BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1832
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1832 (Saldana)
As Introduced February 11, 2010
Majority vote
ELECTIONS 5-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fong, Coto, Mendoza, | | |
| |Saldana, Swanson | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Bill Berryhill | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
AB 1832
Page 2
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
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 : 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 $2,480 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."
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
AB 1832
Page 3
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
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."
Analysis Prepared by : Qiana Charles / E. & R. / (916)
319-2094
FN: 0003764