
1/1
1/1
—
Weed
1/1
1/1
—
Yreka
1/1
1/1
—
Montague
2/2
2/2
—
Fort Jones
Checked 2026-09-02 -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. The local-authoring queue's 1-contest estimate ("2 candidates filed") was accurate as a headcount but understated what those 2 candidates for 3 seats actually means: this is Section 10229 territory, and the county's own document set, read across time, confirms the cancellation happened. Siskiyou County's own "Notice of Municipal Election -- Town of Fort Jones" (dated June 18, 2026, part of the county's consolidated "Notice of Election -- Cities" PDF) calls for electing three Town Council members to 4-year terms ending 2030, filing period July 13-August 7, 2026, and states the standard Elections Code Section 10229 boilerplate. The county's own "List of Local Offices with Candidate Filing Extended to 4 p.m. on Wednesday, August 12, 2026 -- Open to any Candidate OTHER THAN the Incumbent" names "Fort Jones Town Council, full term" among the offices whose filing window had to be extended -- confirming fewer than 3 candidates (the number needed to fill every seat) had filed by the original August 7 deadline. The extension drew no new filer: the county's "Final Siskiyou County Candidate List ... As of 08/12/2026 4:00p.m." (the same document the queue's estimate came from) shows "Town of Fort Jones, Town Council -- Full Term -- Vote for 3" with exactly two candidates, both marked "Incumbent" -- Madeleine DeAndreis and Mercedes M. Garcia -- and zero challengers, for either the two seats they hold or the third, unfilled seat. The decisive document is the county's later "Offices Going to Ballot" list (retitled "Candidate List" in its own PDF metadata, dated Sept. 2, 2026 -- i.e. newer than the Aug. 12 candidate list above): it omits the Town of Fort Jones Town Council contest entirely. This is not an extraction gap -- the same document positively includes every genuinely multi-candidate contested race countywide, plus undersubscribed-but-non-incumbent races that structurally match Fort Jones's 2-for-3 headcount (City of Weed's Council race, also 2 candidates for 3 seats, neither an incumbent; City of Montague's short-term Council seat, 1 candidate for 1 seat, a non-incumbent) -- while consistently dropping every unopposed-incumbent race in the county (Siskiyou County Board of Education Area 4, four uncontested Community College trustee seats, Dunsmuir Joint Union High School District, and all of the City of Tulelake's uncontested-incumbent seats), the same pattern Fort Jones fits. The Town of Fort Jones's own site (fortjonesca.org, live fetch this pass) independently corroborates the people: its Town Council roster page shows Madeleine DeAndreis as sitting Mayor and Mercedes Garcia as a sitting Council Member, alongside three other current members not up this cycle, and confirms the Mayor is chosen from among the 3-seat Council rather than separately elected -- consistent with no county document ever showing a standalone Fort Jones Mayor contest. One honest limit: this pass could not reach a Fort Jones Town Council resolution or minutes formally adopting the Section 10229 appointment -- the town's own Agendas & Minutes page renders its document list client-side and returned no fetchable record, and this session's tooling was restricted to WebFetch/WebSearch (no browser automation) with its WebSearch budget exhausted partway through this jurisdiction's research. Absent that, this finding rests on the same kind of converging documentary evidence -- an extended-filing listing, an unopposed-incumbent-only final candidate roster, and a later authoritative ballot list that drops the race by name while keeping comparable non-incumbent races -- that this dataset has treated as sufficient corroboration elsewhere when a signed resolution wasn't directly reachable (e.g. Wasco's pre-adoption-only paperwork, above). With the only Nov 2026 Fort Jones office -- the 3-seat Town Council race -- resolved via appointment of its two unopposed incumbent filers before the ballot was set, and no other Fort Jones office up this cycle, there is no Fort Jones race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Tulelake
