The California Constitution provides that a proposed constitutional amendment and a statewide initiative measure each take effect only if approved by a majority of the votes cast on the amendment or measure.

This measure would further provide that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure would be approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose. The measure would specify that this voter approval requirement would apply to statewide initiative measures that appear on the ballot on or after January 1, 2024.

The California Constitution also permits initiative and referendum powers to be exercised by the voters of each city or county under procedures provided by the Legislature.

This measure would expressly authorize a local governing body to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. The measure would specify that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor.

This measure would further declare that its provisions are severable and that if any provision is held invalid, the other provisions of the act remain valid, as specified.

The California Constitution provides that a proposed constitutional amendment and a statewide initiative measure each take effect only if approved by a majority of the votes cast on the amendment or measure.

This measure would further provide that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure would be approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose. The measure would specify that this voter approval requirement would apply to statewide initiative measures that appear on the ballot on or after January 1, 2024.

The California Constitution also permits initiative and referendum powers to be exercised by the voters of each city or county under procedures provided by the Legislature.

This measure would expressly authorize a local governing body to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. The measure would specify that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor.

This measure would further declare that its provisions are severable and that if any provision is held invalid, the other provisions of the act remain valid, as specified.

The California Constitution provides that a proposed constitutional amendment and a statewide initiative measure each take effect only if approved by a majority of the votes cast on the amendment or measure.

This measure would further provide that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure would be approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose. The measure would specify that this voter approval requirement would apply to statewide initiative measures that appear on the ballot on or after January 1, 2024.

The California Constitution also permits initiative and referendum powers to be exercised by the voters of each city or county under procedures provided by the Legislature.

This measure would expressly authorize a local governing body to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. The measure would specify that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor.

This measure would further declare that its provisions are severable and that if any provision is held invalid, the other provisions of the act remain valid, as specified.

The California Constitution provides that a proposed constitutional amendment and a statewide initiative measure each take effect only if approved by a majority of the votes cast on the amendment or measure.

This measure would further provide that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure would be approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose.

The California Constitution also permits initiative and referendum powers to be exercised by the voters of each city or county under procedures provided by the Legislature.

This measure would expressly authorize a local governing body to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. The measure would specify that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor.

This measure would further declare that its provisions are severable and that if any provision is held invalid, the other provisions of the act remain valid, as specified.

Under the California Constitution, the Legislature may propose an amendment to the Constitution, as specified. The Constitution permits voters to vote upon various statewide measures appearing on the ballot, including constitutional amendments, initiative statutes, and referenda. The Constitution also permits initiative and referendum powers to be exercised by local voters under procedures provided by the Legislature.

This measure would state the intent of the Legislature to propose an amendment to the Constitution relating to ballot measures.

WHEREAS, In an era of special interests and others attempting to manipulate the electoral process, it is important to preserve the fundamental right of California citizens to approve statewide initiative statutes and referenda by a majority vote; and

WHEREAS, Initiative measures proposing to amend the Constitution to increase the vote requirement above a majority vote to pass other state and local measures violate the principle of majority rule; and

WHEREAS, Citizens have a substantial interest in voicing their opinions on issues of local governance and must be allowed to approve local advisory measures by majority vote; and

WHEREAS, The provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978; and

WHEREAS, The purpose of this measure is to do all of the following:

(a)Retain the majority vote requirement to pass statewide initiative statutes and referenda;

(b)Provide that any proposed initiative measure that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to pass other state or local measures is effective only if the initiative is approved by the highest vote requirement it imposes on other measures;

(c)Constitutionally authorize local governments to submit questions to voters asking for their opinion on issues of governance; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act; and be it further

Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 202324 Regular Session, commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, 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)An initiative statute or referendum approved by the electors pursuant to Section 10.5 takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute, the remainder of the statute shall not be delayed from going into effect.

(b)If provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

(c)The Legislature may amend or repeal a referendum statute. The Legislature may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without the electors approval.

(d)Before circulation of an initiative or referendum petition for signatures, a copy shall be submitted to the Attorney General who shall prepare a title and summary of the measure as provided by law.

(e)The Legislature shall provide for the manner in which a petition shall be circulated, presented, and certified, and the manner in which a measure shall be submitted to the electors.

(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), a statewide initiative statute or referendum is approved if a majority of the votes cast on the measure are in favor.

(b)Notwithstanding Section 4 of Article XVIII or any other provision of the Constitution, an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure is approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose for the adoption of any state or local measure.

(c)This section applies to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors.

At any election, pursuant to procedures that the Legislature shall provide, a local governing body may hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. An advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. The results of the advisory vote shall in no manner be controlling on the sponsoring local governing body.

The provisions of this measure are severable. If any portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, or application of this measure is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this measure. The people of the State of California hereby declare that they would have adopted this measure and each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this measure or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

WHEREAS, In an era of special interests and others attempting to manipulate the electoral process, it is important to preserve the fundamental right of California citizens to approve statewide initiative statutes and referenda by a majority vote; and

WHEREAS, Initiative measures proposing to amend the Constitution to increase the vote requirement above a majority vote to pass other state and local measures violate the principle of majority rule; and

WHEREAS, Citizens have a substantial interest in voicing their opinions on issues of local governance and must be allowed to approve local advisory measures by majority vote; and

WHEREAS, The provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978; and

WHEREAS, The purpose of this measure is to do all of the following:

(a)Retain the majority vote requirement to pass statewide initiative statutes and referenda;

(b)Provide that any proposed initiative measure that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to pass other state or local measures is effective only if the initiative is approved by the highest vote requirement it imposes on other measures;

(c)Constitutionally authorize local governments to submit questions to voters asking for their opinion on issues of governance; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act; and be it further

Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 202324 Regular Session, commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, 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)An initiative statute or referendum approved by the electors pursuant to Section 10.5 takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute, the remainder of the statute shall not be delayed from going into effect.

(b)If provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

(c)The Legislature may amend or repeal a referendum statute. The Legislature may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without the electors approval.

(d)Before circulation of an initiative or referendum petition for signatures, a copy shall be submitted to the Attorney General who shall prepare a title and summary of the measure as provided by law.

(e)The Legislature shall provide for the manner in which a petition shall be circulated, presented, and certified, and the manner in which a measure shall be submitted to the electors.

(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), a statewide initiative statute or referendum is approved if a majority of the votes cast on the measure are in favor.

(b)Notwithstanding Section 4 of Article XVIII or any other provision of the Constitution, an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure is approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose for the adoption of any state or local measure.

(c)This section applies to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors.

At any election, pursuant to procedures that the Legislature shall provide, a local governing body may hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. An advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. The results of the advisory vote shall in no manner be controlling on the sponsoring local governing body.

The provisions of this measure are severable. If any portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, or application of this measure is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this measure. The people of the State of California hereby declare that they would have adopted this measure and each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this measure or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

WHEREAS, In an era of special interests and others attempting to manipulate the electoral process, it is important to preserve the fundamental right of California citizens to approve statewide initiative statutes and referenda by a majority vote; and

WHEREAS, Initiative measures proposing to amend the Constitution to increase the vote requirement above a majority vote to pass other state and local measures violate the principle of majority rule; and

WHEREAS, Citizens have a substantial interest in voicing their opinions on issues of local governance and must be allowed to approve local advisory measures by majority vote; and

WHEREAS, The purpose of this measure is to do all of the following:

(a)Retain the majority vote requirement to pass statewide initiative statutes and referenda;

(b)Provide that any proposed initiative measure that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to pass other state or local measures is effective only if the initiative is approved by the highest vote requirement it imposes on other measures;

(c)Constitutionally authorize local governments to submit questions to voters asking for their opinion on issues of governance; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act; and be it further

Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 202324 Regular Session, commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California, California that the Constitution of the State be amended as follows:

(a)An initiative statute or referendum approved by the electors pursuant to Section 10.5 takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute, the remainder of the statute shall not be delayed from going into effect.

(b)If provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

(c)The Legislature may amend or repeal a referendum statute. The Legislature may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without the electors approval.

(d)Before circulation of an initiative or referendum petition for signatures, a copy shall be submitted to the Attorney General who shall prepare a title and summary of the measure as provided by law.

(e)The Legislature shall provide for the manner in which a petition shall be circulated, presented, and certified, and the manner in which a measure shall be submitted to the electors.

(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), a statewide initiative statute or referendum is approved if a majority of the votes cast on the measure are in favor.

(b)Notwithstanding Section 4 of Article XVIII or any other provision of the Constitution, an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure is approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose for the adoption of any state or local measure.

At any election, pursuant to procedures that the Legislature shall provide, a local governing body may hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. An advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. The results of the advisory vote shall in no manner be controlling on the sponsoring local governing body.

The provisions of this measure are severable. If any portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, or application of this measure is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this measure. The people of the State of California hereby declare that they would have adopted this measure and each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this measure or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

WHEREAS, In an era of special interests and others attempting to manipulate the electoral process, it is important to preserve the fundamental right of California citizens to approve statewide initiative statutes and referenda by a majority vote; and

WHEREAS, Initiative measures proposing to amend the Constitution to increase the vote requirement above a majority vote to pass other state and local measures violate the principle of majority rule; and

WHEREAS, Citizens have a substantial interest in voicing their opinions on issues of local governance and must be allowed to approve local advisory measures by majority vote; and

WHEREAS, The purpose of this measure is to do all of the following:

(a)Retain the majority vote requirement to pass statewide initiative statutes and referenda;

(b)Provide that any proposed initiative measure that would amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to pass other state or local measures is effective only if the initiative is approved by the highest vote requirement it imposes on other measures;

(c)Constitutionally authorize local governments to submit questions to voters asking for their opinion on issues of governance; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, Resolved, That this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act. Act; and be it further

Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 202324 Regular Session, commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, 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)An initiative statute or referendum approved by the electors pursuant to Section 10.5 takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute, the remainder of the statute shall not be delayed from going into effect.

