BILL ANALYSIS
AB 319
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 319 (Niello) - As Amended: April 13, 2009
SUBJECT : Elections: ballot titles.
SUMMARY : Requires the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) to
prepare the title and summary for state initiatives and
referenda, the fiscal estimates for proposed state initiative
measures, and the ballot titles for state measures that will
appear on the ballot. Substantially reduces the amount of time
allowed for the preparation of fiscal estimates for proposed
state initiative measures. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the LAO, instead of the Attorney General (AG), to
prepare a title and summary of the chief purpose and points of
a proposed state initiative or referendum measure.
2)Requires the LAO, instead of the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee (JLBC) and the Department of Finance (DOF), to
prepare an estimate of the amount of increase or decrease in
revenues or costs to the state or local government for a state
initiative measure. Allows the LAO to request the assistance
of any state department, agency, or official in preparing the
estimate.
3)Reduces, from 25 working days to 15 calendar days, the amount
of time that is allowed for the preparation of the estimate of
the amount of increase or decrease in revenues or costs to the
state or local government for a state initiative measure.
4)Requires the LAO, instead of the AG, to prepare the ballot
title for each measure submitted to the voters of the whole
state.
5)Makes corresponding changes.
6)Provides that the provisions of this bill will not go into
effect unless the voters approve Assembly Constitutional
Amendment 20 of the 2009-10 Regular Session.
EXISTING LAW :
AB 319
Page 2
1)Constitutionally requires the AG to prepare a title and
summary of a state initiative or referendum measure before
petitions may be circulated for that measure.
2)Requires the proponents of a state initiative or referendum
measure, prior to circulating petitions for that measure, to
submit a draft of the proposed measure to the AG with a
written request that a title and summary of the chief purpose
and points of the proposed measure be prepared. Limits the
title and summary to not more than 100 words.
3)Requires the AG to prepare a summary of the chief purposes and
points of a proposed state initiative or referendum. Provides
that if the AG determines that an initiative measure would
affect the revenues or expenditures of the state or a local
government, the title and summary shall include an estimate of
the fiscal impact of the measure, to be prepared jointly by
the DOF and the JLBC.
4)Requires the DOF and the JLBC to deliver the fiscal estimate
of a state initiative measure to the AG within 25 working days
from the receipt of the final version of the proposed
initiative. Permits the DOF and the JLBC to use a statement
of fiscal impact prepared by the LAO in the preparation of the
fiscal estimate.
5)Requires the AG to provide a copy of the title and summary to
the Secretary of State (SOS) within 15 days after receipt of
the fiscal estimate or, if the AG determines that no fiscal
estimate is necessary, within 15 days after the receipt of the
final version of the proposed initiative measure.
6)Requires a petition for a proposed state initiative measure to
include the title and summary prepared by the AG on each page
of the petition on which signatures are to appear and on each
section of the petition preceding the text of the measure.
7)Requires the AG to provide and return to the SOS a ballot
title for each measure submitted to the voters of the whole
state. Provides that the ballot title shall express in not
more than 100 words the purpose of the measure. Requires each
state measure to be designated on the ballot by the ballot
title certified to the SOS by the AG.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
AB 319
Page 3
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
The initiative process is an integral and vital component
of the democratic process in California and is being
exercised with increasing frequency. California statute
dictates that the Attorney General shall provide a ballot
and title and summary for each initiative, which will "give
a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the
measure in such language that the ballot title shall
neither argue, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or
against the proposed measure." In addition, the
Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee are charged with determining the fiscal impact of
each initiative. It is important to maintain the
credibility of the initiative process with a non persuasive
ballot title and summary and an accurate fiscal estimate.
The soundness of our initiative process is compromised when
the ballot title and summary is partial. We want voters to
vest their trust in a system that is fair and reliable.
Unfortunately, ballot language is susceptible to
politicization, causing it to be inaccurate and misleading.
This leads to a confused and frustrated rather than
educated and engaged electorate. While initiatives
themselves are inherently political, the ballot title and
summary should not be.
The Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee are currently responsible for determining the
fiscal impact of ballot initiatives. As partisan offices,
they can be susceptible to politicizing fiscal estimates.
It is imperative that voters know the true cost of ballot
initiatives in order to make informed decisions. Moreover,
the current system is redundant as the Legislative
Analyst's Office already includes a fiscal estimate in its
analysis.
An effective initiative process necessitates a non-partisan
entity without political pressures to draft the ballot
title and summary and determine fiscal estimates. AB 319
transfers the authority to write the ballot title and
summary from the Attorney General's Office to the
AB 319
Page 4
Legislative Analyst's office. The LAO is a non-partisan
organization that provides credible and impartial analysis
for the Legislature. The LAO currently provides an
unbiased and honest analysis of each initiative. With this
new duty, the LAO will create a fair and balanced ballot
title and summary for each initiative. AB 319 also
transfers responsibility for the fiscal estimate from the
Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee to the Legislative Analyst. These measures will
assure California voters that they are not being persuaded
by biased or misleading information.
2)Is the LAO the Appropriate Entity to Prepare a Title & Summary
and Ballot Title ? While the LAO currently plays a role in the
preparation of the fiscal estimate for state ballot measures,
and while the LAO is responsible for preparing an impartial
analysis (including a fiscal analysis) that appears in the
state ballot pamphlet for every state ballot measure that will
appear on the ballot, it is not clear that it is appropriate
to shift the duties of preparing the title and summary for
state initiatives and referenda, and of preparing the ballot
title for state ballot measures, to the LAO from the AG.
The purpose of a title and summary on an initiative or
referendum petition, and the purpose of a ballot title for a
measure that appears on the ballot, is to provide a short
overview to voters of the primary legal changes to existing
law that would be made by a measure. This is in contrast to
the analysis prepared by the LAO, in which the LAO examines
the likely impacts of a proposed policy change.
In that respect, one could argue that it is more appropriate
that the AG be the entity to prepare the title and summary,
since the AG is the chief lawyer of the state and has legal
expertise. The LAO, on the other hand, has a great deal of
expertise with respect to analyzing the impacts of proposed
policy changes, but does not have the level of legal expertise
that the AG does in the context of summarizing the legal
changes that a measure would make.
3)LAO's Role in Preparation of Fiscal Estimates of Initiative
Measures : Existing state law provides that the JLBC and the
DOF are jointly responsible for preparing a fiscal estimate
for each state initiative measure that is submitted for title
and summary if the AG determines that the measure is likely to
AB 319
Page 5
have a fiscal impact on state or local governments. However,
existing state law also specifies that the JLBC and the DOF
may use a statement of fiscal impact prepared by the LAO in
the preparation of the fiscal estimate.
In practice, the LAO has taken a greater role in the preparation
of the fiscal estimate than one might assume based on existing
state statutes. When the DOF and JLBC receive a notice from
the AG requesting a fiscal analysis of an initiative measure,
the LAO usually takes the lead and begins the process of
investigative research, including how programs would be
affected and how possible passage and implementation would
impact the state as a whole. Once the LAO has completed this
investigative analysis, the DOF is contacted for review and
concurrence of the LAO's analysis. If the DOF concurs and
signs off on the LAO's work, the estimate is returned to the
AG for inclusion in the title and summary.
4)Reduced Time Period for Preparation of a Fiscal Estimate :
Under existing law, the DOF and the JLBC have 25 working days
to prepare a fiscal estimate for proposed state initiative
measures. Taking weekend days into account, that means that
the DOF and the JLBC have at least 33 calendar days to prepare
a fiscal estimate for a proposed state initiative measure. As
noted above, the LAO plays a large role in the preparation of
that fiscal estimate.
Under the provisions of this bill, the LAO would have only 15
calendar days to prepare the fiscal estimate for each proposed
state initiative measure - less than half of the amount of
time currently provided to prepare the fiscal estimate.
Additionally, under the provisions of this bill, it is unclear
whether that 15 days would be in addition to, or would run
concurrently with, the 15-day time period that the LAO would
have to complete the title and summary for a proposed state
initiative measure.
