HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 4, 1986 - General Municipal Election - Voter Pamphl " UTC , ' " A
If
ar< ' o
� 1,011
_A,.
e�lel� lSiNA,yie._1 + � fiv����
i
•
n1, i
I
I
i;
cV �:
Q
1
SACRAMENTO 95814
Dear Fellow. Californians:
This is your California Ballot- Pamphlet for the November 4,
1986, General Election. It contains the ballot title, a short sum-
mary, the Legislative Analyst's analysis, the pro and con argu-
ments and rebuttals,and the complete text of each proposition. It
also contains the legislative vote cast for and against each measure
proposed by the Legislature.
Marty rights and responsibilities go along with citizenship. Vot-
ing is one of the most important as it is the foundation on which
our democratic system is built. Read carefully-each of the meas-
ures and information about them contained in this pamphlet.Leg-
islative propositions and citizen-sponsored initiatives are designed
specifically to give you, the electorate, the opportunity to influ-
ence the laws which regulate us all.
Take advantage of this opportunity and exercise your.rights.by
voting on November 4, 1986.
SECRETARY OF STATE
t
Please note that Proposition 53 is the first proposition for this election. To avoid confusion with past measures, the
Legislature passed a law which requires propositions to be numbered consecutively startirig with the next number after
those used in the November 1982 General Election. This numbering scheme runs in twenty-year cycles.
2 G86
CONTENTS
Proposition Pages
BOND ACTS
53 Greene-Hughes School Building Lease-Purchase Bond Law
of1986 .......................................................:.......................................... 4-7, 56
54 New Prison Construction Bond Act of 1986 .................................. 8-11
55 California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986....................... 12-15, 56-59
56 Higher Education Facilities Bond Act of 1986 .............................. 16-19
LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
57 Retirement Benefits for Nonjudicial and Nonlegislative
Elected State Constitutional Officers .......................................... 20-23
58 Taxation. Family Transfers.................................................................. 24-27
59 Elected District Attorney......................................................:............. 28-31
60 Taxation. Replacement Residences .................................................. 32-35
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE
61 Compensation of Public Officials,'Employees, Individual
Public Contractors ............................................................................ 36-39, 59-62
INITIATIVE STATUTE
62 Taxation. Local Governments and Districts .................................. .40-43
INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
63 Official State Language
INITIATIVE STATUTES
64 Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) ........................ 48-51
65 Restrictions on Toxic Discharges into Drinking Water;
Requirement of Notice of Persons' Exposure to Toxics.......... 52-55, 62-63
On the Cover . . .
The"Together we can make the difference.Vote."poster on the cover of this ballot pamphlet was designed by Paula
Roukie, La Mirada High School in Los Angeles, first-place winner and recipient of a $500 award in the "Get Out and
Vote" student contest sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Los Angeles Education Fund, 1986. ' -
The other two posters depicted on the cover use the slogans from the runners-up in the Secretary of State-7/Eleven
voter slogan contest. The contest, which ran from January 6 to February 15, 1986, was designed to increase voter
awareness and participation. The winning slogan appeared on the June 3, 1986,primary election ballot pamphlet cover.
As second-place winner, Will Courtenay of San Francisco received $500 for his entry, "You're needed for a group
decision." Territa Lowenberg of Lafayette received $250 as third-place winner for her slogan, "Be heard, not herded.
Vote!" -
Throughout this pamphlet,where space permitted,are printed slogans from the contest. Because so many clever and .
catchy slogans were submitted, we wanted to share as'many of them as possible with you. The authors' names appear
with the slogans.
G86 3
5 3 Greene-Hughes School Building Lease-Purchase
Bond Law of'1986
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
GREENE-HUGHES SCHOOL BUILDING LEASE-PURCHASE BOND LAW OF 1986. This act provides for a bond
issue of eight hundred million dollars ($800,000,000) to provide capital outlay for construction or improvement of public
schools to be sold at a rate not to exceed four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) per year.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on AB 4245 (Proposition 53)
Assembly: Ayes 70 Senate: Ayes 29
Noes 1 Noes 0
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
lion of state general obligation bonds in order to provide
Background funds for the construction, reconstruction, or moderniza-
Since the passage of Proposition-13 in 1978,the state has tion of elementary and secondary school facilities.General
provided most of the money used by local public school obligation bonds are backed by the state,meaning that the
.districts to construct, reconstruct, or modernize school state will use its taxing power to assure that enough money
facilities. Under the current state aid program,school dis- is available to pay off the bonds. The state's General Fund
tricts may be required to contribute up to 10 percent of would'be used to pay the principal'and interest costs on
the cost of each project from local funds. these bonds. General Fund revenues come primarily from
Proposition 46 on the June 1986 ballot restored to school the state corporate and personal income taxes and the
districts the ability to issue school construction bonds and state sales tax. .
levy a property tax increase (subject to a two-thirds voter At least $400 million of the bond money would have to
approval),in order to finance school facilities. This ability be used for the construction of new school facilities. No
had been eliminated by Proposition 13. more than $360 million of the funds raised from the bond
School Facilities Funding Needs. The total amount of sale could be used for the reconstruction or modernization
additional school facilities needed to meet current enroll- of existing school facilities. Up to $40 million of the bond
ment in the state is unknown. As of June 1, 1986,however, sale proceeds could be used to buy and install air-condi-
applications submitted by school districts for state funding tioning equipment and insulation materials,46F eligible
of new school construction projects totaled approximately school districts with year-round school programs.
$1,3 billion. In addition; applications for state funding of Fiscal Effect
reconstruction or rehabilitation of school facilities totaled
approximately $991 million. • Paying Off the Bonds. For these types of bonds, the
An estimated$406 million is available under current law state typically would make principal and•interest pay-
from state sources iri 1986-87 to fund these requests. This ments over,a period of up to 20 years from the state's
amount includes$130 million in bond funds from Proposi- General Fund. The average payment would be about $66
tion 26 of 1984,$200 million in state tidelands oil revenues million each year if$400 million in bonds were sold in both
which were appropriated but not spent,and$76 million in 1986-87 and 1987-88 at an interest rate of 7 percent.
federal funds and revenues from other sources. Borrowing Costs for Other Bonds. By increasing the
Since June 1986 school districts have been able to raise amount which the state borrows, this measure may cause
funding locally through issuance of school construction the state and local governments to pay more under other
bonds under the authority granted by Proposition 46. The bond programs. These costs cannot be estimated. .
amount of money school districts may be able to generate State Revenues. The people who buy these bonds are
through this mechanism is not known. not required to pay state income tax on the interest they
earn. Therefore, if California taxpayers buy these bonds
Proposal instead of making taxable investments, the state would
This measure would authorize the state to sell $800 mil- collect less taxes.This loss of revenue cannot be estimated.
Vote November 4, 1986.
4 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This law proposed by Assembly Bill 4245 (Statutes of On the several dates of maturity of the principal and
1986, Chapter 423) is submitted to the,people in accord- interestin each fiscal year,there shall be transferred to the
ance with the provisions of Article XVI of the Constitu- General Fund in the State Treasury,.all of the money in
tion. the fund exclusive of funds transferred pursuant to sub-
This proposed law adds sections to the Education Code; division (f) of Section 6217 of the Public Resources Code,
therefore,new provisions'proposed to be adde&are print- not in excess of the principal of and interest on the bonds
ed in italic type to indicate that they are new. then due and payable, except as herein provided for the
prior' redemption of the bonds, and, in the event the
PROPOSED LAW money so'returned on the dates ofmaturity is less than the
SECTION 1. Chapter 21.7 (commencing with Section principal and interest then due and payable, then the bal-
17696) is added to Part 10 of the Education Code, to read: ance remaining unpaid shall be returned to the General
CHAPTER 21.7. GREENE-HUGHES SCHOOL BUILDING Fund in the State Treasury out of the fund as soon thereaf-
LEASE-PURCHASE BOND LAW of 1986 ter as it shall become available;
17696.3. All money deposited in the fund under Sec-
17696. This chapter may be cited as the Greene- tion 17732 and pursuant to Part 2 (commencing with Sec-
Hughes School Building Lease-Purchase Bond Law of tion 16300) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government
1986. Code shall be available only for transfer to the General
17696.1. The State General Obligation Bond -Law Fund, as provided in Section 17696.25. When transferred
(Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 16720) of Part 3 of to the General Fund, the money shall be applied as a
Division-4 of Title 2 of the Government Code) is adopted reimbursement of the General Fund on account ofprinci-
for the purpose of the issuance, sale, and repayment of, pal and interest due and payable or paid from the General
and otherwise providing with respect to, the bonds au- Fund on the earliest issue of school building bonds for
thorized to be issued by this chapter,and the provisions of which the General Fund has not been fully reimbursed by
that law are included in this chapter as though set out in the transfer of funds.
'f6ll in this chapter.All references in this chapter to `here- 17696.35. There is hereby appropriated from the Gen-
in"shall be deemed to refer both to this chapter and that eral Fund in the State Treasury for the purpose of this
law. chapter, an amount that will e ual the following:
17696.15. 'As used in this chapter, and for the purposes (a) The sum annually as will be necessary to pay the
of this chapter as used in the State General Obligation principal of and the interest on the bonds issued and sold
Bond Law, the following words shall have the following pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, as the principal
meanings: and interest become due and payable.
(a) "Committee"means the State School Building Fi- (b) The sum as is necessary to carry out Section 17696.4,
nance Committee created by Section 15909. which sum is appropriated without regard to fiscal years.
(b) `Board"means the State Allocation Board. 17696.4. For the purposes of carrying out the provi-
(c) "Fund"means the State School Building Lease-Pur- sions of this chapter, the Director of Finance may, by,
chase Fund executive order, authorize the withdrawal from the Gen-
17696.2. For the purpose of creating a fund toprovide eral Fund of an amount or amounts not to exceed the
aid to school districts of the state in accordance with.the amount of the unsold bonds which the committee has by
provisions of the Leroy F. Greene State School Building resolution authorized to be sold for the purpose of carry-
Lease-Purchase Law of 1976 (Chapter 22 (commencing ing out this chapter. Any amounts withdrawn shall be
with Section 17700)), and of all acts amendatory, thereof deposited in the fund to be allocated by the board in ac-
and supplementary thereto,and to provide funds to repay cordance with this chapter. Any moneys made available
any money advanced or loaned to the State School Build- under this section to the board shall be returned by the
ing Lease-Purchase Fund under any act of the Legislature, board to the General Fund for moneys received from the
together with interest provided for in that act, and to be sale of bonds sold for the purpose of carrying out this
used to reimburse the General Obligation Bond Expense chapter.
Revolving Fund pursuant to Section 16724.5 of the Gov- 17696.5. Upon request of the board from time to time,
ernment Code, the committee shall be and is hereby au- supported by a statement of the apportionments-made
thorized and empowered to create a debt or debts,liabili- and to be made under Chapter 22 (commencing with
ty or liabilities, of the State of California,in the aggregate Section 17700), the committee shall determine whether or
amount of eight hundred million dollars ($800,000,000) in not it is necessary or desirable to issue any bonds author-
the manner provided herein, but not in excess thereof ized under this chapter in order to fund the apportion-
17696.25. All bonds herein authorized, which shall ments, and, if so, the amount of bonds to be issued and
have been duly sold and delivered as herein provided, sold. Four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) shall be
shall constitute valid and legally, binding general obliga- available for apportionment on December 11 1986, and
tions of the State of California,and the full faith and credit four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) shall become
of the State of California is hereby pledged for the punc- available for apportionment on December 1, 1987, such
tual payment of both principal and interest thereof that a total of'eight hundred million dollars ($800,000,000)
There shall be collected annually in the same manner has become available for apportionment. The Treasurer
and at the same time as other state revenue is collected shall sell the bonds so determined at such different times
such a sum, in addition to the ordinary revenues of the as necessary to service expenditures required by the ap-
state,as shall be required to pay the principal and.interest portionments.
on the bonds as herein provided,and it is hereby made the 17696.6. In computing the net interest cost under Sec-
duty of all officers charged bylaw with any duty in regard tion 16754 of the Government Code,interest shall be com-
..to the collection of the revenue, to do and perform each puted from the date of the bonds or the last preceding
and every act which shall be necessary to collect the addi- interest payment date, whichever is latest, to the respec-
tional sum. Continued on page 56
G86 5
E3Greene-Hughes School Building Lease-Purchase
J['3 Bond Law of 1986
Argument in Favor of Proposition 53
In recent years, California has made great strides in schools in growing areas and badly needed repairs to older
improving its elementary and secondary. schools. Test schools. Schoolchildren in every part of California will
scores are rising, students are spending more time in benefit from your YES vote.Using bonds to pay for schools
school, and staff morale is on the upswing. is a safe and financially sound California tradition. .
