BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 12, 2013

                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
                           K.H. "Katcho" Achadjian, Chair
                     SB 311 (Padilla) - As Amended:  June 4, 2013

           SENATE VOTE  :  25-9
           
          SUBJECT  :  Local elections: charters and charter proposals.

           SUMMARY  :  Requires city charter proposals proposed by a city  
          governing body or a charter commission to be presented to the  
          voters at a statewide general election.  Specifically,  this  
          bill  :   

          1)Requires a city or city and county charter proposal proposed  
            by the governing body of a city or city and county on its own  
            motion that qualifies for the ballot, as specified, to be  
            submitted to the voters at the next established statewide  
            general election occurring not less than 88 days after the  
            date of the order of election.

          2)Allows the governing body of a city or city and county to  
            direct that a charter proposal that proposes to amend a  
            charter solely to comply with a court injunction or consent  
            decree or with federal or state voting rights laws be  
            submitted to the voters at the next regularly scheduled  
            general municipal election or at any established statewide  
            general or statewide primary election, as specified, occurring  
            not less than 88 days after the date of the order of election.

          3)Requires a city or city and county charter proposal that  
            proposes to amend a charter and is proposed by a petition  
            signed by 15% of the registered voters of a city or 10% of the  
            registered voters of a city and county, as specified, to be  
            submitted to the voters at the next regularly scheduled  
            general municipal election or at any established statewide  
            general or statewide primary election, as specified, occurring  
            not less than 88 days after the date of the order of election.

          4)Requires a charter or charter amendment proposed by a charter  
            commission, whether elected or appointed by a governing body,  
            for a city or city and county to be submitted to the voters at  
            an established statewide general election, as specified,  
            provided there are at least 95 days before the election.








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  2


          5)Requires the following city or city and county charter  
            proposals to be submitted to the voters at an established  
            statewide general election, as specified, provided that there  
            are at least 88 days before the election:

             a)   A proposal to adopt a charter, or an amendment or repeal  
               of a charter, proposed by the governing body of a city or a  
               city and county on its own motion; or,

             b)   A recodification of the charter proposed by the  
               governing body on its own motion, provided that the  
               recodification does not, in any manner, substantially  
               change the provisions of the charter;

          6)Makes conforming and technical changes.
           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Requires city or city and county charter proposals that  
            qualify for the ballot, as specified, to be submitted to the  
            voters at either the next regular general municipal election  
            occurring not less than 88 days after the date of the order of  
            election, or at a special election called for that purpose or  
            on any established election date, as specified, occurring not  
            less than 88 days after the date of the order of election.

          2)Requires a charter or charter amendment proposed by a charter  
            commission, whether elected or appointed by a governing body,  
            for a city or city and county to be submitted to the voters at  
            an established statewide general, statewide primary, or  
            regularly scheduled municipal election date, as specified,  
            provided that there are at least 95 days before the election.

          3)Requires the following city or city and county charter  
            proposals to be submitted to the voters at an established  
            statewide general, statewide primary, or regularly scheduled  
            municipal election, as specified, provided that there are at  
            least 88 days before the election:

             a)   An amendment or repeal of a charter proposed by the  
               governing body of a city or a city and county on its own  
               motion;

             b)   An amendment or repeal of a city charter proposed by a  
               petition signed by 15% of the registered voters of the  








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  3

               city;

             c)   An amendment or repeal of a city and county charter  
               proposed by a petition signed by 10% of the registered  
               voters of the city and county; and,

             d)   A recodification of the charter proposed by the  
               governing body on its own motion, provided that the  
               recodification does not, in any manner, substantially  
               change the provisions of the charter.

          4)Requires, prior to approving the submission to the voters of a  
            proposal to adopt a charter, a governing body to hold at least  
            two public hearings on the matter of the proposal of a charter  
            and the content of the proposed charter.  Notice of the public  
            hearings shall be given by publication, as specified, in a  
            newspaper designated by the governing body and circulated  
            throughout the city, and by posting the notice in three public  
            places within the jurisdiction at least 21 calendar days prior  
            to the date of each public hearing.  The second public hearing  
            shall be held at least 30 days after the first public hearing.  
             At least one of the public hearings shall be held outside of  
            normal business hours to facilitate public participation.  The  
            governing body shall not conduct a vote on whether to approve  
            the submission to the voters of the proposal to adopt a  
            charter until 21 days after the second public hearing.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  None

           COMMENTS  :   

          1)This bill limits the types of elections at which city charter  
            proposals that are proposed by a city governing body or a  
            charter commission can be presented to the voters, requiring  
            these measures to be voted on at established statewide general  
            elections only.  The bill repeals cities' authority to submit  
            charter proposals to voters at a statewide primary election or  
            a regularly scheduled municipal election.  The bill allows the  
            following charter proposals to be presented to voters at a  
            regularly scheduled general municipal election or any  
            established statewide general or statewide primary election:

             a)   A proposal to amend a charter solely to comply with a  
               court injunction or consent decree or with federal or state  
               voting rights laws; or,








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  4


             b)   A proposal to amend a charter that is proposed by  
               petition (signed by 15% of the registered voters of a city  
               or 10% of the registered voters of a city and county).   
               This provision is substantially similar to current law.

