AB 193, as amended, Logue. Municipal ballot measures: arguments.
Existing lawbegin delete permits a city ballot measure to be placed on the ballot and submitted to the voters of the city by petition or by the legislative body of the city. Existing lawend delete specifies procedures applicable to the preparation, submittal, and printing of arguments for and against a city ballot measure that qualifies for a place on the ballot.begin delete If more than one argument for or more than one argument against a city measure is submitted, existing law requires the city elections official to select one of the arguments for and one of the arguments against the measure for printing and distribution to the voters. In selecting the arguments, existing law requires the city elections official to give preference and priority, in the order named, to the arguments from specified persons, first of which are the arguments from the legislative body of the city, or a member or members of the legislative
body authorized by that body.end deletebegin insert Existing law requires the city elections official to fix a date 14 days from the calling of the election as a deadline for submission of arguments for and against a city ballot measure.end insert
This bill wouldbegin delete insteadend delete require the city electionsbegin delete official, for a measure placed on the ballot by the legislative body, to give preference and priority to the argument of a member or members of the legislative body authorized by that body only if the
argument is consistent with the position taken by the legislative body on the measure.end deletebegin insert official to extend the deadline for submission of arguments relating to a city ballot measure by one calendar day if an argument in favor of or against a city measure is not submitted by the deadline fixed by the official. In doing so, this bill would require the city elections official to immediately issue a press release requesting that arguments for or against the measure, or both, as applicable, be submitted by the extended deadline.end insert
By imposing additional duties on local elections officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
end insertbegin insertThe California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
end insertbegin insertThis bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
end insertVote: majority.
Appropriation: no.
Fiscal committee: begin deleteno end deletebegin insertyesend insert.
State-mandated local program: begin deleteno end deletebegin insertyesend insert.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
begin insertSection 9288 is added to the end insertbegin insertElections Codeend insertbegin insert, to
2read:end insert
(a) Notwithstanding Section 9286, if an argument in
4favor of or against a city measure is not submitted for inclusion
5with the sample ballot materials by the date fixed by the city
6elections official, the city elections official shall do both of the
7following:
8(1) Extend the deadline to submit arguments for or against the
9measure by one calendar day.
10(2) Immediately issue a press release that contains all of the
11following:
12(A) The impartial analysis of the measure prepared by the city
13attorney pursuant to Section 9280.
P3 1(B) A statement that an argument
for or against the measure,
2or both, has not be submitted for inclusion with the sample ballot
3materials.
4(C) A request that arguments for or against the measure, or
5both, as applicable, be submitted by the extended deadline.
6(b) If the city elections official extends the deadline pursuant
7to subdivision (a), any person or organization otherwise qualified
8to submit an argument relating to the city measure may submit an
9argument for or against the measure, as applicable, by the extended
10deadline. The argument shall be prepared and submitted in
11accordance with Sections 9282 and 9283.
If the Commission on State Mandates determines that
13this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to
14local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made
15pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division
164 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
Section 9287 of the Elections Code is amended
18to read:
(a) If more than one argument for or more than one
20argument against a city ballot measure is submitted to the city
21elections official within the time prescribed, he or she shall select
22one of the arguments in favor and one of the arguments against
23the measure for printing and distribution to the voters.
24(b) In selecting the argument in favor of or against a measure
25placed on the ballot by petition, the city elections official shall
26give preference and priority, in the order named, to the arguments
27of the following:
28(1) The individual voter, or bona fide association of citizens, or
29combination
of voters and associations, who are the bona fide
30sponsors or proponents of the measure.
31(2) Bona fide associations of citizens.
32(3) Individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure.
33(c) In selecting the argument in favor of or against a measure
34placed on the ballot by the legislative body, the city elections
35official shall give preference and priority, in the order named, to
36the arguments of the following:
37(1) The legislative body, or a member or members of the
38legislative body authorized by that body if the
member’s argument
39is
consistent with the position taken by that body on the measure.
40(2) Bona fide associations of citizens.
P4 1(3) Individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure.
O
97