But California's school population is growing again. In Outstanding schools are vital to California's economic
many areas of the state, classrooms are badly overcrowd- health. To continue our progress for educational excel-
ed. And over the next five years we will need to provide lence, let's assure that every California child has a safe,
classrooms for nearly 450,000 new students.To keep up the uncrowded classroom. Join us in voting YES on Proposi-
momentum for improvement in the schools, our children tion 53.
need adequate'classrooms,science laboratories,and librar
ies that a more demanding curriculum requires. That is GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
why we urge you to vote YES on Proposition 53. Governor
The total need for new school construction, school re- BILL HONIG
modeling and replacement needs.is estimated to be over Superintendent of Public Instruction
$4 billion by 1990. - TERESA P. HUGHES
Your YES vote on Proposition 53 will help provide new Member of the Assembly,47th District
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 53
To receive an education in California is a privilege. The only to Los Angeles, but_exists in other districts. School
educational system is a MOTHERHOOD-APPLE PIE is- districts should be responsible only to constituents in their
sue.The fisal year 1986-87 budget provides $21 billion for districts. Constituents must retain LOCAL CONTROL.
education, or 55 percent-of the General Fund. If Legisla- VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 53.
ture-approved bond issues for education in this ballot By state law, LOTTERY FUND proceeds may not be
.pamphlet are passed by the voters,the total for education utilized for NEW SCHOOLS. This law must be changed.
would take 58 percent.of the budget, or over $22 billion. To operate schools year-round is not the remedy. Mother-
This budget pie would be reduced to $15 billion, or 42 hooding,parents and all taxpayers realize that $15 billion,
percent,for vital necessities:law enforcement,correction- or 42 percent of the budget expenditures, is not adequate
al facilities, welfare, and costs of government. to,provide safety or vital services for California citizens.
PROPOSITION 53 will place control of the funds for The Bond Act provides for year-round schools. Don't
local school districts in a seven-member Sacramento jeopardize fiscal stability by raising taxes. VOTE NO ON
board. In effect, LOCAL DISTRICTS LOSE CONTROL. PROPOSITION 53.
The largest school district in California,Los Angeles,has
leased, closed and sold schools. Others are used for ad- ELLISON BLOODGOOD
ministrative purposes. This problem is NOT UNIQUE President, United Voters League
If you have any questions about voting call your
county, clerk or registrar of voters•.
6 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Greene-Hughes School Building Lease-Purchase
Bond Law of 1986• Jr'3
Argument Against Proposition 53
SCHOOLS—$800 million bond issue—November'4, During past fiscal years, the educational system was fi-
1986, General Election. For the immediate past decade, nanced from current revenues-on a"pay as you go"basis
and since 1977, California State Budgets have exceeded a —and the school system must return to that policy. Why
total,of$225,000,000,000. Of those billions of dollars, over has new school construction faltered?Poor planning of the
50% has gone to the mandatory state education system— existing fund allocations for new. classrooms. At this date,
or-112.5 billion dollars.. more than $8 billion in general obligation bonds—taxpay-
As voters and taxpayers,let us join in dialogue with the er money—is outstanding,plus billions more in local bond-
authors of the $800 million school'bond measure that ed indebtedness.A financial burden is an albatross on Cali-
would provide $360 million to remodel existing school fornia taxpayers' backs. California legislators have a
buildings and $440 million for new construction of build- fiduciary responsibility to California taxpayers:
ings. A seven-member allocation board would distribute California State Lottery funds for schools—how are the
the funds to school districts.Certainly the money has.been proceeds being utilized?Ask questions. Do not accept the
utilized to pay teacher salaries, pension plan payments, thesis that new school funds or bonds are an absolute re-
insurance,and the general maintenance of the education- cessity to preserve the system. The taxpayers' ability to
al system, while the overall excellence of students has make intelligent decisions and exercise control on govern-
been declining.Obviously,higher standards from students ment spending are the choices we face.Join the dialogue
must be demanded, and until-that is forthcoming.from and VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 53.
school administrators, all the money from .future'state
budgets will be of no avail. $800 million is only the tip of ELLISON BLOODGOOD
the financial iceberg. President, United Voters League'
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 53
The opposition argument is based on misinformation a method preferred by private.industry to fund their capi-
about the way California's schools operate. First, oppo- tal outlay projects.We believe government should use the
nents argue that higher standards must be demanded of same proven,efficient mechanisms private businesses use
students. We concur, and, since 1983 higher standards, to pay their bills. Vote YES on Proposition 53.
more time in school, and more homework have been key Finally, opponents imply that lottery funds can,and
elements of the current education improvement. Help should be used for school construction. The opponents
continue improvement. Vote YES on Proposition 53. may not understand that the voters prohibited the use of
Second, opponents imply that in the past, school con- lottery funds for school construction when they approved
struction has been paid for out of current revenues. This the lottery initiative in 1984.
is simply not true. The majority of school construction Using bonds to build schools for the next generation of
projects have been financed through the fair'and prudent Californians is a fair deal for taxpayers. Vote YES on
method of general obligation bonds. Proposition 53.
Using bonds to pay for school construction is fair and
prudent because it allows the cost of school construction BILL HONIG
to be shared equitably by today's and tomorrow's taxpay- Superintendent of Public Instruction
ers. Why should today's taxpayers fund the full cost of TERESA P. HUGHES
schools that will be used for the next 50 years? Bonds are Member of the Assembly,47th District
Polls are open from 7 a:m. until 8 p.m.
G86 . Arguments printed on this page are,the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency' 7
54
New Prison Construction Bond Act of 1986
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
NEW PRISON CONSTRUCTION BOND ACT OF 1986. This act provides for the acquisition and construction of state
youth and adult correctional facilities pursuant'to a bond issue of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000).
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on AB 2545 (Proposition.54)
Assembly: Ayes 68 Senate: Ayes 32
Noes 1 Noes 0
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
studying options to reduce the size of this expected popu-
lation.The results of the study will determine the need for
In recent years there has been a great increase in the additional facilities. The study should be completed by
number of people sent to the state's adult prisons and November 1, 1986.
youth correctional institutions. This trend is expected to
continue. These facilities were not designed to house this Proposal
increase. This measure would permit the state to sell$500 million
Adult Prison System. This system was built to house in general obligation bonds for youth and adult,prison
about 33,200 inmates: In.June 1986 it held about 55,000 construction. General obligation bonds are backed by the
inmates. By July 1989 the Department of Corrections ex- state, meaning that the state will use its taxing power to
pects an inmate population of over 65,000. assure that enough money is available to pay off the bonds.
The state is addressing the prison capacity problem in Revenues deposited in the state's General Fund would be
several ways. The Department of Corrections is housing used to pay the principal and interest costs on the bonds.
two inmates in cells intended to house only one inmate.In General Fund revenues come primarily from the state
addition, the department has converted gymnasiums, corporate and personal income taxes and.the state sales
classrooms and other space into temporary dormitories. tax.
The state also has approved funds for new prisons to in- The state could use,the money to buy land,construct or
crease the system's capacity to about 45,000 beds by July remodel buildings or maintain facilities.The measure does
1989. not indicate how the money will be divided between the
Most of the money for these new prisons has come from Department of Corrections and the Youth Authority.The
bond funds approved by the voters ($495 million in 1982 'state's 1986 budget would spend over$14 million from this.
and$300 million in 1984).The state has provided addition- bond measure (if approved) for various construction
al money from the General Fund and from lease-purchase projects at Youth Authority institutions. The Governor
agreements. and the Legislature would determine how to spend the
In addition to these steps,the department plans to build rest of the money.
more prisons (for an additional 9,000 inmates),to improve
existing prisons and complete new prisons currently un- Fiscal Effect
der construction. This work will cost over $800 million. . Paying Off the Bonds. For these types of bonds the
The department plans to fund this$800 million effort with state typically would make principal and interest pay-
money from this $500*million bond measure and lease- ments over a period of up to 20 years from the state's
purchase agreements. General Fund. The average payment would be about $43
Based on a 1980 study,it would cost at least another$500 million each year if the bonds were sold at an interest rate
million to renovate existing prisons to meet minimum fire, of 7 percent.
life safety and earthquake requirements. Borrowing Costs for Other Bonds. By increasing the
Youth Correctional Institutions. The state's youth in- amount which the state borrows, this measure may cause
stitutions were built to house about 5,900 offenders. In the state and local governments to pay more.under_ other
June 1986 there were about 7,600 in the system. By 1991 bond programs. These costs cannot be estimated.
the Department of the Youth Authority expects this num- State Revenues. The people who buy these bonds are
ber to increase to 9,200. In order to house this population, not required to pay state income tax on the interest they
the'department plans to construct facilities for an addi- earn. Therefore, if California taxpayers buy these bonds
tional 3,300 offenders at a cost of about$370 million.At the instead of making taxable investments, the state would
direction of the Legislature, however, the department is collect less taxes.This loss of revenue cannot be estimated.
8 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This law proposed by Assembly Bill 2545 (Statutes of ferred maintenance of state youth and adult corrections
1986, Chapter 409) is submitted to the people in accord- facilities.
ance with the provisions of Article XVI of the Constitu- 7307. (a) All bonds herein authorized, which' shall
tion. have been duly sold and deliver d as herein provided,
This proposed law adds sections to the Penal Code; shall constitute valid and legally Minding general obliga-
therefore,new provisions proposed to be added are print- tions of the State of California,and the full faith and credit
ed in italic type to indicate that they are new. of the State of California is hereby pledged for the punc-
tual payment of both principal and interest thereon.
PROPOSED LAW (b) There shall be collected annually in the same man-
ner and at the same time as other state revenue is collect-
SECTION 1. Chapter 14 (commencing with Section ed such a sum,in addition to the ordinary revenues of the
7300) is added to Title 7 of Part 3 of the Penal Code, to state,as shall be required topay the principal and interest
read: on those bonds, and it is hereby made the duty of all
CHAPTER 14 NEW PRISON CONSTRUCTION officers charged by law with any duty in regard to the
Bohn ACT so collection of,that revenue to do and perform each and
every act which shall be necessary to collect that addition-
7300. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as al sum.
the New Prison Construction Bond Act of 1986. . (c) All money deposited in the fund` which has been.
7301. The State General Obligation Bond Law is. derived from premium and accrued interest on bonds sold
adopted for the purpose of the issuance,sale and repay- shall be available for transfer to the General Fund as a
ment of, and otherwise providing with respect to, the credit to expenditures for bond interest.
bonds authorized to be issued by this chapter, and the (d) All money deposited in the fund pursuant to any
provisions of that law are included in this chapter as provision of law requiring repayments to the state which
though set out in full in this chapter except that,notwith- are financed by the proceeds of the bonds authorized by,
standing anything in the State General Obligation Bond this chapter shall be available for transfer to the General
Law, the maximum maturity of the bonds shall not exceed Fund. When transferred to the General Fund that money
20 years from the date of each respective series. The matu- shall be applied as a reimbursement,to the General Fund
rity of each respective series shall be calculated from-the on account of principal and interest on the bonds which
date of such series. has been paid from the General Fund.
7302. There is in the State Treasury the 1986 Prison ' 7308. There is hereby appropriated from the General
Construction Fund, which fund is hereby.created. The Fund in the State Treasury for the purpose of this chapter
proceeds of the sale of bonds authorized by this act shall such an amount as will equal the following:
be deposited in this fund and may be transferred upon (a) That sum annually as will be necessary to pay the
request of the Department of Corrections.and upon ap- ..principal of and the interest on the bonds issued and sold
proval of the Director of Finance, to the 1984 Prison Con- pursuant to the provisions of this chapter..
struction Fund established by Section'7202. If the moneys (b) That sum as is necessary to carry out the provisions
are so transferred, `fund" means the 1984 Prison Con- of Section 7309, which sum is appropriated without regard
struction Fund to fiscal years.
'7303. The 1986 Prison Construction Committee is 7309. For the purpose of carrying out the pprovisions of
hereby created. The committee shall consist of the Con- this chapter, the Director of Finance may by executive
troller, the State Treasurer, and the Director of Finance. order authorize the withdrawal from the General Fund of
That committee shall be the "committee,"as that term is an amount or amounts not to exceed the amount of the
used in the State General Obligation Bond Law. unsold bonds which the committee has by resolution au-
The Department of Corrections is the "board"for the thorized to be sold for the purpose of carrying out this .
purpose of the State General Obligation Bond Law and chapter.Any amounts withdrawn shall be deposited in the
this chapter. fund and shall be disbursed by the committee in accord-
7304. The committee is hereby authorized and em- ance with,this chapter. Any money made available under
powered to create a debt or debts,liability or liabilities, of this section to the board shall be returned'by the board to
the State of California, in the aggregate of five hundred the General Fund from moneys received from the sale of
million dollars ($500,000,000), in the manner provided in, bonds sold for the purpose of carrying out this chapter.
this chapter. That debt or debts,liability or liabilities,shall Those withdrawals from the General Fund shall be.re-
be created for the purpose of providing-the fund to be turned to the General Fund with interest at the rate which
used for the object and work specified in Section 7306. would otherwise have been earned by those sums in the
7305. The committee may determine whether or not Pooled Money Investment Fund.
it is necessary or desirable to issue any bonds authorized 7310. All proceeds from the sale of bonds,except those
under this chapter, and if so, the amount of bonds then to derived from premiums and accrued interest, shall be
be issued and sold. The committee may authorize the available for-the purpose provided in Section 7306 but
Treasurer to,sell all or any part of the bonds herein author- shall not be available for transfer to the General Fund to
ized at such time or times as may be fixed by the Treas- pay principal and interest on bonds. The money in the
urer. fund may be expended only as herein provided.
