The California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for a governing body of 5 or more members, elected (1) by district or, (2) at large, or (3) at large with a requirement that they reside in a district, and to provide for the compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also provides that charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts. Existing law requires, following each decennial federal census and using that census as a basis, the board of supervisors of a county to adjust the boundaries of any or all of the supervisorial districts of the county so that the districts are as nearly equal in population as may be and comply with applicable provisions of federal law.

Existing law also requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of 5 members, and requires, except as provided, each member of the board of supervisors to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This measure would, in a charter county that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000, 3,000,000, require, and deem the county charter to provide for, a governing body consisting of 7 or more members, not to be thereafter reduced to fewer than 7 members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000. The measure would similarly provide that, in such a county, the expenditures for the governing body and its staff may not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding that the county has a population of more than 2,000,000, 3,000,000 the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the countys adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted, as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index. This measure would also extend these same requirements to the governing body of a general law county that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000.

This measure would require, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and would impose that requirement on all general law counties.

As described above, the California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for the compensation of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also requires that, if a county charter provides for the Legislature to prescribe the salary of the governing body, the salary be prescribed by the governing body by ordinance.

This bill would repeal that latter provision on January 1, 2021.

This measure would also make other technical, nonsubstantive changes.

The California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for a governing body of 5 or more members, elected (1) by district or, (2) at large, or (3) at large with a requirement that they reside in a district, and to provide for the compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also provides that charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts. Existing law requires, following each decennial federal census and using that census as a basis, the board of supervisors of a county to adjust the boundaries of any or all of the supervisorial districts of the county so that the districts are as nearly equal in population as may be and comply with applicable provisions of federal law.

Existing law also requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of 5 members, and requires, except as provided, each member of the board of supervisors to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This measure would require the county charter, in a charter county with a population of more than 2,000,000 that is found at a decennial United States census census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000, require, and deem the county charter to provide for for, a governing body consisting of 7 or more members. members, not to be thereafter reduced to fewer than 7 members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000. The measure would also require in such a county, the county charter to similarly provide that that, in such a county, the expenditures for the governing body and its staff may not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 202021 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 202021 fiscal year. year after the release of the census finding that the county has a population of more than 2,000,000, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the countys adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted, as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index. This measure would also extend these same requirements to the governing body of a general law county with a population of more than 2,000,000 that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census. census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000.

This measure would require, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and would impose that requirement on all general law counties.

As described above, the California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for the compensation of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also requires that, if a county charter provides for the Legislature to prescribe the salary of the governing body, the salary be prescribed by the governing body by ordinance.

This bill would repeal that latter provision on January 1, 2021.

This measure would also make other technical, nonsubstantive changes.

The California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for a governing body of 5 or more members, elected (1) by district or, (2) at large, or (3) at large with a requirement that they reside in a district, and to provide for the compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also provides that charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts. Existing law requires, following each decennial federal census and using that census as a basis, the board of supervisors of a county to adjust the boundaries of any or all of the supervisorial districts of the county so that the districts are as nearly equal in population as may be and comply with applicable provisions of federal law.

This measure would require the county charter, in a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 at a decennial United States census beginning with the 2020 United States census, to provide for a governing body consisting of 7 or more members. The measure would also require in such a county, the county charter to provide that the expenditures for the governing body and its staff may not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 2020-21 202021 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 202021 fiscal year. This measure would also extend these requirements to a general law county with a population of more than 2,000,000 at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census.

This measure would require, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and would impose that requirement on all general law counties.

As described above, the California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for the compensation of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also requires that, if a county charter provides for the Legislature to prescribe the salary of the governing body, the salary be prescribed by the governing body by ordinance.

This bill would repeal that latter provision on January 1, 2021.

This measure would also make other technical, nonsubstantive changes.

The California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for a governing body of 5 or more members, elected (1) by district or, (2) at large, or (3) at large with a requirement that they reside in a district, and to provide for the compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also provides that charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts. Existing law requires, following each decennial federal census and using that census as a basis, the board of supervisors of a county to adjust the boundaries of any or all of the supervisorial districts of the county so that the districts are as nearly equal in population as may be and comply with applicable provisions of federal law.

This measure would require the county charter, in a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 at a decennial United States census beginning with the 2020 United States census, to provide for a governing body consisting of 7 or more members. The measure would also require in such a county, the county charter to provide that the expenditures for the governing body and its staff may not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 2020-21 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 fiscal year.

This measure would require, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district.

As described above, the California Constitution requires that a county charter provide for the compensation of members of the governing body. The California Constitution also requires that, if a county charter provides for the Legislature to prescribe the salary of the governing body, the salary be prescribed by the governing body by ordinance.

This bill would repeal that latter provision on January 1, 2021.

This measure would also make other technical, nonsubstantive changes.

WHEREAS, Californias counties are governed by elected members of a board of supervisors; and

WHEREAS, The number of members of the board of supervisors in most counties has remained unchanged for more than a century despite enormous increases in the countys population which, in some cases, are greater than the population of individual states in the union; and

WHEREAS, It is a well-recognized principle that residents are more efficiently able to access their representatives for assistance for services and to hold them better accountable when the ratio of residents to each elected representative on a governing body is smaller rather than larger; and

WHEREAS, It is important to restrain the costs of governance by restricting the fiscal impact of any increase in the number of members of any countys board of supervisors; and

WHEREAS, It is therefore the intent of the people, in adopting this measure, to make all of the following changes with regard to the county board of supervisors in each county having a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000 at each decennial United States census:

(a)To increase democratic representation by substantially reducing the population in each supervisorial district;

(b)By establishing smaller supervisorial districts, to provide greater opportunities for public participation in local government that provide safety, health, transportation, and other vital services;

(c)In order to control the size of government, reduce unnecessary expenditures, and increase efficiency through smaller supervisorial districts, to reduce the office budgets currently allocated for each member of the board of supervisors; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, the Assembly concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 201516 Regular Session commencing on the first day of December 2014, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California, that the Constitution of the State be amended as follows:

(a)The State is divided into counties which are legal subdivisions of the State. The Legislature shall prescribe uniform procedure for county formation, consolidation, and boundary change. Formation or consolidation requires approval by a majority of electors voting on the question in each affected county. A boundary change requires approval by the governing body of each affected county. No county seat shall be removed unless two-thirds of the qualified electors of the county, voting on the proposition at a general election, shall vote in favor of such removal. A proposition of removal shall not be submitted in the same county more than once in four years.

(b)The Legislature shall provide for county powers, an elected county sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, and an elected governing body in each county. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 4 of this article, each governing body shall prescribe by ordinance the compensation of its members, but the ordinance prescribing such compensation shall be subject to referendum. The Legislature or the governing body may provide for other officers whose compensation shall be prescribed by the governing body. The governing body shall provide for the number, compensation, tenure, and appointment of employees.

(a)County charters shall provide for:

(1)Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.5, a governing body of five or more members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district. Charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts.

(2)The compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body, subject to Section 4.5.

(3)An elected sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, other officers, their election or appointment, compensation, terms and removal.

(4)The performance of functions required by statute.

(5)The powers and duties of governing bodies and all other county officers, and for consolidation and segregation of county officers, and for the manner of filling all vacancies occurring in those offices.

(6)The fixing and regulation by governing bodies, by ordinance, of the appointment and number of assistants, deputies, clerks, attaches, and other persons to be employed, and for the prescribing and regulating by such bodies of the powers, duties, qualifications, and compensation of such persons, the times at which, and terms for which they shall be appointed, and the manner of their appointment and removal.

(7)Whenever any county has framed and adopted a charter, and the charter has been approved by the Legislature as provided in this section, the general laws adopted by the Legislature pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1 of this article, shall, as to that county, be superseded by that charter as to matters for which, under this section it is competent to make provision in the charter, and for which provision is made in the charter, except as otherwise expressly provided in this section.

(8)Charter counties shall have all the powers that are provided by this Constitution or by statute for counties.

(b)The changes made by the act adding this subdivision shall apply on and after January 1, 2021.

(a)In a charter county that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000, 3,000,000 there is required, and the county charter shall be deemed to require, the following:

(1)The governing body shall consist of seven or more members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and subject to statutes that relate to apportioning the population of governing body districts. The number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000.

