BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 254
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 15, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
254 (Roger Hernández) - As Amended April 7, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Elections and Redistricting |Vote:|5 - 2 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill requires all cities, school districts, community
college districts, and special districts, as of January 1, 2020,
to hold their general elections at the same time as the
statewide primary or statewide general election, i.e. in
AB 254
Page 2
even-numbered years, or on the first Tuesday after the first
Monday in June or November of odd-numbered years.
FISCAL EFFECT:
1)The bill would mainly impact about 20 charter cities and 40
general law cities who currently conduct their elections on
dates other than those specified in this bill. Any additional
costs to these cities associated with moving their election
dates would be nonreimbursable.
2)The state could incur litigation cost if any of the impacted
charter cities were to challenge the bill's mandate to change
their election dates. (See Comment #2) These costs are
unknown, but could exceed $150,000.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. According to the author, "Multiple studies in the
last 15 years have determined that [the] election date is a
key factor in determining voter turnout. According to the
Public Policy Institute of California, holding elections 'on
cycle' is the largest single factor that affects voter
turnout. Elections held 'on-cycle', help constituents
establish voting as habit and they are more widely publicized.
Both of these factors contribute to higher turnout."
2)LA County. About 90% of the cities impacted by this bill are
in Los Angeles County. The county still uses a variant of its
AB 254
Page 3
1985-era voting system, though it is currently in the planning
and design stage for developing and transitioning to a new
system, which is intended to have sufficient capacity to
accommodate consolidation of elections with local districts
and municipalities. The most recent amendments delay the
requirements in the bill to 2020, at which time LA's system is
expected to be operational.
3)Charter Cities. The California Constitution gives cities and
counties the ability to adopt charters, which give those
jurisdictions greater autonomy over local affairs. Charter
cities, in particular, are granted a great deal of autonomy
over the rules governing the election of municipal officers.
By limiting the dates on which charter cities can conduct
municipal elections, this bill goes to the heart of the
autonomy granted to charter cities in the California
Constitution to determine the times at which municipal
officers are elected. The analysis of this bill by the
Assembly Committee on Elections and Redistricting finds " it
is unclear whether this bill can be made applicable to charter
cities, and the courts may find that this bill impermissibly
interferes with the municipal affairs of charter cities."
4)Previous Legislation. Last year a similar bill, AB 2550
(Hernández), was held on this committee's Suspense file. AB
2550 also required that a notice of the election date changes
be mailed to all registered voters in the impacted
jurisdictions.
Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 254
Page 4