The author's office has indicated that the author believes that
the fiscal estimate should be able to be completed in a much
shorter period of time if there is only one entity - the LAO -
responsible for the preparation of that estimate, as opposed
to the two entities - the DOF and the JLBC - that are
responsible for the preparation of those estimates under
existing law. However, it is not clear whether the LAO will
be able to be as thorough in its fiscal estimate if the amount
AB 319
Page 6
of time provided for the preparation of that estimate is cut
in half. The LAO already does the bulk of the work in
preparing fiscal estimates for state initiative measures under
existing practice, and it regularly takes most or all of the
25 working days to prepare those fiscal estimates.
The committee may wish to consider whether the shortened
timeline provided for the preparation of fiscal estimates of
proposed state initiative measures under this bill could
negatively impact the LAO's ability to provide a complete and
accurate fiscal estimate, particularly in light of the new
duties assigned to the LAO under this bill.
5)Constitutional Amendment Required : Article II, Section 10 (d)
of the California Constitution requires that the AG prepare a
title and summary for any state initiative or referendum
measure before petitions for that measure can be circulated.
As such, the policy proposed by this bill cannot be
implemented by statute alone - making the LAO responsible for
preparing titles and summaries of state initiative and
referendum measures requires a constitutional amendment.
This bill specifies that it will become operative only if the
voters approve ACA 20 from this Legislative session. ACA 20
was introduced by the author of this bill on March 31, 2009,
but has not yet been referred to committee and will not be
eligible to be heard in committee until May 1. If the
committee approves this bill today, it will also need to
approve ACA 20 or some other constitutional amendment at a
later date, and that constitutional amendment will have to be
approved by voters, in order to implement the changes proposed
by this bill.
6)Arguments in Opposition : In opposition to this bill, the
California School Employees Association writes:
The Attorney General is elected to office and
accountable to voters, while the Legislative Analyst
is an appointed position with no accountability to
voters. It is appropriate to maintain the current
process whereby the Attorney General writes the ballot
title and summary for all state ballot initiatives.
[If] the Attorney General does not carry out these
responsibilities in accordance with law, parties have
the option of challenging the ballot title and summary
AB 319
Page 7
in court and voters have the opportunity to express
their dissatisfaction at the polls.
7)Related Legislation : AB 753 (Adams), which is also being
heard in this committee today, standardizes and clarifies
terminology and procedures for the preparation of titles,
summaries, and ballot labels for state ballot measures, and
reorganizes provisions of existing law governing the
preparation of titles, summaries, and ballot labels for state
ballot measures.
ACA 20 (Niello), which is awaiting referral to committee by the
Assembly Rules Committee, would require the LAO, instead of
the AG, to prepare the titles and summaries for proposed state
initiative and referendum measures. ACA 20 is a companion
measure to this bill.
8)Previous Legislation : AB 2209 (Niello) of 2008 would have
required the LAO, instead of the AG, to prepare the title and
summary for state initiatives and referenda and the ballot
title for state measures that would appear on the ballot. AB
2209 failed passage in this committee on a 2-5 vote.
ACA 18 (Adams) of 2008 would have required the LAO, instead of
the AG, to prepare the title and summary for state initiative
and referendum measures. ACA 18, which was a companion
measure to AB 2209, was not referred to committee until after
AB 2209 had failed passage. As such, ACA 18 was not heard in
this committee.
SB 1208 (Ducheny) of 2008 would have required the fiscal
estimate for a proposed state initiative measure to be
prepared by the LAO instead of by the DOF and the JLBC. SB
1208 was vetoed by the Governor, who argued that the joint
responsibility of the DOF and the JLBC in preparing fiscal
estimates for proposed state initiatives was important in
ensuring that the Legislative and Executive branches of
government agreed on the possible fiscal impact of a proposed
initiative.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
None on file.
AB 319
Page 8
Opposition
California School Employees Association, AFL-CIO
Analysis Prepared by : Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094