(2)(A)The expenditures for the governing body and its staff shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding a population of more than 2,000,000, 3,000,000, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the countys adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted, as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index.

(B)This expenditure limitation shall continue to apply even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000.

(b)(1)Each general law county that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000, shall have a governing body consisting of seven or more members. Any county described in this subdivision shall be subject to statutes that relate to apportioning the population of governing body districts. The number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000.

(2)(A)In a general law county that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000, 3,000,000, the expenditures for the governing body and its staff shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding a population of more than 2,000,000, 3,000,000, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the countys adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted, as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index.

(B)This expenditure limitation shall continue to apply even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 3,000,000.

(3)On and after January 1, 2021, the members of a governing body of a general law county shall be elected by district, and the member shall reside in that district.

WHEREAS, Californias counties are governed by elected members of a board of supervisors; and

WHEREAS, The number of members of the board of supervisors in most counties has remained unchanged for more than a century despite enormous increases in the countys population which, in some cases, are greater than the population of individual states in the union; and

WHEREAS, It is a well-recognized principle that residents are more efficiently able to access their representatives for assistance for services and to hold them better accountable when the ratio of residents to each elected representative on a governing body is smaller rather than larger; and

WHEREAS, It is important to restrain the costs of governance by restricting the fiscal impact of any increase in the number of members of any countys board of supervisors; and

WHEREAS, It is therefore the intent of the people, in adopting this measure, to make all of the following changes with regard to the county board of supervisors in each county having a population of more than 2,000,000 at each decennial United States census:

(a)To increase democratic representation by substantially reducing the population in each supervisorial district;

(b)By establishing smaller supervisorial districts, to provide greater opportunities for public participation in local government that provide safety, health, transportation, and other vital services;

(c)In order to control the size of government, reduce unnecessary expenditures, and increase efficiency through smaller supervisorial districts, to reduce the office budgets currently allocated for each member of the board of supervisors; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, the Assembly concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 201516 Regular Session commencing on the first day of December 2014, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California, that the Constitution of the State be amended as follows:

(a)The State is divided into counties which are legal subdivisions of the State. The Legislature shall prescribe uniform procedure for county formation, consolidation, and boundary change. Formation or consolidation requires approval by a majority of electors voting on the question in each affected county. A boundary change requires approval by the governing body of each affected county. No county seat shall be removed unless two-thirds of the qualified electors of the county, voting on the proposition at a general election, shall vote in favor of such removal. A proposition of removal shall not be submitted in the same county more than once in four years.

(b)The Legislature shall provide for county powers, an elected county sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, and an elected governing body in each county. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 4 of this article, each governing body shall prescribe by ordinance the compensation of its members, but the ordinance prescribing such compensation shall be subject to referendum. The Legislature or the governing body may provide for other officers whose compensation shall be prescribed by the governing body. The governing body shall provide for the number, compensation, tenure, and appointment of employees.

(a)County charters shall provide for:

(1)Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.5, a governing body of five or more members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district. Charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts.

(2)The compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body, subject to Section 4.5.

(3)An elected sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, other officers, their election or appointment, compensation, terms and removal.

(4)The performance of functions required by statute.

(5)The powers and duties of governing bodies and all other county officers, and for consolidation and segregation of county officers, and for the manner of filling all vacancies occurring in those offices.

(6)The fixing and regulation by governing bodies, by ordinance, of the appointment and number of assistants, deputies, clerks, attaches, and other persons to be employed, and for the prescribing and regulating by such bodies of the powers, duties, qualifications, and compensation of such persons, the times at which, and terms for which they shall be appointed, and the manner of their appointment and removal.

(7)Whenever any county has framed and adopted a charter, and the charter has been approved by the Legislature as provided in this section, the general laws adopted by the Legislature pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1 of this article, shall, as to that county, be superseded by that charter as to matters for which, under this section it is competent to make provision in the charter, and for which provision is made in the charter, except as otherwise expressly provided in this section.

(8)Charter counties shall have all the powers that are provided by this Constitution or by statute for counties.

(b)The changes made by the act adding this subdivision shall apply on and after January 1, 2021.

(a)In a charter county with a population of more than 2,000,000 that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, the to have a population of more than 2,000,000, there is required, and the county charter shall provide as follows: be deemed to require, the following:

(1)The governing body shall consist of seven or more members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and subject to statutes that relate to apportioning the population of governing body districts. The number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000.

(2)(A)The expenditures for the governing body and its staff may shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 202021 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 202021 fiscal year. year after the release of the census finding a population of more than 2,000,000, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the countys adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted, as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index.

(b)(1)Each general law county with a population of more than 2,000,000 that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000 shall have a governing body consisting of seven or more members. Any county described in this subdivision shall be subject to statutes that relate to apportioning the population of governing body districts. The number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than 2,000,000.

(2)For each (A)In a general law county with a population of more than 2,000,000 that is found at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, to have a population of more than 2,000,000, the expenditures for the governing body and its staff may shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 202021 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 202021 fiscal year. year after the release of the census finding a population of more than 2,000,000, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the countys adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted, as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index.

(3)On and after January 1, 2021, the members of a governing body of a general law county shall be elected by district, and the member shall reside in that district.

WHEREAS, Californias counties are governed by elected members of a board of supervisors, supervisors; and

WHEREAS, The number of members of the board of supervisors in most counties has remained unchanged for more than a century despite enormous increases in the countys population which, in some cases, are greater than the population of individual states in the union, union; and

WHEREAS, It is a well-recognized principle that residents are more efficiently able to access their representatives for assistance for services and to hold them better accountable when the ratio of residents to each elected representative on a governing body is smaller rather than larger, larger; and

WHEREAS, It is important to restrain the costs of governance by restricting the fiscal impact of any increase in the number of members of any countys board of supervisors, supervisors; and

WHEREAS, It is therefore the intent of the people, in adopting this measure, to make all of the following changes with regard to the county board of supervisors in each county having a population of more than 2,000,000 at each decennial United States census:

(a)To increase democratic representation by substantially reducing the population in each supervisorial district;

(b)By establishing smaller supervisorial districts, to provide greater opportunities for public participation in local government that provide safety, health, transportation, and other vital services;

(c)In order to control the size of government, reduce unnecessary expenditures, and increase efficiency through smaller supervisorial districts, to reduce the office budgets currently allocated for each member of the board of supervisors; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, the Assembly concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 2015-16 201516 Regular Session commencing on the first day of December 2014, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California, that the Constitution of the State be amended as follows:

(a)The State is divided into counties which are legal subdivisions of the State. The Legislature shall prescribe uniform procedure for county formation, consolidation, and boundary change. Formation or consolidation requires approval by a majority of electors voting on the question in each affected county. A boundary change requires approval by the governing body of each affected county. No county seat shall be removed unless two-thirds of the qualified electors of the county, voting on the proposition at a general election, shall vote in favor of such removal. A proposition of removal shall not be submitted in the same county more than once in four years.

(b)The Legislature shall provide for county powers, an elected county sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, and an elected governing body in each county. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 4 of this article, each governing body shall prescribe by ordinance the compensation of its members, but the ordinance prescribing such compensation shall be subject to referendum. The Legislature or the governing body may provide for other officers whose compensation shall be prescribed by the governing body. The governing body shall provide for the number, compensation, tenure, and appointment of employees.

(a)County charters shall provide for:

(1)Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.5, a governing body of 5 five or more members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district. Charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts.

(2)The compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body, subject to Section 4.5.

(3)An elected sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, other officers, their election or appointment, compensation, terms and removal.

(4)The performance of functions required by statute.

(5)The powers and duties of governing bodies and all other county officers, and for consolidation and segregation of county officers, and for the manner of filling all vacancies occurring in those offices.

(6)The fixing and regulation by governing bodies, by ordinance, of the appointment and number of assistants, deputies, clerks, attaches, and other persons to be employed, and for the prescribing and regulating by such bodies of the powers, duties, qualifications, and compensation of such persons, the times at which, and terms for which they shall be appointed, and the manner of their appointment and removal.

