BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1253
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1253 (Steinberg)
As Amended August 21, 2014
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE : 29-8
ELECTIONS 5-1 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fong, Bonta, Hall, Perea, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Rodriguez | |Bradford, |
| | | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Eggman, Gomez, Holden, |
| | | |Pan, Quick, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Donnelly |Nays:|Bigelow, Donnelly, Jones, |
| | | |Linder, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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, as specified.
3)Permits proponents of the proposed initiative measure, during
the public review period, to submit amendments to the measure,
as specified, that are reasonably germane to the theme,
purpose, or subject of the initiative measure as originally
proposed. Prohibits amendments from being submitted if the
initiative measure as originally proposed would not effect a
substantive change in law.
4)Deletes provisions of law that require the fiscal estimate or
opinion of the proposed initiative measure be prepared by the
SB 1253
Page 2
Department of Finance (DOF) and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee 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)Extends the period of time that a proposed initiative measure
petition may be circulated from 150 days to 180 days.
6)Requires the proponents of a proposed initiative measure to
submit a 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.
7)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 committees to hold the hearing after the
proponents certify that they have collected 25% of the number
of required signatures, but not later than 131 days before the
date of the election at which the measure is to be voted upon.
8)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
131st day before the election at which the measure will appear
on the ballot.
9)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, as specified.
10)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
SB 1253
Page 3
either the state ballot pamphlet in an electronic format or
an electronic notification making the pamphlet available by
means of online access.
11)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.
12)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.
13)Makes other conforming changes.
14)Contains double-jointing language to avoid chaptering
problems with AB 2219 (Fong), SB 844 (Pavley), and SB 1043
(Torres) of the current legislative session.
15)Contains contingent enactment language to avoid
implementation problems with SB 1442 (Lara) of the current
legislative session.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)The SOS will incur minor additional costs ($40,000 annually)
to create a website and update information on each ballot
measure. All other administrative costs to the SOS will be
minor and absorbable.
2)Extending the petition circulation period by 30 days will
increase the likelihood that more measures will qualify for
the ballot. On the other hand, providing the opportunity for
legislative review during the circulation period could lead to
agreements with the Legislature and withdrawal of some
measures from circulation. The net impact of these two
changes is unknown, however, the average cost for including in
the state ballot pamphlet the text, analysis, and arguments
for and against a measure are around $600,000 per measure.
3)The SOS anticipates minor costs to notify voters
electronically that the state ballot pamphlet is available
SB 1253
Page 4
online. To the extent voters elect not to receive the state
ballot pamphlet via the mail due to the availability of an
online version, savings could far outweigh the costs of the
email notification.
4)The AG could incur annual General Fund costs of up to $200,000
if two positions are needed for additional initiative workload
related to the public comment periods.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "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.'
"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."
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Nichole Becker / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094
FN: 0005151