(b)If provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

(c)The Legislature may amend or repeal a referendum statute. The Legislature may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without the electors approval.

(d)Before circulation of an initiative or referendum petition for signatures, a copy shall be submitted to the Attorney General who shall prepare a title and summary of the measure as provided by law.

(e)The Legislature shall provide for the manner in which a petition shall be circulated, presented, and certified, and the manner in which a measure shall be submitted to the electors.

(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), a statewide initiative statute or referendum is approved if a majority of the votes cast on the measure are in favor.

(b)Notwithstanding Section 4 of Article XVIII, XVIII or any other provision of the Constitution, an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure is approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose for the adoption of any state of or local measure.

At any election, pursuant to procedures that the Legislature shall provide, a local governing body may hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. An advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. The results of the advisory vote shall in no manner be controlling on the sponsoring local governing body.

The provisions of this measure are severable. If any portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, or application of this measure is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this measure. The people of the State of California hereby declare that they would have adopted this measure and each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this measure or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

RESOLVED, That this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act.

Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 202324 Regular Session, commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, 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)An initiative statute or referendum approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute, the remainder of the statute shall not be delayed from going into effect.

(b)If provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

(c)The Legislature may amend or repeal a referendum statute. The Legislature may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without the electors approval.

(d)Before circulation of an initiative or referendum petition for signatures, a copy shall be submitted to the Attorney General who shall prepare a title and summary of the measure as provided by law.

(e)The Legislature shall provide for the manner in which a petition shall be circulated, presented, and certified, and the manner in which a measure shall be submitted to the electors.

(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), a statewide initiative statute or referendum is approved if a majority of the votes cast on the measure are in favor.

(b)Notwithstanding Section 4 of Article XVIII, an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure is approved by the voters only if the proportion of votes cast in favor of the initiative measure is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement that the initiative measure would impose for the adoption of any state of local measure.

At any election, pursuant to procedures that the Legislature shall provide, a local governing body may hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. An advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. The results of the advisory vote shall in no manner be controlling on the sponsoring local governing body.

The provisions of this measure are severable. If any portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, or application of this measure is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this measure. The people of the State of California hereby declare that they would have adopted this measure and each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this measure or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 202324 Regular Session, commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, 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:

It is the intent of the Legislature to propose an amendment to the Constitution relating to ballot measures.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:ACA 13

Author:(Ward)

As Amended Ver:September 11, 2023

2/3 vote

SUMMARY

Requires an initiative constitutional amendment to comply with any increased voter approval threshold that it seeks to impose on future ballot measures. Guarantees in the state constitution the ability of local governments to submit advisory questions to voters.

Senate Amendments

1. Specify that the provisions of this measure regarding voter approval thresholds applies to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election as this measure.
2. Specify that the provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978.

COMMENTS

Under existing law, any state ballot measure can be approved by a simple majority vote of the electorate, regardless of the changes to state law made by the measure. By contrast, some local ballot measures are subject to higher vote requirements. For instance, a local measure that is placed on the ballot by a local governing body and that proposes a special tax (a tax for which the proceeds will be used for a specific purpose) requires a two-thirds vote of the electorate.

If this measure qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it would mark the first time that any state ballot measure would require more than a simple majority vote to be approved. Specifically, state ballot measures that 1) are initiative measures (the term "initiative" refers exclusively to a proposed law that qualifies for the ballot through the collection of voters' signatures on an initiative petition), 2) propose to amend the state constitution, and 3) propose to increase the vote required for voters to approve a state or local ballot measure would be subject to a voter approval threshold that is greater than a simple majority vote.

On February 1, 2023, the Secretary of State (SOS) certified that initiative #1935 (referred to as "The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act" by its proponent) – a measure that would amend the California Constitution to change the rules for how the state and local governments can impose taxes, fees, and other charges – is eligible to appear on the ballot at the November 5, 2024, statewide general election. The proponent of that initiative can withdraw it at any time through June 27, 2024. If the proponent does not withdraw the initiative by that deadline, the SOS will certify that the measure is qualified and it will appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot.

Among other provisions, initiative #1935 requires that any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate to take effect. Recent case law suggests that local special taxes that are proposed by a local initiative measure can be approved by a majority vote of the electorate. By contrast, local special taxes that are placed on the ballot by a local governmental body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. Additionally, initiative #1935 prohibits an advisory measure from appearing on the same ballot as a local measure that proposes a general tax if the advisory measure would indicate that the revenue from the general tax will, could, or should be used for a specific purpose.

If this measure applied to the voter's consideration of initiative #1935, it appears that initiative #1935 would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters in order to take effect. However, while this measure likely would affect the vote requirement for initiative #1935, its effects are not limited to that initiative. Rather, the provisions of this measure would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and that proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure.

The provisions of this measure related to the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments apply only to initiatives that seek to make it more difficult for voters to take a specified action by approving a ballot measure. It does not affect the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments that seek only to make it harder for a governmental body to approve a specified action by increasing the vote by which that body must approve an action.

For example, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of the local electorate to approve any ballot measure that sought to rezone parcels would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters if this measure takes effect. By contrast, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of a local governing body to rezone parcels would be subject to a simple majority vote (provided that the initiative did not also include other provisions that affected the vote requirement for actions taken by voters).

The Senate amendments to this measure provide that its provisions apply to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election as this measure. This measure, as amended in the Senate, is consistent with prior Assembly actions.

As a constitutional amendment, this measure requires the approval of the voters to take effect.

According to the Author

"The Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act, ACA 13, would retain the majority vote requirement for passage of state and local initiatives. ACA 13 will require proposed initiatives that seek to increase vote thresholds on future ballot measures to pass with that same proportional higher vote threshold. For example, a measure that would impose a two-thirds vote threshold on future measures should also pass with a two-thirds vote. Cities and counties also often place non-binding advisory measures on the ballot to allow voters to weigh in on various issues. This is a critical tool that allows voters to advise local government, and ACA 13 would protect the right of cities to place advisory questions on the ballot to ask voters their opinion on issues."

Arguments in Support

The sponsor of this measure, the California State Council of Service Employees International Union (SEIU California), writes, "One of the most sacred principles of democracy, the majority vote, is under attack. Anti-Democratic efforts are seeking to establish and enshrine the right of a privileged and powerful minority to veto the will of the people. These anti-democratic measures to increase voter thresholds are intended to take away our freedoms such as abortion access and to prevent progress. As a result, we must take additional steps to fortify the foundations of our democracy and place ACA 13 on the March 2024 ballot. ACA 13 is simple. It would retain and protect the majority vote, require any initiative that increases voter approval requirements to also be approved at the higher level, and would ensure local governments can always ask voters for their opinion on issues. ACA 13 protects the democratic principle of 'one person, one vote.'"

Arguments in Opposition

In opposition to this measure, the California Business Roundtable writes, "The initiative process is a vital tool for Californians to voice their concerns, propose changes, and stand up for their values. It allows citizens to bypass the usual legislative channels and bring about changes that matter deeply to them. However, ACA 13 risks diminishing these voices, shifting power away from the people and towards the Legislature in a drastic and unprecedented way. Under ACA 13, the power to increase voter thresholds for new and higher taxes would vest solely with the Legislature, taking away a fundamental and often-used tool for voters looking to better control their cost of living and higher taxes. However, the power to reduce voter thresholds would remain with both citizens and the Legislature, creating significant power imbalance and an unlevel playing field."

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, one-time costs of approximately $987,000 to the SOS for printing and mailing expenses associated with placing the measure on the ballot at the next statewide election (General Fund). Based on the average cost per page of the last three elections, the SOS estimates such costs to be approximately $123,000 per page, and the magnitude of costs for this bill depends on the length of the title and summary, analysis by the Legislative Analyst's Office, proponent and opponent arguments, and text of the proposal for publication in the Voter Information Guide. The SOS estimates this measure to result in eight additional pages.

VOTES:

ASM ELECTIONS: 5-2-1

YES: Pellerin, Bennett, Lee, Low, Berman

NO: Lackey, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Blanca Rubio

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 9-4-3

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Soria, Weber, Wilson

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 57-19-4

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

NO: Alanis, Chen, Megan Dahle, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Lackey, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Sanchez, Ta, Waldron, Wallis

ABS, ABST OR NV: Bains, Grayson, Schiavo, Soria

UPDATED

VERSION: September 11, 2023

CONSULTANT: Ethan Jones / ELECTIONS / (916) 319-2094 FN: 0002428

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: ACA 13

Author: Ward (D), et al.

