BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1832
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 16, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Paul Fong, Chair
AB 1832 (Saldana) - As Introduced: February 11, 2010
SUBJECT : Initiative measures: filing fee.
SUMMARY : Incrementally increases the fee that proponents of an
initiative measure are required to pay at the time of submitting
the draft of the measure to the Attorney General (AG) from $200
to $2000. Specifically, this bill establishes the following fee
schedule:
1)$500 beginning in 2011.
2)$1,000 beginning in 2013.
3)$1,500 beginning in 2015.
4)$2,000 beginning in 2017.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes a process for the AG to prepare a summary of the
chief purposes and points of a proposed measure. Requires the
AG to provide a copy of the title and summary to the Secretary
of State within 15 days after receipt of the final version of
a proposed initiative measure, or if a fiscal estimate or
opinion is to be included, within 15 days after receipt of the
fiscal estimate or opinion prepared by the Department of
Finance (DOF) and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee
(JLBC).
2)Requires proponents of any initiative measure, at the time of
submitting the draft of the measure to the AG, to pay a fee of
two hundred dollars ($200), which shall be placed in a trust
fund in the office of the Treasurer and refunded to the
proponents if the measure qualifies for the ballot within two
years from the date the summary is furnished to the
proponents. If the measure does not qualify within that
period, the fee shall be immediately paid into the General
Fund of the state.
3)Specifies that in preparing a title and summary, the AG shall
determine whether the substance thereof, if adopted, would
affect the revenues or expenditures of the state or local
government, and if he or she determines that it would, he or
AB 1832
Page 2
she shall include in the title either the estimate of the
amount of any increase or decrease in revenues or costs to the
state or local government.
FISCAL EFFECT : Keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the Bill : According to the author:
AB 1832 would raise the initiative measure filing fee from
$200 to $2000 over a period of six years. In 2011, the fee
would initially increase to $500 and continue to do so by
$500 every two years until 2017. This bill will generate
additional revenue to offset the administrative costs of
the initiative process as well as reduce costs by deterring
frivolous proposals. Originally set in 1943, the fee was
intended to cover the administrative costs of the
initiative process to the state and to discourage frivolous
proposals. According to the Consumer Price Index, the
value of the $200 in 1943 corresponds to approximately
$2480 today.
According to the Attorney General's office, 107 initiatives
were filed in 2009, making it the second-highest annual
total in California history. From 2000-2009, 647
initiative proposals were submitted for preparation of a
title and summary; in contrast, 1990-1999 saw only 391
measures filed. That is a 60% increase this decade over
the previous one with more measures having been submitted
from 2000-2009 than the sum total during the 74 year period
from 1912 to 1986. By realigning the fee closer to its
original value, frivolous filings would again be
discouraged.
2)Attorney General's Process for Preparing Ballot Summaries and
Titles : Before circulating a measure, initiative proponents
must first submit their proposal to the AG's office. The AG
obtains a fiscal analysis from the DOF and the JLBC and then
provides the proponent with a title and summary that must be
placed at the top of each petition. Current law states that
proponents must pay a $200 fee to the AG, a fee that is
refunded if the initiative qualifies for the ballot.
3)Increasing Number of Initiatives and Ballot Summaries:
AB 1832
Page 3
According to the AG's office, there has been a steady increase
in the number of initiative proposals submitted in the last
few decades. The following illustrates the increased number
of filed initiative proposals:
a) 47 from 1960 to 1969
b) 180 from 1970 to 1979
c) 282 from 1980 to 1989
d) 391 from 1990 to 1998
e) 647 from 2000 to 2009
4)How Do Other States Administer Filing Fees for Initiative
Petitions : According to the National Conference of State
Legislatures, there are a number of ways in which states have
addressed the issue of filing fees for initiative petitions.
States like Arizona, Colorado, Illinois and Ohio do not
require an initiative filing fee, while others like Alaska,
Mississippi, Washington and Wyoming require anywhere from $5
to $500 for filing fees. Currently only Alaska, California,
and Washington allow for refunds if petitions are properly
filed or if initiatives qualify for the ballot.
5)Arguments in Support : According to the California Common
Cause:
The current initiative filing fee does not accurately
reflect the cost to the Attorney General's office to
prepare the initiative title and summary, and by increasing
the initiative filing fee, AB 1832 will deter some
dishonest practices currently used by committees that
choose to submit multiple initiatives on the same topic to
ensure favorable public opinion. This practice is both
wasteful and confusing to citizens seeking to gain
information about initiatives and their sponsors.
6)Previous Legislation : AB 436 (Saldana) of 2009 was
substantially similar to this bill, except that it would have
begun to increase the initiative filing fee in 2010 and every
two years thereafter until 2018, at which time the AG would
have been required to adjust the fee for inflation. AB 436
was vetoed by the Governor. In his veto message, Governor
Schwarzenegger argues that "the original fee was established
to deter frivolous filings and that this bill would
fundamentally alter the purpose of the fees to instead be used
to pay the administrative costs borne by the AG. Using the
AB 1832
Page 4
fees to reimburse the AG for actual costs sets a precedent of
allowing the fees to increase to the point that it would
significantly deter grassroots and volunteer efforts to
qualify a measure."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Common Cause
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Qiana Charles / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094