BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1253|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1253
Author: Steinberg (D), et al.
Amended: 8/22/14
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONSTITUTIONAL AMEND. COMM. : 4-1, 4/22/14
AYES: Torres, Hancock, Jackson, Padilla
NOES: Anderson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/23/14
AYES: De León, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Gaines
SENATE FLOOR : 29-8, 5/29/14
AYES: Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De
León, DeSaulnier, Evans, Galgiani, Hancock, Hernandez, Hill,
Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Mitchell,
Monning, Padilla, Pavley, Roth, Steinberg, Torres, Wolk,
Wyland
NOES: Anderson, Fuller, Gaines, Knight, Morrell, Nielsen,
Vidak, Walters
NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon, Wright, Yee
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 55-23, 8/27/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Initiative measures
SOURCE : California Common Cause
League of Women Voters of California
CONTINUED
SB 1253
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill makes several changes to the initiative
process including providing a 30-day public review process,
extending the timeframe allowed for circulating a petition, and
allowing the withdrawal of a petition at any time before the
measure qualifies for the ballot; and makes several other
changes to the procedures and requirements for placing an
initiative petition measure on the ballot.
Assembly Amendments add coauthors; require the Secretary of
State (SOS) to identify the date of the next statewide election
and, on the 131st day prior to that election, to issue a
certificate of qualification certifying that the initiative
measure is qualified for the ballot at that election; provide
that the initiative measure will be deemed qualified for the
ballot for purposes of specified provisions of the California
Constitution; clarify proponents of the proposed initiative
measure may submit amendments to the measure that further its
purposes; require the fiscal estimate to be delivered within 50
days of the date of receipt of the proposed measure by the
Attorney General, instead of 25 working days, as specified; add
double-jointing language with AB 2219 (Fong), SB 1043 (Torres),
and SB 844 (Pavley); add contingent enactment language to avoid
implementation problems with SB 1442 (Lara); and make other
conforming and technical changes.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Establishes specific procedures and requirements for placing
an initiative petition measure on the ballot.
2.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.
3.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.
4.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
SB 1253
Page
3
pamphlet by mail.
5.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.
6.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.
7.Requires that state initiative petitions circulated for
signature include a prescribed notice to the public.
8.Makes certain activities relating to the circulation of an
initiative referendum, or recall petition a criminal offense.
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 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
SB 1253
Page
4
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
SOS immediately upon the collection of 25% 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
either the state ballot pamphlet in an electronic format or
SB 1253
Page
5
an electronic notification making the pamphlet available by
means of online access.
1. 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.
2. 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 purpose of withdrawing an initiative petition after
filing it with the appropriate elections official.
3. Makes other conforming changes.
4. Contains double-jointing language to avoid chaptering
problems with AB 2219 (Fong), SB 844 (Pavley), and SB 1043
(Torres) of the current legislative session.
5. Contains contingent enactment language to avoid
implementation problems with SB 1442 (Lara) of the current
legislative session.
6. Makes findings and declarations regarding 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.
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;
SB 1253
Page
6
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
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
SB 1253
Page
7
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.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
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.
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.
The SOS anticipates minor costs to notify voters
electronically that the state ballot pamphlet is available
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/27/14)
California Common Cause (co-source)
League of Women Voters of California (co-source)
AARP
AAUW
Bay Area Council
California Business Roundtable
California Calls
California Chamber of Commerce
California Council of Church IMPACT
California Democratic Party
California Forward Action Fund
California School Employees Association
California State Employees Association
Chino Valley Dem Club
SB 1253
Page
8
Dems of North Orange County
Laguna Woods Democratic Club
Los Angeles Business Council
NAACP
RFK Democratic Club
San Gabriel Valley Democratic Women's Club
Sonoma County Democratic Club
Think Long Committee for California
Yucaipa-Calimesa Democratic Club
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/27/14)
California Teachers Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
The changes in this bill are similar to the recommendations
made twenty years ago by the Citizen's Commission on Ballot
Initiatives. The current 150 days to gather signature does
not provide enough time for public input or changes to the
initiative language. This bill 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
SB 1253
Page
9
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.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California Teachers Association
states in opposition, "Our State Council of Education members
expressed grave concerns about the extension of time SB 1253
authorizes the circulation of a proposed initiative given that
previous initiative proposals have resulted in a variety of
'unintended consequences' including but not limited to the
opportunity for non-legal campaign contributions to influence
election outcomes; the increased possibility of fraud in the
signature gathering process; and the likelihood that initiatives
that adversely affect 'good government' will qualify for the
ballot."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 55-23, 8/27/14
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta,
Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Chesbro, Cooley, Dababneh, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong,
Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Hall,
Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lowenthal,
Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Olsen, Pan, Perea, John
A. Pérez, V. Manuel Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Chávez, Conway, Dahle,
Donnelly, Fox, Beth Gaines, Gonzalez, Grove, Hagman, Jones,
Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Nestande,
Patterson, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Harkey, Vacancy
RM:nl 8/27/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
SB 1253
Page
10