Checked 2026-09-02 -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. This was an untouched placeholder row (three candidate names had been tentatively noted but never independently verified or built); this pass re-fetched Siskiyou County's own certified "Final Siskiyou County Candidate List -- Local Offices Going to Election -- November 3, 2026 -- As of 08/12/2026 4:00p.m." directly and confirms the City of Tulelake actually has four separate Nov 2026 offices, not one: "Council Member -- Full Term -- Vote for 3" ("Penny" Paulette Velador, Appointed Incumbent; Thoman Cordonier, Incumbent; Teresa Williams, Incumbent), "Council Member -- Short Term -- Vote for 1" (Patty Taylor, Appointed Incumbent), "City Clerk -- Full Term -- Vote for 1" (Anna Gabiela Perez-Ramirez, ballot designation City Clerk), and "City Treasurer -- Full Term -- Vote for 1" (Sara R Luscombe, Incumbent) -- every seat exactly matched by an incumbent or appointed-incumbent filer, county-wide Full-Term meaning a 4-year term (12/4/26-12/6/30) and Short-Term a 2-year term. That headcount alone (candidates = seats, all incumbents) makes this Section 10229 territory the same way Fort Jones (elsewhere in this same county) was, and the county's own separate "Offices going to Ballot" document (re-fetched directly this pass, all 4 pages read in full) positively confirms the cancellation: it omits all four City of Tulelake races by name, while it still includes every genuinely contested Siskiyou race (Dorris, Dunsmuir, Etna, Montague full-term, Mt. Shasta, Yreka) and even undersubscribed-but-not-cancelled races (Weed's 2-candidates-for-3-seats Council race; Montague's 1-candidate-for-1-seat, non-incumbent short-term Council seat) -- so this isn't a doc-omission artifact, it's the same selective drop pattern this dataset has already verified means an actual cancellation. Unlike Fort Jones, this pass found the decisive primary-source paper trail directly: the City of Tulelake's own posted agendas (cityoftulelake.com/agenda-minutes/, PDFs fetched and read directly) show its August 18, 2026 regular meeting agenda item 9, "Approval of Resolution 26-15, 'A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Tulelake, California, appointing three City Council full-term (four years), one City Council short-term (two years), one City Clerk and one City Treasurer positions for a period of four years in lieu of an election pursuant to Elections Code Section 10229'" -- and the city's own subsequently posted minutes of that same meeting (in the September 1, 2026 regular-meeting packet) confirm it passed: "Council Member Cordonier made a motion to approve Resolution 26-15 ... Council Member Taylor seconded the motion. All votes were aye. Motion carried. (Motion 26-130)". That is a directly reachable, signed roll-call adoption -- stronger corroboration than Fort Jones had. The city's own live site (cityoftulelake.com) independently corroborates the people and structure: a 5-member Council (Tom Cordonier as Mayor, Paulette Velador as Mayor Pro Tem, Teresa Williams, Patricia Taylor, and Margaret Cordonier, the latter not up this cycle), with a separately elected City Clerk (Anna Perez) and City Treasurer (Sara Luscombe) rather than council-appointed ones -- structurally different from every other small Siskiyou city in this dataset (Dorris, Weed, Yreka, etc.), all of which elect Council only and select their Mayor from among themselves. With all four Nov 2026 Tulelake offices resolved via appointment before the ballot was set, and no other Tulelake office up this cycle, there is no Tulelake race of any kind on the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Ione
1/1
1/1
—
Plymouth
1/1
1/1
—
Jackson
1/1
1/1
—
Sutter Creek
1/1
1/1
—
Amador City
Checked 2026-09-02 -- not a Nov 2026 ballot contest of any kind, so nothing to author. This is the sibling city to Ione, Jackson, Plymouth, and Sutter Creek off the same two countywide Amador County documents used to build those four (sources/amador-candidates-nov2026.txt); the queue's original 2-contest estimate came from the first of those two documents alone and did not survive a check against the second. Document 1, Amador County's own pre-filing "Offices for the November 3, 2026 General Election" notice (Registrar of Voters Kimberly L. Grady, fetched via the same pdf.js-in-page DOM-injection workaround already documented for this county's Akamai-blocked PDFs), lists three genuine Amador City offices up this cycle: "2 Councilmember seats (4-yr term); 1 Councilmember seat (2-yr