Amended: 9/11/23 in Senate

Vote: 27

SENATE ELECTIONS & C.A. COMMITTEE: 6-1, 9/11/23

AYES: Glazer, Allen, McGuire, Menjivar, Newman, Umberg

NOES: Nguyen

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 9/12/23

AYES: Portantino, Ashby, Bradford, Wahab, Wiener

NOES: Jones, Seyarto

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 57-19, 9/6/23 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Voting thresholds

SOURCE: California School Employees Association, AFL-CIO

SEIU California

DIGEST:

This constitutional amendment, subject to voter approval, requires an initiative constitutional amendment to comply with any increased voter approval threshold that it seeks to impose on future ballot measures. This measure also enshrines in the state constitution the ability of local governments to submit advisory questions to voters.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Permits voters to propose statutes or amendments to the California Constitution by initiative.
2. Provides that a state initiative statute that is approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State (SOS) files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on.
3. Provides that a proposed constitutional amendment that is approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the SOS files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on.
4. Permits each city, county, school district, community college district, county board of education, and special district to hold an advisory election for the purpose of allowing voters to voice their opinions on substantive issues, as specified.
5. Provides that every constitutional amendment, bond measure, or other legislative measure submitted to the people by the Legislature shall appear on the ballot of the first statewide election occurring at least 131 days after the adoption of the proposal by the Legislature.
6. Provides that a proposed amendment or revision to the California Constitution, if approved by a majority of votes cast thereon, takes effect on the fifth day after the SOS files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. Provides that if provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

This constitutional amendment:

1. Provides that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the California Constitution, and that increases the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure, must receive a proportion of votes in favor of the initiative that is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement imposed by the initiative for the adoption of a state or local measure.
2. Permits a local governing body, at any election, to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. Provides that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. Provides that the results of the advisory vote are not controlling on the local governing body.
3. Provides that the provisions of this amendment apply to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors.
4. Contains intent language stating that the provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the California Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978.
5. Provides that this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act.
6. Contains a severability clause.
7. Makes a conforming change.

Background

Supermajority Vote Requirements. Under existing law, any state ballot measure can be approved by a simple majority vote of the electorate, regardless of the changes to state law made by the measure. By contrast, some local ballot measures are subject to higher vote requirements. For example, a local measure that is placed on the ballot by a local governing body that proposes a special tax (a tax for which the proceeds will be used for a specific purpose) requires a two-thirds vote of the electorate.

If this measure qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it would mark the first time that any state ballot measure would require more than a simple majority vote to be approved. Specifically, state ballot measures that (1) are initiative measures (the term “initiative” refers exclusively to a proposed law that qualifies for the ballot through the collection of voters’ signatures on an initiative petition), (2) propose to amend the state constitution, and (3) propose to increase the vote required for voters to approve a state or local ballot measure would be subject to a voter approval threshold that is greater than a simple majority vote.

The provisions of ACA 13 would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure. ACA 13 does not affect vote thresholds currently in effect.

Prior Effort to Impose Supermajority Vote Requirement on State Ballot Measures. Notwithstanding the fact that all state ballot measures require a simple majority to pass, at least one prior initiative measure sought to impose a supermajority vote requirement on certain state ballot measures.

Specifically, Proposition 136, which appeared on the ballot at the November 1990 statewide general election, would have required any state special taxes that were proposed by a state initiative measure to be approved by two-thirds of the voters, among other provisions. Proposition 136 failed narrowly, receiving 47.9% of the vote.

Voter Approval Thresholds Only. The provisions of this measure related to the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments apply only to initiatives that seek to make it more difficult for voters to take a specified action by approving a ballot measure. It does not affect the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments that seek only to make it harder for a governmental body to approve a specified action by increasing the vote by which that body must approve an action.

For example, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of the local electorate to approve any ballot measure that sought to rezone parcels would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters if this measure takes effect. By contrast, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of a local governing body to rezone parcels would be subject to a simple majority vote (provided that the initiative did not also include other provisions that affected the vote requirement for actions taken by voters).

Pending Initiative. On February 1, 2023, the SOS certified that initiative #1935—a measure that would amend the California Constitution to change the rules for how the state and local governments can impose taxes, fees, and other charges—is eligible to appear on the ballot at the November 5, 2024, statewide general election. The proponent of that initiative can withdraw it at any time through June 27, 2024. If the proponent does not withdraw the initiative by that deadline, the SOS will certify that the measure is qualified and it will appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot.

Among other provisions, initiative #1935 requires that any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate to take effect. Recent case law suggests that local special taxes that are proposed by a local initiative measure can be approved by a majority vote of the electorate. By contrast, local special taxes that are placed on the ballot by a local governmental body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. Additionally, initiative #1935 prohibits an advisory measure from appearing on the same ballot as a local measure that proposes a general tax if the advisory measure would indicate that the revenue from the general tax will, could, or should be used for a specific purpose.

If this measure applied to the voter’s consideration of initiative #1935, it appears that initiative #1935 would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters in order to take effect. However, while this measure likely would affect the vote requirement for initiative #1935, its effects are not limited to that initiative. The provisions of ACA 13 would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and that proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure.

Advisory Measures. As detailed above, the California Elections Code already permits cities, counties, school districts, community college districts, county boards of education, and special districts to submit advisory questions to their voters. This measure proposes to add a similar provision to the state constitution.

As detailed above, a pending initiative measure that is eligible to appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot would limit the ability of a local government to place an advisory measure on the ballot if the measure is related to the potential use of revenues derived from a general tax that is appearing on the same ballot. If approved by voters, that constitutional limitation on local advisory measures would prevail over the general provisions of the Elections Code that permit local advisory measures.

If both this measure and the pending initiative measure were to be approved by voters, the California Constitution would include potentially conflicting provisions governing local advisory measures. In such a situation, it is unclear which provision would prevail if a local jurisdiction sought to place an advisory measure on the ballot related to the use of revenues from a general tax appearing on the same ballot.

Comments

According to the author, the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act, ACA 13, would give Californians the right to vote on retaining the majority vote requirement for passage of state and local initiatives. ACA 13 will require proposed initiatives that seek to increase vote thresholds on future ballot measures to pass with that same proportional higher vote threshold. For example, a measure that would impose a two-thirds vote threshold on future measures should also pass with a two-thirds vote.

Cities and counties also often place non-binding advisory measures on the ballot to allow voters to weigh in on various issues. This is a critical tool that allows voters to advise local government, and ACA 13 would protect the right of cities to place advisory questions on the ballot to ask voters their opinion on issues.

With a pattern of abuse of our initiative process to use a lower threshold to set higher thresholds for future voters – and worse, using this tactic to extract legislative action for special interests – the time is right for the Legislature to reflect a protection afforded in the Oregon Constitution since 1998 and adopt ACA 13 to send to the voters for their consideration.

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

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this measure would result in one-time General Fund costs to the Secretary of State (SOS) in the range of $738,000 to $984,000, likely in 2023-24, for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in a statewide election. Actual costs may be higher or lower, depending on the length of required elements and the overall size of the ballot.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/12/23)

California School Employees Association, AFL-CIO (co-source)

SEIU California (co-source)

AAPIs for Civic Empowerment – Education Fund

ACLU California Action

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO

Alameda County Early Care and Education Planning Council

Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District

Alliance for a Better Community

Alliance for Community Transit

Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Action

Alliance San Diego

American Council of Engineering Companies

Antelope Valle Mosquito and Vector Control District

Apple Valley Fire Protection District

Arcade Creek Recreation and Park District

Arden Park Recreation and Park District

Artesia Cemetery District

Asian Pacific Environmental Network

Association of California Water Agencies

Atascadero Cemetery District

Bear Valley Water District

Berkeley Fire Department

Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency

Bonita Sunnyside Fire Protection District

Brilliant Corners

Burney Fire Protection District

California Association of Recreation & Park Districts

California Black Power Network

California Calls

California Common Cause

California Community Foundation

California Conference of Carpenters

California Conference of Machinists

California Conference of the Amalgamated Transit Union

California Environmental Justice Alliance

California Environmental Voters

California Faculty Association

California Federation of Teachers

California Green New Deal Coalition

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Housing Partnership

California Labor Federation

California Municipal Utilities Association

California Professional Firefighters

California School Employees Association

California Special Districts Association

California State Association of Counties

California Teachers Association

California Teamsters

CalNonprofits

Catalyst California

Center on Policy Initiatives

Central Coast United for a Sustainable Economy

Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District

City of Alameda

City of Anaheim

City of Avalon

City of Arcata

City of Azusa

City of Belmont

City of Berkeley Fire Department

City of Brentwood

City of Buena Park

City of Burbank

City of Chino Hills

City of Chula Vista

City of Cloverdale

City of Concord

City of Cotati

City of Cypress

City of Elk Grove

City of Fairfield

City of Fortuna

City of Glendale

City of Half Moon Bay

City of Inglewood

City of Irvine

City of Kerman

City of King

City of Lakewood

City of Long Beach

City of Los Alamitos

City of Los Angeles

City of Manhattan Beach

City of Mission Viejo

City of Mountain View

City of Napa

City of Newark

City of Norco

City of Norwalk

City of Novato

City of Oakland

City of Oceanside

City of Ontario

City of Pacifica

City of Palo Alto

City of Pasadena

City of Petaluma

City of Pismo Beach

City of Placentia

City of Pleasanton

City of Rancho Cucamonga

City of Riverside

City of Roseville

City of Sacramento

City of San Diego

City of San Fernando

City of San Francisco

City of San José

City of San Luis Obispo

City of San Pablo

City of Santa Barbara

City of Santa Rosa

City of Shasta Lake

City of Soledad

City of Stanton

City of Sunnyvale

City of Tehachapi

City of Tustin

City of Ukiah

City of Upland

City of Visalia

City of Walnut Creek

City of West Hollywood

Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights

Coastside County Water District

Communities for a Better Environment

Communities for a New California

Community Coalition

Congregations Organized for Prophetic Engagement

Contra Costa County

Costa Mesa Sanitary District

Cosumnes Community Services District

Courage California

Desert Recreation District

Dolores Huerta Foundation

Eden Health District

El Toro Water District

End Poverty in California

Evolve California

Fort Bragg Fire Protection Authority

Fresno Mosquito and Vector Control District

Gold Mountain Community Service District

Goleta West Sanitary District

GPSN

GRACE – End Child Poverty in California

Groveland Community Services District

Hanford Fire Department

Health Access California

Helix Water District

Housing California

Human Impact Partners

Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District

IBEW Local 569

IFPTE Local 20

Innercity Struggle

Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance

League of California Cities

League of Women Voters of California

Lift up Contra Costa

Livermore Area Recreation and Park District

Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy

Los Angeles Forward

Lutheran Office of Public Policy – California

Mammoth Community Water District

Mayor Ashleigh Aitken (Anaheim)