7306. The moneys in the fund shall be used for the 7311. Money in the,fund may only be expended pursu-
acquisition, construction,renovation,remodeling,and de- ant to appropriations by the Legislature.
G86 9
54 New Prison Construction Bond Act of 1986
Argument in Favor of Proposition 54
In the past decade, California enacted more public orders limiting the prison population. We want to avoid
safety laws than in any other time in the state's history. that in California: More than 15,000 new prison cells have
The "Use a Gun, Go to. Prison" law requires criminals either been completed or are currently being built.These
convicted.of using a gun in the commission of a serious bonds will make it possible to build additional facilities to
felony to be sentenced to state prison. Other mandatory meet the challenge of our prison population, which we
sentencing laws require the incarceration of those who anticipate increasing to more than 70,000 within the next
prey on the elderly and disabled while others require pris- five years.
on terms for those convicted of forcible rape, commission NEW PRISONS MUST BE BUILT IF WE ARE TO
of burglaries and other serious crimes. CONTINUE PROTECTING SOCIETY FROM CRIMI-
These and other tough laws have resulted in more crimi- -NALS. We must have the funds provided by this bond to
nals being sentenced to state prisons than ever before. IN build additional.prison facilities or the courts may not al-
THE PAST SIX YEARS THE NUMBER OF FELONS IN low any more felons to be confined. THIS BOND MEAS-
OUR STATE PRISON HAS INCREASED FROM 21,000 URE WILL COST LESS THAN $2 PER YEAR FOR
TO MORE THAN 55,000.However,our state prisons were EACH RESIDENT OF THIS STATE. THIS IS A SMALL
built to house only about 32,000 convicted felons. OUR PRICE TO PAY TO BETTER PROTECT YOUR FAMILY
INSTITUTIONS_ ARE SERIOUSLY OVERCROWDED, AND HOME.
often placing our courageous California correctional offi- If you favor increased public safety,'vote yes on Proposi-
cers and staff in great.danger. PASSAGE OF THIS BOND tion 54. ,
MEASURE IS VITAL TO THE CONTINUED ISOLA-
TION OF CONVICTED FELONS from the law-abiding GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
public as°well as to the safety of correctional officers and Governor
staff. RICHARD ROBINSON
WE CURRENTLY HAVE THOUSANDS OF INMATES Member of the Assembly, 72nd District
HOUSED IN TEMPORARY FACILITIES, with some liv- ROBERT PRESLEY
ing in tents. In 39 other states, the courts have issued . State Senator,36th District
Rebuttal to Argument. in Favor of Proposition 54
IF YOU WANT CHEAPER PRISONS WHERE THE one prison nearly reached $1 million.
INMATES HAVE TO WORK,VOTE NO ON 54. Prop.54 Wait till you see what they do with the toilet.
is not needed to build new prisons. NEW PRISONS WILL The Nonexistent Camps
BE BUILT FOR LESS IF PROP. 54 IS DEFEATED. The prison officials have spent several hundred thousand
only reason Prop. 54 is on the ballot is to evade spending _ dollars planning ten work camp's which they,promised to
limits that the taxpayers have placed on state bureaucrats. build in 1983.
These limits do not count bonds,bonds which your grand-
children will have to pay for. So far only one camp has materialized.
- Financing the needed prisons-from the millions avail- These camps . (World War II-style barracks and cot
able in prior prison bonds and in the General Fund re- beds) have taken longer-to build than the Empire State
serve is a-lot cheaper than floating another bond. 'Building, the Sears Tower, and the Hoover Dam.
A yes vote frees prison planners to continue spending as (Note that prison planning consultants are paid by the
if there is 'no tomorrow. For example: hour.)
The Million-Dollar Door- DON'T GET CONNED BY THIS PRISON CON.VOTE
Because prison planning consultants kept changing NO.
their minds about the type of cell door to be used (should RICHARD FLOYD
it slide or should it swing shut?), the door design costs at Member of the Assembly,53rd District
10 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked.for accuracy by any official agency G86
New Prison Construction Bond Act of 1986 n54
Argument Against Proposition 54
WILL YOU BUY ANYTHING? The Department of Corrections is paying a consulting
Prop. 54 is the third prison bond in three elections. firm millions of dollars a year to plan the new prisons.This
Before you sign away another half billion dollars, you firm gets a percentage of each project. The bigger the
might want to know what you're buying. project, the bigger the take.
The first prison bond went to build a prison at Tehach- A 1984 audit of the Corrections contract consultant
api,which was the most expensive prison ever built in this found hundreds of thousands of dollars going for racquet-
state. At a cost of$100,000 per cell, we could have housed ball club dues, apartments, spouses on payroll, and other
these felons cheaper in condos. "project-related" expenses.
The second bond went: The Department of Corrections says that it has cleaned
. for a prison at Vacaville which is more than a year up its act. If you believe that, you may be interested in
behind schedule (it still isn't finished) and more than buying.some Florida-swampland.
307 over budget. Supporters of Prop.54 say that.without this bond no new
. for a prison in the Mojave Desert. Out of the whole prisons can be built to lock up criminals. That is POP-
desert, the prison planners bought land in the flight PYCOCK! Prisons will be built if Californians defeat this
path of an Air Force Base. This is the second site bond. We have already approved over $1 billion in new
abandoned because it was too close to an air base. prison funding. Defeating Prop. 54 will mean that new
for a prison in San Diego, but the planners forgot to prisons will have to be built on a tighter budget than they
obtain sewage connections. The Department of.Cor- are now.
rections proposed to instead use Porta Potties at a cost The supporters of this measure plan to finance prisons
of$1,000 per month per inmate just to flush the toilet. through a new gimmick called "lease-purchase," regard-
At that cost we could have put the cons up cheaper less of what you voters decide. Lease-purchase is just a
at a hotel.This oversight cost you an extra few million fancy way of putting the state into debt without the say-so
dollars. of the public.
If you want to send a message that this sort of waste has These new prison building schemes have become big
got to stop JUST VOTE NO. business—monkey business. The only way to make it
The California Department of Corrections is starting to become the people's business again is to'VOTE NO.
resemble the Pentagon—after all, it's not their money.
Where will this new prison bond go?Into the pockets of RICHARD E. FLOYD
CONSULTANTS. Member of the Assembly,53rd District
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 54
The opponents argument contains numerous inaccu- ing this technology to help.others in the state REDUCE
rate and incorrect statements. His argument is particular- THE TIME AND COSTS REQUIRED FOR COMPLE-
ly perplexing since he voted for this measure twice when TION OF NEW JAILS AND PRISONS."
it was debated in the Legislature. California's Auditor.General found that the Corrections
The truth of the matter is that IF THIS BOND MEAS- Department saved more than$50million from earlier esti-
URE DOES NOT PASS, THERE WILL BE NO MONEY mates in building the San Diego prison.
available TO CONTINUE BUILDING PRISONS. Passage of this measure will provide tens of thousands
Correctional facilities are overburdened by increased of new jobs for California workers and will allow law en-
commitments. From December 22, 1985, to July 1, 1986, forcement to remove dangerous felons from our streets.
the prison population increased 'by over 5,000.. MORE THIS BOND MEASURE WILL COST LESS THAN$2
PRISONS MUST BE BUILT IF WE ARE TO CONTINUE PER YEAR FOR EACH CITIZEN;A SMALL PRICE TO
REMOVING VIOLENT FELONS FROM OUR PAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.
STREETS. IF YOU FAVOR INCREASED PUBLIC SAFETY,
The Department of Corrections occupied the new pris- VOTE "YES" ON PROPOSITION 54.
on at Vacaville in less than a year from the date the prison DICK SIMPSON
was authorized. THE EFFORTS OF THE STATE TO Executive Vice President, California Taxpayers'Association
BUILD NEW PRISONS HAVE BEEN PRAISED BY THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NI ROBERT H. KRESS
( Vice President, Citizens For Law and Order
June construction bulletin the NUSTICE
J J). In their IJ stated, "CALIFORNIA BRAD GATES
HAS DEVELOPED ECONOMICAL BUILDING METH- ' Sheriff of Orange County
ODS, and CORRECTIONAL OFFICIALS are now char- President, California State Sheriffs'Association
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 11
55
California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
CALIFORNIA SAFE DRINKING WATER BOND LAW OF 1986. This act provides for a bond issue of one hundred
million dollars ($100,000,000) to provide funds for improvement of domestic water systems to meet minimum drinking
water standards.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on AB 2668 (Proposition 55)
Assembly: Ayes 67 Senate: Ayes 32
Noes 5 Noes 1
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
the cost of a project and the loan amount the agencies can
Background repay. The maximum grant to any supplier would be
Since 1960 the state has made loans and grants to help. $400,000.
pay for local water supply systems.The state has sold gen- 2. Up.to $3 million for short-term loans or grants to
eral obligation bonds to raise this money.All but about$50 water suppliers to study and identify ways of improving
million of the $380 million authorized by previous bond their water systems. Up to $1 million could be used for
acts will be spent or committed by November 1986. grants to public agencies.
The Department of Water Resources administers the 3. Up to $5 million for administrative costs of the De-
safe.drinking water program in cooperation with the De- partment of Water Resources and Department of Health
partment of Health Services. The Department of Health Services. About $3 million of these costs would be repaid
Services has estimated that a total of$500 million is needed from fees charged to the loan recipients.
to eliminate health hazards in 900 of the state's local water 4. Up to $1.5 million for legal expenses of the Attorney
systems. General.
Reduced Interest Rate on Other Loans. This measure
Proposal also reduces the interest rate on existing and new loans
This measure would permit the state to sell$100 million made from the 1984 Safe Drinking.Water Bond Fund.
of general-obligation bonds to make loans and grants for Under the 1984 Bond Law,about$50 million can be loaned
local water systems. General obligation bonds are backed at the same interest rate paid by the state on the'bonds.
by the state, meaning that the state will use its taxing This measure would lower the interest rate on these.loans
power to assure that enough money is available to pay off to one-half of the rate that the state pays on the bonds.
the bonds.,The state's General Fund would be used to pay
the net principal and interest costs on these bonds. Gen- Fiscal Effect
eral Fund revenues are derived primarily from the state Paying Off the Bonds. For these types of bonds the,
corporate and personal income taxes and the state sales state typically would make principal and interest pay-
tax. ments over a period of up to 30 years from the state's
The Department of Water Resources would use the General Fund.The average payment would be about$8.1
money from the sale of the bonds for loans and grants to million each year if the bonds were sold at an interest rate
public and private water suppliers to bring drinking water of 7.5 percent.
quality up to state health standards. The loans and grants Net Costs. If all of the loans are repaid on time,the net
could be used for constructing, improving, or'rehabilitat- state cost could average up to$5.5 million each year for 30
ing water systems to meet drinking water standards. years,for a total of$165 million.This net cost would consist
Loans. First priority for the loans would go to water of (1) up to $28.5 million for grants, administrative, and
suppliers whose facilities pose the most critical public legal costs,and (2) one-half of the interest cost on the new
health problems.The maximum loan to any water supplier bonds and the 1984 bonds because loans would be pro-
would be$5 million,unless the Legislature raises this limit.' vided at a reduced interest rate. Over the 30 years, the
The interest rate on these loans would be one-half of the total interest subsidy would be $94.5 million for the new
interest rate that the state pays on the bonds. 'bonds, and $42 million for the 1984 bonds.
Grants and Other Uses. Although all of the bond Borrowing Costs for Other Bonds. By increasing the
money could be used for loans,part of the money could be amount which the state borrows, this measure may cause
used for Ether purposes, such as: the state and local governments to pay more under other
1. Up to $25 million for grants to public agencies that bond programs. These costs cannot be estimated.
supply water in order to make up the difference between State Revenues. Purchasers of these bonds are not re-
12 G86
quired to pay state income tax on the interest they earn. of making other taxable investments, the state would col-
Therefore,if.California taxpayers buy these bonds instead ,lect less taxes. This loss cannot be estimated.
