BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 415|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 415
Author: Hueso (D), et al.
Amended: 6/23/15
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-1, 4/21/15
AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu
NOES: Anderson
SENATE FLOOR: 24-13, 5/7/15
AYES: Allen, Beall, Block, De León, Galgiani, Hall, Hancock,
Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva,
McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Pavley, Roth,
Wieckowski, Wolk
NOES: Anderson, Bates, Berryhill, Cannella, Gaines, Huff,
Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Runner, Stone, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuller, Liu
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 45-30, 7/16/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Voter participation
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill prohibits a local government, beginning
January 1, 2018, from holding an election on any date other than
a statewide election date if doing so in the past has resulted
in turnout that is at least 25 percent below the average turnout
in that jurisdiction in the last four statewide general
elections, as specified
SB 415
Page 2
Assembly Amendments permit a political subdivision to continue
to hold elections on dates other than statewide election dates
after January 1, 2018, notwithstanding the provisions of this
bill, if the political subdivision adopts a plan not later than
January 1, 2018, to consolidate future elections with the
statewide election not later than the November 8, 2022,
statewide election.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1) Provides that the following dates are "established election
dates":
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,
SB 415
Page 3
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. Provides that the following types
of elections, among others, are not required to be held on an
established election date:
a) Any special election called by the Governor;
b) Elections held in chartered cities or chartered
counties in which the charter provisions are inconsistent
with state election laws;
c) School governing board elections conducted pursuant to
specified provisions of law;
d) Elections required or permitted to be held by a school
district located in a charter city or county when the
election is consolidated with a regular city or county
election held in a jurisdiction that includes 95 percent
or more of the school district's population;
SB 415
Page 4
e) County, municipal, district, and school district
initiative, referendum, or recall elections;
f) Any election conducted solely by mailed ballot pursuant
to specified provisions of law; and,
g) Elections held pursuant to specified provisions of law
on the question of whether to authorize school bonds.
3) Requires a general law city to hold its general municipal
election on an established election date or on the second
Tuesday in April of each odd-numbered year, except as
specified.
4) Requires a school district, community college district, or
county board of education to hold the regular election to
select governing board members on the first Tuesday after the
first Monday of November in each odd-numbered year, or at the
same time as the statewide direct primary election, the
statewide general election, or the general municipal
election, except as specified.
5) Requires the general district election held to elect members
of the governing board of a special district to be held on
SB 415
Page 5
the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each
odd-numbered year, unless the principal act of the district
provides for the general district election to be held on a
different established election date, or on an established
mailed ballot election date, as specified. Permits a special
district to adopt a resolution requiring its general district
election to be held on the same day as the statewide general
election, upon approval of the county board of supervisors,
as specified.
6) Permits a county or a city to provide for its own governance
through the adoption of a charter by a majority vote of its
electors voting on the question.
7) Permits a city charter to provide for the conduct of city
elections. Grants plenary authority, subject to limited
restrictions, for a city's charter to provide for the manner
in which and the method by which municipal officers are
elected.
8) Provides that a legally adopted city charter supersedes all
laws inconsistent with that charter with respect to municipal
affairs.
This bill:
1) 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
SB 415
Page 6
turnout that is at least 25% less than the average voter
turnout within that political subdivision for the previous
four statewide general elections. Permits a voter who
resides in a political subdivision where a violation of this
requirement is alleged to file an action in the superior
court in the county in which the political subdivision is
located.
2) Permits a political subdivision to continue to hold elections
on dates other than statewide election dates after January 1,
2018, notwithstanding the provisions of this bill, if the
political subdivision adopts a plan not later than January 1,
2018, to consolidate future elections with the statewide
election not later than the November 8, 2022, statewide
election.
3) Requires a court, upon finding a violation of this bill, 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. Permits a
court to require a county board of supervisors to approve the
consolidation of elections, as specified, when imposing
remedies.
4) Permits a prevailing plaintiff party in an action brought
pursuant to this bill, other than the state or a political
subdivision of the state, to recover reasonable attorney's
fees and litigation expenses, including, but not limited to,
expert witness fees and expenses as part of the costs, as
specified. Prohibits a prevailing defendant party from
recovering any costs unless the court finds the action to be
frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.
5) Provides that the provisions of this bill do not apply to
special elections.
6) Provides that this bill shall become operative on January 1,
SB 415
Page 7
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
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
SB 415
Page 8
elections can occur in a timely manner when necessary.
On-Cycle vs. Off-Cycle Elections: Although existing law
generally requires that regularly scheduled county elections be
held at the same time as statewide elections, other local
jurisdictions (e.g., cities, school districts, and special
districts) have greater flexibility when deciding when to hold
regularly scheduled elections that are held to elect governing
board members. Elections that are held at the same time as
statewide elections are often referred to as "on-cycle"
elections, while elections held at other times are often
referred to as "off-cycle" elections.
The degree to which local governments hold their elections
on-cycle or off-cycle varies significantly throughout the state.
Roughly 30 percent of the counties in California do not have
regularly-scheduled off-cycle elections, because all the local
jurisdictions in those counties hold their governing board
elections at the same time as statewide elections. In other
counties, large numbers of cities, school districts, and special
districts hold their governing board elections off-cycle in
November of odd-numbered years. A smaller number of local
jurisdictions hold their regularly scheduled governing board
elections on other permitted off-cycle dates.
Charter Cities: As noted above, 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. In fact, the Constitution grants "plenary authority,"
subject to limited restrictions, for a city charter to provide
"the manner in which, the method by which, the times at which,
and the terms for which the several municipal officers and
employees?shall be elected or appointed." The Constitution
further provides that properly adopted city charters "shall
supersede all laws inconsistent" with the charter.