Mayor Farrah Khan (Irvine)

Mayor Karen Bass (Los Angeles)

Mayor London Breed (San Francisco)

Mayor Matt Mahan (San José)

Mayor Patricia Lock Dawson (Riverside)

Mayor Rex Richardson (Long Beach)

Mendocino Fire Protection District

Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District

Million Voters Project

Monte Vista Water District

Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District

Mutual Housing California

National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter

North Central Fire Protection District

North County Fire Protection District

Oakland Rising

Olympic Valley Public Service District

Otay Water District

Parent Voices Oakland

Physicians for Social Responsibility – LA

PowerSwitch Action

Public Advocates

Rancho Adobe Fire Protection District

Rim of the World Recreation and Park District

Rising Communities

Ross Valley Sanitary District

Sacramento Suburban Water District

Safe Return Project

San Diego for Every Child

San Francisco Rising

San Joaquin County Mosquito and Vector Control District

San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District

Santa Clara Valley Water District

Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority

Sonoma Water

Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing

Southern Marin Fire Protection District

Summerland Sanitary District

Stege Sanitary District

Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education

Tahoe City Public Utility District

Three Valleys Municipal Water District

Town of Apple Valley

Town of Corte Madera

Town of Discovery Bay, CSD

TreePeople

Truckee Sanitary District

UNITE-HERE

United Domestic Workers/AFSCME Local 3930

Utility Workers Union of America

Valley Sanitary District

Vista Irrigation District

Voices in Solidarity Against Oil in Neighborhoods

Working Partnerships USA

YMCA of San Diego County

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/12/23)

Anaheim Chamber of Commerce

Brea Chamber of Commerce

Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles

Apartment Association of Orange County

Brea Chamber of Commerce

Building Owners and Managers Association of California

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business and Industrial Association

California Business Properties Association

California Business Roundtable

California Chamber of Commerce

California Farm Bureau

California Farm Workers and Families

California Forestry Association

California Fuels and Convenience Alliance

California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce

California Hotel and Lodging Association

California Manufacturers and Technology Association

California Rental Housing Association

California Retailers Association

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

California Taxpayers Association

Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce

Central Coast Taxpayers Association

Central Valley Business Federation

Central Valley Taxpayers Association

Chino Valley Chamber of Commerce

Citrus Heights Chamber of Commerce

Contra Costa Taxpayers Association

Dana Point Chamber of Commerce

Danville Area Chamber of Commerce

Fontana Chamber of Commerce

Fremont Chamber of Commerce

Garden Grove Chamber of Commerce

Gateway Chambers Alliance

Greater High Desert Chamber of Commerce

Greater Irvine Chamber of Commerce

Greater San Fernando Valley Chamber of Commerce

Half Moon Bay Coastside Chamber of Commerce

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

Imperial Valley Regional Chamber of Commerce

Inland Empire Latino Coalition – San Bernardino-Riverside Counties

Jesse Miranda Center for Hispanic Leadership

La Cañada Flintridge Chamber of Commerce

Laguna Niguel Chamber of Commerce

Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce

Livermore Valley Chamber of Commerce

Lodi Chamber of Commerce

Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce

Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce

Los Angeles Business Federation

Los Angeles County Taxpayers Association

Mission Viejo Chamber of Commerce

NAIOP of California

National Diversity Coalition

National Federation of Independent Business – California

Norwalk Chamber of Commerce

Oceanside Chamber of Commerce

Orange Chamber of Commerce

Orange County Business Council

Orange County Taxpayers Association

Palm Desert Area Chamber of Commerce

Palos Verdes Peninsula Chamber of Commerce

Paso Robles and Templeton Chamber of Commerce

Placer County Taxpayers Association

Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce

Sacramento Taxpayer Association

San Diego Tax Fighters

Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce

Santa Maria Valley Chamber of Commerce

Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association

Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce

Solano County Taxpayers Association

South Bay Association of Chambers of Commerce

Southern California Leadership Council

Sutter-Yuba Taxpayers Association

The Chamber of Commerce for Greater Brawley

Torrance Area Chamber of Commerce

Tulare Chamber of Commerce

United Chambers of the San Fernando Valley

United Latinos Action

Vacaville Chamber of Commerce

Valley Industry and Commerce Alliance

Ventura County Taxpayers Association

Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce

Whittier Together

Women Veterans Alliance

Yorba Linda Chamber of Commerce

Yuba-Sutter Chamber of Commerce

16,000+ Individuals

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 57-19, 9/6/23

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

NOES: Alanis, Chen, Megan Dahle, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Lackey, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Sanchez, Ta, Waldron, Wallis

NO VOTE RECORDED: Bains, Grayson, Schiavo, Soria

Prepared by: Scott Matsumoto / E. & C.A. / (916) 651-4106

9/13/23 11:29:19

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

ACA 13 (Ward) - Voting thresholds

Bill Summary:

ACA 13, if approved by the voters, would (1) require an initiative constitutional amendment to comply with any increased voter approval threshold that it seeks to impose on future ballot measures, and (2) enshrine in the California Constitution the ability of local governments to submit advisory questions to voters.

Fiscal Impact:

This measure would result in one-time General Fund costs to the Secretary of State (SOS) in the range of $738,000 to $984,000, likely in 2023-24, for printing and mailing costs to place the measure on the ballot in a statewide election. Actual costs may be higher or lower, depending on the length of required elements and the overall size of the ballot.

Background:

Current law provides for the approval of any state ballot measure with a simple majority vote. However, some local ballot measures are subject to alternative vote thresholds. For example, a special tax (proceeds restricted for a specific purpose) proposed by a local government body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. In contrast, a general tax (proceeds designated for general purposes) proposed by a local government body can be approved with a majority vote, and recent court rulings have determined that the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes imposed by a local government does not apply if the special tax is enacted by local initiative. Thus, a special tax proposed by voters who gather enough signatures to qualify a local initiative measure can be approved by majority vote.

Proposed Law:

This measure, if approved by the voters, would among other things do the following:

• Provide that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the California Constitution, and that increases the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure, must receive a proportion of votes in favor of the initiative that is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement imposed by the initiative for the adoption of a state or local measure.
• Permit a local governing body, at any election, to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue, as specified.
• Provide that the provisions of this amendment apply to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors.

Related Legislation:

ACA 9 (Gatto, 2011) would have required that an initiative that would increase the current vote requirement for an action by either the electors or by the Legislature, or would impose an extraordinary vote requirement for the amendment of an initiative. The measure was not heard in the Assembly Committee on Elections and Redistricting.

Staff Comments:

SOS indicates that printing and mailing costs associated with placing a measure on the statewide ballot are approximately $123,000 per page, depending on the length of the ballot. The fiscal estimates noted above reflect the addition of 6-8 pages in the Voter Information Guide. Actual costs would depend upon the length of the title and summary, analysis by the LAO, proponent and opponent arguments, and text of the proposal.

SOS has certified that initiative #1935—a measure that would amend the California Constitution to change the rules for how the state and local governments can impose taxes, fees, and other charges—is eligible to appear on the ballot at the November 5, 2024, statewide General Election. Among other provisions, this initiative would require that any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate to take effect. As noted previously, recent case law has determined that local special taxes that are proposed by a local initiative measure can be approved by a majority vote. In contrast, local special taxes that are placed on the ballot by a local governmental body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate.

If ACA 13 applied to initiative #1935, the latter likely would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters in order to take effect. More generally, ACA 13’s provisions would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and that proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

Senator Steven Glazer, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: ACA 13 Hearing Date: 9/11/23

Subject: Voting thresholds.

DIGEST

This measure, subject to voter approval, requires an initiative constitutional amendment to comply with any increased voter approval threshold that it seeks to impose on future ballot measures. This measure also enshrines in the state constitution the ability of local governments to submit advisory questions to voters.

ANALYSIS

Existing law:

1. Permits voters to propose statutes or amendments to the California Constitution by initiative.
2. Provides that a state initiative statute that is approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State (SOS) files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on.
3. Provides that a proposed constitutional amendment that is approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the SOS files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on.
4. Permits each city, county, school district, community college district, county board of education, and special district to hold an advisory election for the purpose of allowing voters to voice their opinions on substantive issues, as specified.
5. Provides that every constitutional amendment, bond measure, or other legislative measure submitted to the people by the Legislature shall appear on the ballot of the first statewide election occurring at least 131 days after the adoption of the proposal by the Legislature.
6. Provides that a proposed amendment or revision to the California Constitution, if approved by a majority of votes cast thereon, takes effect on the fifth day after the SOS files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, but the measure may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. Provides that if provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, the provisions of the measure receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall prevail.

