BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1253
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 24, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
SB 1253 (Steinberg) - As Amended: June 17, 2014
SENATE VOTE : 29-8
SUBJECT : Initiative measures.
SUMMARY : Makes significant changes to the initiative process.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes minor modifications to provisions of law that prescribe
how words are counted for the purposes of various provisions
of the Elections Code, including for the word limit on a
ballot title and summary.
2)Requires the Attorney General (AG), upon the receipt of a
request from the proponents of a proposed initiative measure
for a circulating title and summary, to initiate a public
review process for a period of 30 days by doing all of the
following:
a) Posting the text of the proposed initiative measure on
the AG's Internet Web site; and,
b) Inviting, and providing for the submission of, written
public comments on the proposed initiative measure on the
AG's Internet Web site. Requires the site to accept
written public comments for the duration of the public
review period. Requires the written comments to be public
records, available for inspection upon request pursuant to
existing law, but prohibits the written comments from being
displayed to the public on the AG's Internet Web site
during the public review period. Requires the AG to
transmit any written public comments received during the
public review period to the proponents of the proposed
initiative measure.
3)Permits proponents of the proposed initiative measure, during
the public review period, to submit amendments to the measure.
Prohibits the submission of an amendment from extending the
period to prepare the fiscal estimate required by current law.
Prohibits an amendment from being accepted more than five
SB 1253
Page 2
days after the public review period is concluded. Provides
that a proponent shall not be prohibited from proposing a new
initiative measure and requesting that a circulating title and
summary be prepared for that measure pursuant to existing law.
4)Deletes provisions of law that require the fiscal estimate or
opinion of the proposed initiative measure be prepared by the
Department of Finance (DOF) and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee (JLBC) and instead requires the estimate to be
prepared by the DOF and the Legislative Analyst. Requires the
fiscal estimate to be delivered to the AG within 50 days of
the date of receipt of the proposed measure by the AG, instead
of 25 working days from the date the AG receives the final
version of the proposed measure.
5)Requires the ballot title and summary to satisfy all of the
following:
a) 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;
b) If the measure imposes or increases a tax or fee, the
type and amount of the tax or fee must be described;
c) If the measure repeals existing law in an substantial
manner, that fact shall be included; and,
d) If the measure is contingent on the passage or defeat of
another measure or statute, that fact shall be included.
6)Requires the AG to invite and consider public comment in
preparing each ballot title and summary.
7)Requires the Legislature to 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.
8)Extends the period of time that a proposed initiative measure
petition may be circulated from 150 days to 180 days.
SB 1253
Page 3
9)Requires the proponents of a proposed initiative measure to
submit certification, signed under penalty of perjury, to the
Secretary of State (SOS) immediately upon the collection of 25
percent of the number of signatures needed to qualify the
initiative measure for the ballot.
10)Deletes provisions of law that require a proposed initiative
or referendum measure petition to be deemed filed and
qualified on the date the SOS receives a certificate or
certificates from all the county elections officials showing
the petition is signed by the requisite number of voters of
the state and instead provides that upon the issuance of a
certificate of qualification, an initiative or referendum
measure is deemed qualified for the ballot.
11)Requires the SOS, in the case of an initiative measure, to
identify the date of the next statewide general election as
defined by current law, or the next statewide special
election, that will occur not less than 131 days after the
date the SOS receives a petition certified to have been signed
by the requisite number of voters.
12)Requires the SOS, on the 131st day prior to the date of the
election identified, to do all of the following:
a) Issue a certificate of qualification certifying that the
initiative measure, as of that date, is qualified for the
ballot at the election identified;
b) Notify the proponents of the initiative measure and the
elections official of each county that the measure, as of
that date, is qualified for the ballot at the election
identified; and,
c) Include the initiative measure in a list of all
statewide initiative measures that are eligible to be
placed on the ballot at the election identified and publish
the list on the SOS's Internet Web site.
13)Requires the SOS, in the case of a referendum measure, upon
the receipt of a petition certified to have been signed by the
requisite number of qualified voters, to do all of the
following:
a) Issue a certificate of qualification certifying that the
SB 1253
Page 4
referendum measure, as of that date, is qualified for the
ballot;
b) Notify the proponents of the referendum measure and the
elections official of each county that the measure, as of
that date, is qualified for the ballot; and
c) Include the referendum measure in a list of all
statewide referendum measures that are qualified for the
ballot and publish the list on the SOS's Internet Web site.