(7)Whenever any county has framed and adopted a charter, and the charter has been approved by the Legislature as provided in this section, the general laws adopted by the Legislature pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1 of this article, shall, as to that county, be superseded by that charter as to matters for which, under this section it is competent to make provision in the charter, and for which provision is made in the charter, except as otherwise expressly provided in this section.

(8)Charter counties shall have all the powers that are provided by this Constitution or by statute for counties.

(b)The changes made by the act adding this subdivision shall apply on and after January 1, 2021.

(a)In a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, the county charter shall provide as follows:

(1)The governing body shall consist of 7 seven or more members. members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and subject to statutes that relate to apportioning the population of governing body districts.

(2)The expenditures for the governing body and its staff may not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 2020-21 202021 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 202021 fiscal year.

WHEREAS, Californias counties are governed by elected members of a board of supervisors, and

WHEREAS, The number of members of the board of supervisors in most counties has remained unchanged for more than a century despite enormous increases in the countys population which, in some cases, are greater than the population of individual states in the union, and

WHEREAS, It is a well-recognized principle that residents are more efficiently able to access their representatives for assistance for services and to hold them better accountable when the ratio of residents to each elected representative on a governing body is smaller rather than larger, and

WHEREAS, It is important to restrain the costs of governance by restricting the fiscal impact of any increase in the number of members of any countys board of supervisors, and

WHEREAS, It is therefore the intent of the people, in adopting this measure, to make all of the following changes with regard to the county board of supervisors in each county having a population of more than 2,000,000 at each decennial United States census:

(a)To increase democratic representation by substantially reducing the population in each supervisorial district;

(b)By establishing smaller supervisorial districts, to provide greater opportunities for public participation in local government that provide safety, health, transportation, and other vital services;

(c)In order to control the size of government, reduce unnecessary expenditures, and increase efficiency through smaller supervisorial districts, to reduce the office budgets currently allocated for each member of the board of supervisors; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, the Assembly concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 2015-16 Regular Session commencing on the first day of December 2014, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California, that the Constitution of the State be amended as follows:

(a)The State is divided into counties which are legal subdivisions of the State. The Legislature shall prescribe uniform procedure for county formation, consolidation, and boundary change. Formation or consolidation requires approval by a majority of electors voting on the question in each affected county. A boundary change requires approval by the governing body of each affected county. No county seat shall be removed unless two-thirds of the qualified electors of the county, voting on the proposition at a general election, shall vote in favor of such removal. A proposition of removal shall not be submitted in the same county more than once in four years.

(b)The Legislature shall provide for county powers, an elected county sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, and an elected governing body in each county. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) (a) of Section 4 of this article, each governing body shall prescribe by ordinance the compensation of its members, but the ordinance prescribing such compensation shall be subject to referendum. The Legislature or the governing body may provide for other officers whose compensation shall be prescribed by the governing body. The governing body shall provide for the number, compensation, tenure, and appointment of employees.

(a)County charters shall provide for:

(1)Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.5, a governing body of 5 or more members, elected (1) by district or, (2) at large, or (3) at large, with a requirement that they the member reside in a district. Charter counties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts.

(2)The compensation, terms, and removal of members of the governing body. If a county charter provides for the Legislature to prescribe the salary of the governing body, such compensation shall be prescribed by the governing body by ordinance, subject to Section 4.5.

(3)An elected sheriff, an elected district attorney, an elected assessor, other officers, their election or appointment, compensation, terms and removal.

(4)The performance of functions required by statute.

(5)The powers and duties of governing bodies and all other county officers, and for consolidation and segregation of county officers, and for the manner of filling all vacancies occurring therein in those offices.

(6)The fixing and regulation by governing bodies, by ordinance, of the appointment and number of assistants, deputies, clerks, attaches, and other persons to be employed, and for the prescribing and regulating by such bodies of the powers, duties, qualifications, and compensation of such persons, the times at which, and terms for which they shall be appointed, and the manner of their appointment and removal.

(7)Whenever any county has framed and adopted a charter, and the same shall have charter has been approved by the Legislature as herein provided in this section, the general laws adopted by the Legislature in pursuance of Section 1(b) pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1 of this article, shall, as to such that county, be superseded by said that charter as to matters for which, under this section it is competent to make provision in such the charter, and for which provision is made therein in the charter, except as herein otherwise expressly provided in this section.

(8)Charter counties shall have all the powers that are provided by this Constitution or by statute for counties.

In a county with a population of more than 2,000,000 at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, the county charter shall provide as follows:

(a)The governing body shall consist of 7 or more members.

(b)The expenditures for the governing body and its staff may not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year, the lesser of the amount budgeted for that purpose for the 2020-21 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the expenditures for that purpose had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 fiscal year.

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SCA 8

Author:

: 3/30/16

Vote:

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-2, 7/1/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara

NOES: Nguyen, Moorlach

NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley

SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-0, 7/7/15

AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu

NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Bates, Nielsen

SENATE FLOOR: 24-15, 9/10/15 (FAIL)

AYES: Beall, Block, Cannella, De León, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Monning, Nielsen, Pan, Runner, Wieckowski, Wolk

NOES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Berryhill, Fuller, Gaines, Huff, Leyva, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Mitchell

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, if approved by the voters, requires any county with a population greater than three million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

Senate Floor Amendments of 3/30/16 increase the population threshold in SCA 8 from two million residents to three million residents, making the bill’s provisions applicable only to Los Angeles County, San Diego County, and Orange County, based on current population estimates.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/15 (1) add co-authors, (2) clarify that once a county’s population reaches two million, SCA 8 applies and cannot be reversed even if a subsequent Census shows a decline below two million, and (3) provide that a county board of supervisors budget can be increased from the base year annually to reflect the Consumer Price Index.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to the California Constitution, that if a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, it must have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.
   
2. Requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of five members, and requires, except under specified circumstances, each member to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This bill:

1. Requires that a charter or general law county with a population of more than three million residents as of the 2020 U.S. census or thereafter must have a governing body (board of supervisors) of seven or more members.
   
2. Provides that the number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than three million.
3. Provides that the expenditures for affected boards of supervisors and their staffs shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding a population of more than three million, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the county’s adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index. This expenditure limitation shall continue to apply even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than three million.
4. Requires, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members of the board of supervisors to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and imposes that same requirement on all general law counties.

Background

Affected counties. Three counties have populations of more than three million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), and Orange (3.1 million).

Are some supervisorial districts too large? In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County Supervisor represents nearly two million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness. Some observers also suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

1. On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.
2. At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
3. Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.
   
4. On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   

On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.

Comments

1. According to the author, SCA 8 is a bipartisan measure that will require that any county that has three million or more residents based upon the 2020 Census, to add two seats to their board of supervisors. While counties have the ability to address the issue of adequate representation on county boards, only a few such ballot attempts have been made in the last 150 years – all unsuccessfully. Since the 1950s, four of them have taken place in Los Angeles and once in Orange County and rejected each time for inadequate cost controls. SCA 8 has strong and effective cost control by requiring funding of the expanded board at the 2020-21, pre-expansion levels.

As a statewide measure, SCA 8 reduces the historic ability of individual incumbents or groups of incumbents to kill local measures to expand a board, as in 2000 when Los Angeles County Supervisors responded to SCA 7 (Polanco) that sought to expand the Los Angeles County Board. They instead placed County Measure A on the ballot to expand to nine members and insisted on a vacuous cost control mechanism. Once on the ballot, the majority of the five board incumbents raised funds and campaigned against Measure A – using the lack of effective cost control and the near doubling of the members as a platform - to ensure its defeat.

SCA 8 is designed to have the most minimal impact on a county’s authority to manage itself as it restricts itself to expanding the board by two members if the population of the county exceeds three million people. The affected county retains all of its existing powers.

Expanding the number of supervisorial seats for the state’s largest counties will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more responsive and reflective of the needs of the people they represent and serve. This constitutional amendment is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home and to the people they represent.

County boards of supervisor members carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. They oversee a majority of vital services to our residents including healthcare, public safety, traffic, social services, public works, parks, and libraries among others. However, although elected, the number of members on county board of supervisors has not changed since their creation more than 150 years ago, despite dramatic changes in the state’s population, demographics and their increased responsibilities for the services they oversee for their constituents. These types of services require constant attention to the concerns of their constituents in the delivery of these services.

