BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS
AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Norma J. Torres, Chair
BILL NO: SB 1253 HEARING DATE: 4/22/14
AUTHOR: STEINBERG ANALYSIS BY: Frances Tibon
Estoista
AMENDED: 4/9/14
FISCAL: YES
SUBJECT
Initiative measures
DESCRIPTION
Existing law establishes specific procedures and requirements
for placing an initiative petition measure on the ballot. The
current process for getting an initiative ready for circulation
is as follows:
Proponents of a proposed statewide initiative measure are
required to submit a draft of the measure to the Attorney
General (AG) with a request for a ballot title and summary to
be prepared, prior to circulating the petition for
signatures. The request must include a payment of $200 which
is refunded to the proponent if the measure ultimately
qualifies for the ballot.
Upon receipt of the fee and request, the AG must, within 15
days of receipt of the final version of the measure, prepare
a title and a summary for submission to the Secretary of
State (SOS). If, within the 15 day period, the proponents of
the proposed initiative submit amendments, the AG must
provide, to the SOS, a revised title and summary of the
amended final version of the measure.
If however, the measure requires a fiscal analysis, the
Department of Finance (DOF) and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee, must prepare a fiscal analysis within 25 working
days of receipt of the final version of the measure. Within
15 days following receipt of the fiscal estimate of the
measure, the AG prepares the title and summary of the
Initiative including any fiscal impact and submits it to the
SOS.
Only after the title and summary has been submitted to the
SOS may the proponents begin to circulate the initiative
petitions for signatures.
Existing law requires the SOS to transmit copies of an
initiative measure and its circulating title and summary to the
Senate and the Assembly after the measure is certified to appear
on the ballot for consideration by the voters.
Existing law requires that each house of the Legislature assign
the initiative measure to its appropriate committees, and that
the committees hold joint public hearings on the subject of the
proposed measure prior to the date of the election at which the
measure is to be voted upon, as specified.
Existing law requires the SOS to disseminate the complete state
ballot pamphlet over the Internet and to establish a process to
enable a voter to opt out of receiving the state ballot pamphlet
by mail. Existing law requires the SOS to develop a program to
utilize modern communications and information processing
technology to enhance the availability and accessibility of
information on statewide candidates and ballot initiatives,
including making information available online as well as through
other information processing technology.
Existing law authorizes the proponents of a statewide initiative
or referendum measure to withdraw the measure at any time before
filing the petition with the appropriate elections official.
Existing law also requires that state initiative petitions
circulated for signature include a prescribed notice to the
public.
This bill imposes specified requirements with respect to the
ballot materials required to be prepared by the AG.
Specifically, this bill requires the AG to do the following:
Upon receipt of a request from the proponents of a
proposed initiative measure for a circulating title and
summary, the AG shall initiate a 30-day public review
process of the proposal.
Post the text of the proposed initiative measure on the
AG's Internet Web site.
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 2
Promote public participation by inviting on the AG's
Internet Web site written public comments on the proposed
initiative measure, and allow the site to accept written
public comments for the duration of the public review
period. Public comments may address perceived errors in
the drafting of, or perceived unintended consequences of,
the proposed initiative measure. Requires the AG to
transmit any written public comments received during the
public review period to the proponents of the proposed
initiative measure.
Allows proponents of the proposed initiative measure,
during the public review period, to submit amendments to
the measure. An amendment shall be submitted to the AG's
Sacramento Office via United States Postal Service. This
bill also provides that an amendment shall not be accepted
more than five days after the public review period id
concluded, however a proponent is not prohibited from
proposing a new initiative measure and requesting that a
circulating title and summary be prepared for that measure.
This bill also requires the AG to provide a ballot title and
summary be written in clear and concise terms, understandable to
the average voter, and in an objective and nonpartisan manner,
avoiding the use of technical terms whenever possible, and also
requires the following be satisfied:
If the measure imposes or increases a tax or fee, the
type and amount of the tax or fee shall be described.
If the measure repeals existing law in any substantial
manner, that fact shall be included.
If the measure is contingent on the passage or defeat of
another measure or statute, that fact shall be included.
The AG shall invite and consider public comment in
preparing each ballot title and summary.
The Legislature shall provide the AG with sufficient
funding for administrative and other support relating to
preparation of the ballot title and summary for initiative
measures, including, but not limited to, plain-language
specialists.
This bill provides that the submission of an amendment shall not
extend the period to prepare the fiscal estimate.