term); City Clerk (4-yr)" -- more offices than any of its sibling cities (which have only Councilmember seats), consistent with Amador City being the one city on this document with its own separately elected City Clerk. Document 2, the county's later certified "Candidate List -- Qualified Candidates Only" (form CFMR009, print date 08/27/2026, the same post-filing document that supplied the rosters for Ione/Jackson/Plymouth/Sutter Creek), is the decisive one: it contains zero Amador City contests of any kind -- no Councilmember race, no City Clerk race -- anywhere in its full extracted text. This is not an extraction gap: the document's own footer, "Grand Total: 18, Total Qualified: 18," matches the sum of every contest it does list exactly (2 school trustee + 5 Ione + 3 Jackson + 3 Plymouth + 3 Sutter Creek + 2 other school = 18), with no room for missed Amador City rows, and the same document positively includes every one of its four sibling Amador County cities' contests. Zero qualified candidates for all three Amador City offices combined -- not merely fewer candidates than seats, as in the Fort Jones/Holtville pattern above -- points to a more severe version of the same Elections Code Section 10229 mechanism: with no candidate at all having filed for any of the three seats, there is nothing to appoint anyone to, and no contest of any kind could reach a November ballot. Independent corroboration attempted but blocked by the same access gaps documented dataset-wide for this county and for other small Gold Country cities: the City of Amador City's own site (amadorcity.com) renders client-side and returned no extractable text to a direct fetch (root, /city-council, and other guessed paths all returned only the bare domain string, not page content); Amador County's own elections landing page 403s directly (the same Akamai-style block already on record for this county, requiring a browser-based workaround this session's tooling could not perform without the disallowed computer-use/chrome-extension tools); the Amador Ledger Dispatch (ledger.news) returned HTTP 429 on every fetch attempted; and both a Bing web-search fetch and a DuckDuckGo HTML fetch returned no on-point results (DuckDuckGo bot-walled behind a CAPTCHA). A Google News RSS query for "Amador City" council coverage over the trailing 60 days returned only articles about the sibling cities (Ione, Jackson, Sutter Creek, Plymouth), never Amador City itself -- a genuine negative result consistent with a town of about 200 residents (2020 Census, per Wikipedia) generating no news coverage over an election with no candidates and nothing to report. Wikipedia's own 'Amador City, California' article, used here only for the population figure and June 2, 1915 incorporation date (not for any current-officeholder claim, since the name it lists as sitting Mayor could not be independently corroborated by any primary source reached this pass), offers no further help. With all three known Amador City offices confirmed absent from the county's own certified qualified-candidates roster, and no independent source reachable to explain what happens to the seats (appointment, vacancy, or otherwise), there is no Amador City race of any kind to author for the November 2026 ballot.
—
—
—
Susanville
Council race resolved outright in the June 2026 primary (vote-for-two plurality); no November contest
—
—
—
Orland
2/2
2/2
—
Willows
1/1
1/1
—
Crescent City
2/2
2/2
—
Colusa
1/1
1/1
—
Williams
(1)City Council is covered. Three candidates qualified for the three open seats: Janet Escalante Ramos, Guillermo Hernandez Jr., and Brayan Antonio Velazquez Velazquez, confirmed by the Williams City Clerk's office and by each candidate's campaign-finance filing with Colusa County. City Treasurer is the one seat still owed. Both the county's and the city's election notices list it, and the City Clerk's office says one candidate qualified, but no public document names that person yet. We'll add it as soon as the city or county publishes the name.
1/2
1/1
—
Bishop
1/1
1/1
—
Mammoth Lakes
1/1
1/1
—
Alturas
City Council and Treasurer seats are on the June 2, 2026 primary ballot, not the November general
—
—
—
Loyalton
1/1
1/1
—
99.89%Subtotal
895/896
895/895
22/26
September 29, 2026
Brand refresh! Time for some whimsy and fun. We all deserve it. Rugrats - sue us, we’ve all been very naughty.