Text of Proposed Law
This law proposed by Assembly Bill 2668 (Statutes of thorized to be issued pursuant to this chapter, and the
1986, Chapter 410) is submitted to the people in accord- provisions of that law are included in this chapter as
ance with the provisions of Article XVI of the Constitu- though set out in full in this chapter,except that notwith-
tion. standing anything in the State General Obligation Bond
This proposed law adds sections to the Water Code; Law, the bonds authorized hereunder shall bear the rates
therefore,new provisions proposed to be added are print- of interest, or maximum rates, as may,from time to time,
ed in italic type to indicate that they are new. be fixed by the Treasurer, with the approval of the com-
PROPOSED LAW mittee,.and the maximum maturity of bonds shall not ex-
ceed 50 years from the date of the bonds, or from the date
SECTION 1. Chapter 10.7 (commencing with Section of each respective series. The maturity of each respective
13895) is added to Division 7 of the Water Code, to read: series shall be calculated from the date of the series.
CHAPTER 10.7. CALIFORNIA SAFE DRINKING WATER 13895.5. As used in this chapter, and for purposes of
BOND LAw'oF 1986 this chapter as used in the State General Obligation Bond
13895. This chapter shall be known and may be cited Law (Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 16720) of Part
as the California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986. 3 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code), the
13895.1. The Legislature hereby finds and declares all following terms shall have the following meanings:
of the following: (a) "Committee"means the Safe Drinking Water Fi-
g: narice Committee created by Section 13895.6.
(a) The State Department of Health Services has dis- (b) `Department" means the Department of Water
covered toxic chemicals in 126 of California's large public Resources.
drinking water systems. (c) "Domestic water system"means a system for the
(b) Many of the chemical contaminants in California's provision to the public of piped water for human con-
drinking firthwa defects, and
other s ri suspected ofcausing sumption, if the system has at least five service connec-
cancer, birth defects, and other serious illnesses. tions or regularly supplies water to at least 25 individuals.
(c) Following the passage of the California Safe Drink- The term includes any water supply, treatment, storage,
ing Water Bond Law of 1984, the State Department of and distribution facilities under the control of the operator
Health Services received 1,359 requests for eight hundred of the system.
twenty-five million dollars ($825,000,000) to improve pub- (d) "Fund-means the California Safe Drinking Water
lic drinking water systems. The department has deter- Fund
mined that an additional five hundred million dollars e "Supplier" "supplier or "su er of water"means an er-
($500,000,000) is n eeded imm edia tely for pu blic wa ter sys- ( )' any
tems to correct deficiencies which pose a health hazard to son, partneerr ship, corporation, association, or other entity
enable hundreds of systems to meet minimum health a political subdivision of the state which owns or operates
standards. a domestic water system.
( (f) "Federal assistance" means funds available, or
d) New monitoring programs for small public water .
s which may become available, to a supplier either directly
systems are expected to identify many new toxic contami-
nation problems. It is unlikely that these problems can be or through allocation by the state from the federal govern-
solved without financial assistance from the State of Cali- meet as grants or loans for the improvement of'domestic
forma. water systems.
13895.2. The Legislature further finds and declares (g) Treatment works"means any devices or systems
that the protection of the health,safety,and welfare of the used in the treatment of water supplies, ure, wholesome,
es-
people of California requires that water supplied for do- saryand ]ands, which render water supplies pure, wholesome,
and potable for domestic purpose.
mesticpurposes beat al timespure, wholesome,andpota- (h) `Project" means proposed facilities for the con-
ble,and thatitisin the interest ofthe people that the State struction, improvement, or rehabilitation of the domestic
of California provide technical and financial assistance to water system, and may include water supply, treatment
the end that the people of California are assured a safe, works, and all or part of a water distribution system, if
dependable,and potable supply of water for domestic pur- necessary to carry out the purpose of this chapter.
poses and that water is available in adequate quantity at (i) 'Public agency" means any city, county, city and
sufficient pressure for health, cleanliness, and other,do- county, district,joint powers authority, or other political
mestic purposes. subdivision of the state which owns or operates a domestic
13895.3. The Legislature further finds. and declares water system. For purposes of this chapter, Chapter 102
that it is the intent of the Legislature to provide for the (commencing with Section 13810), Chapter 10.5 (com-
upgrading of domestic water supply systems to assure that mencing with Section 13850), and Chapter 10.6 (com-
all domestic water supplies at least meet minimum domes- mencing with Section 13880),a political subdivision of the
tic water supply standards established under Chapter 7 state may be any public agency.
(commencing with Section 4010) of Part I bfDivision 5 of 13895.6. The Safe Drinking Water Finance Committee
the Health and Safety Code. is hereby created. The committee shall consist,of the Gov-
13895.4. , The State General Obligation Bond Law ernor, the Treasurer, the Director of Finance, the Direc-'
(Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 16720) of Part 3 of for of Water Resources, and the State Director of Health
Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code) is adopted Services or their designated representatives.A majority of
for the purpose of the issuance, sale, and repayment of,
and otherwise providing with respect to, the bonds-au- Continued on page 56
G86 13
J cJ California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986
Argument in Favor of Proposition 55
Vote yes on Proposition 55,the California Safe Drinking be made on the basis of-immediate health-related prob-
Water Bond Law of 1986. lems certified by the Department of Health Services.In all
Ensuring safe drinking water and the public health is a cases, the community must seek federal water project
fundamental responsibility of the state. Citizens have. funding before applying to the state for assistance.
recognized this need and responsibility in the past with Support for this bond law is widespread and bipartisan.
their overwhelming approval of water bond issues in 1976, It is supported by the Association of California Water
1980 and 1984. 1 Agencies, the Health Officers Association of California,
Yet, despite these efforts, we still have drinking water the California Council for Environmental and Economic
problems. Following the pasgage"of the California Safe Balance, the California PTA, the California Municipal
Drinking Water Bond Law of 1984, the State Department Utilities Association, and the League of Women Voters.
of Health Services received 1,359 requests for$825 million All but a small portion of the 1984 Safe Drinking Water
to improve public drinking water systems in our state. Bond funds have been allocated. The Department of
This means that significant.numbers of Californians con- Health Services continues to add community water sup-
tinue to drink polluted water which fails to meet public pliers to its priority health hazard list as new sources of
health standards as set by the Department of Health Serv- contamination are discovered. This effort deserves your
ices. The Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986 will ad- support.While we will not fully solve California's drinking
dress this urgent problem. water problems with this bond law,it will help us meet our
California's economic growth as well as our quality of most immediate needs.The safety of our communities and
life depends upon the availability of safe drinking water the health of our children deserve no less.
for all of our citizens.The 1986 Safe Drinking Water Bond Support safe drinking water for all Californians. Vote
Law will assist communities in modernizing their water YES on Proposition 55.
systems and meeting,direct health threats by bringing JACK O'CONNELL
their drinking water up to primary drinking water stand- Member of the Assembly,35th District
and levels. This bond law will provide $75 million in loans ROBERT J. LAGOMARSINO
and up to$25 million in grants to small and medium water Member of Congress, 19th District
districts for construction,improvement,and rehabilitation RICHARD KATZ
of public and private drinking water systems. Grants will Member of the Assembly,39th District
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 55
The November 1986 ballot contains a record high Bonds are exempt from Proposition 4, passed by a 74%
$1,800,000,000 in bond measures proposed by the Legisla- vote of the people in 1979,which limits the growth of state
ture. They say that the taxpayers won't have to pay, but budgets. The maximum will soon be reached, and the
they don't tell us that there are millions of dollars in inter- politicians are scrambling to deceive the taxpayers while
est that will be due to bondholders, still maintaining all their government programs for special
This money must come from the pockets of taxpayers— interest groups.
not just'those of us eligible to cast ballots in 1986, but Don't make debtors out of our children. Vote NO on
taxpayers of many years in the future. Since our children Proposition 55.
and grandchildren do not have an opportunity to vote,we TED BROWN
can only call these bond measures "taxation without rep- Libertarian candidate for U.S. Representative,25th District
resentation," the same battle cry-that led our forefathers LAURA G. BROWN
to fight a revolution against the British Crown. Libertarian candidate for State Senator,24th District
The politicians only seek bond financing of this expen- STEPHEN I. MALMBERG
sive water treatment proposal because voters'have limited Libertarian candidate for State Board of Equalization,
their ability .to constantly raise government spending. 4th District
14 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986 Jr Jt'
Argument Against Proposition 55
Proposition 55 asks for $100 million to improve water centive,these companies would provide the service much
treatment and filtering systems to allegedly protect Cali-' more efficiently and economically than the government
fornia drinking water supplies.While pure drinking water does. It would then be logical for the owners to pass any
is an admirable goal,it seems improper for all the taxpay- improvement costs along to their customers. This is the
ers of California to subsidize a project that will only bene- most fair and equitable solution:
fit a few communities. We urge a "NO" vote on-Proposition 55.
We believe that the communities which have aging or
defective water systems should ask for.money from the NORMA JEAN ALMODOVAR
users of those systems. If the people who will benefit vote Libertarian candidate for Lieutenant Governor
to pay,'then.the improvements will.be made. If they vote TED BROWN
"no,".then the systems will remain as they are. Libertarian candidate for U.S. Representative,25th District
An even better solution would be to sell water treat LAURA G. BROWN
ment facilities to private businesses. With profit as an,in- Libertarian candidate for Stare Senator,24th District
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 55
The opponents to Proposition 55 are misinformed about for the presence of 100 chemicals. Nearly 20 percent of
the California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1986. them had detectable levels of contaminants..
Since the original Safe Drinking Water Bond Law was The California Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of'1986
passed in 1976, community water districts statewide, in a is a program established to do precisely what government
in of cases, have established a surcharge program is designed to do: provide services in a timely manner
consisting of a small fee on .each monthly bill for repay- which the citizenry cannot provide for themselves acting
ment of the loans with a trust fund holding and disbursing alone. With the passage of this bond measure, everyone
debt service funds.,Therefore,-the loan program is repaid benefits. Not only do your community water systems im-
by user fees, not general local government property tax prove, but the general taxpayer is spared the necessity of
resources. funding .health and safety costs which most surely will
The opponents to Proposition,55 are clearly not in- result-from poor-quality drinking water.
formed about the magnitude of.the problem.facing our
drinking water supply.Almost every day in the newspaper JACK O'CONNELL
you read about a new source of contamination to our Member of the Assembly,35rh District
drinking water, especially toxic contamination. This con- ROBERT LAGOMARSINO
tamination is not restricted to a.certain area;cthe problem n Member of Congress, 19th District
is statewide. The State Department of Health Services RICHARD KATZ
recently surveyed 2,800 large water systems in the state Member of the Assembly,39th District
You must reregister to vote if you move.
If you need a registration form call the
Secretary of State at 1=800-345-VOTE
• or TDD 1-800-833-8683. .,
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency '15
56
Higher Education Facilities Bond Act of 1986
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
HIGHER EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 1986. This act provides for a bond issue of four hundred million
dollars ($400,000,000) to provide capital for construction or improvement of facilities at California's public higher
education institutions, including the University of California's nine campuses, the California State University's 19 cam-
puses, the California Community College's 106 campuses,and the California Maritime Academy,to be sold at a rate not
to exceed two hundred fifty million-dollars ($250,000,000) per year.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on SB 2366 (Proposition 56)
Assembly:. Ayes 55 Senate: Ayes 27
Noes 3 Noes 2
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
and the state sales tax..
Background The state could spend the bond money to purchase
California's system of public higher education consists of building sites and certain equipment,construct new build-
135 campuses serving approximately 1.6 million'students. ings and alter existing buildings. The state also could use
This system includes the University of California,the Cali- the money.for short-term loans to the community colleges .
fornia State University, the' California Community Col- for the purchase of instructional equipment. These.loans
leges and the California Maritime Academy. would be repaid from the state's tidelands oil revenue.
The University of California has nine campuses with a The'Governor and the Legislature would decide how to
total enrollment of about 138,000 students. This system spend the bond money. No more than $150 million could
offers bachelor, master and doctoral degrees. The univer- be authorized per year, except in the first year $250 mil-
sity is also the`primary state-supported,agency for re- lion could be authorized.Loans to the community colleges
search. would not require legislative approval.
The California State University system has 19 campuses The state's 1986 budget would spend $242 million from
with an enrollment of about 320,000 students. The system this bond measure (if approved) for projects at various
grants bachelor and master degrees. - campuses. About$260 million in additional money will be.
The California Community Colleges provide instruction needed to complete these projects.
to approximately 1.2 million students at 106 campuses op-
erated by 70 locally governed districts throughout the Fiscal Effect
state. The community colleges give associate degrees and Paying Off'the Bonds. For these types of bonds the
also offer a variety of.basic skill courses. state typically•would make principal and interest pay-
The California Maritime Academy provides instruction merits over a period of up to 20 years from the state's
for students who seek to become licensed officers in the General,Fund.,The-average payment would be about $35
U.S.Merchant Marine:One of six such schools in the coun- million each year if the bonds were sold at an interest rate
try, the academy has an enrollment of about 400 students. of 7 percent.