SCA 8 will bring about better delivery of services for residents and accountability to make sure the services are fairly and efficiently provided.

SCA 8 currently covers three counties, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego.

1. Is this the best approach? Some observers note that increasing the size of a county governing board addresses only part of the problem when discussing the ability of county governments to properly function. As the author notes, members of county boards of supervisors carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. Since San Francisco is both a city and county, it is the only county in California with an elected mayor or county executive. However, some or all of the counties in 25 other states also have elected county executives or mayors. An elected county executive relieves the governing board from the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of administrative agencies and allows them to function more like a traditional legislative body. Furthermore, an elected county executive is accountable to the voters in the entire county rather than just those within a supervisorial district.

Related/Prior Legislation

SCA 7 (Polanco, 1999), which was held in the Assembly Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee, would have expanded the minimum number of supervisors for Los Angeles County from five to nine.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• One-time costs in the range of $275,000 to $330,000 to the Secretary of State in 2015-16 for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in the next statewide election. (General Fund)
• Unknown, likely significant local costs and cost pressures to establish additional district boundaries, perform election related duties, and make necessary office and facility improvements, beginning in 2021. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 4/8/16)

American GI Forum of California

Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Los Angeles

California League of United Latin American Citizens

Los Amigos of Orange County

Los Angeles City Employees Chicano Association

Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association

Los Angeles County Hispanic Managers Association

Mexican American Bar Association of Los Angeles County

National Association of Latino Elected Officials

Orange County Employees Association

UDW/AFSCME Local 3930

OPPOSITION: (Verified 4/8/16)

California State Association of Counties

County of San Bernardino

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Orange County Board of Supervisors

Urban Counties Caucus

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association, SCA 8 is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home, protecting the integrity of the board by keeping its core functions intact, without increasing costs for the operations of board member offices.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California State Association of Counties, current law already provides citizens of a charter county with the tools needed to expand their county board of supervisors if they so choose. This can be done through either a local ballot initiative or through a charter proceeding. Each time that this change has been sought by ballot initiatives in Los Angeles and Orange County the voters rejected the expansion.

Prepared by:

4/8/16 12:09:25

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SCA 8

Author:

: 3/30/16

Vote:

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-2, 7/1/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara

NOES: Nguyen, Moorlach

NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley

SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-0, 7/7/15

AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu

NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Bates, Nielsen

SENATE FLOOR: 24-15, 9/10/15 (FAIL)

AYES: Beall, Block, Cannella, De León, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Monning, Nielsen, Pan, Runner, Wieckowski, Wolk

NOES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Berryhill, Fuller, Gaines, Huff, Leyva, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Mitchell

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, if approved by the voters, requires any county with a population greater than three million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

Senate Floor Amendments of 3/30/16 increase the population threshold in SCA 8 from two million residents to three million residents, making the bill’s provisions applicable only to Los Angeles County, San Diego County, and Orange County, based on current population estimates.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/15 (1) add co-authors, (2) clarify that once a county’s population reaches two million, SCA 8 applies and cannot be reversed even if a subsequent Census shows a decline below two million, and (3) provide that a county board of supervisors budget can be increased from the base year annually to reflect the Consumer Price Index.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to the California Constitution, that if a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, it must have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.
   
2. Requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of five members, and requires, except under specified circumstances, each member to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This bill:

1. Requires that a charter or general law county with a population of more than three million residents as of the 2020 U.S. census or thereafter must have a governing body (board of supervisors) of seven or more members.
   
2. Provides that the number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than three million.
3. Provides that the expenditures for affected boards of supervisors and their staffs shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding a population of more than three million, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the county’s adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index. This expenditure limitation shall continue to apply even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than three million.
4. Requires, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members of the board of supervisors to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and imposes that same requirement on all general law counties.

Background

Affected counties. Three counties have populations of more than three million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), and Orange (3.1 million).

Are some supervisorial districts too large? In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County Supervisor represents nearly two million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness. Some observers also suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

1. On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.
2. At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
3. Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.
   
4. On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   

On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.

Comments

1. According to the author, SCA 8 is a bipartisan measure that will require that any county that has three million or more residents based upon the 2020 Census, to add two seats to their board of supervisors. While counties have the ability to address the issue of adequate representation on county boards, only a few such ballot attempts have been made in the last 150 years – all unsuccessfully. Since the 1950s, four of them have taken place in Los Angeles and once in Orange County and rejected each time for inadequate cost controls. SCA 8 has strong and effective cost control by requiring funding of the expanded board at the 2020-21, pre-expansion levels.

As a statewide measure, SCA 8 reduces the historic ability of individual incumbents or groups of incumbents to kill local measures to expand a board, as in 2000 when Los Angeles County Supervisors responded to SCA 7 (Polanco) that sought to expand the Los Angeles County Board. They instead placed County Measure A on the ballot to expand to nine members and insisted on a vacuous cost control mechanism. Once on the ballot, the majority of the five board incumbents raised funds and campaigned against Measure A – using the lack of effective cost control and the near doubling of the members as a platform - to ensure its defeat.

SCA 8 is designed to have the most minimal impact on a county’s authority to manage itself as it restricts itself to expanding the board by two members if the population of the county exceeds three million people. The affected county retains all of its existing powers.

Expanding the number of supervisorial seats for the state’s largest counties will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more responsive and reflective of the needs of the people they represent and serve. This constitutional amendment is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home and to the people they represent.

County boards of supervisor members carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. They oversee a majority of vital services to our residents including healthcare, public safety, traffic, social services, public works, parks, and libraries among others. However, although elected, the number of members on county board of supervisors has not changed since their creation more than 150 years ago, despite dramatic changes in the state’s population, demographics and their increased responsibilities for the services they oversee for their constituents. These types of services require constant attention to the concerns of their constituents in the delivery of these services.

SCA 8 will bring about better delivery of services for residents and accountability to make sure the services are fairly and efficiently provided.

SCA 8 currently covers three counties, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego.

1. Is this the best approach? Some observers note that increasing the size of a county governing board addresses only part of the problem when discussing the ability of county governments to properly function. As the author notes, members of county boards of supervisors carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. Since San Francisco is both a city and county, it is the only county in California with an elected mayor or county executive. However, some or all of the counties in 25 other states also have elected county executives or mayors. An elected county executive relieves the governing board from the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of administrative agencies and allows them to function more like a traditional legislative body. Furthermore, an elected county executive is accountable to the voters in the entire county rather than just those within a supervisorial district.

Related/Prior Legislation

SCA 7 (Polanco, 1999), which was held in the Assembly Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee, would have expanded the minimum number of supervisors for Los Angeles County from five to nine.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• One-time costs in the range of $275,000 to $330,000 to the Secretary of State in 2015-16 for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in the next statewide election. (General Fund)
• Unknown, likely significant local costs and cost pressures to establish additional district boundaries, perform election related duties, and make necessary office and facility improvements, beginning in 2021. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 3/31/16)

American GI Forum of California

California League of United Latin American Citizens

Los Amigos of Orange County

Los Angeles City Employees Chicano Association

Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association

Los Angeles County Hispanic Managers Association

Mexican American Bar Association of Los Angeles County

National Association of Latino Elected Officials

Orange County Employees Association

UDW/AFSCME Local 3930

OPPOSITION: (Verified 3/31/16)

California State Association of Counties

County of San Bernardino

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Orange County Board of Supervisors

Urban Counties Caucus

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association, SCA 8 is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home, protecting the integrity of the board by keeping its core functions intact, without increasing costs for the operations of board member offices.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California State Association of Counties, current law already provides citizens of a charter county with the tools needed to expand their county board of supervisors if they so choose. This can be done through either a local ballot initiative or through a charter proceeding. Each time that this change has been sought by ballot initiatives in Los Angeles and Orange County the voters rejected the expansion.

Prepared by:

3/31/16 15:46:05

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SCA 8

Author: Mendoza (D), et al.