14)Permits proponents of a statewide initiative or referendum
measure to withdraw the measure after filing the petition with
the appropriate elections official at any time before the
measure qualifies for the ballot.
15)Requires a state or local initiative petition to contain a
statement informing voters that the proponents have the right
to withdraw the petition at any time before the SOS certifies
that the measure has qualified for the ballot.
16)Deletes provisions of law that require Senate and Assembly
committees to hold a joint public hearing on the subject of
each initiative measure that qualifies for the ballot before
the 30th day prior to the date of the election and instead
requires the Senate and Assembly committees to hold a joint
public hearing on the subject of each initiative measure not
later than 131 days before the date of the election at which
the measure is to be voted upon.
17)Requires the SOS to create an Internet Web site, or use other
available technology, to consolidate information about each
state ballot measure in a manner that is easy for voters to
access and understand. Requires the information to include
all of the following:
a) A summary of the ballot measure's content;
b) A current list of the top 10 contributors supporting and
opposing the ballot measure, as compiled by the Fair
Political Practices Commission (FPPC) pursuant to existing
law;
c) A list of each committee primarily formed to support or
SB 1253
Page 5
oppose the ballot measure pursuant to existing law, and a
means to access information about the sources of
contributions reported to each committee; and,
d) Any other information deemed relevant by the SOS.
18)Requires information about sources of contributions to be
updated as new information becomes available to the public
pursuant to existing law.
19)Requires the SOS, if a committee identified above receives at
least one million dollars ($1,000,000) in contributions for an
election, to provide a means to access online information
about the committee's top 10 contributors reported to the FPPC
pursuant to current law. Requires the FPPC to automatically
provide any list of top 10 contributors, and any subsequent
updates to that list, to the SOS for purposes of compliance
with this section.
20)Extends the time period that the SOS must make the ballot
pamphlet available for public examination from 20 days to 25
days.
21)Requires the SOS to establish processes to enable a voter to
do both of the following:
a) Opt out of receiving the state ballot pamphlet by mail
pursuant to existing law; and
b) When the state ballot pamphlet is available, to receive
either the state ballot pamphlet in an electronic format or
an electronic notification making the pamphlet available by
means of online access.
22)Requires the processes described above to become effective
only after the SOS has certified that the state has a
statewide voter registration database that complies with the
federal Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA).
23)Makes it a crime for a proponent of a statewide initiative
measure to seek, solicit, bargain for, or obtain any money or
thing of value of or from any person, firm, or corporation for
the purposes of withdrawing an initiative petition after
filing it with the appropriate elections official.
SB 1253
Page 6
24)Makes other conforming changes.
25)Creates the Ballot Initiative Transparency Act (Act) and
makes the following Legislative findings and declarations:
a) 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.
b) States the intent of the Legislature in enacting this
Act is to update the initiative process, which is more than
100 years old, by doing all of the following:
i) 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 will 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 gives
voters updated information about who is spending large
sums of money to support or oppose each initiative
measure. Voters will also be allowed to request an
electronic copy of ballot materials, thereby reducing the
expenses of printing and mailing.
ii) Providing a voter-friendly explanation of each
initiative measure. This Act requires that ballot
materials be drafted in clear and impartial language.
iii) 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 gives voters an
opportunity to comment on an initiative measure before
the petition is circulated for signatures. Public comment
may address perceived errors in the drafting of, or
perceived unintended consequences of, the proposed
initiative measure. By extending the time for gathering
signatures, this Act will give the Legislature the
SB 1253
Page 7
opportunity to hold earlier public hearings to review
initiative measures. This Act also allows 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.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Defines a ballot title and summary to mean the summary of the
chief purpose and points, including the fiscal impact summary,
of any measure that appears in the state ballot pamphlet.
2)Defines a circulating title and summary to mean the text that
is required to be placed on the petition for signatures that
is either of the following:
a) The summary of the chief purpose and points of a
proposed initiative measure that affects the Constitution
or laws of the state, and the fiscal impact of the proposed
initiative measure; or,
b) The summary of the chief purpose and points of a
referendum measure that affects a law or laws of the state.