The state funds planning, construction and alterations Borrowing Costs for Other Bonds. By increasing the
for buildings in the state's system of public higher educa- amount which the state borrows, this measure may cause
tion. In recent years, these funds have come from the the state and local governments to�pay-more under other
state's tidelands oil revenue and from lease-purchase bond programs. These costs cannot be estimated.
agreements.
State Revenues. The people who buy these bonds are
Proposal not required to pay state income tax on the interest they
This measure authorizes the state to sell $400 million in. earn. Therefore,.if California taxpayers buy these bonds,
general obligation bonds to fund facilities for California's instead of making taxable investments, the state would
public higher education system. General obligation bonds collect less taxes.This loss of revenue cannot be estimated.
.are backed by the state,meaning that the state will use its Paying Off Loans to Community Colleges: This meas-
taxing power to assure that enough money is available to ure appropriates future revenue from the state's tidelands
pay off the bonds. Revenues deposited in the state's Gen- oil to replace any bond money lent to the community
eral Fund would be used to pay the principal and,interest colleges.The amount required for this purpose would de-
costs on the bonds. General Fund revenues are-derived pend on the amount of money lent to the community
primarily from state corporate and personal income taxes colleges.
16 G86
Text of-Proposed Law
This law proposed by Senate Bill 2366 (Statutes of 1986, fund the apportionments that are expressly authorized by
Chapter 424) is submitted to the people in accordance the Legislature in the annual BudgetAct.Pursuant to that
with the provisions of Article XVI of the Constitution. legislative direction, the committee shall determine when
This proposed law expressly adds sections to the Educa- the bonds authorized under this chapter shall be issued in
tion Code;therefore,new provisions proposed to be added order to fund the authorized apportionments, and the
are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new. amount of the bonds to be issued and sold.
(c) Up to two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,-
PROPOSED LAW 000) shall be available for apportionment in the 1986-87
SEC. 2. Chapter 14.5 (commencing with Section fiscal year, and up to one hundred fifty million dollars
67350) is added to Part 40 of the Education Code, to read: ($150,000,000) shall be available for apportionment for the
CHAPTER 14.5. HIGHER EDUCATION FACILITIES except
fiscal year, and in each subsequent fiscal year,
BOND ACT OF 1986 except that the maximum aggregate debt or liability
amount set forth in subdivision (a) shall not be exceeded.
67350. This chapter shall be known and may be cited (d) Pursuant to this section, the Treasurer shall sell the
as the Higher Education Facilities Bond Act of 1986. bonds authorized by the committee at such different
67351. The State General Obligation Bond Law times as necessary to service expenditures required by the
(Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 16720) of Part 3 of apportionments.
Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code) is adopted (e) The proceeds of bonds issued and sold pursuant to
for the purpose of the issuance, sale, and repayment of, this chapter shall be deposited in the Higher Education
and otherwise providing with respect to, the bonds au- Capital Outlay Bond Fund, which is hereby created in the
thorized to be issued by this chapter,and the provisions of State Treasury.
that law are hereby incorporated in this chapter as though 67354.5. The proceeds of the bonds may also be used to
set out in full in this chapter.All references in this chapter provide short-term loans to community colleges for the'
to "herein"shall be deemed to refer both to this chapter purchase of instructional equipment. Those loans shall be
and that law. repaid from the first moneys available in the Capital Out-
67352. As used in this chapter, and for the purposes of lay Fund for Public Higher Education beginning in the
this chapter as used in the State General Obligation Bond 1987-88 fiscal year.
Law, the following words shall have the following mean- 67355. All bonds herein authorized, which shall have
ings: been duly sold and delivered as herein provided, shall
(a) `Board"means the State Public Works Board. constitute valid and legally binding general obligations of
(b) "Committee"means the Higher Education Facili- the State of California, and the full faith and credit of the
ties Finance Committee, created pursuant to Section State of California is hereby pledged for the punctual pay-.
67353. ment of both principal and interest thereof.
(c) `Fund"means the Higher Education Capital Out- There shall be collected annually in the same manner
lay Bond Fund, created pursuant to subdivision (e) of and at the same time as other state revenue is collected a
Section 67354.. sum, in addition to the ordinary revenues of the state, as
67353. The,Higher Education Facilities Finance Com- is required to pay the principal and interest on the bonds
mittee is hereby created, consisting of the Governor, the as herein provided, and it is hereby made the duty of all
Controller, the Treasurer, the Director of Finance, the officers charged by law with any duty in regard to the
President ofthe University ofCalifornia,the Chancellor of collection of the revenue, to do and perform each and
the California State University, and the Chancellor of the every act which is necessary to collect the additional sum.
California Community Colleges, or their designees. The 67356. There is hereby appropriated from the General
Treasurer shall serve as chairperson of the committee. Fund in the State Treasury for the purpose of this chapter,
67354. (a) For the purpose of funding aid to the Uni- an amount that will equal the following:
versity of California, the California State University, the (a) The sum annually as will be necessary to pay the
California Community Colleges, and the California Mari- principal of and the interest on the bonds issued and sold
time.Academy for the construction, including the con- pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, as the principal
struction of buildings and the acquisition of related fix- and interest become due and payable.
tures, renovation, and reconstruction of facilities, for the - (b) The sum as is necessary to carry out Section 67357,
acquisition of sites upon which these facilities are to be which sum is appropriated without regard to fiscal years.
constructed, for the equipping of new, renovated, or 67357. For the purposes of carrying out the provisions
reconstructed facilities, which equipment shall have a use- of this chapter, the Director of Finance may, by executive
ful life of at least 10 years, to provide funds for payment order,authorize the withdrawal from the General Fund of
ofpreconstruction costs;including, but not limited to,pre- an amount or amounts not to exceed the amount of the
liminary plans and working drawings, and to provide unsold bonds which the committee has by resolution au-
funds to reimburse the General Obligation Bond Expense thorized to be sold for the purpose of carrying out this
Revolving Fund pursuant to Section 16724.5 of the Gov, chapter.Anyamounts withdrawn shall be deposited in the
ernment Code, the committee shall be and is hereby au- fund to be allocated by the board in accordance with this
thorized and empowered to create a debt or debts,liabili- chapter.Any moneys made available under this section to
ty or liabilities, of the State of California, in the aggregate the board shall be returned by the board to the General
amount of four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) in Fund, together with interest in the amount that those
the manner provided in this chapter, but not in excess moneys would have earned in the Pooled Money Invest-
thereof. ment Account, which repayment shall be made from
(b) The committee shall authorize the-issuance of moneys received from the sale of bonds sold for the pur-
bonds under this chapter only to the extent necessary to pose of carrying out this chapter.
G86 17
1
56 Higher Education Facilities Bond Act of 1986
Argument in Favor of Proposition 56
California has established one of the most respected development, a direct result of our successful higher
systems of higher education in the world. The University education system, has increased the need for new and
of California,the California State University,and the Cali- renovated facilities. State-of-the-art instructional and
fornia Community Colleges have combined to produce a research laboratories are essential to adequately train
system that guarantees every high school graduate an op- the teachers, scientists, doctors,and engineers who will
portunity to pursue a college 'education. These colleges attract industry and jobs to the state as well as improve
and universities, with 135 campuses that enroll over 1.5 the quality of life for every Californian.
million students,prepare individuals for leadership posi- All of the construction projects which will be funded from
tions in a wide variety of careers that contribute to Califor- this bond measure in the coming year have already been
nia's growth and prosperity, including teachers, doctors, reviewed and approved by the Governor and the State
business leaders,research scientists,industrialists and agri- Legislature. In past years,public higher education institu-
cultural specialists. tions have depended on income from state-owned oil
The construction of facilities at our colleges and univer- fields to pay for needed construction projects.The decline
sities has not kept pace with the demands of recent times. in oil prices, which has benefited consumers, has at the
Until recently, the state's total funding for higher educa- same time sharply reduced the amount of money available
tion construction steadily declined, leaving our campuses for higher education facility needs. Recognizing this prob-
with an enormous backlog of projects urgently needed to lem, the Governor and the Legislature authorized this
maintain the quality of California's higher education pro- bond issue as an alternative way of financing needed im-
grams. provements at the state's colleges and universities..
Proposition 56 would provide $400 million, over two Proposition 56 will maintain and enhance the quality of
years, to construct projects urgently needed to: California's public colleges and universities by providing
Accommodate increases in student enrollments. funds needed to modernize teaching and research facili-
New and renovated classrooms, libraries, and laborato- ties,improve health and safety and help ensure adequate
ries are needed on our campuses in order to keep pace space for increasing numbers of future students. Funding
with population growth. Without a carefully planned these needed projects depends on the passage of the High-
and cost-effective expansion, our colleges and universi- er Education Facilities Bond Act of 1986 now before you.
ties will be hopelessly overcrowded. WE URGE YOU TO VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 56.
Upgrade for earthquake, health and safety require-
ments. Older buildings on our campuses were con- GARY K. HART
structed before new methods for making buildings safer State Senator, 18th District
in the event of earthquakes or fires were available. Chairman, Senate Education Committee
Renovation and replacement projects are needed to GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
bring these facilities into,compliance with new earth- Governor, State of California
quake, fire, and other,safety regulations. DAVID P. GARDNER
Adapt to new technology. Rapid technological President, University of California
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 56
. Proponents of Proposition 56 claim that their facilities New technology, research laboratories and classroom
have not kept pace with demands of recent times. Yet renovations are always needed but should be obtained at
they also claim that California has established one of the a pace payable WITHOUT GOING INTO DEBT.
most respected systems of higher education in the world. . Even with a welcomed decrease in oil prices, State
WHICH IS TRUE? General.Fund budgets have grown-from $26 billion three
. Unlike K-12, college education is VOLUNTARY and years ago to $37 billion this year. The highest ever.
NOT required by the state . . . thus demanding different . If this $400-million item, WHICH WILL COST TAX-
criteria for funding. PAYERS OVER $1 billion TO REPAY, is so urgent right-
. Funding has increased substantially ,in our recent now, then the Legislature and the Governor should pro-
budgets for higher education, yet the institutions did not vide for it out of the regular budget.
spend their funds on building these "needed facilities." . These bonds are a BAD BUSINESS DEAL for all tax-
. Freshmen enrollments in California's higher educa- payers—and for 20 years of repayment!
tion have,DROPPED generally since 1974 according to Vote NO on Proposition 56.
the most recent data published by the State College Board
in 1984. NOLAN FRIZZELLE,O.D.
. Educational facilities have always been built accord- Member'of the Assembly, 69th District
ing to state-of-the-art methods and have withstood Califor- DON SEBASTIANI,
nia's earthquakes. Member of the Assembly,8th District
18 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
0
Higher Education Facilities Bond Act of 1986 5
Argument Against Proposition 56
. ASK YOURSELF: Would studies run by those who This measure requires that equipment purchased with
want your money ever come back with an answer showing the bond money has to last for 10 years, but you will be
that they didn't need it? paying for it for 20 years.
. WHO MADE THE STUDIES THAT CAUSED THE • When the state's universities and colleges can come to
DEMAND FOR THESE BONDS?The University of Cali- the taxpayers whenever they want to expand or create a
fornia, the State University and Colleges and the Com- more grandiose image they have very little reason to think
munity College Systems. they must manage their regular budgets and personnel
They,created the "wish list" that became this ''desper_ efficiently.
ate" demand for $400 million, and the amount is consid- • Private universities must compete for students with
ered by them to be only the down payment for construc- the state universities. When the state system gets regular
tion and equipment for 2 years. infusions of public tax dollars such as from these bonds,the
. However, this bond proposal costs $1 billion ($1,000 private universities must increase their fees to their stu-
million) to you the taxpayers over the 20-year payback_ dents by similar amounts to provide competitive facilities.
period in principal and interest. • Of all the levels of education the higher levels should
$400 million to the universities—$1 billion debt pay- feel most obligated to teach their students what we all
back. have to learn—namely to live within our means. In every
Does that make good sense? case any debt ought to be payable out of predictable reve-
Consider also that the bond payments each year have to nues. Just as we can't spend our way out of a debt as
be added to what has to be paid in order to solve each individuals,we can't do it as a state.We can't avoid serious
year's new "desperate needs." debt by spending this$400 million above our state income.
. THIS bond issue addresses only costs of construction • Summarizing: We say that truly needed costs for con-
and equipment or reconstruction and it commits 400 mil- struction should be budgeted each year out of the avail-
lion tax dollars above those already generous increases able revenues on a priority basis decided by the Legisla-
furnished by the Legislature in the budget. ture. This is what we call the budgeting process, and the
Solutions and funding for other higher education prob- Legislature has spent far more-this year than ever before
on higher education. It is enough, without the debt of
lems are not a part.
the bonds, until next year.
• Do new buildings guarantee a better education? Is es
this the best way to improve the performance of students Vote NO on this miserable bond proposition.
or teachers? NOLAN FRIZZELLE,O.D.