Amended: 9/4/15

Vote: 27

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-2, 7/1/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara

NOES: Nguyen, Moorlach

NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley

SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-0, 7/7/15

AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu

NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Bates, Nielsen

SENATE FLOOR: 24-15, 9/10/15 (FAIL)

AYES: Beall, Block, Cannella, De León, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Monning, Nielsen, Pan, Runner, Wieckowski, Wolk

NOES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Berryhill, Fuller, Gaines, Huff, Leyva, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Mitchell

SUBJECT: Counties: board of supervisors: redistricting

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, if approved by the voters, requires any county with a population greater than two million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/15 (1) add co-authors, (2) clarify that once a county’s population reaches two million, SCA 8 applies and cannot be reversed even if a subsequent Census shows a decline below two million, and (3) provide that a county board of supervisors budget can be increased from the base year annually to reflect the Consumer Price Index.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to the California Constitution, that if a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, it must have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.
   
   

2. Requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of five members, and requires, except under specified circumstances, each member to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This bill:

1. Requires that a charter or general law county with a population of more than two million residents as of the 2020 U.S. census or thereafter must have a governing body (board of supervisors) of seven or more members.
   
   

2. Provides that the number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than two million.

3. Provides that the expenditures for affected boards of supervisors and their staffs shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding a population of more than two million, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the county’s adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index. This expenditure limitation shall continue to apply even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than two million.

4. Requires, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members of the board of supervisors to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and imposes that same requirement on all general law counties.

Background

Affected counties. Five counties have populations of more than two million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), Orange (3.1 million), Riverside (2.3 million), and San Bernardino (2.1 million).

Are some supervisorial districts too large? In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County Supervisor represents nearly two million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness. Some observers also suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

1. On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.

2. At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

3. Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.
   
   

4. On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

5. On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.
   
   

Comments

1. According to the author, SCA 8 is a bipartisan measure that will require that any county that has two million or more residents based upon the 2020 Census, to add two seats to their board of supervisors. While counties have the ability to address the issue of adequate representation on county boards, only a few such ballot attempts have been made in the last 150 years – all unsuccessfully. Since the 1950s, four of them have taken place in Los Angeles and once in Orange County and rejected each time for inadequate cost controls. SCA 8 has strong and effective cost control by requiring funding of the expanded board at the 2020-21, pre-expansion levels.

As a statewide measure, SCA 8 reduces the historic ability of individual incumbents or groups of incumbents to kill local measures to expand a board, as in 2000 when Los Angeles County Supervisors responded to SCA 7 (Polanco) that sought to expand the Los Angeles County Board. They instead placed County Measure A on the ballot to expand to nine members and insisted on a vacuous cost control mechanism. Once on the ballot, the majority of the five board incumbents raised funds and campaigned against Measure A – using the lack of effective cost control and the near doubling of the members as a platform - to ensure its defeat.

SCA 8 is designed to have the most minimal impact on a county’s authority to manage itself as it restricts itself to expanding the board by two members if the population of the county exceeds two million people. The affected county retains all of its existing powers.

Expanding the number of supervisorial seats for the state’s largest counties will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more responsive and reflective of the needs of the people they represent and serve. This constitutional amendment is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home and to the people they represent.

County boards of supervisor members carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. They oversee a majority of vital services to our residents including healthcare, public safety, traffic, social services, public works, parks, and libraries among others. However, although elected, the number of members on county board of supervisors has not changed since their creation more than 150 years ago, despite dramatic changes in the state’s population, demographics and their increased responsibilities for the services they oversee for their constituents. These types of services require constant attention to the concerns of their constituents in the delivery of these services.

SCA 8 will bring about better delivery of services for residents and accountability to make sure the services are fairly and efficiently provided.

SCA 8 currently covers five counties, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and San Diego. Santa Clara may join the list if its population exceeds two million in 2020.

Is this the best approach? Some observers note that increasing the size of a county governing board addresses only part of the problem when discussing the ability of county governments to properly function. As the author notes, members of county boards of supervisors carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. Since San Francisco is both a city and county, it is the only county in California with an elected mayor or county executive. However, some or all of the counties in 25 other states also have elected county executives or mayors. An elected county executive relieves the governing board from the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of administrative agencies and allows them to function more like a traditional legislative body. Furthermore, an elected county executive is accountable to the voters in the entire county rather than just those within a supervisorial district.

Related/Prior Legislation

SCA 7 (Polanco, 1999), which was held in the Assembly Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee, would have expanded the minimum number of supervisors for Los Angeles County from five to nine.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• One-time costs in the range of $275,000 to $330,000 to the Secretary of State in 2015-16 for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in the next statewide election. (General Fund)

• Unknown, likely significant local costs and cost pressures to establish additional district boundaries, perform election related duties, and make necessary office and facility improvements, beginning in 2021. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/4/15)

American GI Forum of California

Los Amigos of Orange County

Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association

Los Angeles County Hispanic Managers Association

UDW/AFSCME Local 3930

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/4/15)

California State Association of Counties

County of San Bernardino

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Orange County Board of Supervisors

Urban Counties Caucus

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association, SCA 8 is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home, protecting the integrity of the board by keeping its core functions intact, without increasing costs for the operations of board member offices.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California State Association of Counties, current law already provides citizens of a charter county with the tools needed to expand their county board of supervisors if they so choose. This can be done through either a local ballot initiative or through a charter proceeding. Each time that this change has been sought by ballot initiatives in Los Angeles and Orange County the voters rejected the expansion.

Prepared by: Darren Chesin / E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106

9/10/15 23:23:41

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SCA 8

Author: Mendoza (D), et al.

Amended: 9/4/15

Vote: 27

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-2, 7/1/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara

NOES: Nguyen, Moorlach

NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley

SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-0, 7/7/15

AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu

NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Bates, Nielsen

SUBJECT: Counties: board of supervisors: redistricting

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, if approved by the voters, requires any county with a population greater than two million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/15 (1) add co-authors, (2) clarify that once a county’s population reaches two million, SCA 8 applies and cannot be reversed even if a subsequent Census shows a decline below two million, and (3) provide that a county board of supervisors budget can be increased from the base year annually to reflect the Consumer Price Index.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to the California Constitution, that if a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, it must have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.
   
   

2. Requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of five members, and requires, except under specified circumstances, each member to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This bill:

1. Requires that a charter or general law county with a population of more than two million residents as of the 2020 U.S. census or thereafter must have a governing body (board of supervisors) of seven or more members.
   
   

2. Provides that the number of members on the governing body shall not thereafter be reduced to fewer than seven members even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than two million.

3. Provides that the expenditures for affected boards of supervisors and their staffs shall not exceed, for any subsequent fiscal year after the release of the census finding a population of more than two million, the amount that was allocated for the expenses of the governing body and its staff in the county’s adopted budget for the fiscal year in which that same census was conducted as adjusted each fiscal year thereafter for changes in the California Consumer Price Index. This expenditure limitation shall continue to apply even if, in a future decennial United States census, the county is not a county with a population of more than two million.

4. Requires, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members of the board of supervisors to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and imposes that same requirement on all general law counties.

Background

Affected counties. Five counties have populations of more than two million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), Orange (3.1 million), Riverside (2.3 million), and San Bernardino (2.1 million).

Are some supervisorial districts too large? In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County Supervisor represents nearly two million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness. Some observers also suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

1. On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.

2. At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

3. Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.
   
   

4. On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

5. On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.
   
   

Comments

1. According to the author, SCA 8 is a bipartisan measure that will require that any county that has two million or more residents based upon the 2020 Census, to add two seats to their board of supervisors. While counties have the ability to address the issue of adequate representation on county boards, only a few such ballot attempts have been made in the last 150 years – all unsuccessfully. Since the 1950s, four of them have taken place in Los Angeles and once in Orange County and rejected each time for inadequate cost controls. SCA 8 has strong and effective cost control by requiring funding of the expanded board at the 2020-21, pre-expansion levels.

As a statewide measure, SCA 8 reduces the historic ability of individual incumbents or groups of incumbents to kill local measures to expand a board, as in 2000 when Los Angeles County Supervisors responded to SCA 7 (Polanco) that sought to expand the Los Angeles County Board. They instead placed County Measure A on the ballot to expand to nine members and insisted on a vacuous cost control mechanism. Once on the ballot, the majority of the five board incumbents raised funds and campaigned against Measure A – using the lack of effective cost control and the near doubling of the members as a platform - to ensure its defeat.

