BILL ANALYSIS Ó
ACA 7
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 15, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Shirley Weber, Chair
ACA 7
(Gonzalez) - As Introduced February 11, 2016
SUBJECT: Voting age: school and community college district
governing board elections.
SUMMARY: Permits 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in school and
community college district governing board elections.
Specifically, this measure proposes a constitutional amendment
that would permit a United States citizen who is at least 16
years of age and a resident of California to vote in a school or
community college district governing board election in which
that person would be qualified to vote based on residence.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Permits a person who is a United States citizen, a resident of
California, not in prison or on parole for the conviction of a
felony, and is at least 18 years of age at the time of the
next election to register to vote in any local, state, or
federal election.
2)Allows a person who is at least 16 years old and otherwise
meets all voter eligibility requirements to register to vote.
ACA 7
Page 2
Provides that the registration will be deemed effective as
soon as the affiant is 18 years old at the time of the next
election. Provides this option will be operative when the
Secretary of State certifies that the state has a statewide
voter registration database that complies with specified
provisions of federal law.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose of the Measure: According to the author:
ACA 7 would allow individuals age 16 years and older
to vote in their local school board and community
college district governing board elections.
Currently, 16- to 18-year-olds continue to increase
their advocacy at local and statewide levels, but lack
actual electoral power and have traditionally low
engagement in politics. The 18-year-old voting age
requirement does not allow many young people to cast
votes until they are moved out of their family's home
and out of high school - two environments where they
are able to confer with parents and teachers about the
civic importance of voting and the role of government
on our lives. Furthermore, once able to vote at age
18, many face additional obstacles, such as moving
frequently, which make beginning to vote at this age
difficult.
ACA 7
Page 3
Across the nation and worldwide, a movement has been
growing to more fully engage young people in democracy
and democratic processes. In 2014, the United Nations
called for countries to increase their engagement
efforts with young people in democratic processes.
Alaska, Arizona, New Mexico and Washington have all
had proposals to lower the voting age, and local
efforts in California have begun progressing as well.
Two cities in Maryland - Takoma Park and Hyattsville -
have actually had success in lowering the voting age
by amending their city charters. In 2013, the turnout
of newly enfranchised voters in Takoma Park was nearly
double the turnout of voters over age 18.
Research suggests that not only do 16- and
17-year-olds have the maturity to make these informed
political decisions, but that a lower voting age could
lead to instilled voting habits in these young adults
and greater civic engagement throughout their lives.
Some academic research even suggests that a lower
voting age may lead to an increase in parental voter
turnout as 16- and 17-year-olds bring home discussions
of civic engagement and their opportunity to
participate.
ACA 7
Page 4
In particular in this discussion, it is important to
highlight the clear nexus of enfranchisement and local
educational boards. Young adults must rely on their
parents to vote for the best choices in board members,
while others may have parents that are unable to vote
due to citizenship status or other reasons. This
leaves these students whom society has deemed can
drive, work, and pay taxes without a means to have
meaningful representation in decisions like the
formation of Local Control and Accountability Plans
(LCAPs) which impact their daily lives in school.
While students may engage in protests, show up to
meetings, or even form youth committees, to engage in
the process, none of these actions allow them to exert
the accountability over educational boards that a vote
does. The lack of meaningful representation of these
students and in many cases even their parents may mean
that these local educational decisions are neglecting
a significant part of the community. Being able to
vote in local educational board elections would give
these young adults a true voice, and force local
educational boards to be accountable to their true
constituencies.
2)Age of Majority: This measure breaks with traditional notions
of the age of majority and the responsibilities and privileges
attached thereto. For the most part, California law does not
allow minors to enter into civil contracts, including
marriage, or to be held to the same standards of
accountability in criminal matters, absent extenuating
circumstances.
With a few limited exceptions (most notably the legal drinking
ACA 7
Page 5
age and, as of earlier this month, the legal smoking age),
California confers the legal rights and responsibilities
attendant with adulthood on those individuals who are 18 years
of age or older. The committee should consider whether it is
appropriate to confer one specific legal right-the right to
vote-on certain individuals who have not yet reached the age
of majority.
3)Limited Voting Rights: While this measure would establish a
framework under which 16- and 17-year olds could be allowed to
vote in elections for public office, those 16- and 17-year
olds would have only limited voting rights. Voters under the
age of 18 would be able to vote for school board and community
college district board members, but would not be able to vote
on other offices or measures that appear on the ballot.
Under existing state law, eligibility to participate in public
elections generally is governed by a single set of
qualifications: namely, that a person must be a United States
citizen, at least 18 years of age, a resident of the
jurisdiction, not mentally incompetent, and not imprisoned or
on parole for the conviction of a felony. (The one notable
exception is for elections in landowner voter districts, where
only landowners in the district are eligible to vote in
elections conducted by the district. The United States
Supreme Court has found that landowner voter districts can be
constitutionally permissible only where a district does not
"exercise what might be thought of as 'normal governmental'
authority, but its actions disproportionately affect
landowners." Salyer Land Co. v. Tulare Water District (1973)
410 US 719.) Having different qualifications for voting on
different offices or measures, instead of a uniform set of
voting qualifications, is a significant departure from
existing policy in California.
ACA 7
Page 6
4)Election Administration Complications: By allowing 16- and
17-year olds to vote in certain elections, but not in others,
this measure could complicate the administration of elections.