3)Requires the proponents of a proposed initiative or referendum
measure to submit the text of the proposed measure to the AG
with a written request that a circulating title and summary of
the measure be prepared, prior to circulating the petition for
signatures. Requires proponents of any initiative measure, at
the time of submitting the text of the proposed initiative
measure to the AG, to pay a fee of two hundred dollars ($200).
4)Requires the AG to give a true and impartial statement of the
purpose of the measure in such language that the ballot title
and summary shall neither be an argument nor be likely to
create prejudice, for or against that proposed measure.
5)Requires the AG to provide a copy of the circulating title and
summary to the SOS within 15 days after receipt of the final
version of a proposed initiative measure, or if a fiscal
estimate or opinion is to be included, within 15 days after
receipt of the fiscal estimate or opinion prepared by the DOF
and the JLBC. Requires the DOF and the JLBC to deliver the
SB 1253
Page 8
fiscal estimate to the AG within 25 working days from the date
of receipt of the final version of the proposed measure.
6)Requires the SOS, upon request of the proponents of an
initiative measure which is to be submitted to the voters, to
review the provisions of the initiative measure after it is
prepared prior to its circulation. Requires the SOS, in
conducting the review, to analyze and comment on the
provisions of the measure with respect to form and language
clarity and request and obtain a statement of fiscal impact
from the Legislative Analyst. Provides that the review
performed shall be for the purpose of suggestion only and
shall not have any binding effect on the proponents of the
initiative measure.
7)Requires the Legislative Counsel to cooperate with the
proponents of an initiative measure in its preparation when
requested in writing by 25 or more electors proposing the
measure when, in the judgment of the Legislative Counsel,
there is reasonable probability that the measure will be
submitted to the voters of the State under the laws relating
to the submission of initiatives.
8)Allows the proponents of a proposed initiative measure to
amend the proposed measure prior to the preparation of a
circulating title and summary, as specified.
9)Defines official summary date to mean the date a circulating
title and summary of a proposed
initiative measure is delivered or mailed by the AG to the
proponents of the proposed measure.
10)Prohibits a petition for a proposed statewide initiative or
referendum from being circulated prior to the official summary
date. Requires a petition with signatures on a proposed
initiative measure to be filed with the county elections
official no later than 150 days from the official summary
date.
11)Requires that state initiative petitions circulated for
signature to include a prescribed notice to the public.
12)Provides that an initiative or referendum measure petition is
deemed filed and the measure qualified on the date that the
SOS receives certificates from all of the county elections
SB 1253
Page 9
officials showing that the petition has been signed by the
requisite number of voters.
13)Requires the SOS to notify the proponents, and immediately
transmit to the elections official or registrar of voter of
every county or city and county in the state a certificate,
when the SOS has received from one or more elections officials
or registrars a petition certified to have been signed by the
requisite number of qualified voters.
14)Requires the SOS, upon certification of an initiative measure
to appear on the ballot, to transmit copies of an initiative
measure and its circulating title and summary to the Senate
and the Assembly.
15)Requires that each house of the Legislature assign the
initiative measure to its appropriate committees. Requires
the committees to hold a joint public hearing on the subject
of the proposed measure prior to the date of the election at
which the measure is to be voted upon. Prohibits a hearing
from being held within 30 days prior to the date of the
election.
16)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,
as specified.
17)Requires the SOS to submit an initiative measure at the next
general election held at least 131 days after it qualifies or
at any special statewide election held prior to that general
election. Permits the Governor to call a special statewide
election for the measure.
18)Requires the SOS to submit a referendum measure at the next
general election held at least 31 days after it qualifies or
at a special statewide election held prior to that general
election. Permits the Governor to call a special statewide
election for the measure.
19)Provides that a "general election" means only the election
held throughout the state on the first Tuesday after the first
Monday in November of each even-numbered year with respect to
an initiative or referendum, as specified. Prohibits an
initiative measure from being submitted to the voters at a
SB 1253
Page 10
statewide special election held less than 131 days after the
date the measure is certified for the ballot.
20)Requires the SOS to disseminate the complete state ballot
pamphlet over the Internet.
21)Requires the SOS to establish a process to enable a voter to
opt out of receiving the state ballot pamphlet by mail, as
specified. Requires this process to become effective only
after the SOS certifies that the state has a statewide voter
registration database that complies with the HAVA.