Be advised that dollars used for bond repayment of prin- Member of the Assembly, 69th District
cipal and interest out of each yearly budget WILL NOT DON SEBASTIANI
BE AVAILABLE FOR SALARY INCREASES. Member of the Assembly,8th District
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 56
The opponents' argument against Proposition 56 ig- est rates currently available.California voters have repeat-
nores the critical construction needs of California's col- edly approved bond issues over the years for high-priority
leges and universities,and the benefits they provide to our long-term state needs.At the same time,California's level
economy and all Californians. Proposition 56 will help our of indebtedness is well below average when compared to
colleges and universities: other states. To argue that the state should not use bonds
• Keep pace with increasing student enrollments. to finance long-term construction projects is like saying
• Renovate existing buildings, build new classrooms that individuals should not use mortgages to finance their
and libraries. homes.
• Modernize laboratories to keep up to date with scien- Proposition 56 will not diminish California's financial
tific development. stability. It will fund urgently needed improvements to
• Make critical earthquake,health and safety improve- our college campuses and maintain the quality of Califor-
ments. nia's higher education programs.
The pprojects to be financed by Proposition 56 were de- VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 56.
veloped after careful planning and study by not just the
universities, but also the Governor and the Legislature. GARY K. HART
Bond funds will be used to construct buildings which will State Senator, 18th District
last well into the 21st century, long after the bonds are Chairman,Senate Education Committee
repaid. DAVID P. GARDNER
Bond funds are commonly used by government and President, University of California
private industry to finance long-term construction needs. W. ANN REYNOLDS
Bond financing is particularly sensible given the low inter- Chancellor, California State University
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. 19
57 Retiremept Benefits for Nonjudicial and Nonlegislative
Elected State Constitutional Officers
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR NONJUDICIAL AND NONLEGISLATIVE ELECTED STATE CONSTITUTIONAL
OFFICERS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Presently retirement benefits for nonjudicial and
nonlegislative elected state constitutional officers are governed by statute and differ depending upon the dates such
officers held office. For those who took office prior to October 7, 1974, their retirement benefits have been increased
as the compensation paid their successors has increased. This measure amends the Constitution to preclude the retire-
ment benefits of any nonlegislative or nonjudicial elected state constitutional officers from increasing or being affected
by changes in compensation payable to their successors on or after November 5, 1986..Summary of Legislative Analyst's
estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: This measure would reduce the future retirement benefits of
fewer than 20 people, resulting in annual state savings of about $400,000. The state would realize savings because these
retirement benefits would not be adjusted for increases in the salaries of state elected officials due to take effect in
January 1987 and in future years.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on SCA 32 (Proposition 57)
Assembly: Ayes 74 Senate: Ayes 38
Noes 0 Noes 0
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
to their benefits: (1) a direct, annual cost-of-living adjust-
Background ment,and (2) an indirect adjustment when the salaries of
The seven statewide elected officials (such as the Gov- the 11 state officials are increased.
ernor and the State Treasurer) and the four elected mem-
bers of the Board of Equalization receive pension benefits Proposal
through a state retirement system. Persons serving in This constitutional amendment eliminates the connec-
these 11 offices receive initial retirement benefits,up to a tion between.future increases in the salaries of the persons
maximum of 60 percent of-salary,based on the number of serving in the 11 state offices and the retirement benefits
years they serve in office, of those officials who took office prior to October 7, 1974.
For officials taking office on or after October 7, 1974, Thus, beginning November 5, 1986, these retired officials
retirement benefits are based on their highest salary while (or their beneficiaries) would receive only one adjust-
in office. These benefits increase each year at the rate of ment—an annual cost-of-living increase.
inflation. Thus, if prices go up by 5 percent in any one
year,retirement benefits increase by 5 percent in the fol- Fiscal Effect
lowing year. This measure would reduce the future retirement bene-
For officials who took office prior to October 7, 1974, fits of fewer than 20 people, resulting in annual state sav-
however, benefits are based on the current salary of the ings of about $400,000. The state .would realize savings
office from which the official retired. These benefits also because these retirement benefits would not be adjusted
increase each year by the rate of inflation in the prior year. for increases in the salaries of state elected officials due to
As a result,these retired persons receive two adjustments take effect in January 1987 and in future years.
If you need an absentee ballot call your
county clerk or_ registrar of voters
for an application.
20 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This amendment proposed by Senate Constitutional
Amendment 32 (Statutes of 1986, Resolution Chapter 57)
expressly amends the Constitution by adding a section
thereto; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added
are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III
Sec. 7. (a) The retirement allowance for any person,
all of whose credited service in the Legislators' Retire-
ment System was rendered or was deemed to have been
rendered as an elective officer of the state whose office is
provided for by the California Constitution, other than a
judge and other than a Member of the Senate or Assembly,
and all or any part of whose retirement allowance is cal-
culated on the basis of the compensation payable to the
officer holding the office which the member last held pri-
or to retirement, or for the survivor or beneficiary of such
a person,shall not be increased or affected in any manner
by changes on or after November 5,1986,in the compensa-
tion payable to the officer holding the office which the
member last held prior to retirement.
(b) This section shall apply to any person, survivor, or
beneficiary described in subdivision (a) who receives, or
is receiving, from the Legislators' Retirement System a
retirement allowance on or after November 5, 1986, all or
any part of which allowance is calculated on the basis of
the compensation payable to the officer holding the office
which the member last held prior to retirement.
(c) It is the intent of the people,-in adopting this sec-
-tion,'to restrict retirement allowances to amounts reason-
ably to be expected by certain members and retired mem-
bers of the Legislators' Retirement System and to
preserve the basic character of earned retirement benefits
while prohibiting windfalls and unforeseen advantages
which have no relation to the real theory and objective of
a sound retirement system. It is not the intent of this
section to deny any member,retired member,survivor,or
beneficiary a reasonable retirement allowance. Thus, this
section shall not be construed as a repudiation of a debt
nor the impairment of a contract for a substantial and
reasonable retirement allowance from the Legislators'
Retirement System.
(d) The people and the Legislature hereby find and
declare,that the dramatic increase in the retirement al-
lowances of persons described in subdivision (a) which
would otherwise result when the compensation for those
offices increases on November 5, 1986, or January 5, 1987,
are not benefits which could have reasonably been expect-
ed. The people and the Legislature further find and de-
clare that the Legislature did not intend to provide in its
scheme of compensation for those offices such windfall
benefits.
G86 21
Retirement Benefits for Nonj udicial and Nonlegislative
57 ; Elected State Constitutional Officers
Argument in Favor of Proposition 57
One of our public pension systems needs some delicate stitutional officers (such as the Governor and the Attorney
surgery. General) are increased, the pensions of 16 retired consti-
The voters of this state must perform this operation tutional officers are increased in a similar manner.
NOW—in order to prevent millions of taxpayer dollars Proposition 57 would break this link between salaries of
from being wasted on the pension benefits of a handful of our current state officials and the pensions of retired offi-
former state officials. cials!
Proposition 57 gives YOU—the voters—an opportunity AS VOTERS, YOU CAN AFFECT THE SIZE OF
to do the job properly. THESE PENSIONS!
Proposition 57 will correct a significant legal problem Proposition 57 must be approved NOW to stop these
that involves a very small number of cases.Because of the retired officials from receiving outrageous increases in
combined effects of an outdated law,an old court decision their pensions come January 1st!
and a new law that takes effect next January 1st,16 former Like the scalpel of a skilled surgeon,Proposition 57 goes
constitutional officers could receive huge, undeserved in- right to the source of the problem and eliminates it.
creases in their pensions. WADIE P. DEDDEH
If these unwarranted increases are allowed to take ef- State Senator,40th District
fect, the pensions of this favored group will be several Author of proposition
times larger than the salaries they earned in office. LEO T. McCARTHY
PROPOSITION 57 WOULD STOP SCANDALOUS Lieutenant Governor
PENSION INCREASES! ERNEST DRONENBERG
Current law provides that when the salaries of our con- Member,State Board of Equalization,3rd District
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 57
Would Proposition 57 truly "stop scandalous pension ernor, Attorney General or other constitutional officer
increases"? may have a "vested"right to promised increases based on
Voters should examine this measure closely. the salaries of later officeholders.
First, Proposition 57 only applies to"state constitutional The reason is that retirement benefits are considered
officers"who never served in the Legislature as members part of a person's employment contract.Under the United
of the Assembly or State Senate. States Constitution (Article I, Section 10), a state may not
Second, Proposition 57 only limits pension increases pass any laws `impairing the obligation of contracts."
based on increases `in the compensation payable to the As a result, the courts would be forced to hold that
officer holding the office which the[retiree]last held prior Proposition 57 could not deprive retirees of pension in-
to retirement." creases promised while they were in office by an overly
Even if Proposition 57 passes, the Legislature would be generous or wasteful Legislature.
free to increase retirement benefits on. any basis other Certain politicians.would then blame the courts!
than the compensation payable to current officeholders. The only way to"stop scandalous pension increases"for
Proposition 57 does not guarantee any real limitation on former officeholders may be to stop large salary increases
pension increases. for current officeholders.
Third, it may be too late to take away the exorbitant
pensions the Legislature has promised former and current GARY B. WESLEY
constitutional officers.Any person who has served as Gov- Attorney at Law
Voting. Your response-
your ability.
Will Courtenay, San Francisco
22 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Retirement Benefits for Nonjudicial and Nonlegislative
Elected State Constitutional Officers 57
Argument Against Proposition 57
This measure is a proposal by the Legislature to place in subsequent officeholders.
our State Constitution a limit on the retirement benefits In addition, this measure would not place ANY limit on
payable to "state constitutional officers" (i.e., the Gover- the retirement benefits payable to a person"whose credit-
nor,Lieutenant Governor,Attorney General,Secretary of ed service in the Legislators' Retirement System" is not
State, Controller, Superintendent of Public Instruction restricted to service as a constitutional officer. Governor
and Treasurer). Deukmejian, for example, who served as a State Senator
The trouble with the proposal is that the only limit before becoming Attorney General and then Governor,
would be that retirement benefits "shall not be increased would evidently be unaffected by the limit imposed by
or affected in any manner by changes on or after Novem- this measure, and his retirement benefits as a former At-
ber 5, 1986, in the compensation payable to the officer torney General and Governor could continue to soar
holding the office which the member last held prior to based on later increases in compensation to subsequent
retirement." officeholders.
The windfall retirement benefits already being re- This measure does not go far enough. For this reason, I
ceived by former officeholders would continue to flow respectfully,recommend a "no" vote.
from the government treasury,and the Legislature would
retain the authority to increase these retirement benefits GARY B. WESLEY
on any basis other than the compensation payable to Attorney at Law
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 57
Mr. Wesley says Proposition-57 does not go far enough. limit pensions earned by retirees who served in other
He is completely WRONG! elected offices before becoming constitutional officers.
Proposition 57 goes as far as legally possible to limit the Again, Mr. Wesley is absolutely WRONG. A great deal of
outrageous pensions received by a select few. care was taken to make sure that Proposition 57 would
First, Mr. Wesley states that Proposition 57 would not limit the future benefits 6f each and every one of the 16
reduce the retirement benefits now being received by a former officials .who receive these unconscionable pen-
handful of former constitutional officers.If it were possible sions. .
to roll back the pensions of these 16 retirees, the Legisla- Not a single "NO" vote was cast on Proposition 57 as it
ture would have done it. moved through the Legislature!
Legal opinion is unanimous: once a pension benefit is THERE ARE NO LOOPHOLES IN PROPOSITION 57!
paid to a retiree,it cannot be stopped.This is an excellent VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 57!
reason to vote FOR Proposition 57:if the pensions of these
16 former constitutional officers are allowed to skyrocket WADIE P. DEDDEH
as scheduled on January 1, 1987, there will be no chance State Senator, 40th District
to reduce them ever again. DAN McCORQUODALE
YOU—the voters—must approve Proposition 57 NOW State Senator, 12th District
to keep these pensions from going any higher! ERNEST DRONENBERG
Second, Mr. Wesley writes that Proposition 57 does not Member, State Board of Equalization, 3rd District
Here's voting for you, California!
Ray Van Diest, Redding
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 23
58
Taxation. Family Transfers
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
TAXATION. FAMILY TRANSFERS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. State Constitution Article
XIII A, enacted as Proposition 13 in 1978, with certain exceptions, places a limitation on real property taxes equal to 1
percent of its full cash value listed on the 1975-1976 tax bill. Property may be reassessed on"purchase"or other"change
of ownership."This measure amends Article XIII A to provide the terms "purchase"and "change of ownership"do not
include the purchase or transfer of (1) real property between spouses and (2) the principal residence and the first
$1,000,000 of other real property between parents and children. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of state and
local fiscal impact: Measure would reduce local property tax revenues. Cities, counties, and special 'districts would lose
an estimated $17 million in 1987--88, $37 million in 1988-89, and increasing amounts in future years. Remaining losses
would be to school and community college districts. Increased state aid from the State General Fund would offset these
losses,resulting in an estimated loss to the General Fund of$11 million in 1987-88,$23 million in 1988-89,and increasing
amounts in future years.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on ACA 2 (Proposition 58)
Assembly: Ayes 74 Senate: Ayes 34
Noes 0 Noes 0
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst -
prohibits the reassessment of property to reflect its mar-
Background ket value under additional' circumstances.