SCA 8 is designed to have the most minimal impact on a county’s authority to manage itself as it restricts itself to expanding the board by two members if the population of the county exceeds two million people. The affected county retains all of its existing powers.

Expanding the number of supervisorial seats for the state’s largest counties will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more responsive and reflective of the needs of the people they represent and serve. This constitutional amendment is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home and to the people they represent.

County boards of supervisor members carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. They oversee a majority of vital services to our residents including healthcare, public safety, traffic, social services, public works, parks, and libraries among others. However, although elected, the number of members on county board of supervisors has not changed since their creation more than 150 years ago, despite dramatic changes in the state’s population, demographics and their increased responsibilities for the services they oversee for their constituents. These types of services require constant attention to the concerns of their constituents in the delivery of these services.

SCA 8 will bring about better delivery of services for residents and accountability to make sure the services are fairly and efficiently provided.

SCA 8 currently covers five counties, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and San Diego. Santa Clara may join the list if its population exceeds two million in 2020.

Is this the best approach? Some observers note that increasing the size of a county governing board addresses only part of the problem when discussing the ability of county governments to properly function. As the author notes, members of county boards of supervisors carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. Since San Francisco is both a city and county, it is the only county in California with an elected mayor or county executive. However, some or all of the counties in 25 other states also have elected county executives or mayors. An elected county executive relieves the governing board from the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of administrative agencies and allows them to function more like a traditional legislative body. Furthermore, an elected county executive is accountable to the voters in the entire county rather than just those within a supervisorial district.

Related/Prior Legislation

SCA 7 (Polanco, 1999), which was held in the Assembly Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee, would have expanded the minimum number of supervisors for Los Angeles County from five to nine.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• One-time costs in the range of $275,000 to $330,000 to the Secretary of State in 2015-16 for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in the next statewide election. (General Fund)

• Unknown, likely significant local costs and cost pressures to establish additional district boundaries, perform election related duties, and make necessary office and facility improvements, beginning in 2021. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/4/15)

American GI Forum of California

Los Amigos of Orange County

Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association

Los Angeles County Hispanic Managers Association

UDW/AFSCME Local 3930

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/4/15)

California State Association of Counties

County of San Bernardino

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Orange County Board of Supervisors

Urban Counties Caucus

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association, SCA 8 is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home, protecting the integrity of the board by keeping its core functions intact, without increasing costs for the operations of board member offices.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California State Association of Counties, current law already provides citizens of a charter county with the tools needed to expand their county board of supervisors if they so choose. This can be done through either a local ballot initiative or through a charter proceeding. Each time that this change has been sought by ballot initiatives in Los Angeles and Orange County the voters rejected the expansion.

Prepared by: Darren Chesin / E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106

9/8/15 22:21:14

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SCA 8

Author: Mendoza (D), et al.

Amended: 7/9/15

Vote: 27

SENATE GOVERNANCE & FIN. COMMITTEE: 4-2, 7/1/15

AYES: Hertzberg, Beall, Hernandez, Lara

NOES: Nguyen, Moorlach

NO VOTE RECORDED: Pavley

SENATE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Bates, Nielsen

SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 4-0, 7/7/15

AYES: Allen, Hancock, Hertzberg, Liu

NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson

SUBJECT: Counties: board of supervisors: redistricting

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, if approved by the voters, requires any county with a population greater than two million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to the California Constitution, that if a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, it must have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.
   
   

2. Requires a general law county to have a board of supervisors consisting of five members, and requires, except under specified circumstances, each member to be elected by the district which the member represents.

This bill:

1. Requires that a charter or general law county with a population of more than two million residents as of the 2020 U.S. census or thereafter must have a governing body (board of supervisors) of seven or more members.

2. Caps expenditures for affected boards of supervisors and their staffs at either the amount budgeted for the 2020-21 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the governing body and staff expenditures had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 fiscal year, whichever is less.

3. Requires, on and after January 1, 2021, a county charter to provide for members of the board of supervisors to be elected by district with a requirement that the member reside in a district, and imposes that same requirement on all general law counties.

Background

Affected counties. Five counties have populations of more than two million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), Orange (3.1 million), Riverside (2.3 million), and San Bernardino (2.1 million).

Are some supervisorial districts too large? In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County Supervisor represents nearly two million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness. Some observers also suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

1. On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.

2. At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

3. Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.
   
   

4. On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the board of supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

5. On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.
   
   

Comments

1. According to the author, SCA 8 is a bipartisan measure that will require that any county that has two million or more residents based upon the 2020 Census, to add two seats to their board of supervisors. While counties have the ability to address the issue of adequate representation on county boards, only a few such ballot attempts have been made in the last 150 years – all unsuccessfully. Since the 1950s, four of them have taken place in Los Angeles and once in Orange County and rejected each time for inadequate cost controls. SCA 8 has strong and effective cost control by requiring funding of the expanded board at the 2020-21, pre-expansion levels.

As a statewide measure, SCA 8 reduces the historic ability of individual incumbents or groups of incumbents to kill local measures to expand a board, as in 2000 when Los Angeles County Supervisors responded to SCA 7 (Polanco) that sought to expand the Los Angeles County Board. They instead placed County Measure A on the ballot to expand to nine members and insisted on a vacuous cost control mechanism. Once on the ballot, the majority of the five board incumbents raised funds and campaigned against Measure A – using the lack of effective cost control and the near doubling of the members as a platform - to ensure its defeat.

SCA 8 is designed to have the most minimal impact on a county’s authority to manage itself as it restricts itself to expanding the board by two members if the population of the county exceeds two million people. The affected county retains all of its existing powers.

Expanding the number of supervisorial seats for the state’s largest counties will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more responsive and reflective of the needs of the people they represent and serve. This constitutional amendment is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home and to the people they represent.

County boards of supervisor members carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. They oversee a majority of vital services to our residents including healthcare, public safety, traffic, social services, public works, parks, and libraries among others. However, although elected, the number of members on county board of supervisors has not changed since their creation more than 150 years ago, despite dramatic changes in the state’s population, demographics and their increased responsibilities for the services they oversee for their constituents. These types of services require constant attention to the concerns of their constituents in the delivery of these services.

SCA 8 will bring about better delivery of services for residents and accountability to make sure the services are fairly and efficiently provided.

SCA 8 currently covers five counties, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and San Diego. Santa Clara may join the list if its population exceeds two million in 2020.

2. Is this the best approach? Some observers note that increasing the size of a county governing board addresses only part of the problem when discussing the ability of county governments to properly function. As the author notes, members of county boards of supervisors carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. Since San Francisco is both a city and county, it is the only county in California with an elected mayor or county executive. However, some or all of the counties in 25 other states also have elected county executives or mayors. An elected county executive relieves the governing board from the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of administrative agencies and allows them to function more like a traditional legislative body. Furthermore, an elected county executive is accountable to the voters in the entire county rather than just those within a supervisorial district.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• One-time costs in the range of $275,000 to $330,000 to the Secretary of State in 2015-16 for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in the next statewide election. (General Fund)
  
  

• Unknown, likely significant local costs and cost pressures to establish additional district boundaries, perform election related duties, and make necessary office and facility improvements, beginning in 2021. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/28/15)

American GI Forum of California

Los Amigos of Orange County

Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association

Los Angeles County Hispanic Managers Association

UDW/AFSCME Local 3930

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/28/15)

California State Association of Counties

County of San Bernardino

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Orange County Board of Supervisors

Urban Counties Caucus

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association, SCA 8 is about increasing representation and accountability in the county governments by bringing them a little closer to home, protecting the integrity of the board by keeping its core functions intact, without increasing costs for the operations of board member offices.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: According to the California State Association of Counties, current law already provides citizens of a charter county with the tools needed to expand their county board of supervisors if they so choose. This can be done through either a local ballot initiative or through a charter proceeding. Each time that this change has been sought by ballot initiatives in Los Angeles and Orange County the voters rejected the expansion.

Prepared by: Darren Chesin / E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106

8/30/15 19:48:51

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

SCA 8 (Mendoza) - Counties: board of supervisors: redistricting

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

SCA 8, if approved by the voters, would require counties with a population greater than two million residents after the 2020 United States Census to have a governing body consisting of at least seven members. The bill would also require members of a county governing body to be elected by district, beginning in 2021.