            This bill is sponsored by the California State Building and  
            Construction Trades Council and the California Professional  
            Firefighters.

          2)According to the author, "This bill is needed to ensure that  
            the largest number of voters have an opportunity to vote when  
            cities decide to take the step of asking the voters to allow  
            the city to become a charter city.  Often, in the past, these  
            measures have been put before the voters in off year elections  
            or during municipal or primary elections when there tends to  
            be much lower voter turnout compared to general elections in  
            November."

          3)The California Constitution gives cities the power to become  
            charter cities.  The benefit of becoming a charter city is  
            that charter cities have supreme authority over "municipal  
            affairs."  In other words, a charter city's law concerning a  
            municipal affair will trump a state law governing the same  
            topic.  Of California's 482 cities, 121 are charter cities.  

            City charter and city charter amendment proposals can  
            originate from a charter commission, the governing body of the  
            city, or by a petition of the voters.  Regardless of their  
            source, all charter proposals must be submitted to the voters  
            at an established statewide general, statewide primary, or  
            regularly scheduled municipal election.

            Statewide general elections are held on the first Tuesday,  
            after the first Monday, in November of each even-numbered  
            year.  Statewide primary elections are held on the first  
            Tuesday, after the first Monday, in June of each even-numbered  
            year.  Municipal elections can fall on a range of dates.   
            Charter cities can establish generally scheduled elections  
            based on their charters.

          4)In 2005, the City of Bell drafted a city charter and placed  
            the proposal on the ballot at a special municipal election on  
            November 29, 2005, shortly after a state law limiting city  
            council members' compensation was enacted.  The measure was  








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  5

            the only item on the ballot, and was presented as a change  
            that would give the city more local control.  The ballot  
            language included no mention of the effect the change would  
            have on council members' salaries.  Fewer than 400 voters  
            turned out in the city of more than 36,000 residents.

            As a result of this action and other questionable or illegal  
            activities by the City of Bell and other municipal  
            governments, AB 1344 (Feuer and Alejo), Chapter 692, Statutes  
            of 2011, made a number of changes to the process by which a  
            new charter or a charter amendment is enacted.  AB 1344  
            removed the authority for a city charter, charter amendment,  
            or charter repeal to be presented to the voters at a special  
            election.  The measure also required a local agency to hold  
            two public hearings before submitting to voters a proposal to  
            adopt a charter, and it required a proposal to adopt or amend  
            a charter to include explicit notice of new city powers.

            SB 311 takes a step further by limiting the vote on charter  
            proposals that are proposed by city governing bodies to  
            statewide general elections only.  This applies to proposals  
            that would convert a general law city to a charter city, and  
            to proposals that would amend an existing charter.  The  
            Committee may wish to consider whether the enhanced public  
            notification required by AB 1344 is sufficient and whether  
            enough time has elapsed to fully evaluate the new law's effect  
            on voter behavior and outcomes in charter conversion or  
            amendment proposals.

          5)Opponents have expressed great concern with the provision of  
            this bill pertaining to charter amendments.  They contend that  
            charters often must be amended to respond to legal, technical  
            or fiscal issues.  If the charter amendment cannot be  
            presented to voters until a statewide general election, such  
            issues could remain unaddressed and/or could be exacerbated  
            for upwards of two years depending on when the particular  
            problem is identified and the timing of the election cycle.   
            For example, the League of California Cities points to a City  
            of Los Angeles ballot measure that was presented to voters at  
            the city's primary election on March 8, 2011.  Measure N asked  
            voters to remove from the city's charter three provisions  
            governing campaign contributions and candidates' campaign  
            spending, which the city attorney identified as unlawful in  
            light of court rulings.  It was argued that those provisions  
            posed a litigation risk as long as they remained in the city's  








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  6

            charter, an argument that prevailed when voters approved  
            Measure N.  Under SB 311, this type of measure would have to  
            wait until a statewide general election before it could be  
            presented to the voters.  

            On the other hand, proponents of SB 311 express equal concern  
            with charter amendments that have a significant impact on  
            their members and levels of city services, which they argue  
            should be considered by as many voters as possible at a  
            general election.  In 2010, voters in the City of Stockton  
            approved Measure H, which changed the city's charter so that  
            contract disputes between the city and fire department are no  
            longer settled by binding arbitration.  The Measure also  
            allowed the city to hire a fire chief and deputy chiefs from  
            outside the department and removed civil service protections  
            from those positions.  While Measure H did appear at a general  
            election, current law allows any charter amendments -  
            including those that represent substantial and enduring  
            changes to a city's powers, operations, services and fiscal  
            practices - to also be presented at municipal and primary  
            elections, in which voter turnout is historically lower.

