BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 732|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 732
Author: Buchanan (D)
Amended: 8/31/11 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ELECTIONS & CONSTIT. AMEND. COMM. : 5-0, 06/21/11
AYES: Correa, La Malfa, De Le�n, Gaines, Lieu
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 05/26/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Elections
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires the Attorney General's (AG's)
summary prepared in the state voter pamphlet for each state
bond measure to include an explanatory table summarizing
the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO's) estimated fiscal
impact of the bond measure.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/31/11 prevent a chaptering out
problem with SB 334 (DeSaulnier), and AB 1021 (Gordon).
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Establishes a process for the AG to prepare a title and
summary for each measure submitted to the voters of the
whole state. Requires the ballot title and summary to
CONTINUED
AB 732
Page
2
include a summary of the Legislative Analyst's estimate
of the net state and local government fiscal impact.
2.Requires the Legislative Analyst to prepare an impartial
analysis of each proposed measure describing the measure
and including a fiscal analysis of the measure showing
the amount of any increase or decrease in revenue or cost
to state or local government. Provides that if a proposed
measure is estimated to result in increased costs to the
state, the estimate of those costs shall be set out in
boldface print in the ballot pamphlet.
3.Requires the statewide ballot pamphlet to include
information, in a specific order, for each state measure
to be voted upon including, but not limited to:
A. Upon the top portion of the first page, and not
exceeding one-third of the page, shall appear:
Identification of the measure by number and
title; and,
The official summary prepared by the AG.
A. Beginning at the top of the right page, the
analysis prepared by the Legislative Analyst.
B. Arguments for and against the measure.
Related Legislation
AB 1021 (Gordon) requires additional fiscal information to
be included in the circulating title and summary prepared
by the AG and the summary statements prepared by the
Legislative Analyst for a proposed initiative measure.
Previous Legislation
AB 1278 (Harkey) of 2009, would have required the
Legislative Analyst to include additional information in
the ballot pamphlet for an election for each state
initiative measure that proposed the issuance of a state
bond. The bill also would have required that the ballot
labels for state bond measures include additional
information relating to the proposed bond.
AB 732
Page
3
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/1/11)
California State Controller John Chiang
California Taxpayers Association
Little Hoover Commission
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office:
AB 732 attempts to decrease California's future debt
obligations by improving voter clarity on bond
measures and their future fiscal implications. The
bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to
prepare a simple and easy to understand graph, chart,
or report card for each statewide bond measure,
illustrating the information discussed in the Overview
of State Bond Debt section of the Voter Information
Guide. AB 732 stems from a recommendation from the
Little Hoover Commission's 2009 report, Bond Spending:
Expanding and Enhancing Oversight. Nearly two-thirds
of California voters know very little or nothing about
how the state pays for bond measures. This makes it
very difficult for a majority of voters to know
exactly what they are authorizing at the ballot box
and how it contributes to the state's General Fund
obligations.
In addition to voters' limited knowledge on bond
financing, many organizations mislead voters to think
that enormous projects won't cost taxpayers. As more
general obligation bond measures are enacted, the debt
service on bonds consumes a larger portion of the
General Fund. General obligation bond measures
typically do not have a dedicated revenue source
outside the General Fund. Ads promoting the bonds
often tout that a measure can be implemented without
new taxes. While these bond measures may not
specifically require new taxes, they are not without
cost. In the current budget climate, money to pay for
a bond measure may displace money for another program
that derives its funds from the General Fund. As our
AB 732
Page
4
state's deficit continues to grow and the Legislature
is being forced to cut funding to school districts and
public safety organizations, Californians must do
something to control future debt obligations. In 2007,
the Legislative Analyst's Office reported that General
Fund debt payments for already authorized general
obligation and lease-revenue bonds for
infrastructure-related purposes will total about $4.7
billion in 2007-08, rising to a peak of $7.5 billion
in 2014-15. Unless the state does more to educate
voters on the impacts of ballot-box budgeting,
California's debt obligations could take up an even
greater portion of the General Fund and fiscally
impact the state for years to come.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eng, Feuer,
Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Beth Gaines, Galgiani,
Garrick, Gatto, Gordon, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Hall,
Harkey, Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez, Hill, Huber, Hueso,
Huffman, Jeffries, Knight, Lara, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal,
Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Morrell,
Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel
P�rez, Portantino, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio,
Swanson, Torres, Valadao, Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams,
Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Campos, Cedillo, Davis, Gorell, Jones
DLW:nl 9/1/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****