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 3
This bill requires the prepared circulating title and summary to
be not less than 25 words and not more than 150 words in length.
This bill requires the fiscal estimate be prepared jointly by
the DOF and the Legislative Analyst and further provides that
the fiscal estimate be delivered to the AG within 45 days of the
date of receipt of the proposed initiative measure.
This bill extends the date that a petition with signatures on a
proposed initiative measure is required to be filed with the
county elections official to not later than 180 days from the
official summary date.
This bill requires the SOS, on the 131st day before an election,
to issue a certificate identifying each initiative measure for
which he or she issued a notice of qualification for a given
election.
This bill requires the SOS to transmit copies of the initiative
measure and circulating title and summary to the Legislature
after receiving a certification from the initiative proponents,
signed under penalty of perjury, upon collection of 25 percent
of the number of signatures needed to qualify the initiative
measure for the ballot.
This bill requires the appropriate committees of the Senate and
Assembly to hold joint public hearing on the subject of the
measure not later than 131 days before the date of the election
at which the measure is to be voted upon.
This bill requires the SOS to establish a process to enable a
voter to receive the state ballot pamphlet in an electronic
format instead of by mail, and also requires the SOS to create
an Internet Web site, or use other available technology, to
consolidate information about each ballot measure in a manner
that is easy for voters to access and understand. The
information shall include:
1) A summary of each ballots content;
2) The sources of funding for each committee formed or existing
primarily to support or oppose the ballot measure;
3) A statement identifying the 10 donors who have contributed
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 4
the largest amounts to campaigns for and against a ballot
measure. This statement is required to be updated as new
information becomes available to the public pursuant to the
Political Reform Act of 1974, and
4) Any other Internet Web site hyperlinks to other relevant
information.
This bill authorizes the proponents of a statewide initiative or
referendum measure to have the measure withdrawn from the ballot
at any time before the measure qualifies for the ballot.
This bill requires a petition for a statewide initiative measure
to contain additional prescribed language in its notice to the
public describing the right of proponents to withdraw the
measure from the ballot.
This bill would make it a crime, with a prescribed penalty, for
proponents of a statewide initiative or referendum measure to
solicit or accept, and a person to offer or pay any money or
other valuable consideration to obtain the withdrawal of a
statewide initiative or referendum measure from the ballot.
This bill also finds and declares all of the following:
1. Initiative measures, also known as ballot measures or
propositions, allow California voters to participate directly
in lawmaking. California voters have enjoyed the right to
enact laws through the initiative process since 1911.
However, many voters find it difficult to understand the
language of an initiative measure and to learn who is behind
an initiative measure.
2. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to
update the initiative process, which is more than 100 years
old, by doing all of the following:
Providing voters with more useful information so that they
are able to make an informed decision about an initiative
measure. Under this act, the SOS would be required to give
voters one-stop access to a clear explanation of each measure
and information about the individuals and groups behind each
measure. This would give voters updated information about
who is spending large sums of money to support or oppose each
initiative measure. Voters would also be allowed to request
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 5
an electronic copy of ballot materials, thereby reducing the
expenses of printing and mailing.
Providing a voter-friendly explanation of each initiative
measure. This act would require that ballot materials be
drafted in clear and impartial language.
Identifying and correcting flaws in an initiative measure
before it appears on the ballot. Currently, proponents of an
initiative measure have few options to correct the language
of an initiative measure or to withdraw a petition for a
proposed initiative measure, even when flaws are identified.
This act would give voters an opportunity to comment on an
initiative measure before the petition is circulated for
signatures. By extending the time for gathering signatures,
this act would give the Legislature the opportunity to hold
earlier public hearings to review initiative measures. This
act would also allow the proponents of an initiative measure
to withdraw the measure after the petition and signatures are
submitted to elections officials, but before the measure
qualifies for the ballot.
BACKGROUND
The Initiative and Referendum Institute . According to the
iandrinstitute.org, although the initiative process is different
in every state, there are certain aspects of the process that
are common to all. The five basic steps to any initiative are:
Preliminary filing of a proposed initiative with a
designated state official;
Review of the initiative for compliance with statutory
requirements prior to circulation;
Circulation of the petition to obtain the required number of
signatures;
Submission of the petition signatures to the state elections
official for verification of the signatures;and
The placement of the initiative on the ballot and subsequent
vote.