September 24, 2026
Candidate profiles rewritten for every race for Congress, State Senate, Assembly and the Board of Equalization. Profiles were falling short of our own standard: they restated campaign finance instead of saying who the candidate is. Each now opens with the person’s record, what they say drives them, and what they promise, in their own words. Money stays in the Financial info section. Every fact is tied to a source we read, and where nothing about a candidate could be found, the profile says so instead of filling the space.
LA Mayor homelessness timeline corrected. The court order pausing the federal suspension of the county homeless agency came in August, not June, and is on hold while the government’s appeal is heard.
September 7, 2026
Updated weekly checks for full California coverage. Our automated checks on rosters, filings, and source freshness were built for 191 contests and now watch 1,140. Fixes are queued, freshness first.
Weekly ballot check: The two candidates who are no longer running — one withdrew in Stockton, one died in Calaveras County — were re-confirmed and stay noted on their races.
LA Mayor date fix. The congressional letter asking Mayor Bass to testify was sent September 2, not September 3.
Screen readers now announce the coverage dots in the table above (complete, in progress, not started).
September 4, 2026
Authoring is done — 1,140 of 1,141 known contests. The last holdout is the City Treasurer race in Williams, Colusa County. We spoke with the city clerk’s office by phone: one candidate qualified, so the seat is uncontested, but no public document names that person yet. We are leaving it unauthored on purpose, as a benchmark for how quickly the record catches up once ballots go out in a month.
Reading levels adjusted for a smoother experience. We rewrote the whole corpus so the reading level scales with the depth you pick: Before today, contests read at a 14th grade level with fragmented grammar at all depth sizes. Now, Small lands at 7th grade, Medium at 8th, and Large at 11th.
Many other small fixes.
September 3, 2026
Coverage up to 99% — holy macaroni! We only authored 76 contests today but closed gaps for Chico, Delano, Placer County’s Board of Education, Redding, Fairfield, South Lake Tahoe, San Luis Obispo, Crescent City, Placerville, Roseville, Colfax, Eureka, Shasta County’s Board of Education, BART District 8, Napa, Lake, Mono, Monterey, Huntington Park, and West Covina.
We also completed our sweep of financial data for candidates who reported them. 54 city and county races that shipped without fundraising data previously were checked against their city’s own disclosure portal. If their city didn’t have one, or a candidate only filed a short form, the section will say so. Remember: we automate a weekly check to keep this as fresh as possible.
Fake news doesn’t rest and neither do we. Now we enter serious optimization mode while keeping an eye on updates about the most impactful races. As defined by 1) population density, 2) cultural impact, 3) federal moves and 4) local proximity. Regarding #4, this is a 1-woman-shop based out of Los Angeles.
September 2, 2026
Coverage up to 92% today, from 79% yesterday — 1062 published contests, up from 917. The North Coast, the Sierra, and the Central Coast came online: Marin, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo, Yolo, Butte, Napa, Humboldt, Mendocino, Nevada, Siskiyou, Tehama, Shasta, Imperial, and San Benito counties, plus Supervisor and Board of Education runoffs in a dozen rural counties.
We didn’t finish overnight. Yesterday we said we expected to. About 90 counted contests are still unbuilt, almost all because we can’t confirm a candidate roster from a real document — Chico, Delano, Placer County’s school board, and a few dozen small cities. Now doing a more manual pass with fresher eyes.
September 1, 2026
LA mayor: new Recent News item. The Legislature passed a bill giving the mayor final say over the Forest Lawn Drive lane project that Raman planned and Bass paused. It now goes to the governor.
Authoring continues: coverage up to 79% today, from 49% yesterday. Most of Monterey County’s city races are sourced and live now — Pacific Grove, Marina, Salinas, Greenfield, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, and King City — with a few seats honestly left undocumented pending a confirmed candidate roster yet.