This measure:

1. Provides that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the California Constitution, and that increases the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure, must receive a proportion of votes in favor of the initiative that is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement imposed by the initiative for the adoption of a state or local measure.
2. Permits a local governing body, at any election, to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. Provides that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. Provides that the results of the advisory vote are not controlling on the local governing body.
3. Provides that the provisions of this amendment apply to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors.
4. Contains intent language stating that the provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the California Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978.
5. Provides that this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act.
6. Contains a severability clause.
7. Makes a conforming change.

BACKGROUND

Amendments to ACA 13. This analysis reflects amendments being presented in this committee. The amendments provide that the provisions of ACA 13 apply to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors. Additionally, the amendments contain intent language stating that the provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the California Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978.

Pathways to the Ballot – Constitutional Amendments. There are two ways to qualify a statewide measure to amend the California Constitution. One way is for the Legislature to adopt an Assembly or a Senate Constitutional Amendment with a two-thirds vote of both legislative houses. This is sometimes referred to as a legislative constitutional amendment.

The other way is to collect signatures, submit those signatures, and have those signatures verified through the initiative process. This is sometimes referred to as an initiative constitutional amendment. The number of signatures must be equal to at least eight percent of the total votes cast for the office of Governor at the last gubernatorial election. Currently, to qualify an initiative constitutional amendment, 874,641 signatures are required.

It should be noted, while it is similar to the process for initiatives, the thresholds to enact statutes are different. For example, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiative that does not amend the California Constitution must be equal to at least five percent of the total votes cast for the office of Governor at the last gubernatorial election. This equates to 546,651 signatures.

This measure affects initiative constitutional amendments that increase the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure.

Supermajority Vote Requirements. Under existing law, any state ballot measure can be approved by a simple majority vote of the electorate, regardless of the changes to state law made by the measure. By contrast, some local ballot measures are subject to higher vote requirements. For example, a local measure that is placed on the ballot by a local governing body that proposes a special tax (a tax for which the proceeds will be used for a specific purpose) requires a two-thirds vote of the electorate.

If this measure qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it would mark the first time that any state ballot measure would require more than a simple majority vote to be approved. Specifically, state ballot measures that (1) are initiative measures (the term “initiative” refers exclusively to a proposed law that qualifies for the ballot through the collection of voters’ signatures on an initiative petition), (2) propose to amend the state constitution, and (3) propose to increase the vote required for voters to approve a state or local ballot measure would be subject to a voter approval threshold that is greater than a simple majority vote.

Prior Effort to Impose Supermajority Vote Requirement on State Ballot Measures. Notwithstanding the fact that all state ballot measures require a simple majority to pass, at least one prior initiative measure sought to impose a supermajority vote requirement on certain state ballot measures.

Specifically, Proposition 136, which appeared on the ballot at the November 1990 statewide general election, would have required any state special taxes that were proposed by a state initiative measure to be approved by two-thirds of the voters, among other provisions. Proposition 136 failed narrowly, receiving 47.9% of the vote.

Voter Approval Thresholds Only. The provisions of this measure related to the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments apply only to initiatives that seek to make it more difficult for voters to take a specified action by approving a ballot measure. It does not affect the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments that seek only to make it harder for a governmental body to approve a specified action by increasing the vote by which that body must approve an action.

For example, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of the local electorate to approve any ballot measure that sought to rezone parcels would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters if this measure takes effect. By contrast, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of a local governing body to rezone parcels would be subject to a simple majority vote (provided that the initiative did not also include other provisions that affected the vote requirement for actions taken by voters).

Pending Initiative. On February 1, 2023, the SOS certified that initiative #1935—a measure that would amend the California Constitution to change the rules for how the state and local governments can impose taxes, fees, and other charges—is eligible to appear on the ballot at the November 5, 2024, statewide general election. The proponent of that initiative can withdraw it at any time through June 27, 2024. If the proponent does not withdraw the initiative by that deadline, the SOS will certify that the measure is qualified and it will appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot.

Among other provisions, initiative #1935 requires that any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate to take effect. Recent case law suggests that local special taxes that are proposed by a local initiative measure can be approved by a majority vote of the electorate. By contrast, local special taxes that are placed on the ballot by a local governmental body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. Additionally, initiative #1935 prohibits an advisory measure from appearing on the same ballot as a local measure that proposes a general tax if the advisory measure would indicate that the revenue from the general tax will, could, or should be used for a specific purpose.

If this measure applied to the voter’s consideration of initiative #1935, it appears that initiative #1935 would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters in order to take effect. However, while this measure likely would affect the vote requirement for initiative #1935, its effects are not limited to that initiative. The provisions of ACA 13 would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and that proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure.

Oregon Measure 63. The vote requirement provisions of this measure are similar to the provisions of a constitutional amendment approved by Oregon voters in 1998. Specifically, Measure 63 amended the Oregon Constitution to provide “any measure that includes any proposed requirement for more than a majority of votes cast by the electorate to approve any change in law or government action shall become effective only if approved by at least the same percentage of voters specified in the proposed voting requirement.” Measure 63 was approved with 55% of the vote.

Advisory Measures. As detailed above, the California Elections Code already permits cities, counties, school districts, community college districts, county boards of education, and special districts to submit advisory questions to their voters. This measure proposes to add a similar provision to the state constitution.

As detailed above, a pending initiative measure that is eligible to appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot would limit the ability of a local government to place an advisory measure on the ballot if the measure is related to the potential use of revenues derived from a general tax that is appearing on the same ballot. If approved by voters, that constitutional limitation on local advisory measures would prevail over the general provisions of the Elections Code that permit local advisory measures.

If both this measure and the pending initiative measure were to be approved by voters, the California Constitution would include potentially conflicting provisions governing local advisory measures. In such a situation, it is unclear which provision would prevail if a local jurisdiction sought to place an advisory measure on the ballot related to the use of revenues from a general tax appearing on the same ballot.

COMMENTS

1. According to the author. The Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act, ACA 13, would give Californians the right to vote on retaining the majority vote requirement for passage of state and local initiatives. ACA 13 will require proposed initiatives that seek to increase vote thresholds on future ballot measures to pass with that same proportional higher vote threshold. For example, a measure that would impose a two-thirds vote threshold on future measures should also pass with a two-thirds vote.

Cities and counties also often place non-binding advisory measures on the ballot to allow voters to weigh in on various issues. This is a critical tool that allows voters to advise local government, and ACA 13 would protect the right of cities to place advisory questions on the ballot to ask voters their opinion on issues.

With a pattern of abuse of our initiative process to use a lower threshold to set higher thresholds for future voters – and worse, using this tactic to extract legislative action for special interests – the time is right for the Legislature to reflect a protection afforded in the Oregon Constitution since 1998 and adopt ACA 13 to send to the voters for their consideration.

1. Does ACA 13 Affect Current Voter Thresholds in Proposition 13? As previously mentioned, the provisions of ACA 13 would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure. ACA 13 does not affect vote thresholds currently in effect.

This analysis reflects amendments accepted by the author to insert language stating that the provisions of ACA 13 apply to all statewide initiative measures submitted to the electors on or after January 1, 2024, including measures that appear on the ballot at the same election at which the measure adding this section is approved by the electors. The amendments also contain intent language stating that the provisions of this measure are not intended to reverse or invalidate provisions of the California Constitution in effect before January 1, 2024, including the provisions of Proposition 13 of 1978.

1. Argument in Support. In a letter co-sponsoring ACA 13, SEIU California stated, in part, the following:

One of the most sacred principles of democracy, the majority vote, is under attack. Anti-Democratic efforts are seeking to establish and enshrine the right of a privileged and powerful minority to veto the will of the people. These anti-democratic measures to increase voter thresholds are intended to take away our freedoms such as abortion access and to prevent progress.

As a result, we must take additional steps to fortify the foundations of our democracy and place ACA 13 on the March 2024 ballot.

ACA 13 is simple. It would retain and protect the majority vote, require any initiative that increases voter approval requirements to also be approved at the higher level, and would ensure local governments can always ask voters for their opinion on issues. ACA 13 protects the democratic principle of “one person, one vote.”

1. Argument in Opposition. In a coalition letter opposing ACA 13, the California Business Roundtable stated, in part, the following:

ACA 13 will fundamentally change the initiative process by increasing the voter threshold to pass future limits on taxes and fees only for measures put on the ballot by signature gathering, not those put on by the Legislature. ACA 13 will change the power balance between the Legislature and voters and is yet another attempt to diminish the voice of voters as the right and necessary check-and-balance in our system of government.

[...]

The initiative process is a vital tool for Californians to voice their concerns, propose changes, and stand up for their values. It allows citizens to bypass the usual legislative channels and bring about changes that matter deeply to them. However, ACA 13 risks diminishing these voices, shifting power away from the people and towards the Legislature in a drastic and unprecedented way. Under ACA 13, the power to increase voter thresholds for new and higher taxes would vest solely with the Legislature, taking away a fundamental and often-used tool for voters looking to better control their cost of living and higher taxes. However, the power to reduce voter thresholds would remain with both citizens and the Legislature, creating significant power imbalance and an unlevel playing field.

[...]

The ballot measure process has posed a significant check-and-balance for both the Legislature and the courts. In fact, in many cases, it is the only recourse taxpayers have when the courts overstep their authority and rule against voters’ will.