The following is a national comparison on pre-circulation filing
requirements and review processes: Prior to circulating a
petition, the proposed initiative and a request to circulate
must be submitted to the designated public officer such as the
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 6
Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General or Secretary of State for
approval. Nine states require the proposed initiative to be
submitted with a certain number of signatures - ranging from
five in Montana to 100 in Alaska. Five states require a deposit
that is refunded when the completed petition has been filed.
Depending, on the state the petition may be reviewed for form,
language and/or constitutionality. Ten states require the
Secretary of State's office or the Attorney General to review
initiatives for proper form only. Twelve states require some
form of pre-circulation/certification review regarding language,
content or constitutionality.
However, in all but four of these states, the results of the
review are advisory only. In Arkansas, the Attorney General has
authority to reject a proposal if it utilizes misleading
terminology. In Utah, the Attorney General can reject an
initiative if it is patently unconstitutional, nonsensical, or
if the proposed law could not become law if passed. In Oregon,
the Attorney General can stop an initiative from circulating if
he believes it violates the single amendment provision for
initiatives and in Florida, the State Supreme Court - during its
mandatory review - can stop an initiative if it is
unconstitutional or violates the state's very strict single
subject requirement.
Circulation periods range from as brief as 64 days in
Massachusetts to an unlimited duration - though there are limits
on how long a petition signature is valid. Most states also
have deadlines for submitting initiative petitions, so that
officials will have time to verify the signatures, publish the
initiative, and prepare the ballot. Arkansas, Ohio and Utah
have no time limit for signature gathering. Oklahoma at 90
days, California at 150 days, and Massachusetts at 64 days have
the shortest circulation periods.
It is unknown if any of the 24 states provides opportunity
during the process for the proponent to withdraw a proposal at
any time before the measure qualifies for the ballot.
COMMENTS
1. According to the Author : The changes in SB 1253 are similar
to the recommendations made twenty years ago by the Citizen's
Commission on Ballot Initiatives. The current 150 days to
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 7
gather signature does not provide enough time for public
input or changes to the initiative language. SB 1253 extends
the time allowed to gather signatures and establishes a
prequalification process. The prequalification process
includes the ability to amend an initiative before it appears
on the ballot as long as the changes are consistent with the
original intent. The prequalification process also engages
the Legislature earlier in the process.
Presently, there is not a sufficient review process of
initiatives by the public or the Legislature where either is
able to provide greater input and suggest amendments or
correct flaws before the measure is printed on the ballot.
Implementing a better public review process before the title
and summary process by the AG and allowing the Legislature to
hold a hearing after 25% of signatures are collected helps
address this deficiency. Also, the concern that voters are
asked to decide important issues through the initiative
process without adequate information is real. This bill aims
to provide clearer and more thorough information.
Another problem in current law is inability for a proponent to
withdraw their own initiative. As described in the previous
section, if a proponent of an initiative pursues an
alternative path to solving an issue - specifically through
compromise through the legislative process - there is no
mechanism for the proponent to remove their own ballot
initiative after it's been qualified.
2. Related Legislation : SB 844 (Pavley) of this year,
among other things requires the SOS to post on his or her
Internet Web site a list of the 10 highest contributors of
$50,000 or more who have made the largest cumulative
contributions to campaign committees formed or existing
primarily to support or oppose for each statewide ballot
measure and would also require the statewide ballot
pamphlet to include a printed statement that refers voters
to the SOS's Internet Web site for these contributor lists.
The bill is currently in Senate Appropriations Committee.
SB 1715 (Margett) of 2006, would have extended the signature
gathering period from 150 days to 365 days, but failed
passage in this committee.
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 8
AB 2524 (Evans) of 2010, was held on the Senate
Appropriations Suspense file and would have allowed for a
30-day public examination/ comment period prior to the AG
drafting the title and summary. AB 1245 (Laird) of 2003,
would have similarly allowed for a 30-day public
examination/comment period prior to the AG drafting the
title and summary. AB 1245 was vetoed by former Governor
Gray Davis who stated in relevant part: "I am concerned
that an initiative could receive either a negative or
positive comment while displayed on the SOS web site; the
proponents may then revise the initiative, but is not
required to repost it. Consequently, the public may see one
version of the initiative prior to the election and an
entirely different initiative during the election."
POSITIONS
Sponsor: California Common Cause
League of Women Voters of California (Co-Sponsor)
Support: AARP
California Church IMPACT
California Forward Action Fund (CFAF)
Think Long Committee for California
Oppose: None received
SB 1253 (STEINBERG)
Page 9