Under the California Constitution; real property (such In the case of transfers between parents and their chil-
as land and buildings), is taxed on the basis of its assessed dren, the measure applies to transfers_ of the principal
value. This value is the property's 1975-76 assessed value, residence, regardless of value, and to a limited amount of
or its market value when "purchased,newly constructed, all other real property. This limit is the first $1,000,000 of
or a change of ownership has, occurred after the.1975 as- assessed value, regardless of the number of properties
sessment."The assessed value may increase at a later date transferred. Property transferred after the $1,000,000 as-
to reflect the value of improvements made by the owner. sessed value ceiling is reached would be subject to reas-
Otherwise,the assessed value may increase to reflect infla- sessment. The measure provides for the Legislature to
tion,but by no more than 2 percent each year. Generally, define its terms, and these definitions would affect the
the assessed value of real property is considerably less than scope of the measure.
its current market value. The measure would apply only to transfers of property
The Legislature has passed statutes that define certain between parents and children which occur after the meas-
transfers of real property as not constituting a "change of ure becomes effective.
ownership."As a result,in these cases,reassessment of the
property to reflect its market value is prohibited. These Fiscal Effect
include transfers between spouses, and transfers of eligi- The provisions preventing the reassessment of real
ble dwelling units between parents and children under property transferred between spouses, and between par-
limited circumstances. These include: ents and their children under the limited circumstances
• transfers of a dwelling unit from a parent or legal provided for by existing law, would have no fiscal effect.
guardian to a minor child,or between minor siblings, This is because existing statutory law prevents reassess-
as a result of a court order related to the death of the ment in these cases.
parent; The provisions which prevent reassessment of property
• transfers of a dwelling unit from a parent or legal transferred between parents and their children under cir-
guardian to a disabled child following the death of the cumstances not covered by existing law, however, would
parent. reduce local property tax revenues.The scope of the reve-
nue losses would depend on actions taken by the Legisla-
Proposal ture in defining the terms used in the measure. If these
This constitutional amendment would broaden the cir- terms were defined broadly, revenues would fall by an
cumstances under which reassessment is not required in estimated $28 million in 1987-88, $60 million in 1988-89,
cases involving the transfer of real property between par- and increasing amounts in subsequent years. Of these
ents and children. In addition, the measure would place amounts, cities, counties and special districts would lose
the existing statutory treatment of property transfers $17 million in 1987--88,$37 million in 1988--89,and increas-
between spouses into the Constitution.Thus,the measure ing amounts in each subsequent year.
24 G86
The remainder,of the losses would affect-school districts State General Fund cost for the increased aid would
and community college districts.Under existing law,high- amount to $11 million in 1987-88, $23 million in 1988-89,
er state aid would offset these losses.We estimate that the and increasing amounts in each subsequent year.
Text of Proposed Law
This amendment proposed by Assembly Constitutional
Amendment 2 (Statutes of 1986, Resolution Chapter 61)
expressly amends the Constitution by adding provisions
thereto; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added
are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XIII A,
SECTION 2
(g) For purposes of subdivision (a), the terms "pur-
chased"and "change in ownership"shall not include the
purchase or transfer of real property between spouses
since March 1,1975,including, but not limited to,all of the
following:
(1) Transfers to a trustee for the beneficial use of a
spouse,or the surviving spouse ofa deceased transferor,or
by a trustee of such a trust to the spouse of the trustor.
(2) Transfers to a spouse which take effect upon the
death of a spouse.
(3) Transfers to a spouse or former spouse in connec-
tion with a property settlement agreement or decree of
dissolution of a marriage or legal separation.
(4) The creation, transfer, or termination, solely
between spouses, of any coowner s interest.
(5) The distribution of a legal entity's property to a
spouse or former spouse in exchange for the interest of the
spouse in the legal entity in connection with a property
settlement agreement or a decree of dissolution of mar-
riage or legal separation.
(h) For purposes of subdivision (a), the terms `pur-
chased"and "change of ownership"shall not include the
purchase or transfer of the principal residence of the
transferor in the case of a purchase or transfer between
parents and their children, as defined by the Legislature,
and the purchase or transfer of the first$1,000,000 of the
full cash value of all other real property between parents
and their children, as defined by the Legislature. This
subdivision shall apply to both voluntary transfers and
transfers resulting from a court order or judicial decree.
(i) Unless specifically provided otherwise, amend-
ments to this section shall be effective for change of own-
erships which occur, and new construction which is com-
pleted, after the effective date of the amendment.
You're the ruler! Make the system measure up! Vote!
Richard Harris, Davis
G86 25
58 Taxation. Family Transfers
Arguments in Favor of Proposition 58
It's time to fix another mistake made in Proposition 13. In addition to the exemption from reappraisal of trans-
Proposition 58 will exempt most transfers of property fers between parents and their children, there is another
between parents and children from property tax reap- very important feature of Proposition 58.
praisals which are required by Proposition 13. The princi- Proposition 58 makes sure that when property is trans-
pal residence of the transferee and up to $1 million of ferred between husbands and wives,property taxes won't
other property may be transferred without reappraisal. go up.
The strength of our society rests in the family. This is a This protection against reappraisal of property trans-
special relationship,that is recognized in all other areas of ferred between spouses is currently in law.
the tax code. There are two reasons to provide constitutional protec-
Many parents have aided their children in obtaining tion for transfers of property between spouses to prevent
their first homes. In doing so, title is often in the name of tax increases resulting from reappraisal:
the parent.When title is transferred,there is a reappraisal (1) Some attorneys have argued that the statutory gro-
under current law,even though the occupants of the prop- tection is unconstitutional.
erty remain the same. (2) Constitutional protection is more secure as it can
Proposition 58 would correct this problem and exempt only be changed by another vote of the people.
such transactions from reappraisal. Inherited property Please vote yes on Proposition 58.
passing from parents to children (or vice versa) would also LUCY KILLEA
be exempt, up to the limit provided in the bill. Member of the Assembly, 78th District
Many family businesses and farms are jeopardized by
reappraisals caused by the death of the parents. These
reappraisals often increase property taxes so much that a
viable business becomes uneconomic.
A yes vote on Proposition 58 will protect property trans-
fers within the family.
THOMAS M. HANNIGAN
Member of the Assembly, 4th District
LEO T. MCCARTHY
Lieutenant Governor
Rebuttal to Arguments in Favor of Proposition 58
Proponents contend it's unfair to reassess property and property changes hands?
impose higher property taxes upon family members who The Legislature and Governor should stop tinkering
have received homes and other real estate.often FOR with Proposition 13 and offer voters a comprehensive
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING as a gift or through inherit- amendment which eliminates all of these inequities.
ance. Here are some possibilities:
Fine. But what about the millions of Californians who (1) Equalize the assessed value of all property at the
must use their own life savings and most of their own 1975 levels established for some owners under Proposition
monthly income to BUY a home in today's inflated real 13. Homes built since 1975,for example,would be taxed at
estate market? a level reflective of the area's lower property values in
Why should these first-time home buyers and families 1975.
forced to move for economic reasons (such as job layoffs (2) Periodically reassess all property but provide for an
and transfers) be additionally burdened with property automatic reduction-in the tax rate so that government
taxes 3-4 times higher than their residential neighbors and does not get more money just because overall property
owners of commercial and industrial property purchased values go up.
at lower prices years ago?
Why should renters face rent increases due, in part, to GARY B. WESLEY
higher property taxes imposed on the landlord each time Attorney at Law
26 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Taxation. Family Transfers 58
Argument Against Proposition 58
This measure is a proposal by the Legislature to amend upon new owners and'renters of residential property.
Proposition 13, a constitutional limitation on property Specifically, this measure provides that property "pur-
taxes approved by voters in 1978. chased" or otherwise transferred "between spouses since-
Under Proposition 13 (now Article XIII A of the Califor- March 1, 1975," would not be subject to reassessment and
nia Constitution), assessed property values generally are higher property taxes. This measure also provides that
frozen at their 1975 levels;however,property is reassessed property "purchased" or otherwise transferred "between
and higher property taxes are imposed each time the parents and their children" ("after the effective date of
property is "purchased,newly constructed, or a change in the amendment" following this election) .would not be
ownership has occurred after the 1975 assessment." subject to reassessment and higher property taxes.
As a result of this reassessment each time property Surely, it is unfair to reassess property which changes
changes hands, new owners are required to pay far more hands within a family—especially when a spouse or parent
in property taxes than do their neighbors whose property has died. However, it is even more unfair to require per-
has the same value but was purchased earlier when prop- sons who must pay the sky-high current price for a home
erty values were lower. in California to suffer the additional penalty of paying
In addition, this automatic reassessment provision has sky-high property taxes imposed following reassessment.
caused a gradual but massive shift of the overall property A"no"vote on this measure may send a message to the
tax burden from owners of commercial and industrial Legislature (and Governor) that voters want to be offered
property (which is often leased but seldom sold) to own- a comprehensive amendment to Proposition 13 which
ers (and renters) of residential property. would eliminate the unfairness to all new owners and rent-
Instead of offering voters an amendment to Proposition ers created by the automatic reassessment provision.
13 which would correct these inequities, the Legislature For this reason, I respectfully recommend a "no" vote
proposes in this measure to retain the basic flaw but ex- on this measure.
empt a relatively small number of persons from the unfair GARY B. WESLEY
tax burden the automatic reassessment provision places Attorney at Law
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 58
Mr.Wesley does not question the fairness of Proposition for a comprehensive reform of Proposition 13.
58. What he is suggesting is that Proposition 58 be held Tax relief provided by Proposition 58 is needed now.
hostage to some future unspecified reform of Proposition Please vote yes on Proposition 58.
13.This is not fair to California families who will pay high-
er taxes on property transferred between parents and chil- THOMAS M. HANNIGAN
dren while they wait for Mr. Wesley to develop his plan Member of the Assembly,4th District
Your direct line to the Capitol—your vote.
Linda Bunch and Sally Burgan, San Diego
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 27
5 9 .
Elected District Attorney
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
ELECTED DISTRICT ATTORNEY. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Presently the State Con-
stitution does not provide for elected district attorneys. State statutory law provides for elected district attorneys but
provides that office may be made appointive office by local popular vote. This measure amends the Constitution to
require the Legislature provide for an elected district attorney in all counties.Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate
of state and local government fiscal impact: This measure would have no direct state or local fiscal effect.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on SCA 26 (Proposition 59)
Assembly: Ayes 68 Senate: Ayes 37
Noes 2 Noes 0
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
Background
The office of district attorney in all of the state's 58
counties is filled by election. This could be changed to an
appointive office with the approval of the voters.
Proposal
This constitutional amendment requires the office of
the district attorney to be filled by election in all counties.
Fiscal Effect
This measure would have no direct state or local fiscal
effect.
Celebrate your freedom . . . Vote
Dayna Carr, Fremont
28 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This amendment proposed by Senate Constitutional (a) A governing body of 5 or more members, elected
Amendment 26 (Statutes•of 1986, Resolution Chapter 66) (1) by district or, (2) at large, or (3) at large, with a
expressly amends the Constitution by amending sections requirement that they reside in a district. Charter coun-
thereof; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added ties are subject to statutes that relate to apportioning
are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new. population of governing body districts.
(b) The compensation,terms,and removal of members
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XI, of the governing body. If a county charter provides for the
SECTIONS 1 AND 4 Legislature to prescribe the salary of the governing body,
First—That Section 1 of Article XI thereof is amended such compensation shall be prescribed by the governing
body by ordinance.
to read: I (c) An elected sheriff, an elected district attorney,
SEC. 1. (a) The State is divided into counties which other officers, their election or appointment, compensa-
are legal subdivisions of the State. The Legislature shall tion, terms and removal.
prescribe uniform procedure for county formation, con- (d) The performance of functions required by statute.
solidation, and boundary change. Formation or consolida- (e) The powers and duties of governing bodies and all
tion requires approval by a majority of electors voting on other county officers, and for consolidation and segrega-
the question in each affected county. A boundary change tion of county officers, and for the manner of filling all
requires approval by the governing body of each affected
county..No county seat shall be removed unless two-thirds vacancies occurring therein.
of the qualified electors of the county, voting on the ordinance,(f) The fixing and regulation by governing bodies, by
proposition at a general election,shall vote in favor of suchof the appointment and number of assistants,
deputies, clerks, attaches, and other persons to be em-
removal. A at
of removal shall not be submitted ployed, and for the prescribing and regulating by such
in the same county more than once in four years. bodies of the powers,duties,qualifications,and compensa-
(b) The Legislature shall provide for county powers,an tion of such persons, the times at which, and terms for
elected county sheriff,an elected district attorney, and an which they shall be appointed, and the manner of their
elected .governing body in each county. Except as pro- appointment and removal.
vided in subdivision (b) of Section 4 of this article, each (g) Whenever any county has framed and adopted a
governing body shall prescribe by ordinance the compen- charter, and the same shall have been approved by the
sation of its members, but the ordinance prescribing such Legislature as herein provided, the general laws adopted
compensation shall be subject to referendum.The Legisla- by the Legislature in pursuance of Section 1(b) of this
ture or the governing body may provide for other officers article, shall, as to such county, be superseded by said
whose compensation shall be prescribed by the governing charter as to matters for which, under this section it is
body. The governing body shall provide for the number, competent to make provision in such charter, and for
compensation, tenure, and appointment of employees. which provision is made therein, except as herein other-
Second—That Section 4 of Article XI thereof is wise expressly provided.
amended to read: (h) Charter counties shall have all the powers that are
SEC. 4. County charters shall provide for: provided by this Constitution or by statute for counties.