            While SB 311 contains an exemption for charter amendments that  
            are necessary to comply with a court injunction or consent  
            decree or with federal or state voting rights laws, this  
            exemption is likely too narrow to encompass the range of  
            charter amendments that may be needed to help a city avoid  
            litigation or fiscal distress.  The Committee may wish to  
            consider whether the potential benefits of this bill -  
            increasing voter participation in charter proposal decisions -  
            outweigh the possible drawbacks of delaying prudent charter  
            amendments, and whether this bill could be amended to exempt  
            charter amendments that are necessary for a city to comply  
            with court decisions and prevent litigation, and to avert  
            fiscal emergencies.

          6)The California Professional Firefighters, in support, state,  
            "Fewer voters actually participate in the local direct  
            democracy process because many local proposals are placed on  
            municipal, primary or special election ballots when voter  
            participation is historically and consistently much lower than  
            in general elections.  It is this low primary, municipal and  
            special election turnout that proponents of controversial  
            charter proposals and charter amendments attempt to use to  
            their advantage, especially proponents of proposals that seek  








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  7

            to strip firefighters and law enforcement officers of their  
            due process rights under grievance arbitration charter  
            provisions.  For example, in August 2011, the San Luis Obispo  
            City Council placed a charter amendment measure on the ballot  
            to repeal a longstanding grievance arbitration process for  
            fire and police that was overwhelmingly approved by voters in  
            the 2000 general election.  They did so as part of a special  
            election, which was held via mail-in ballot only.  When the  
            results were tallied, only 43% of registered voters had  
            participated compared to nearly 80% voter turnout in statewide  
            general elections in San Luis Obispo since 2008.  In fact,  
            voter participation in San Luis Obispo for a special election  
            dropped as low as 32% in 2009 and 38% for a primary election  
            in 2010.

            "?(T)here is a need to bring the local initiative process back  
            to its original intent and invite greater voter participation  
            at the ballot box.  Doing so is especially important when  
            considered in the context of charter conversion and charter  
            amendment proposals, which can have far-reaching impacts on a  
            community's public services."

          7)The League of California Cities, in opposition, argues that  
            existing law's "in-depth process for adopting proposed  
            charters illustrates the thoroughness required of a public  
            agency to consider the matter and help engage the public  
            before it is put before the voters at a regularly scheduled  
            municipal election, a statewide primary election, or a  
            statewide general election."  The League also notes that  
            "Oftentimes, charter amendments deal with very technical  
            issues, are needed to avoid litigation, or may generate much  
            needed revenue and these changes may need to be dealt with  
            expeditiously.  Requiring that charter cities wait up to 24  
            months or two years to make these changes could mean a lawsuit  
            or could mean putting a fiscally strapped city in further  
            distress."

            The League also expresses concern that "charter amendments and  
            proposed adoption of charters have particularly been called  
            out for needed change.  Truthfully, other very important  
            decisions are put before the voters at regularly scheduled  
            municipal elections, special elections, and statewide  
            primaries."  The League also contends that this bill does not  
            change the problem of low voter turnout.









                                                                  SB 311
                                                                 Page  8

          8)AB 822 (Hall, 2013) requires local measures that propose a  
            change to municipal employee retirement benefit plans to be  
            submitted to voters only at established statewide general  
            elections, and requires an independent actuarial statement  
            regarding such measures to be prepared and printed in the  
            voter information portion of the sample ballot.  This  
            Committee approved AB 822 on a 7-1 vote on April 10, 2013.  AB  
            822 is pending in the Senate Elections and Constitutional  
            Amendments Committee.  The Committee may wish to consider how  
            AB 822 and SB 311 interact.

           9)Support Arguments  :  Supporters contend that charter proposals  
            deserve the greatest voter participation possible, which is  
            achieved at general elections.

             Opposition Arguments  :  Opponents argue that this bill will  
            hamper cities' ability to respond in a timely manner when  
            charter amendments are needed.

          10)This bill is double-referred to the Elections and  
            Redistricting Committee.
           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          California Professional Firefighters [SPONSOR]
          California State Building and Construction Trades Council  
          [SPONSOR]
          California Labor Federation
          California State Association of Electrical Workers
          California State Pipe Trades Council
          Costa Mesans for Responsible Government
          Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
           
            Opposition 
           
          Air Conditioning Trade Association
          Associated Builders and Contractors of California
          Cities of Arcadia, Brawley, Burbank, Carlsbad, Ceres, Cerritos,  
          Chowchilla, Cypress, Del Mar, Downey, El Centro, Grover Beach,  
          Hayward, Livingston, Los Alamitos, Palmdale, Palo Alto,  
          Pasadena, Rancho Cordova, Sacramento, San Luis Obispo, Santa  
          Barbara, Santa Maria, Santa Rosa, Shafter, Torrance, Tulare, and  
          Vista
          City and County of San Francisco








                                                                  SB 311
                                                                  Page  9

          City of San Ramon Councilmember Scott Perkins
          League of California Cities
          Mayor Tom Tait, City of Anaheim
          Vice Mayor Ken Weir, City of Bakersfield
          Mayor Kevin Johnson, City of Sacramento
          Mayor Chuck Reed, City of San Jose
          Mayor Miguel Pulido, City of Santa Ana
          Mayor Edwin M. Lee, City of San Francisco
          Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors Association of California
          Western Electrical Contractors Association


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958