22)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.
23)Makes certain activities relating to the circulation of an
initiative, referendum, or recall petition a criminal offense.
24)Requires a committee that is primarily formed to support or
oppose a state ballot measure or state candidate, and that
raises one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more for an
election, to maintain an accurate list of the committee's top
10 contributors, as specified by the FPPC. Requires a current
list of the top 10 contributors to be disclosed on the FPPC's
Internet Web site, as specified. Requires the FPPC to update
the top 10 contributor list as specified. Requires the FPPC
to adopt regulations to govern the manner in which the FPPC
displays to top 10 contributor lists. Requires the FPPC to
provide the top 10 contributor lists to the SOS, upon request
of the SOS, for the purpose of additionally posting the
contributor lists on the SOS's Internet Web site.
25)Requires the FPPC to compile, maintain, and display on its
Internet Web site a current list of the top contributors
supporting and opposing each state ballot measure, as
specified.
26)Requires the state ballot pamphlet to contain a written
explanation of the top 10 contributor lists described above,
including a description of the Internet Web site where the
lists are available to the public.
SB 1253
Page 11
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, annual costs of $114,326 to AG's office. (General
Fund)
The AG's office indicates the need for one Personnel Year (PY)
at Associate Governmental Program Analyst position to handle the
additional workload related to monitoring the required public
comment section and associated duties.
The SOS has indicated that amending the initiative qualification
process will have minor cost implications for providing notice
to the Legislature and providing a certification of all voter
initiated measures that qualify for the ballot.
Existing law requires the SOS, upon the completion of VoteCal,
to establish a process to allow voters to opt-out of receiving
the Voter Information Guide (VIG). This bill would require that,
when opting out, the voter would have the option to receive the
VIG "in an electronic format." If this is interpreted to mean
the SOS will be required to email the VIG to voters electing
this option, numerous changes to VoteCal and county election
management systems (EMS) would be required. A website function
would need to be developed for voters to choose a VIG delivery
option of paper, email, or no delivery. Both VoteCal and the
county EMS would need to be modified to capture email addresses
and store VIG delivery options. Other system changes include the
voter registration interface between VoteCal and the EMS,
functions for elections officials to extract email addresses,
record in the voter record system activity, and more. The costs
to modify VoteCal and county EMS systems to send the VIG
electronically to those opting out are estimated to be $500,000.
To the degree that voters elected to either not receive the VIG
or to receive it in electronic format, there would be unknown,
but significant, printing and postage cost savings.
Additionally, the SOS indicates the need for two PY's with a
first year cost of $215,000 and $205,000 ongoing relating to the
provision requiring the online posting of consolidated ballot
measure summaries and the top 10 donors.
COMMENTS :
SB 1253
Page 12
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
Californians, in 1911, won the right to enact legislation
through the initiative process, giving them the power equal
to the legislative branch of government. The initiative
process has been a well-used tool for Californians to act
on a broad range of issues. In recent years, voters have
been asked to decide on an increasing number of highly
complex, sometimes confusing initiatives. Although voters
overwhelmingly continue to support the initiative process,
they're becoming increasingly concerned over various
aspects.
The Public Policy Institute of California's (PPIC) 2013
Statewide Survey results substantiated the public's desire
to maintain the initiative process but with targeted
improvements. The PPIC survey found that 83% of voters "say
the wording of initiatives is often too complicated," 75%
of voters favor "giving initiative sponsors more time to
qualify initiatives if they use only volunteers to gather
signatures," and 77% of voters "support a review and
revision process to avoid legal issues and drafting
errors."
Over the years, the use of the initiative has swelled in
frequency - 112 propositions have been put before voters
since 2002 - and complexity. Both are major concerns among
voters. SB 1253 would require ballot title and summaries
to be written in non-technical terms that are easily
understood by voters.
Additionally, SB 1253 establishes a mechanism for public
input on changes to an initiative before it qualifies for
the ballot. Currently no such mechanism exists. For
example, in 1996, Proposition 212 - an ethics and campaign
reform initiative - included an unintended provision that
repealed a ban on gifts to legislators and other public
officials. Unfortunately, proponents were not allowed to
fix their mistake and the initiative failed.
