BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 415|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 415
Author: Hueso (D), et al.
Amended: 4/28/15
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-1, 4/21/15
AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu
NOES: Anderson
SUBJECT: Voter participation
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill prohibits a local political subdivision from
holding an election on a date other than on a statewide election
date if it has previously resulted in voter turnout that was at
least 25% lower than the average turnout within that political
subdivision for the previous four statewide general elections.
This bill authorizes a voter who resides in a political
subdivision where a violation is alleged to file an action to
enforce this prohibition and requires a court to implement
specified remedies including a change of election dates.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Provides that the following dates are "established election
dates:"
SB 415
Page 2
a) The second Tuesday of April in each even-numbered year;
b) The first Tuesday after the first Monday in March of
each odd-numbered year;
c) The first Tuesday after the first Monday in June in each
year; and,
d) The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in
each year.
2)Requires all state, county, municipal, district, and school
district elections to be held on an established election date,
except as specified.
3)Provides, generally, that any local political subdivision may
submit a resolution to the relevant county board of
supervisors that its regular elections be held on the same day
as a statewide election. The board of supervisors must
approve the resolution unless it finds that the ballot style,
voting equipment, or computer capacity is such that additional
elections or materials cannot be handled.
This bill:
1)Creates the California Voter Participation Rights Act, which
prohibits a political subdivision from holding an election
other than on a statewide election date if holding an election
on a non-concurrent date has previously resulted in a
significant decrease in voter turnout.
2)Defines "significant decrease in voter turnout" as the voter
turnout for a regularly-scheduled election in a political
subdivision that is at least 25% less than the average voter
turnout within that political subdivision for the previous
four statewide general elections.
3)Authorizes a voter who resides in a political subdivision
where a violation is alleged to file an action in the superior
court of the county in which the political subdivision is
located.
SB 415
Page 3
4)Requires, upon finding of a violation, the court to implement
appropriate remedies, including the imposition of concurrent
election dates for future elections and the upgrade of voting
equipment or systems to do so. In imposing remedies, a court
may also require a county board of supervisors to approve
consolidation.
5)Defines "political subdivision" as a geographic area of
representation created for the provision of government
services, including, but not limited to, a city, a school
district, a community college district, or other district
organized pursuant to state law.
6)Defines "voter turnout" as the percentage of voters who are
eligible to cast ballots within a given political subdivision
who voted (i.e., registered voters within the affected
jurisdiction).
7)Requires the court to allow the prevailing plaintiff other
than the state or political subdivision thereof, reasonable
attorney's fees and litigation expenses including, but not
limited to, expert witness fees and expenses as part of the
costs. Also requires prevailing defendant to not recover any
costs, unless the court finds the action to be frivolous,
unreasonable, or without foundation.
8)Does not apply to special elections.
9)Becomes operative on January 1, 2018.
Background
History of established election dates. In 1973, the Legislature
approved and Governor Reagan signed SB 230 (Biddle, Chapter
1146, Statutes of 1973), which created "regular election dates"
(which subsequently were renamed "established election dates").
The concept behind having a regular election schedule that
governed when most elections would be held was that such a
schedule would encourage election consolidations, thereby
potentially reducing election costs, and could encourage greater
voter participation because voters would become used to voting
on these regular election dates. SB 230 created five
SB 415
Page 4
established election dates in each two-year cycle-three in
even-numbered years (in March, June, and November), and two in
odd-numbered years (in March and November).
One year after established election dates were first created, AB
4180 (Keysor, Chapter 1386, Statutes of 1974) added an
additional established election date in May of odd-numbered
years. The rationale for adding an established election date
was that the eight-month gap between established election dates
in March and November of odd-numbered years delayed many special
local elections from taking place in a timely manner, including
elections to fill vacancies, annexation elections, bond
elections, and tax rate elections. Since that time, the exact
dates that are established election dates have fluctuated, often
moving to reflect changes in the date of the statewide primary
election held in even-numbered years, though generally there
have been at least three established election dates in each
year.
Having multiple established election dates in each year, but
specifying that many types of elections must be held on an
established election date, reflects an attempt to balance the
desire to hold most elections on a predictable, regular
schedule, while still providing the flexibility to ensure that
elections can occur in a timely manner when necessary.
General election turnout vs. off-year local election turnout.
According to statistics published by the Secretary of State,
average turnout among registered voters for the last four
statewide general elections was 63.39%. Conversely, the average
turnout for off-year local elections is usually much lower. For
instance, turnout of registered voters for the March 3, 2015
municipal election conducted in the City of Los Angeles was only
9.9%. The November 5, 2013 municipal election in the City and
County of San Francisco was significantly better than Los
Angeles but still only 29.3% of registered voters.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:NoLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified4/28/15)
SB 415
Page 5
California Common Cause
OPPOSITION: (Verified4/27/15)
Desert Water Agency
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:
Voter turnout in local elections held on odd-numbered years
has been abysmal. On average, less than 30% of registered
voters have come out to vote in local odd-year elections. As
a result of low voter turnout, the voting population often
does not look like the general public as a whole and neither
does the city council. While there is no silver bullet, one
way to increase voter turnout in local elections is to hold
them concurrently with statewide and federal elections, where
voter turnout is often twice as high.
Elections held on the same date can help reduce voter fatigue
and make voting more habit forming, while saving local
government on administrative costs. For example, the City of
San Diego in 2012 spent 42 cents per voter on elections and
saw a 70% voter turnout. The City of Los Angeles in 2011
spent $39.35 per voter for a voter turnout of 14.1%.
This bill is attempting to remedy the low voter turnout of
local elections held in off-cycle election years by giving
individuals the right to challenge local government for
holding costly elections with little voter turnout.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSTION: The Desert Water Agency states in
opposition, "Ballots with more races on the ballot require more
effort on the part of citizens. Voter attention to the work of
SB 415
Page 6
the Agency and voter participation in its elections are of
paramount importance. The enactment of SB 415 might force the
Agency to change its election date to the statewide election
date. Voter fatigue would likely counteract any benefit of
forcing such a change as Agency elections would fall toward the
end of a crowded ballot."
Prepared by:Frances Tibon Estoista/ E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106
5/1/15 14:26:38
**** END ****