RELATED/PRIOR LEGISLATION

ACA 9 (Gatto) of 2010 would have required that an initiative that would increase the current vote requirement for an action by either the electors or by the Legislature, or would impose an extraordinary vote requirement for the amendment of an initiative statute by the Legislature without approval by the electors, itself receive the same affirmative vote percentage in order to be approved by the electors. ACA 9 was referred but not heard by the Assembly Committee on Elections and Redistricting.

PRIOR ACTION

POSITIONS

Sponsor: California School Employees Association, AFL-CIO

SEIU California

Support: NOTE – Support reflects a prior version of the bill.

AAPIs for Civic Empowerment – Education Fund

ACLU California Action

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO

Alameda County Early Care and Education Planning Council

Alameda County Mosquito Abatement District

Alliance for a Better Community

Alliance for Community Transit

Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Action

Alliance San Diego

American Council of Engineering Companies

Antelope Valle Mosquito and Vector Control District

Apple Valley Fire Protection District

Arcade Creek Recreation and Park District

Arden Park Recreation and Park District

Artesia Cemetery District

Asian Pacific Environmental Network

Association of California Water Agencies

Atascadero Cemetery District

Bear Valley Water District

Berkeley Fire Department

Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency

Bonita Sunnyside Fire Protection District

Brilliant Corners

Burney Fire Protection District

California Association of Recreation & Park Districts

California Black Power Network

California Calls

California Common Cause

California Community Foundation

California Conference of Carpenters

California Conference of Machinists

California Conference of the Amalgamated Transit Union

California Environmental Justice Alliance

California Environmental Voters

California Faculty Association

California Federation of Teachers

California Green New Deal Coalition

California Healthy Nail Salon Collaborative

California Labor Federation

California Municipal Utilities Association

California Professional Firefighters

California School Employees Association

California Special Districts Association

California State Association of Counties

California Teachers Association

California Teamsters

CalNonprofits

Catalyst California

Center on Policy Initiatives

Central Coast United for a Sustainable Economy

Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District

City of Alameda

City of Anaheim

City of Arcata

City of Azusa

City of Belmont

City of Berkeley Fire Department

City of Brentwood

City of Buena Park

City of Burbank

City of Chula Vista

City of Cloverdale

City of Concord

City of Corona

City of Cotati

City of Cypress

City of Elk Grove

City of Fairfield

City of Fortuna

City of Glendale

City of Half Moon Bay

City of Inglewood

City of Irvine

City of Kerman

City of King

City of Lakewood

City of Long Beach

City of Los Alamitos

City of Los Angeles

City of Manhattan Beach

City of Mission Viejo

City of Mountain View

City of Napa

City of Newark

City of Norco

City of Norwalk

City of Novato

City of Oakland

City of Oceanside

City of Ontario

City of Pacifica

City of Palo Alto

City of Placentia

City of Pleasanton

City of Rancho Cucamonga

City of Riverside

City of Roseville

City of Sacramento

City of San Diego

City of San Fernando

City of San Francisco

City of San José

City of San Luis Obispo

City of San Pablo

City of Santa Rosa

City of Shasta Lake

City of Soledad

City of Stanton

City of Tehachapi

City of Tustin

City of Ukiah

City of Upland

City of Visalia

City of Walnut Creek

City of West Hollywood

Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights

Coastside County Water District

Communities for a Better Environment

Communities for a New California

Community Coalition

Congregations Organized for Prophetic Engagement

Contra Costa County

Costa Mesa Sanitary District

Cosumnes Community Services District

Courage California

Desert Recreation District

Dolores Huerta Foundation

Eden Health District

El Toro Water District

End Poverty in California

Evolve California

Fort Bragg Fire Protection Authority

Fresno Mosquito and Vector Control District

Gold Mountain Community Service District

Goleta West Sanitary District

GPSN

GRACE – End Child Poverty in California

Groveland Community Services District

Hanford Fire Department

Health Access California

Housing California

Human Impact Partners

Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District

IBEW Local 569

IFPTE Local 20

Innercity Struggle

Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance

League of California Cities

League of Women Voters of California

Lift up Contra Costa

Livermore Area Recreation and Park District

Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy

Los Angeles Forward

Lutheran Office of Public Policy – California

Mammoth Community Water District

Mayor Ashleigh Aitken (Anaheim)

Mayor Farrah Khan (Irvine)

Mayor Karen Bass (Los Angeles)

Mayor London Breed (San Francisco)

Mayor Matt Mahan (San José)

Mayor Patricia Lock Dawson (Riverside)

Mayor Rex Richardson (Long Beach)

Mendocino Fire Protection District

Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District

Million Voters Project

Monte Vista Water District

Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District

Mutual Housing California

National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter

North Central Fire Protection District

North County Fire Protection District

Oakland Rising

Olympic Valley Public Service District

Otay Water District

Parent Voices Oakland

Physicians for Social Responsibility – LA

PowerSwitch Action

Public Advocates

Rancho Adobe Fire Protection District

Rim of the World Recreation and Park District

Safe Return Project

San Diego for Every Child

San Francisco Rising

San Joaquin County Mosquito and Vector Control District

San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District

Santa Clara Valley Water District

Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority

Sonoma Water

Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing

Southern Marin Fire Protection District

Summerland Sanitary District

Stege Sanitary District

Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education

Tahoe City Public Utility District

Three Valleys Municipal Water District

Town of Apple Valley

Town of Corte Madera

Town of Discovery Bay, CSD

TreePeople

Truckee Sanitary District

UNITE-HERE

United Domestic Workers/AFSCME Local 3930

Utility Workers Union of America

Valley Sanitary District

Vista Irrigation District

Voices in Solidarity Against Oil in Neighborhoods

Working Partnerships USA

YMCA of San Diego County

Oppose: NOTE – Opposition reflects a prior version of the bill.

Anaheim Chamber of Commerce

Brea Chamber of Commerce

Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles

Apartment Association of Orange County

Brea Chamber of Commerce

Building Owners and Managers Association of California

California Association of Realtors

California Building Industry Association

California Business and Industrial Association

California Business Properties Association

California Business Roundtable

California Chamber of Commerce

California Farm Bureau

California Farm Workers and Families

California Forestry Association

California Fuels and Convenience Alliance

California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce

California Hotel and Lodging Association

California Manufacturers and Technology Association

California Rental Housing Association

California Retailers Association

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

California Taxpayers Association

Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce

Central Coast Taxpayers Association

Central Valley Business Federation

Central Valley Taxpayers Association

Chino Valley Chamber of Commerce

Citrus Heights Chamber of Commerce

Contra Costa Taxpayers Association

Dana Point Chamber of Commerce

Danville Area Chamber of Commerce

Fontana Chamber of Commerce

Fremont Chamber of Commerce

Garden Grove Chamber of Commerce

Gateway Chambers Alliance

Greater High Desert Chamber of Commerce

Greater Irvine Chamber of Commerce

Greater San Fernando Valley Chamber of Commerce

Half Moon Bay Coastside Chamber of Commerce

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

Imperial Valley Regional Chamber of Commerce

Inland Empire Latino Coalition – San Bernardino-Riverside Counties

Jesse Miranda Center for Hispanic Leadership

La Cañada Flintridge Chamber of Commerce

Laguna Niguel Chamber of Commerce

Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce

Livermore Valley Chamber of Commerce

Lodi Chamber of Commerce

Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce

Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce

Los Angeles Business Federation

Los Angeles County Taxpayers Association

Mission Viejo Chamber of Commerce

NAIOP of California

National Diversity Coalition

National Federation of Independent Business – California

Norwalk Chamber of Commerce

Oceanside Chamber of Commerce

Orange Chamber of Commerce

Orange County Business Council

Orange County Taxpayers Association

Palm Desert Area Chamber of Commerce

Palos Verdes Peninsula Chamber of Commerce

Paso Robles and Templeton Chamber of Commerce

Placer County Taxpayers Association

Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce

Sacramento Taxpayer Association

San Diego Tax Fighters

Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce

Santa Maria Valley Chamber of Commerce

Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association

Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce

Solano County Taxpayers Association

South Bay Association of Chambers of Commerce

Southern California Leadership Council

Sutter-Yuba Taxpayers Association

The Chamber of Commerce for Greater Brawley

Torrance Area Chamber of Commerce

Tulare Chamber of Commerce

United Chambers of the San Fernando Valley

United Latinos Action

Vacaville Chamber of Commerce

Valley Industry and Commerce Alliance

Ventura County Taxpayers Association

Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce

Whittier Together

Women Veterans Alliance

Yorba Linda Chamber of Commerce

Yuba-Sutter Chamber of Commerce

15,000+ Individuals

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:ACA 13

Author:(Ward)

As Amended Ver:September 1, 2023

2/3 vote

SUMMARY

Requires an initiative constitutional amendment to comply with any increased voter approval threshold that it seeks to impose on future ballot measures. Guarantees in the state constitution the ability of local governments to submit advisory questions to voters.

Major Provisions

1. Provides that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the California Constitution, and that increases the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure, must receive a proportion of votes in favor of the initiative that is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement imposed by the initiative for the adoption of a state or local measure.
2. Permits a local governing body, at any election, to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. Provides that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. Provides that the results of the advisory vote are not controlling on the local governing body.

COMMENTS

Under existing law, any state ballot measure can be approved by a simple majority vote of the electorate, regardless of the changes to state law made by the measure. By contrast, some local ballot measures are subject to higher vote requirements. For instance, a local measure that is placed on the ballot by a local governing body and that proposes a special tax (a tax for which the proceeds will be used for a specific purpose) requires a two-thirds vote of the electorate.