We expect to complete authoring of all California candidate ballots overnight. There’s still lots to do. Editing, refining, filling in gaps and tying up loose ends… Thank you for your patience.
August 31, 2026
Published races went from 206 to 578 — coverage up from 18% to 49%. Every November city council and mayor race in San Diego, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties now has real candidates and sourcing, and Santa Clara County is underway.
County-level races are authored in 14 more counties. Supervisor, Board of Education, and judge runoffs, plus one correction: Riverside’s “County Superintendent runoff” turned out to be a header-shift bug in the county’s own results PDF, corrected.
August 30, 2026
We pulled hundreds more city council and mayor races. City-level races were our biggest gap — we now track every one of California’s 483 incorporated cities, up from 29.
Candidate money now shows two time windows, not one. For over 100 races, you can see what a candidate raised before the June primary and what they’ve raised since, side by side — not just one combined total.
August 29, 2026
We checked every California county for what’s actually on the ballot. All 58 counties are now enumerated against their own elections office’s real candidate list or certified primary results — up from 9 after the August 27 deadline for counties to publish certified candidate lists.
Most county races were decided in June, not November. Offices like Supervisor, Assessor, and judge only go to a November runoff when nobody won a majority in the June primary.
We caught and fixed two mistakes. Riverside’s real results added a County Superintendent race we’d missed. Glenn’s County Board of Education race is still unconfirmed, so it’s staying off the site until we find a real document, not a guess.
August 25, 2026
Every contest now has one address, and search can reach it. Each race used to exist at two URLs: the one you read on your ballot, which search engines were told to ignore, and a plain reference copy that they indexed instead. Land here from a search now and you get the real page —voteorelse.com/2026/governor— with your full ballot one click away. Old links still work.
You can see what we haven’t covered yet. The roadmap above lists every California county and city, what’s published in each, and what we still owe you — including the counties nobody has assessed yet. It’s generated from the site itself, so it can’t quietly drift from reality, and it says plainly where our own numbers are still incomplete.
August 22, 2026
The homepage now opens straight into a ballot. Visiting the site lands you on a real, fully resolved demo ballot (a Los Angeles district) instead of an address form — and if this device has already looked up a ballot, you go straight back to yours. Entering your own address moved to its own page, one link away from the ballot header.
The landing-page video is gone — and with it an accessibility failure. The old homepage autoplayed a 60-second looping video with no pause control, a known WCAG 2.2.2 failure we had accepted and documented. Removing it resolves that failure outright and drops a 6.5 MB download nobody asked for.
San Diego and San Jose council runoffs are on the ballot. All four San Diego council runoffs (Districts 2, 4, 6 and 8) and all three San Jose runoffs (Districts 5, 7 and 9) — fourteen candidates, each with the same full write-up every other race gets, and district lookups verified against sitting councilmembers’ own districts. 214 contests total.
August 21, 2026
San Francisco and Orange County local races are here — the first coverage beyond Los Angeles. San Francisco addresses now get their real local ballot: Assessor-Recorder, Public Defender, all five Board of Supervisors districts on this year’s ballot, and the Board of Education. Orange County’s District 5 supervisor runoff is in too. That’s nine new contests and 35 newly covered candidates, each researched to the same sourcing standard as everything else on the site — 207 contests total.
San Francisco races now show the money and the June results. Every SF contest carries official campaign-finance figures from the Ethics Commission — totals, small-donor amounts, and public matching funds — including explicit notes for candidates with no committee or no filings yet. Races that had a June special election (Districts 2 and 4, the school board) also carry those certified results for context.
Vote-for-three contests now work like the real ballot. SF’s school board elects three seats at once, so the picker now lets you select up to three candidates in contests that work that way — the first multi-seat contest the site has carried.
Where nobody has covered a candidate, we say exactly that. A few qualified candidates have no press coverage, no campaign committee, and no public platform anywhere we could find. Their entries say so plainly — documented absence, not silence — and will deepen when the city’s official candidate statements publish.