For example, in school districts that consolidate their
governing board elections with statewide elections, this
measure presumably would require the creation of a separate
ballot that contains school district governing board races,
but not the other races and measures that appear on the ballot
at the same consolidated election. Poll workers would need to
be trained and new procedures would need to be developed to
ensure that each voter received the correct ballot.
5)San Francisco Charter Amendment: Last month, the San
Francisco County Board of Supervisors voted to place a charter
amendment on the ballot at this November's statewide general
election that would authorize 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in
municipal elections. The charter amendment-if approved by
voters-would allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in elections
for the offices of Assessor-Recorder, City Attorney, District
Attorney, Mayor, Public Defender, Sheriff, Treasurer, and
members of the Board of Supervisors, Board of Education, and
Governing Board of the Community College District, as well as
any local measures that appear on the ballot. The charter
amendment would not permit 16- or 17-year-olds to vote for
federal or state office, or to vote on state ballot measures.
Article II, Section 2 of the California Constitution provides,
"A United States citizen 18 years of age and resident in this
State may vote." Because this provision of the Constitution
describes voter qualifications, it is unclear whether the San
Francisco charter amendment may extend the right to vote in
local elections to 16- and 17-year-olds absent an amendment to
the Constitution.
6)Amendment Requested: The California School Boards Association
ACA 7
Page 7
(CSBA), which has a position of "support if amended" on this
measure, urges an amendment that would expand the scope of
this constitutional amendment to permit 16- and 17-year-olds
to be granted voting rights for "all non-federal elected
positions and ballot measures." In its letter to the
committee outlining its position, CSBA writes:
ACA 7 presupposes that 16- and 17-year-olds are
capable voters, but only allows them to vote in a
limited capacity. This establishes two different
classes of voters in California: one that has full
voting rights, and one that does not. This raises
significant questions of fairness and equality not
just to the voters themselves, but to the individual
candidates that would be elected by those voters.
Under ACA 7, school and community college board
members would be subject to a different electorate
than every other elected official at every level of
state and local government, creating the unfounded
perception that school board members fall into a
different, or even a "lower" class of government than
does any other elected position. This undermines the
role of governing board members statewide.
7)Related Legislation: AB 2517 (Thurmond), which is pending in
this committee, allows a charter city to permit 16- and
17-year olds to vote in school district elections if those
elections are governed by the city's charter. AB 2517 was
heard in this committee on April 27, 2016, but was pulled by
the author prior to a vote. AB 2517 is no longer eligible to
be acted on by this committee or by the Assembly absent a
suspension of the Joint Rules.
ACA 2 (Mullin), which is pending on the Inactive File on the
ACA 7
Page 8
Assembly Floor, allows a person who is 17 years of age, and
who will be 18 years old at the time of the next general
election, to vote in any intervening primary or special
election that occurs before the next general election.
8)Previous Legislation: ACA 7 (Mullin) of 2013, ACA 2
(Furutani) of 2009, ACA 17 (Mullin) of 2005, and ACA 25
(Mullin) of 2004, all were similar to ACA 2 of the current
legislative session (as described above). All of these
measures were approved by the Assembly Elections &
Redistricting Committee (or, in the case of ACA 25 of 2004,
the Assembly Elections, Redistricting, and Constitutional
Amendments Committee), but none of the measures passed off the
Assembly Floor.
SCA 19 (Vasconcellos) of 2004, initially proposed to lower the
voting age to 14 years, with votes by 14- and 15-year olds
counting as one-quarter of a vote, and votes by 16- and
17-year olds counting as one-half of a vote. SCA 19
subsequently was amended instead to lower the voting age to
16, with all votes counting equally as a single vote. SCA 19
failed passage in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
ACA 23 (Speier) of 1995, proposed lowering the voting age to 14,
but was never set for a hearing in the Assembly Elections,
Reapportionment, and Constitutional Amendments Committee.
9)Approval by Voters: As a constitutional amendment, this
measure requires the approval of the voters to take effect.
Legislation making statutory changes necessary to implement
this measure would also be required.
Existing law requires measures submitted to the people by the
ACA 7
Page 9
Legislature to appear on the ballot of the first statewide
election occurring at least 131 days after the adoption of the
proposal by the Legislature. The statutory deadline to place
a measure on the ballot for the November 8, 2016, statewide
election is June 30, 2016. If this measure is chaptered after
June 30, 2016, it would appear on the ballot at the 2018
statewide primary election, or at any statewide special
election that is held prior to that date, but at least 131
days after this measure is chaptered.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Alliance for Boys and Men of Color
Alliance San Diego
AYPAL
Brothers, Sons, Selves Coalition
California Equity Leaders Network
California Immigrant Policy Center
California School Boards Association (if amended)
ACA 7
Page 10
California Walks
Californians for Justice
Center for Community Action & Environmental Justice
Children's Defense Fund - California
Fathers and Families of San Joaquin
Fresno Interdenominational Refugee Ministries
The Greenlining Institute
InnerCity Struggle
Khmer Girls in Action
Movement Strategy Center
Policy Link
Service Employees International Union, California State Council
ACA 7
Page 11
Social Justice Learning Institute
Southeast Asia Resource Action Center
Urban Habitat
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by:Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094