If this measure qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it would mark the first time that any state ballot measure would require more than a simple majority vote to be approved. Specifically, state ballot measures that 1) are initiative measures (the term "initiative" refers exclusively to a proposed law that qualifies for the ballot through the collection of voters’ signatures on an initiative petition), 2) propose to amend the state constitution, and 3) propose to increase the vote required for voters to approve a state or local ballot measure would be subject to a voter approval threshold that is greater than a simple majority vote.

On February 1, 2023, the Secretary of State (SOS) certified that initiative #1935 (referred to as "The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act" by its proponent)—a measure that would amend the California Constitution to change the rules for how the state and local governments can impose taxes, fees, and other charges – is eligible to appear on the ballot at the November 5, 2024, statewide general election. The proponent of that initiative can withdraw it at any time through June 27, 2024. If the proponent does not withdraw the initiative by that deadline, the SOS will certify that the measure is qualified and it will appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot.

Among other provisions, initiative #1935 requires that any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate to take effect. Recent case law suggests that local special taxes that are proposed by a local initiative measure can be approved by a majority vote of the electorate. By contrast, local special taxes that are placed on the ballot by a local governmental body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. Additionally, initiative #1935 prohibits an advisory measure from appearing on the same ballot as a local measure that proposes a general tax if the advisory measure would indicate that the revenue from the general tax will, could, or should be used for a specific purpose.

If this measure applied to the voter’s consideration of initiative #1935, it appears that initiative #1935 would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters in order to take effect. However, while this measure likely would affect the vote requirement for initiative #1935, its effects are not limited to that initiative. Rather, the provisions of this measure would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and that proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure.

The provisions of this measure related to the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments apply only to initiatives that seek to make it more difficult for voters to take a specified action by approving a ballot measure. It does not affect the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments that seek only to make it harder for a governmental body to approve a specified action by increasing the vote by which that body must approve an action.

For example, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of the local electorate to approve any ballot measure that sought to rezone parcels would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters if this measure takes effect. By contrast, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of a local governing body to rezone parcels would be subject to a simple majority vote (provided that the initiative did not also include other provisions that affected the vote requirement for actions taken by voters).

As a constitutional amendment, this measure requires the approval of the voters to take effect.

According to the Author

"The Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act, ACA 13, would retain the majority vote requirement for passage of state and local initiatives. ACA 13 will require proposed initiatives that seek to increase vote thresholds on future ballot measures to pass with that same proportional higher vote threshold. For example, a measure that would impose a two-thirds vote threshold on future measures should also pass with a two-thirds vote. Cities and counties also often place non-binding advisory measures on the ballot to allow voters to weigh in on various issues. This is a critical tool that allows voters to advise local government, and ACA 13 would protect the right of cities to place advisory questions on the ballot to ask voters their opinion on issues."

Arguments in Support

The sponsor of this measure, the California State Council of Service Employees International Union (SEIU California), writes, "One of the most sacred principles of democracy, the majority vote, is under attack. Anti-Democratic efforts are seeking to establish and enshrine the right of a privileged and powerful minority to veto the will of the people. These anti-democratic measures to increase voter thresholds are intended to take away our freedoms such as abortion access and to prevent progress. As a result, we must take additional steps to fortify the foundations of our democracy and place ACA 13 on the March 2024 ballot. ACA 13 is simple. It would retain and protect the majority vote, require any initiative that increases voter approval requirements to also be approved at the higher level, and would ensure local governments can always ask voters for their opinion on issues. ACA 13 protects the democratic principle of ‘one person, one vote.’"

Arguments in Opposition

In opposition to this measure, the California Business Roundtable writes, "The initiative process is a vital tool for Californians to voice their concerns, propose changes, and stand up for their values. It allows citizens to bypass the usual legislative channels and bring about changes that matter deeply to them. However, ACA 13 risks diminishing these voices, shifting power away from the people and towards the Legislature in a drastic and unprecedented way. Under ACA 13, the power to increase voter thresholds for new and higher taxes would vest solely with the Legislature, taking away a fundamental and often-used tool for voters looking to better control their cost of living and higher taxes. However, the power to reduce voter thresholds would remain with both citizens and the Legislature, creating significant power imbalance and an unlevel playing field."

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, one-time costs of approximately $987,000 to the SOS for printing and mailing expenses associated with placing the measure on the ballot at the next statewide election (General Fund). Based on the average cost per page of the last three elections, the SOS estimates such costs to be approximately $123,000 per page, and the magnitude of costs for this bill depends on the length of the title and summary, analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, proponent and opponent arguments, and text of the proposal for publication in the Voter Information Guide. The SOS estimates this measure to result in eight additional pages.

VOTES

ASM ELECTIONS: 5-2-1

YES: Pellerin, Bennett, Lee, Low, Berman

NO: Lackey, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Blanca Rubio

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 9-4-3

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Soria, Weber, Wilson

UPDATED

VERSION: September 1, 2023

CONSULTANT: Ethan Jones / ELECTIONS / (916) 319-2094 FN: 0001595

Date of Hearing: September 1, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Chris Holden, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:ACA 13

Author:(Ward) – As Amended Ver:August 17, 2023

Urgency: State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This measure, if approved by voters, requires an initiative constitutional amendment be passed by the same increased voter threshold the constitutional amendment seeks to impose on future state or local ballot measures.

Specifically, this measure, if approved by voters:

1. Requires an initiative measure to amend the Constitution to increase the voter approval requirement for a state or local measure to receive a proportion of favorable votes equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement the initiative measure would impose for the adoption of that state or local measure.
2. Authorizes, at any election, a local governing body to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance so voters within the jurisdiction can voice their opinions on that issue.
3. Specifies an advisory question is approved only if a majority of votes cast on the question are in favor, but that the results are in no manner controlling on the local governing body.

FISCAL EFFECT:

One-time costs of approximately $987,000 to the Secretary of State (SOS) for printing and mailing expenses associated with placing the measure on the ballot at the next statewide election (General Fund). Based on the average cost per page of the last three elections, the SOS estimates such costs to be approximately $123,000 per page, and the magnitude of costs for this bill depends on the length of the title and summary, analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office, proponent and opponent arguments, and text of the proposal for publication in the Voter Information Guide. The SOS estimates this measure to result in eight additional pages.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

ACA 13 will require proposed initiatives that seek to increase vote thresholds on future ballot measures to pass with that same proportional higher vote threshold. For example, a measure that would impose a two-thirds vote threshold on future measures should also pass with a two-thirds vote.

Cities and counties also often place non-binding advisory measures on the ballot to allow voters to weigh in on various issues. This is a critical tool that allows voters to advise local government, and ACA 13 would protect the right of cities to place advisory questions on the ballot to ask voters their opinion on issues.

1. Support and Opposition. This bill is supported by a large coalition of local governments, labor organizations, and community groups. For example, the League of California Cities and other local government associations argue the framework of allowing a simple majority of voters to require super majority voter approval for future measures gives “disproportionate power to a small number of voters, with a little more than 1/3 of the voters being able to prevent the enactment of laws that an overwhelming majority of voters agree upon.”

This bill is opposed by a large coalition of business groups led by the California Business Roundtable, which argues “ACA 13 will fundamentally change the initiative process by increasing the voter threshold to pass future limits on taxes and fees only for measures put on the ballot by signature gathering [emphasis in original], not those put on by the Legislature” and thus shifting “the power to raise the voter threshold for new and higher taxes to the Legislature.”

1. Background.

Different Voter Thresholds. Existing law provides for the approval of any state ballot measure with a simple majority vote. However, some local ballot measures are subject to different vote thresholds. For example, a special tax (proceeds restricted for a specific purpose) proposed by a local government body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. In contrast, a general tax (proceeds designated for general purposes) proposed by a local government body can be approved with a majority vote, and recent court rulings have determined that the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes imposed by a local government does not apply if the special tax is enacted by local initiative. In other words, a special tax proposed by voters who gather enough signatures to qualify a local initiative measure can be approved by majority vote.

Pending Initiative. On February 1, 2023, the SOS certified that initiative #1935 is eligible to appear on the ballot for the November 2024 statewide general election. Initiative #1935 proposes to amend the Constitution to change the rules for how state and local governments impose taxes, fees, and other charges, including requiring any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote and prohibiting an advisory measure from appearing on the same ballot as a general tax measure if the advisory measure asks whether the revenue from the general tax measure should be used for a specific purpose.

This measure, if approved by voters, requires an initiative constitutional amendment be passed by the same increased voter threshold the constitutional amendment seeks to impose on future state or local ballot measures. For example, under existing law, initiative #1935 requires approval of only a majority of voters, but, if this measure were enacted, initiative #1935 would require two-thirds voter approval because initiative #1935 seeks to impose a two-thirds threshold for all local special tax measures. This measure, if approved by voters, also adds to the Constitution existing statutory authorization for a local governing body to submit advisory questions to voters.

Analysis Prepared by: Irene Ho / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: August 23, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS

Gail Pellerin, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:ACA 13 (

Author:Ward) – As Amended Ver:August 17, 2023

SUBJECT: Voting thresholds.