Fiscal Impact:

• One-time costs in the range of $275,000 to $330,000 to the Secretary of State (SOS) in 2015-16 for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in the next statewide election. (General Fund)
  
  

• Unknown, likely significant local costs and cost pressures to establish additional district boundaries, perform election related duties, and make necessary office and facility improvements, beginning in 2021. (local funds)

Background:

Existing law, Section 4 of Article XI of the California Constitution, requires county charters to provide for a governing body of at least five members, elected by district, or at large, as specified. Existing law authorizes a charter county to expand the number of governing body members by a simple majority vote of its residents. There have only been five attempts to expand charter county boards of supervisors, all of which failed to achieve voter-approval:

• On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five to seven members.

• At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five to nine members.

• Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, but the measure failed by a margin of about two-to-one.

• On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the board of supervisors from five to nine members.

• On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.

There are 14 charter counties in California: Alameda, Butte, El Dorado, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange, Placer, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Tehama. Currently, only five counties have populations of more than two million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), Orange (3.1 million), Riverside (2.3 million), and San Bernardino (2.1 million). All counties in California conduct elections for county supervisors by district.

Proposed Law:

SCA 8 would place a measure on the statewide ballot to amend the California Constitution to do the following:

• Require the county charter in a county with a population of more than two million residents at a decennial U.S. Census, beginning with the 2020 U.S. Census, to provide for a governing body of seven or more members, elected by district, with a requirement that the member reside in a district, as specified.

• Require general law counties with over 2 million residents as of the 2020 U.S. Census to also have a governing body of seven or more members, as specified.

• Require the county charter in a county with over 2 million residents to limit the expenditures for the governing body and its staff to the lesser of the amount budgeted in the 2020-21 fiscal year or the proportional amount that the county budgeted for governing body and staff expenditures as a percentage of the total county budget in 2020-21. These limitations would also apply to general law counties with over 2 million residents as of the 2020 U.S. Census.

• Require the members of a governing body of a general law county to be elected by district, with the member residing in a respective district, beginning in 2021.

• Repeal the authority for any county charter to provide for a governing body elected at large or at large by district on January 1, 2021.

• Repeal constitutional provisions on January 1, 2021 that specify the manner in which some charter counties can prescribe the salary of the governing body by ordinance.

• Make additional non-substantive and conforming changes.

Related Legislation:

SCA 7 (Polanco) of the 1999-2000 Session, would have amended the California Constitution to require a charter county with a population of over 5 million to have a governing body of at least nine members, which only applied to Los Angeles County. The measure was approved by the Senate but held in the Assembly Elections, Redistricting, and Constitutional Amendments Committee.

Staff Comments:

This bill is intended to make California’s largest counties more responsive and representative by mandating the addition of two county supervisors to counties with a population of over 2 million residents, while ensuring that the larger boards do not increase costs for board operations. Staff notes, however, that freezing or reducing the total budgets for governing body members and associated staff at the 2020-21 level would likely result in reduced resources for constituent services. Despite these limits on board operations budgets, affected counties would incur significant one-time costs to make necessary district boundary changes, conduct elections, and make facility improvements.

According to the SOS, the printing and mailing costs associated with placing a measure on the statewide ballot are approximately $55,000 per page, depending on the length of the ballot. The fiscal estimates noted above reflect the addition of a minimum of 5-6 pages in the Voter Information Guide for this initiative. Actual costs would depend upon the length of the title and summary, analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, proponent and opponent arguments, and text of the proposal.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

Senator Ben Allen, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SCA 8 Hearing Date: 7/7/15

Subject: Charter counties: board of supervisors: redistricting

DIGEST

This bill, if approved by the voters, requires any charter county with a population greater than two million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

ANALYSIS

Existing law:

1. Requires, pursuant to the California Constitution, that if a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, it must have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.

This bill:

1. Requires that in a charter county with a population of more than two million residents at a decennial U.S. census, beginning with the 2020 U.S. census, the county charter must provide for a governing body of seven or more members.

2. Caps expenditures for the governing body and its staff, in a charter county with a population of more than 2 million residents, at either the amount budgeted for the 2020-21 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the governing body and staff expenditures had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 fiscal year, whichever is less.

3. Repeals, on January 1, 2021, the authority for any county charter to provide for a governing body elected at-large or at-large by district.

4. Repeals, on January 1, 2021, constitutional language specifying the manner in which some charter counties can prescribe their governing bodies’ compensation by ordinance.

5. Makes additional non-substantive changes to current law.

BACKGROUND

Affected Counties. There are 14 charter counties in California: Alameda, Butte, El Dorado, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange, Placer, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Tehama. San Francisco, a city and county, elects its 11 supervisors by districts. The other charter counties all elect their five-member boards of supervisors by districts.

Five counties have populations of more than two million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), Orange (3.1 million), Riverside (2.3 million), and San Bernardino (2.1 million).

Are Some Supervisorial Districts Too Large? In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County supervisor represents nearly two million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness. Some observers also suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

1. On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.

2. At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

3. Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.
   
   

4. On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the board of supervisors from five members to nine members.
   
   

5. On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.
   
   

COMMENTS

1. According to the author: SCA 8 is a bipartisan measure that will require that any county that has two million or more residents based upon the 2020 Census, to add two seats to their board of supervisors. While counties have the ability to address the issue of adequate representation on county boards, only a few such ballot attempts have been made in the last 150 years – all unsuccessfully. Since the 1950s, four of them have taken place in Los Angeles and once in Orange county and rejected each time for inadequate cost controls. SCA 8 has strong and effective cost control by requiring funding of the expanded board at the 2020-21, pre-expansion levels.

As a statewide measure, SCA 8 reduces the historic ability of individual incumbents or groups of incumbents to kill local measures to expand a board, as in 2000 when Los Angeles County Supervisors responded to SCA 7 (Polanco) that sought to expand the LA County Board. They instead placed County Measure A on the ballot to expand to nine members and insisted on a vacuous cost control mechanism. Once on the ballot, the majority of the five board incumbents raised funds and campaigned against Measure A – using the lack of effective cost control and the near doubling of the members as a platform - to ensure its defeat.

SCA 8 is designed to have the most minimal impact on a county’s authority to manage itself as it restricts itself to expanding the Board by two members if the population of the county exceeds two million people. The affected County retains all of its existing powers.

Expanding the number of supervisorial seats for the state’s largest counties will provide the opportunity for these bodies to be more responsive and reflective of the needs of the people they represent and serve. This constitutional amendment is about increasing representation and accountability in our county governments by bringing them a little closer to home and to the people they represent.

County boards of supervisor members carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. They oversee a majority of vital services to our residents including healthcare, public safety, traffic, social services, public works, parks, and libraries among others. However, although elected, the number of members on county board of supervisors has not changed since their creation more than 150 years ago, despite dramatic changes in the state’s population, demographics and their increased responsibilities for the services they oversee for their constituents. These types of services require constant attention to the concerns of their constituents in the delivery of these services.

SCA 8 will bring about better delivery of services for residents and accountability to make sure the services are fairly and efficiently provided.

As amended, SCA 8 would currently cover five counties, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange, and San Diego. Santa Clara may join the list if its population exceeds two million in 2020.

2. Proposed Author’s Amendments. The author has informed the committee that he wishes to amend this bill to include general law counties with a population of more than two million. Such an amendment would have the effect of including Riverside County within it provisions. The proposed amendments would also clarify that the seven board members be elected by district, require that the members reside in the district, and that they be subject to existing statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts.
   
   

3. Is This the Best Approach? Some observers note that increasing the size of a county governing board addresses only part of the problem when discussing the ability of county governments to properly function. As the author notes, members of county boards of supervisors carry out legislative and executive branch responsibilities for their constituents. Since San Francisco is both a city and county, it is the only county in California with an elected mayor or county executive. However, some or all of the counties in 25 other states also have elected county executives or mayors. An elected county executive relieves the governing board from the responsibility of overseeing the day-to-day operations of administrative agencies and allows them to function more like a traditional legislative body. Furthermore, an elected county executive is accountable to the voters in the entire county rather than just those within a supervisorial district.

RELATED/PRIOR LEGISLATION

SCA 7 (Polanco) of 1999-2000, which was held in Assembly Elections Committee, would have expanded the minimum number of supervisors for Los Angeles County from five to nine.