Corrected a hedge in the LA mayor race. We’d been saying nobody could confirm Bass blocked the Controller’s audit of Inside Safe — but our own sources already had both sides on the record. Fixed the paragraph, no new sources added.
Added Bass and Raman’s first debate to Recent News. They clashed over Inside Safe’s cost and read dueling homelessness numbers into the record on August 19 — now in the LA mayor race’s news feed.
Recent News now always shows, even on Small. A news item’s visibility used to depend on how it was authored; developments show at every size now, since they’re often the thing you most want to know.
Privacy and Terms are now one Legal page. Same content, one effective date, less duplication — the old URLs redirect there. We also swapped the email contact for a text line: reach us at 858-218-6711 instead.
August 13, 2026
Names are now in ballot order. The Secretary of State drew the randomized alphabet this morning — the state does not order candidates A to Z, it draws a new order of the alphabet for each election and sorts surnames by that. We ingested the drawing, and 85 of the 178 contested races on this site changed order as a result. The order you read here is the order on the paper in your hand.
One caveat we’d rather state than bury. California also rotates the drawn alphabet by district for many offices, and we do not implement rotation. So this is the correct statewide order — far closer to your ballot than what we showed yesterday — but for some races the exact order in your specific district can still differ.
August 12, 2026
We tell you the facts behind the headlines. There’s news about Nithya Raman being fired from her chairmanship role in the Housing and Homelessness Committee, after she moved against a consensus that successfully voted 13-1 to split the organization. We now have a daily Newspaper agent that checks for developments across high-profile contests such as the Mayoral and Governor’s races. Issues appear as an accordion in the new Recent News section, so you can dive deeper. And of course, any new source recalculates that contest’s objectivity score.
August 10, 2026
Every candidate race on the ballot now has authored profiles — all 182 of them, statewide. Writing them meant expanding the source list from 36 sources to 60, and the payoff shows in the floor rather than the average: the lowest objectivity score of any contest is now 83, up from 74, with no contest left in the “mixed” band.
Legislative records, with the context that makes them readable. We’re experimenting with showing what a candidate in office has actually done, and adding context wherever a raw count would mislead by itself: Robert Rivas authored one bill because Speakers rarely author, and Jesse Gabriel authored several times more than anyone else because Budget chairs are nominal authors on every trailer bill. A number without its role is not a record.
Every source carries the date we last retrieved it, and the build refuses a source that has gone stale for its kind — a certified canvas never expires, a campaign-finance export does. Each contest shows its own last-updated date in the Sources panel.
August 8, 2026
Our internal documentation is checked every weekday. A routine runs Monday through Friday and holds the docs to the same standard as the code: a claim that something is checked has to be checkable. Not weekends — robots get tired too.
August 7, 2026
Fixed a bug that could have moved your saved pick to the wrong candidate. Picks were stored by a candidate’s position in the list, so any reordering of the ballot would have silently reattached your pick to whoever landed on that spot. Picks are now tied to the person. Two reorderings were already scheduled when we caught it, which is why it was fixed before either one. If a pick ever can’t be matched to a person, it is cleared rather than guessed.
Write-in candidates are labelled — 24 candidates carried forward from the June primary are now annotated as such.
Unopposed races are cleaned up. This applied to four Assembly contests: Districts 4, 8, 22, and 32.
Withdrawals and disqualifications now have somewhere to live. If a candidate leaves the race, we label it plainly on their line. Their name stays visible and their oval stays live, because California does not reprint ballots for a late withdrawal — the name is still on the paper in your hand, and whether to vote for them is your call, not ours.
Prepared for the August 13 ballot drawing. We will ingest the state’s randomized-alphabet drawing so the order of names on this site matches the order on your paper ballot.
We now meet WCAG 2.2 AA, checked automatically before every push, in light and dark, on mobile and desktop. More remains to do.