SB 415
Page 9
Los Angeles County and Limitations on Election Consolidations:
Existing law requires all state, county, municipal, district,
and school district elections that are held on a statewide
election date to be consolidated with the statewide election,
except that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is
allowed to deny a request for consolidation of an election with
the statewide election if the voting system used by the county
cannot accommodate the additional election. This unique
provision allowing Los Angeles County to deny consolidation
requests was created through the passage of SB 693 (Robbins,
Chapter 897, Statutes of 1985), in response to attempts by a
number of cities in Los Angeles to move their municipal
elections to the same day as statewide elections. Los Angeles
County sought the ability to deny consolidation requests because
its voting system could accommodate only a limited number of
contests at each election, and the county was concerned that the
move by cities to hold their elections at the same time as the
statewide election would exceed the capacity of that voting
system. Los Angeles County still uses a variant of the voting
system that it used in 1985, though the county is currently
developing a new voting system. One of the principles that the
county has articulated to guide the development of its new
voting system is having a system that has "sufficient technical
and physical capacity to accommodate?consolidation of elections
with local districts and municipalities." That voting system,
however, may not be available for use countywide before 2020.
Some local jurisdictions have already taken steps to move the
date of their elections in anticipation of Los Angeles County's
new voting system. Earlier this year, voters in the city of Los
Angeles and in the Los Angeles Unified School District approved
ballot measures to move those jurisdictions' general elections
so that they are held at the same time as statewide elections,
beginning in 2020. Arguments in support of those measures
indicated that such a timeline would allow local elections to be
consolidated with federal and state elections.
While this bill will go into effect on January 1, 2018, recent
amendments taken by the author allow a political subdivision to
continue to hold its elections on dates other than statewide
SB 415
Page 10
election dates after January 1, 2018, notwithstanding the
provisions of this bill, if the political subdivision adopts a
plan not later than January 1, 2018 to consolidate future
elections with the statewide election beginning no later than
November 2022. Based on Los Angeles County's current timeline
for deploying its new voting system, these amendments should
allow political subdivisions in that county to continue holding
off-cycle elections until the county is able to accommodate
additional election consolidations.
Special Elections: This bill explicitly provides that its
provisions do not apply to special elections. As a result,
special elections that are conducted by a political subdivision
to fill a vacancy on that subdivision's governing board, or to
vote on a local ballot measure, will not be required to occur at
the same time as statewide elections, even if the turnout at
special elections in the jurisdiction regularly is significantly
lower than the turnout in that jurisdiction at statewide
elections.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 254 (R. Hernández) requires general law cities, school
districts, community college districts, and special districts to
hold their general elections and certain special elections at
the same time as the statewide primary or statewide general
election, or in June or November of odd-numbered years,
beginning in 2020. AB 254 is currently in Senate Appropriations
Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:NoLocal: No
SUPPORT: (Verified8/6/15)
California Common Cause
SB 415
Page 11
Southwest Voter Registration Education Project
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/6/15)
Desert Water Agency
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to California Common
Cause: One of the greatest barometers for waning civic
engagement in American politics is declining voter turnout in
federal, state, and municipal elections. There are many
potential contributing factors: general cynicism about
government and elected officials, a decline in investment in
civics education, and an increasingly transient society.
Yet there is one major contributing factor to low voter turnout
- the timing of elections - that could be addressed with a
relatively simple policy change. The Public Policy Institute of
California surveyed 350 California cities and found that simply
moving an election to be synchronized with the even year state
elections can result in a 21-36 percent boost in voter turnout
for municipal and other local elections. SB 415 accomplishes
this goal by prohibiting municipalities from holding off-cycle
elections if doing so results in a significant (25% or more)
decline in voter turnout.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The Desert Water Agency (DWA)
writes: DWA holds an election for its governing board in
November of odd-numbered years. The Agency was asked many years
ago by the Riverside County Elections Department to change?its
election schedule due to the large size of the ballot when all
elections were consolidated on a statewide election date. The
November 2013 election turnout for DWA was 32.32%; the November
2014 statewide turnout for Riverside County was 34.52%. In
comparison, voter turnout in Riverside County in the 2012
presidential election was nearly 75%, which would significantly
SB 415
Page 12
skew the comparative analysis called for by SB 415 (an average
of the previous four statewide elections).
Nevertheless, combining the DWA election with the statewide
election would not likely result in greater voter
participation?.[A] review of voter analytics shows that voters
are less likely to cast a vote as they move down the ballot, a
phenomenon known as "roll-off." While this effect might be due
to fatigue, it also might be due to the fact that contest
saliency generally decreases with ballot positions. Voter
fatigue would likely counteract any benefit of forcing local
agencies to change election dates as they would fall to the end
of a crowded ballot.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 45-30, 7/16/15
AYES: Alejo, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon,
Campos, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Eggman,
Frazier, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson,
Gomez, Gonzalez, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones-Sawyer,
Levine, Lopez, Low, McCarty, Medina, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone,
Thurmond, Ting, Weber, Williams, Wood, Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Chang,
Chávez, Dahle, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Grove, Hadley, Harper,
Irwin, Jones, Kim, Lackey, Linder, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes,
Melendez, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Steinorth,
Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cooley, Gordon, Gray, Mullin, Nazarian
Prepared by:Frances Tibon Estoista / E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106
8/13/15 13:52:39
**** END ****
SB 415
Page 13