SUMMARY: Requires an initiative constitutional amendment to comply with any increased voter approval threshold that it seeks to impose on future ballot measures. Guarantees in the state constitution the ability of local governments to submit advisory questions to voters. Specifically, this measure:

1. Provides that an initiative measure that includes one or more provisions that amend the California Constitution, and that increases the voter approval requirement to adopt any state or local measure, must receive a proportion of votes in favor of the initiative that is equal to or greater than the highest voter approval requirement imposed by the initiative for the adoption of a state or local measure.
2. Permits a local governing body, at any election, to hold an advisory vote concerning any issue of governance for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction to voice their opinions on the issue. Provides that an advisory question is approved only if a majority of the votes cast on the question are in favor. Provides that the results of the advisory vote are not controlling on the local governing body.
   
3. Provides that this measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act.
   
4. Contains a severability clause.
   
5. Makes a conforming change.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Permits voters to propose statutes or amendments to the Constitution by initiative. (California Constitution, Article II, §8)
   
2. Provides that a state initiative statute that is approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the Secretary of State (SOS) files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on. (California Constitution, Article II, §10(a))
   
3. Provides that a proposed constitutional amendment that is approved by a majority of votes cast thereon takes effect on the fifth day after the SOS files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on. (California Constitution, Article XVIII, §4)
   
4. Permits each city, county, school district, community college district, county board of education, and special district to hold an advisory election for the purpose of allowing voters to voice their opinions on substantive issues, as specified. (Elections Code §9603(a))

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose of the Measure: According to the author:

The Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act, ACA 13, would retain the majority vote requirement for passage of state and local initiatives. ACA 13 will require proposed initiatives that seek to increase vote thresholds on future ballot measures to pass with that same proportional higher vote threshold. For example, a measure that would impose a two-thirds vote threshold on future measures should also pass with a two-thirds vote.

Cities and counties also often place non-binding advisory measures on the ballot to allow voters to weigh in on various issues. This is a critical tool that allows voters to advise local government, and ACA 13 would protect the right of cities to place advisory questions on the ballot to ask voters their opinion on issues.

1. Supermajority Vote Requirements: Under existing law, any state ballot measure can be approved by a simple majority vote of the electorate, regardless of the changes to state law made by the measure. By contrast, some local ballot measures are subject to higher vote requirements. For instance, a local measure that is placed on the ballot by a local governing body and that proposes a special tax (a tax for which the proceeds will be used for a specific purpose) requires a two-thirds vote of the electorate.
   
   If this measure qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, it would mark the first time that any state ballot measure would require more than a simple majority vote to be approved. Specifically, state ballot measures that (1) are initiative measures (the term “initiative” refers exclusively to a proposed law that qualifies for the ballot through the collection of voters’ signatures on an initiative petition), (2) propose to amend the state constitution, and (3) propose to increase the vote required for voters to approve a state or local ballot measure would be subject to a voter approval threshold that is greater than a simple majority vote.
   
2. Prior Effort to Impose Supermajority Vote Requirement on State Ballot Measures: Notwithstanding the fact that all state ballot measures require a simple majority to pass, at least one prior initiative measure sought to impose a supermajority vote requirement on certain state ballot measures.
   
   Specifically, Proposition 136, which appeared on the ballot at the November 1990 statewide general election, would have required any state special taxes that were proposed by a state initiative measure to be approved by two-thirds of the voters, among other provisions. Proposition 136 failed narrowly, receiving 47.9% of the vote.
3. Voter Approval Thresholds Only: The provisions of this measure related to the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments apply only to initiatives that seek to make it more difficult for voters to take a specified action by approving a ballot measure. It does not affect the vote requirement for initiative constitutional amendments that seek only to make it harder for a governmental body to approve a specified action by increasing the vote by which that body must approve an action.
   
   For example, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of the local electorate to approve any ballot measure that sought to rezone parcels would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters if this measure takes effect. By contrast, an initiative constitutional amendment that required a two-thirds vote of a local governing body to rezone parcels would be subject to a simple majority vote (provided that the initiative did not also include other provisions that affected the vote requirement for actions taken by voters).
4. Pending Initiative: On February 1, 2023, the SOS certified that initiative #1935—a measure that would amend the California Constitution to change the rules for how the state and local governments can impose taxes, fees, and other charges—is eligible to appear on the ballot at the November 5, 2024, statewide general election. The proponent of that initiative can withdraw it at any time through June 27, 2024. If the proponent does not withdraw the initiative by that deadline, the SOS will certify that the measure is qualified and it will appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot.
   
   Among other provisions, initiative #1935 requires that any local special tax be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate to take effect. Recent case law suggests that local special taxes that are proposed by a local initiative measure can be approved by a majority vote of the electorate. By contrast, local special taxes that are placed on the ballot by a local governmental body must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the electorate. Additionally, initiative #1935 prohibits an advisory measure from appearing on the same ballot as a local measure that proposes a general tax if the advisory measure would indicate that the revenue from the general tax will, could, or should be used for a specific purpose.
   
   If this measure applied to the voter’s consideration of initiative #1935, it appears that initiative #1935 would need to be approved by two-thirds of the voters in order to take effect. However, while this measure likely would affect the vote requirement for initiative #1935, its effects are not limited to that initiative. Rather, the provisions of this measure would apply to any initiative constitutional amendment that appears on the ballot in the future and that proposes to increase the vote requirement for a state or local ballot measure.
5. Oregon Measure 63: The vote requirement provisions of this measure are similar to the provisions of a constitutional amendment approved by Oregon voters in 1998. Specifically, Measure 63 amended the Oregon Constitution to provide “any measure that includes any proposed requirement for more than a majority of votes cast by the electorate to approve any change in law or government action shall become effective only if approved by at least the same percentage of voters specified in the proposed voting requirement.” Measure 63 was approved with 55% of the vote.
6. Advisory Measures: As detailed above, the California Elections Code already permits cities, counties, school districts, community college districts, county boards of education, and special districts to submit advisory questions to their voters. This measure proposes to add a similar provision to the state constitution.
   
   As detailed above, a pending initiative measure that is eligible to appear on the November 5, 2024, statewide general election ballot would limit the ability of a local government to place an advisory measure on the ballot if the measure is related to the potential use of revenues derived from a general tax that is appearing on the same ballot. If approved by voters, that constitutional limitation on local advisory measures would prevail over the general provisions of the Elections Code that permit local advisory measures.
   
   If both this measure and the pending initiative measure were to be approved by voters, the California Constitution would include potentially conflicting provisions governing local advisory measures. In such a situation, it is unclear which provision would prevail if a local jurisdiction sought to place an advisory measure on the ballot related to the use of revenues from a general tax appearing on the same ballot.
7. Arguments in Support: In support of this measure, the California Special Districts Association writes:

Under current law, an initiative constitutional amendment that proposes to amend the California Constitution requires a simple majority of voters casting votes in favor of the measure for the amendment to be approved. Notably, this simple majority requirement is irrespective of any of the provisions contained within the proposed constitutional amendment; should the text of the proposed constitutional amendment contain provisions that would otherwise require voter thresholds in excess of a simple majority in the future, those increased vote thresholds may nonetheless be imposed with a simple majority of voters. Phrased another way, this allows a simple majority of voters to insert a three-fifths, two-thirds, four-fifths, or higher vote threshold into the California Constitution, even without the corresponding level of support in terms of votes cast in favor of the original amendment proposal.

ACA 13 would propose to California voters a solution to this quirk in the initiative process: if approved by two-thirds of the California Legislature, California voters would be asked to decide whether an initiative constitutional amendment containing provisions that increase vote thresholds should be required to attain the same proportion of votes in favor of the amendment that the proposed increased vote thresholds would demand. In this way, ACA 13 would ensure that a proposal cannot impose vote thresholds on our communities and our State that exceed the level of support for imposing such thresholds.

ACA 13 protects the democratic process in local communities by ensuring that a simple majority of statewide voters cannot restrict the will of a supermajority of voters in a local community.

1. Arguments in Opposition: In opposition to this measure, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association writes:

ACA 13 reminds us of the recently failed effort in Ohio to make it more difficult to pass constitutional amendments. Many in this Legislature decried that as undemocratic. How is creating a two-tiered system for amending the California Constitution any less undemocratic? We would argue it is even more so.

This is a blatant attempt to erode the citizen initiative process by creating content-based distinctions to pass certain types of constitutional amendments. It also begs the question why the Legislature would impose such a content-based standard. Since there is no precedent for setting different standards as it relates to the passage of constitutional amendments, this seems an obvious attempt to undermine an initiative that has already qualified for the ballot. The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act would restore the voter thresholds that the state Constitution requires for new and higher taxes. These thresholds were set by voters when they approved Propositions 13 and 218.

Clearly then, ACA 13 is yet another attempt by the Legislature to make it not only easier to raise taxes but also directly attack Proposition 13.

1. Approval by Voters: As a constitutional amendment, this measure requires the approval of the voters to take effect.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Alliance San Diego

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO

Asian Pacific Environmental Network

California Calls

California Environmental Justice Alliance Action, a Project of Tides Advocacy

California Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO

California Green New Deal Coalition

California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO

California Professional Firefighters

California School Employees Association

California Special Districts Association

California State Association of Counties

California State Council of Service Employees International Union

California Teachers Association

Catalyst California

Central Coast Alliance United for A Sustainable Economy

City of San Diego

Communities for A New California

Community Coalition

Congregations Organized for Prophetic Engagement

Corporation for Supportive Housing

Courage California

Dolores Huerta Foundation

Innercity Struggle

League of California Cities

Million Voters Project

Oakland Rising

San Francisco Rising

Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education

Working Partnerships USA

Opposition

California Business Roundtable

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

2 individuals

Analysis Prepared by: Ethan Jones / ELECTIONS / (916) 319-2094