PRIOR ACTION

POSITIONS

Sponsor: Author

Support: Los Amigos of Orange County

Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association

Oppose: California State Association of Counties

Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Orange County Board of Supervisors

San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors

Urban Counties Caucus

-- END –

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE

Senator Robert M. Hertzberg, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

CHARTER COUNTIES’ BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS

Requires any charter county with a population greater than 2 million residents after the 2020 U.S. census to have a governing body comprised of at least seven members.

Background and Existing Law

If a county adopts its own voter-approved charter, the California Constitution requires the county to have a directly elected board of supervisors with at least five members. The Constitution allows charter counties to elect their supervisors by districts, from districts, or at large.

There are 14 charter counties: Alameda, Butte, El Dorado, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange, Placer, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Tehama. San Francisco, a city and county, elects its 11 supervisors by districts. The other charter counties elect their five-member boards of supervisors by districts.

Five counties have populations of more than 2 million residents: Los Angeles (10.1 million), San Diego (3.2 million), Orange (3.1 million), Riverside (2.3 million), and San Bernardino (2.1 million). In large counties, some observers complain that the size of the supervisorial districts result in unrepresentative democracy. Each Los Angeles County supervisor represents nearly 2 million constituents, which is larger than the countywide population in 53 of California’s 58 counties. The extreme ratio between constituents and supervisors can lead to political alienation and a lack of political responsiveness.

Although voters can amend their county's charter to expand the number of supervisors, there are no recent successes:

• On November 6, 1962, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition D, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to seven members.

• At the November 2, 1976 General Election, Los Angeles County voters rejected Proposition B, which would have expanded the Board of Supervisors from five members to nine members.

• Proposition C on the November 3, 1992 ballot, would have increased the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five to nine members, failed by a margin of about two-to-one.

• On the March 26, 1996 primary ballot, voters in Orange County rejected Measure U, a charter proposal to expand the board of supervisors from five members to nine members.

• On November 7, 2000, more than 64% of Los Angeles County voters rejected Measure A, which would have increased the number of county supervisors from five to nine.

Some observers suggest that five-member boards of supervisors provide few opportunities to increase the diversity of the members to better represent demographic changes in California’s most populous counties. They want the Legislature to propose an amendment to the California Constitution that, if approved by California voters, would expand some charter counties’ boards of supervisors to at least seven members after the next U.S. Census in 2020.

Proposed Law

Senate Constitutional Amendment 8 requires that in a charter county with a population of more than 2 million residents at a decennial United States census, beginning with the 2020 United States census, the county charter must provide for a governing body of 7 or more members.

SCA 8 caps expenditures for the governing body and its staff, in a charter county with a population of more than 2 million residents, at either the amount budgeted for the 2020-21 fiscal year or the amount that has the same proportion to total county expenditures as the governing body and staff expenditures had to the total county budget in the 2020-21 fiscal year, whichever is less.

SCA 8 repeals, on January 1, 2021, the authority for any county charter to provide for a governing body elected at-large or at-large by district.

SCA 8 repeals, on January 1, 2021, constitutional language specifying the manner in which some charter counties can prescribe their governing bodies’ compensation by ordinance.

SCA 8 renumbers provisions within Section 4 of Article XI of the California Constitution, adds a cross-reference to the new Section 4.5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, and makes additional non-substantive changes to current law.

State Revenue Impact

No estimate.

Comments

1. Purpose of the measure. In 1850, Los Angeles County’s five-member board of supervisors governed just 3,530 people. Today, five Los Angeles County Supervisors govern more than 10 million county residents, a population larger than most states’ populations. Even though charter counties can boost the size of their boards of supervisors and create numerically more representative governments, no recent ballot measure has succeeded. Massive supervisorial districts create barriers to running for a seat on a county board and make it difficult for supervisors to engage with and respond to their constituents. If county government structures don’t adapt to the enormous changes in the size, demographic composition, and service needs of their populations, some county residents may become increasingly frustrated and disengaged. SCA 8 will make county governments more responsive and representative by adding two members to the board of some of California’s largest counties, while ensuring that the larger boards do not increase costs to taxpayers for board operations.

2. State interest vs. home rule. Counties adopt voter-approved charters to gain more local control over their governance and employees. Voters in any county can adopt a charter that calls for more county supervisors. Voters in any charter county can increase the size of its board. Over a span of more than four decades, Los Angeles County voters have rejected multiple charter amendments that would have expanded the board of supervisors. Orange County voters also rejected a county charter proposal to create a nine members board of supervisors. If local voters don’t support expanding boards of supervisors, why should legislators ask voters throughout California to amend the Constitution to tell Los Angeles County and Orange County residents how to govern themselves? Should votes cast by residents in the San Francisco Bay Area really outweigh local votes in determining the size of the governing bodies in San Diego County or San Bernardino County? SCA 8 may not be consistent with the home-rule purpose of county charters.

3. Bigger boards, or smaller counties? It is unclear whether adding members to a board of supervisors is the best way to ensure that a county government is reflective of, and responsive to, the full diversity of interests within each county’s population. Even if the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors were expanded to nine members, each supervisor would still represent more than 1 million constituents, producing only a relatively modest increase in the representativeness of the board of supervisors. More substantial changes to county governance may be needed to produce the results sought by SCA 8’s proponents. It has been more than a century since California has created a new county. The massive demographic changes that the state has experienced since Imperial County became the 58^th county in 1907 may warrant a reconsideration of existing county jurisdictions. The statutes governing the formation of new counties have remained largely unchanged since 1974. Legislators may wish to consider whether streamlining the process for creating new counties out of territory within existing counties that have more than 2 million residents may be a more effective way to create new county government structures that will better represent and serve all Californians.

4. Balancing interests. Policymakers may wish to consider other ways to balance voters’ authority to determine a charter county’s governance structure with the state’s interest in ensuring that extremely large districts represented by county supervisors don’t undermine county governments’ representativeness and responsiveness. One possible model is Senate Constitutional Amendment 17 (Marks, 1993), which would have required any charter county with a population of more than 1.5 million residents to hold an election on increasing the number of county supervisors after each census. SCA 17 died in the Senate Local Government Committee without a vote. A recurring election requirement could ensure that the issue of expanding boards of supervisors would regularly be placed on voters’ agenda. However, such an amendment would not guarantee that any board of supervisors would, in fact, be expanded.

5. Who’s in, and who’s out? SCA 8 affects four of the 14 charter counties: Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange, and San Bernardino. Department of Finance demographic projections suggest that Santa Clara County’s population in 2020 may fall just short of SCA 8’s threshold of 2 million residents. Although Riverside County has a population that exceeds 2 million residents, it is not a charter county and, therefore, remains unaffected by SCA 8. If legislators want to require Riverside County to expand its board of supervisors, they will need to either amend the provisions of Government Code §25000, which requires general law counties to have five-member boards of supervisors, or amend the California Constitution to apply a minimum size requirement to general law counties’ boards.

6. Let’s be clear. Although SCA 8 is intended to require that the most populous charter counties must elect at least seven county supervisors by district after the 2020 census, the amendment is drafted in a way that makes it ambiguous whether the requirement that supervisors must be elected by district would apply to the largest charter counties. To prevent possible misinterpretations, the Committee may wish to consider amending SCA 8 to specify that counties with populations of more than 2 million after the 2020 census must:

• Elect the seven members of their boards of supervisors by district.

• Require that the members reside in the district.

• Be subject to statutes that relate to apportioning population of governing body districts.

7. Prior legislation. SCA 8 is similar to SCA 7 (Polanco, 1999), which would have expanded the board of supervisors in any charter county with more than 5 million residents from five members to seven members. SCA 7 was passed by the Senate, but died in an Assembly policy committee.

8. Double-referral. The Senate Rules Committee has ordered a double-referral of SCA 8 --- first to the Senate Governance & Finance Committee which has policy jurisdiction over county governments, and then to the Senate Elections & Constitutional Amendments Committee, which has jurisdiction over all proposed constitutional amendments.

Support and Opposition

(6/25/15)

Support: Los Amigos of Orange County.

Opposition: Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors; Orange County Board of Supervisors; San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors.

-- END --