There is also no mechanism for a proponent to remove a
ballot initiative in the event the proponent comes to some
form of negotiated resolution. Such an instance occurred in
2004. The League of Cities qualified a local government
protection initiative (Proposition 65) on the ballot.
SB 1253
Page 13
Before the election, they then came to a compromise through
a separate measure with the Legislature and Governor, which
also went on the same ballot as Prop 1A. There was no way
for the League of Cities to remove Prop 65, resulting in
them actively opposing it and supporting Prop 1A.
There have been many discussions about the initiative
process and possible improvements. SB 1253 takes a
reasonable approach to initiative reform that addresses the
concerns many Californians have voiced with the current
system.
2)AG's Process for Preparing Ballot Summaries and Titles :
Before circulating a measure, current law requires initiative
proponents to first submit a draft of the proposed initiative
or referendum measure to the AG with a written request that a
circulating title and summary of the chief purpose of the
points of the measure be prepared. At the time of submitting
the draft, current law requires the proponents to pay a $200
fee. Upon receipt of the fee and request, the AG is required
to prepare a circulating title, which will be the official
title and summary of the proposed measure. In addition,
existing law requires the AG to provide a copy of the title
and summary to the SOS within 15 days after receipt of the
final version of the proposed initiative measure. If during
that 15-day period, if the proponents submit amendments, other
than technical, non-substantive amendments, to the initiative
measure, the AG must submit the title and summary to the SOS
within 15 days after receipt of such amendments. In addition,
if a fiscal estimate or opinion is required, additional time
is allotted and existing law requires the DOF and the JLBC to
jointly prepare an estimate, as specified, within 25 working
days from the date they receive the final version of the
proposed measure. In practice, the Legislative Analyst
typically prepares the fiscal estimate on behalf of the JLBC,
and that estimate is reviewed and approved by the DOF.
When the official title and summary is complete, the AG sends it
and the text of the measure to the Senate and the Assembly.
The Legislature may conduct public hearings on the proposed
initiative measure but cannot amend it.
This bill conforms state law to existing practice by requiring
the DOF and the Legislative Analyst to prepare the fiscal
estimate. In addition, this bill increases the time period
SB 1253
Page 14
allotted for the fiscal analysis to be prepared from 25
working days to 50 days.
3)Public Comment : In addition to the changes mentioned above,
this bill makes other substantial changes to the AG's process.
This bill adds a 30 day public review period and requires the
AG to post the text of the proposed initiative measure on the
AG's Internet Web site and provide for the submission of
written public comments on the proposed initiative measure.
However, this bill prohibits the written comments from being
displayed to the public and instead requires the AG to
transmit the written public comments to the proponents of the
measure. According to the author, this establishes a
mechanism for the public to provide input on changes to an
initiative that could help fix perceived drafting errors and
avert perceived unintended consequences of the proposed
initiative measure.
While the author's goal is laudable, nothing in current law
prohibits proponents from posting the initiative text online
for public comment. In addition, there are other avenues in
which initiative proponents can obtain assistance when
drafting the text of their proposed initiative measure.
Current law permits initiative measure proponents to obtain
assistance from the Office of the Legislative Counsel in
drafting the language of the proposed law. In order to do so,
the proponents must obtain the signatures of 25 or more
electors on a request for a draft of the proposed law before
submitting their proposal to the Legislative Counsel.
Moreover, current law allows initiative proponents to submit
the text of their proposed initiative measure to the SOS for
review, as specified. Finally, proponents are permitted to
seek the assistance of their own private counsel to help draft
the text of the proposed law. In practice, initiative
proponents with greater financial resources tend to use
private counsel or legal firms that specialize in certain
issue areas, such as the Political Reform Act, when drafting
the text of a proposed initiative.
4)Possibility of "Spot" Initiatives : During the public review
period, this bill permits proponents of a proposed initiative
measure to submit amendments to the measure. However, this
bill does not place any limitation on the amendments submitted
by the proponents. Consequently, this bill does not prevent a
proponent from receiving public comments on the text of a
SB 1253
Page 15
"spot" initiative, and then submitting a substantially revised
initiative text to the AG after the 30 day public comment
period for the ballot title and summary preparation. This
scenario renders the public review process meaningless.
Moreover, the proponents of a proposed measure could do this
and circumvent paying another $200 filing fee.
