Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports·Decided February 2, 1995·No. 94-821·Published

Opinion

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICAL REPORTS

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

State of California

DANIEL E. LUNGREN

Attorney General

______________________________________

OPINION : : No. 94-821 of : : February 9, 1995 DANIEL E. LUNGREN : Attorney General : : CLAYTON P. ROCHE : Deputy Attorney General : : ________________________________________________________________________________

THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH G. HILL, LEGISLATIVE ANALYST, CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE, has requested an opinion on the following question:

With respect to submitting substantive amendments to a proposed state initiative measure, are the proponents limited to one 15-day period following receipt of the draft petition by the Attorney General?

CONCLUSION

With respect to submitting substantive amendments to a proposed state initiative measure, the proponents are limited to one 15-day period following receipt of the draft petition by the Attorney General.

ANALYSIS

The constitutional power to propose initiative measures has been reserved to the people of California since 1911. (See former Cal. Const., art. II, ' 1.) Article II, section 8 of the Constitution currently provides:

"(a) The initiative is the power of the electors to propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject them.

"(b) An initiative measure may be proposed by presenting to the Secretary of State a petition that sets forth the text of the proposed statute or amendment to the Constitution and is certified to have been signed by electors equal in number to 5 percent in the case of a statute, and 8 percent in the case of an amendment to the Constitution, of the votes for all candidates for Governor at the last gubernatorial election.

"(c) The Secretary of State shall then submit the measure at the next general election held at least 131 days after it qualifies or at any special statewide election held prior to that general election. The Governor may call a special statewide election for the measure.

"(d) An initiative measure embracing more than one subject may not be submitted to the electors or have any effect."

Section 10 of the same article additionally provides with respect to the adoption of initiatives and referendums (the power of the electors to approve or reject statutes):

"(a) An initiative statute or referendum approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise. If a referendum petition is filed against a part of a statute the remainder shall not be delayed from going into effect.

"(b) If provisions of 2 or more measures approved at the same election conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest affirmative vote shall prevail.

"(c) The Legislature may amend or repeal referendum statutes. It 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 their approval.

"(d) Prior to 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 the manner in which petitions shall be circulated, presented, and certified, and measures submitted to the electors."

In keeping with the constitutional directive, the Legislature has set forth various procedures to be followed in qualifying state initiative measures for the ballot. (Elec. Code, '' 9000- 9035.)1 Before an initiative petition may be circulated for signatures ('' 9020-9022), the proponents of the measure must submit it to the Attorney General for the preparation of a title and summary ('' 336,

1 All section references are to the Elections Code unless otherwise indicated.

9001-9004). After the title and summary have been prepared, the petition may be circulated, and if it receives the requisite number of signatures of registered voters, it will be submitted to the electorate usually at the next general election. ('' 9020-9035.)

Our focus herein is on sections 9004 and 9005 which provide the time frame for the Attorney General to prepare a title and summary for an initiative measure. Section 9004 provides in part:

"Upon receipt of a draft of a petition, the Attorney General shall prepare a summary of the chief purposes and points of the proposed measure. The summary shall be prepared in the manner provided for the preparation of ballot titles in Article 5 (commencing with Section 9050), the provisions of which in regard to the preparation, filing, and settlement of titles and summaries are hereby made applicable to the summary. The Attorney General shall provide a copy of the title and summary to the Secretary of State within 15 days after receipt of the final version of a proposed initiative measure, or if a fiscal estimate or opinion is to be included, within 15 days after receipt of the fiscal estimate or opinion prepared by the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee pursuant to Section 9005.

"If during the 15-day period, the proponents of the proposed initiative measure submit amendments, other than technical, nonsubstantive amendments, to the final version of the measure, the Attorney General shall provide a copy of the title and summary to the Secretary of State within 15 days after receipt of the amendments."

Section 9005 provides:

"Notwithstanding Section 9004, the Attorney General, in preparing a title or summary for an initiative measure, shall determine whether the substance thereof if adopted would affect the revenues or expenditures of the state or local government, and if he or she determines that it would, he or she shall include in the title either the estimate of the amount of any increase or decrease in revenues or costs to the state or local government, or an opinion as to whether or not a substantial net change in state or local finances would result, if the proposed initiative is adopted.

"The estimates as required by this section shall be made jointly by the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, who shall deliver them to the Attorney General so that he or she may include them in the titles prepared by him or her.

"The estimate shall be delivered to the Attorney General within 25 working days from the date of receipt of the final version of the proposed initiative from the Attorney General, unless in the opinion of both the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee a reasonable estimate of the net impact of the proposed initiative cannot be prepared within the 25-day period. In the latter case, the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee shall, within the 3 25-day period, give the Attorney General their opinion as to whether or not a substantial net change in state or local finances would result if the proposed initiative is adopted.

"Any statement of fiscal impact prepared by the Legislative Analyst pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 12172 of the Government Code may be used by the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee in the preparation of the fiscal estimate or the opinion."

The question presented for resolution concerns the time period when proponents of a state initiative measure may submit substantive amendments.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion, (Cal. 1995).

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion (Untitled California Attorney General Opinion) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wells Fargo Bank v. Superior Court
811 P.2d 1025 (California Supreme Court, 1991)
Burden v. Snowden
828 P.2d 672 (California Supreme Court, 1992)
Beverage v. Canton Placer Mining Co.
278 P.2d 694 (California Supreme Court, 1955)
Wade v. Markwell & Co.
258 P.2d 497 (California Court of Appeal, 1953)
Moore v. California State Board of Accountancy
831 P.2d 798 (California Supreme Court, 1992)
Webster v. Superior Court
758 P.2d 596 (California Supreme Court, 1988)
Industrial Indemnity Co. v. City & County of San Francisco
218 Cal. App. 3d 999 (California Court of Appeal, 1990)
Gross v. Raeburn
219 Cal. App. 2d 792 (California Court of Appeal, 1963)
City of Stockton v. Stockton Plaza Corp.
261 Cal. App. 2d 639 (California Court of Appeal, 1968)
Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing Commission
743 P.2d 1323 (California Supreme Court, 1987)