Furthermore, because this bill does not prevent the submission
of a "spot" initiative, the time period that the Legislative
Analyst and DOF have to prepare the fiscal estimate could be
negatively impacted. This bill, which extends the time for the
DOF and the Legislative Analyst to prepare the fiscal estimate
from 25 working days to 50 days, also permits the proponents
to submit amendments 5 days after the 30 day public review
period. As a result, if the proponents submit an amendment
that substantively changes the initiative text, the DOF and
Legislative Analyst will only have 15 days to prepare a new
fiscal estimate.
5)New Title and Summary Criteria : When the AG is drafting the
title and summary for a proposed initiative measure, current
law requires the AG to give a true and impartial statement of
the purpose of the measure in such language that the ballot
title and summary shall neither be an argument nor be likely
to create prejudice, for or against that proposed measure.
This bill adds substantial new requirements on how a ballot
title and summary must be drafted. This bill requires the
ballot title and summary to satisfy all of the following
criteria: 1) 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, 2) include the type and amount of the tax
and fee if the measure imposes or increases a tax or fee, 3)
indicate whether the measure repeals existing law in any
substantial manner, and 4) indicate whether the measure is
contingent on the passage or defeat of another measure or
statute. According to the author, this bill aims to result in
ballot titles and summaries that are written in non-technical
terms that are easily understood by voters. Notwithstanding
the author's goal, these new criteria are ambiguous and
subjective, and consequently could result in more litigation
surrounding the ballot titles and summaries created by the AG.
6)Initiative and Referendum Qualification Changes : Current law
SB 1253
Page 16
provides that an initiative or referendum measure petition is
deemed filed and the measure qualified on the date that the
SOS receives certificates from all of the county elections
officials showing that the petition has been signed by the
requisite number of voters. This bill makes significant
changes to that process and instead provides for a two-step
process for initiative measures. The first step requires the
SOS to identify the date of the next statewide general
election or the next statewide special election that will
occur not less than 131 days after the date the SOS receives a
petition certified to have been signed by the requisite number
of qualified voters. Secondly, the SOS waits until the 131st
day prior to the date of the election identified to issue a
certificate of qualification that the measure, as of that
date, is qualified for the ballot at the election identified.
Under the provisions of this bill, an initiative or referendum
measure is deemed to be qualified for the ballot upon the
issuance of a certificate of qualification by the SOS, instead
of being qualified on the date that the SOS receives
certificates from all of the county elections officials
showing that the petition has been signed by the requisite
number of voters.
There could be a significant amount of time between the date
when the SOS receives certificates certifying that the
requisite number of voters had signed the petition and the
131st day prior to the date of the election identified by the
SOS. According to the author, this two-step process is
designed to increase the time between the completion of the
verification of signatures on a petition and the date that the
measure is technically qualified to appear on the ballot.
Allowing a longer period of time between these two steps will
provide the initiative proponents more time to negotiate with
the Legislature or other entities and perhaps come to an
agreement or settlement.
In addition, increasing the time period will also provide the
proponents with the ability to withdraw the initiative if an
agreement or settlement is reached. Current law permits the
proponents of a statewide or local initiative or referendum
measure to withdraw the measure at any time before filing the
petition with the appropriate elections official. This bill
extends that period of time and permits the proponents of a
statewide initiative or referendum to withdraw the measure
after filing the petition with the appropriate elections
SB 1253
Page 17
official at any time before the SOS certifies that the measure
has qualified for the ballot.
It is unclear, however, whether this bill could be interpreted
to be in conflict with the California Constitution. Under
current law, the Governor is permitted to call a statewide
special election for an initiative or referendum measure that
is qualified for the ballot. As mentioned above, even if an
initiative has been signed by the requisite number of
qualified voters, the initiative, under the provisions of this
bill, is not deemed to be qualified until after the SOS issues
a certification of qualification on the 131st day prior to the
identified election. It is unclear whether this new process
negates the Governor's ability to call a statewide special
election for an initiative measure that has received enough
signatures to qualify for the ballot, but is not deemed to be
qualified under the provisions of this bill. In order to
provide legal assurance, the committee may wish to obtain a
legal opinion from the Office of Legislative Counsel to verify
that this bill does not restrict the Governor's ability to
call a statewide special election for an initiative measure.
7)Increased Timeframes : Current law requires a petition for a
proposed initiative measure to be filed with the county
elections official not later than 150 days from the official
summary date. This bill extends the circulation time period
to 180 days. While the addition of 30 days may be minor, it
is unknown how this additional time will impact the current
initiative process. Presumably adding extra days to the
circulation period could increase the number of initiatives on
the ballot.
In addition, current law requires the SOS to make a copy of the
state ballot pamphlet available for public examination not
less than 20 days before the SOS submits the ballot pamphlet
to the State Printer. This bill extends the public display
period to 25 days.
While both of these time changes may seem minor, in fact they
could have a significant impact on the current initiative
process. For example, there are many tasks that must be
completed and important deadlines that must be met before the
final version of the ballot pamphlet goes on public display.
Conversely, there are tasks and many statutory deadlines that
must be met after the public display period. For instance, if
SB 1253
Page 18
there are any legal challenges to the contents of the SOS's
ballot pamphlet or AG's ballot labels and ballot titles and
summaries, these challenges must be resolved in court. In
addition, time needs to be allocated for the State Printer to
print millions of state ballot pamphlets and for the final
version of the state ballot pamphlet to be translated into
nine foreign languages as required by law. Aside from those
tasks, there are other statutory deadlines that must be met.
For example, current law requires county elections official to
finish sending military and overseas ballots 45 days before
election day. Consequently, the lengthening of any statutory
requirement could reduce the time available for the SOS to
prepare the statewide ballot pamphlet, and may reduce the time
available to county elections officials to prepare, print, and
mail sample ballots, and print the official ballots for their
voters.
8)Related Legislation : SB 844 (Pavley), which is also being
heard in this committee today, contains similar provisions to
portions of this bill. SB 844 requires the SOS, among other
provisions, to create an Internet Web site, as specified, and
consolidate information about each ballot measure in a manner
that is easy for voters to access and understand on any
computer system platform. Specifically, SB 844 requires the
web site to include, among other information, a summary of
each ballot measure, a current list of the top 10 contributors
supporting or opposing a ballot measure, as specified, a list
of each committee primarily formed to support or oppose a
ballot measure, as specified, and for committees primarily
formed to support or oppose a state ballot measure that raise
$1,000,000 or more for an election, a list of the committee's
top 10 contributors as provided by the FPPC, as specified.
9)Previous Legislation : SB 27 (Correa), Chapter 16, Statues of
2014, requires a primarily formed committee formed to support
or oppose a state ballot measure or state candidate, and that
raises $1,000,000 or more for an election, to maintain an
accurate list of their top 10 contributors and to disclose
those lists on the FPPC's Internet Web site, as specified.
Additionally, SB 27 requires the FPPC to compile, maintain,
and display on its Internet Web site a current list of the top
contributors supporting and opposing each state ballot
measure, as specified, among other provisions.
AB 2524 (Evans) of 2010, which was held on the Senate
SB 1253
Page 19
Appropriations suspense file, would have required the AG to
submit a copy of the text of a proposed initiative measure to
the SOS for posting on the SOS's Internet Web site for 30 days
to facilitate public comment prior to the AG drafting the
ballot title and summary for the proposed measure.
AB 1245 (Laird) of 2003, which was vetoed by Governor Gray
Davis, would have required a 30 day public comment period
prior to the AG drafting the ballot title and summary. In his
veto message, Governor Davis stated that, "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."
SB 1715 (Margett) of 2006, which failed passage in the Senate
Elections & Constitutional Amendments Committee, would have
extended the signature gathering period from 150 days to 365
days.
10)Political Reform Act of 1974 : California voters passed an
initiative, Proposition 9, in 1974 that created the FPPC and
codified significant restrictions and prohibitions on
candidates, officeholders, and lobbyists. That initiative is
commonly known as the Political Reform Act (PRA). Amendments
to the PRA that are not submitted to the voters, such as those
contained in this bill, must further the purposes of the
proposition and require a two-thirds vote of each house of the
Legislature.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Common Cause (sponsor)
AARP California
American Association of University Women
California Chamber of Commerce
California School Employees Association
Disability Rights California
Sierra Club California
Opposition
SB 1253
Page 20
California Teachers Association
Analysis Prepared by : Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094