Counties fifty-eight. Vote: cooperate.
Donald Way, Los Angeles
G86 29
0
59 Elected District Attorney
Argument in Favor of Proposition 59
County district attorneys are important and powerful pointed—officials. Proposition 59 does this by amending
public officials. They are integral parts of both the law the State Constitution to specify that district attorneys,
enforcement and criminal justice systems.They hold con- along with county sheriffs and members of county boards
siderable discretion over the prosecution of criminals and of supervisors, must-be elected by the people.
the enforcement of state laws and local ordinances. As Almost two hundred years ago,James Madison, arguing
such,they must be held accountable,not by some political for the adoption of the Federal Constitution,wrote that it
appointing power,but directly by the people.Californians is essential that government "should have an immediate
have ensured that district attorneys remain both account- dependence on,and sympathy with,the people.Frequent
able by,and responsive to,the people by making the office elections are unquestionably the only policy by which this
of district attorney an elective office. California voters dependence and sympathy can be effectually secured."
thus have the right to judge their district attorneys and PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS. GUARANTEE THAT DIS-
render that judgment at the polls. TRICT ATTORNEYS REMAIN DIRECTLY ACCOUNT-
Now,however,there are those who would deprive us of ABLE TO THE PEOPLE. VOTE YES ON PROPOSI-
this right. The law currently contains a loophole; a means TION 59.
by which district attorneys can be appointed instead of
being elected.In some counties there are those who would DAVID ROBERTI
use this loophole to change a position dependent on the State Senator,23rd District
voters into a position dependent on political power DAN McCORQUODALE
brokers. This threat to the right of Californians to elect State Senator, 12th District
their county district attorneys is the reason why Proposi- CECIL HICKS
tion 59 is before you. We wrote Proposition 59 to ensure District Attorney, County of Orange
that district attorneys will always remain elected—not ap- President, California District Attorneys Association
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 59
Proposition 59 would strip local voters of the power to PAIGNS ARE FINANCED.
decide whether their county district attorney will be We need to encourage good people to run for public
elected or appointed (by the elected county board of office and not simply leave candidates to raise money from
supervisors). special interest groups,such as businesses which generate
Proponents argue that forcing voters in every county to toxic pollution. How can we expect our local and state
elect their district attorney will make these `important officials to restrict and,if necessary,prosecute major cam-
and powerful public officials"more accountable. paign contributors?
In•fact, many county district attorneys (especially in Of course, we all cringe at the idea that our tax dollars
large counties) run unopposed for reelection every four would be spent on slick, perhaps dishonest, campaign lit-
years because of the BIG MONEY from SPECIAL INTER- erature and commercials. But use of public campaign
EST GROUPS needed to mount a countywide campaign funds can be restricted.
against a powerful incumbent. For now, if you believe that local voters should be al-
As a result, VOTERS OFTEN HAVE NO CHOICE ON lowed to retain the power to amend their own county
ELECTION DAY. This is not accountability—it is a sham. charters to provide for the election or appointment of
If voters really want to make public officials (including local district attorneys, vote "no" on Proposition 59.
large county district attorneys) more accountable, WE GARY B. WESLEY
NEED TO CHANGE THE WAY POLITICAL CAM- Attorney at Law
Vote today; do it the California way.
Melinda Styles, San Bernardino
30 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Elected District Attorney 59
Argument Against Proposition 59
This measure is a proposal by the Legislature to add to sounds as if he will be "tougher" on crime. An attorney
the California Constitution two provisions: with little experience and ability could be elected district
One provision would require that county charters pro- attorney based on campaign rhetoric. Voters in some
vide for the election of district attorneys. counties may prefer to allow their elected board of super-
The second provision would authorize the Legislature visors to appoint a qualified attorney to serve as county
to `provide for" `an elected district attorney" in every district attorney and remove the appointee if he or she is
county. not tough enough on crime (or otherwise unsatisfactory).
The district attorney is responsible for the prosecution The second question is whether the Legislature should
of felony offenses committed in the county. In addition, be empowered to `provide for" the election of district
the county district attorney prosecutes less serious, "mis- attorneys in each county. Under this provision, the Legis-
demeanor" offenses committed in portions of the county lature could prescribe that all district attorneys through-
not within a city and in cities which do not prosecute out the state be elected in June or November when we
misdemeanors on their own.Further,the district attorney nominate or elect a Governor, for example, and prevent
in each county may handle child support and consumer counties,such as San Francisco,from electing their district
fraud prosecutions. attorneys in conjunction with the election of other county
The first question is whether California voters want to officers. Why shouldn't the decision of when to elect a
make sure that district attorneys are elected by voters in district attorney be'left to voters in each of California's 58
each county and not,for example,appointed by the elect- counties?
ed board of supervisors. For these reasons, I respectfully recommend a "no"
In my view,the decision should be left to voters in each vote.
county. Any attorney can run for the position of county GARY B. WESLEY
district attorney. Voters often select the candidate who Attorney at Law
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 59
The opponent to Proposition 59 says that the primary stitution for years. In charter counties,Proposition 59 calls
question "is whether California voters want to make sure for the county charters,not the Legislature,to provide for
that district attorneys are elected by voters in each county elected district attorneys. In noncharter counties, the
and not . . . appointed. . . ."We agree completely.The en- Legislature already has the right to determine the dates of
tire issue is whether Californians want their district attor- local elections.Proposition 59 simply preserves a right Gur-
neys to be responsible to the voters or to some political rently enjoyed in each of California's counties—the right
power broker whom a district attorney may be called of the voters to elect their district attorney.
upon to investigate. We authored Proposition 59 to give The question is simple. Do you want the people or the
the people the opportunity to guarantee once and for all power brokers to choose district attorneys?If you want the
that district attorneys remain independent,subject only to people to decide, vote YES on Proposition 59.
the judgment of the people.
The opponent raises a false and misleading argument DAVID ROBERTI
about the Legislature playing games with election dates. State Senator,23rd District
Proposition 59 does not give any new power to anyone. DAN McCORQUODALE
The language cited by the opponent has been in the Con- state senator, 12th District
Vote; the proof's in the polling!
Jeffrey Dennis Webster, Fresno
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 31
60
Taxation. Replacement Residences
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
TAXATION. REPLACEMENT RESIDENCES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. State Constitu-
tion Article XIII A,enacted as Proposition 13 in 1978, with certain exceptions, places a limitation on real property taxes
equal to 1 percent of the value of its assessed value listed on the 1975-1976 tax bill. Property may be reassessed on change
of ownership. This measure amends Article XIII A to permit the Legislature to allow persons over age 55,who sell their
residence and buy or build another of equal or lesser value within two years in the same county, to transfer the old
residence's assessed value to the new residence. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local
government fiscal impact: This measure has no direct state or local fiscal effect unless the Legislature passes laws
implementing it. If the Legislature passes such laws,property tax revenues would be reduced. The loss of this revenue
would probably-amount to several million dollars per year beginning in 1987-88. Cities, counties, and special districts
would bear 60 percent of this loss. The other 40 percent would affect community college and school districts. Higher
state aid to community college and school districts would offset these losses. The State General Fund would bear the
cost for the higher aid.
Final Vote Cast by the Legislature on ACA 5 (Proposition 60)
Assembly: Ayes 70 Senate: Ayes 27
Noes 0 Noes 1
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
Background . Of equal or lesser value than the original property;
Under the California Constitution, real property (such . Located within the same county; and
as land and buildings), is taxed on the basis of its assessed . Purchased or newly constructed within two years of
value. This value is either the property's 1975-76 assessed the sale of the present property.
value, or its market value when "purchased, newly con- The measure could apply to replacement property pur-
structed, or a change of ownership has occurred after the chased or newly constructed on or after November 5,1986.
1975 assessment." The assessed value may increase at a
later date to reflect the value of improvements made by Fiscal Effect
the owner. Otherwise, the assessed value may increase to This measure has no direct state or local effect because
reflect inflation,but by no more than 2 percent each year. it merely authorizes the Legislature to implement its
Generally,the assessed value of real property is considera-
bly less than its current market value. provisions.
If this measure is approved, and the Legislature enacts
Proposal the laws for its implementation, the amendment would
This constitutional amendment would authorize the reduce property tax revenue collections. These revenue
Legislature to provide a special method of establishing losses probably would amount to several millions of dollars
assessed value for replacement residential property ac- per year, beginning in 1987--88. Cities, counties, and spe-
quired by a homeowner over the age of 55. Specifically, cial districts would bear approximately 60 percent of the
this method would allow homeowners over the age of 55 revenue loss.
to transfer the assessed value of their present home to a The remainder of the losses would affect school districts
replacement home located in the same county.To qualify and community college districts.Under existing law,high-
for this special treatment,the replacement home must be: er state aid would offset these losses. The State General
. Purchased or newly constructed as a replacement for Fund would bear the cost for the higher aid,beginning in
the person's principal residence; 1987-88.
32 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This amendment proposed by Assembly Constitutional
Amendment 5 (Statutes of 1986, Resolution Chapter 75)
expressly amends the Constitution by amending a section
thereof; therefore, existing provisions proposed to be de-
leted are printed in strtee tie and new provisions
proposed to be inserted or added are printed in italic type
to indicate that they are new.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XIII A,
SECTION 2
SEC. 2. (a) The full cash value means the county
assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975-
76 tax bill under "full cash value" or, thereafter, the ap-
praised value of real property when purchased, newly
constructed, or a change in ownership has occurred after
the 1975 assessment.All real property not already assessed
up to the 1975-76 full cash value may be reassessed to
reflect that valuation. For purposes of this section, t-13e
"newly constructed" s13at1 does not include real
property which is reconstructed after a disaster, as de-
clared by the Governor, where the fair market value of
seek the real property, as reconstructed,is comparable to
its fair market value prior to the disaster. Also, the term
"newly constructed" shall not include the portion of
reconstruction or improvement to a structure, construct-
ed of unreinforced masonry bearing wall construction,
necessary to comply with any local ordinance relating to
seismic safety during the first 15 years following that
reconstruction or improvement.
However, the Legislature may provide that under ap-
propriate circumstances and pursuant to definitions and
procedures established by the Legislature, any person
over the age of 55 years who resides in property which is
eligible for the homeowners exemption under subdivision
(k) of Section 3 of Article XIII and any implementing
legislation may transfer the base year value of the proper-
ty, entitled to exemption, with the adjustments authorized
by subdivision (b), to any replacement dwelling of equal
or lesser value located within the same county and pur-
chased or newly constructed by that person as his or her
principal residence within two years after the sale of the
original property. For purposes of this section, "any per-
son over the age of 55 years"includes a married couple
one member of which is over the age of 55 years. For
purposes of this section, "replacement dwelling"means a
building,structure, or other shelter constituting a place of
abode, whether real property or personal property, and
any land on which it may be situated. For purposes of this
section, a two-dwelling unit shall be considered as two
separate single-family dwellings. This paragraph shall not
apply to any replacement dwelling which was purchased
or newly constructed prior to the effective date of this
paragraph.
G86 33
6� Taxation. Replacement Residences
E3
Argument in Favor of Proposition 60
California can create new housing opportunities for sen- Legislature to provide that the base year value of owner-
ior citizens by easing a property tax burden that now pre- occupied residential property can be transferred for sen-
vents many of them from finding affordable housing. At iors to newly purchased.or constructed owner-occupied
the same time,we can help many young families find their residential property of equal or'lesser value.
first homes. This proposition will do both by protecting To qualify for Proposition 60, the property must be:
older homeowners from huge property tax increases when (1) A replacement for property located within the
they choose to sell their large family homes and move into same county.
new smaller residences. As a result, more seniors will be (2) Purchased by either (a) a person over the age.of 55
able to enjoy the rewards of years of hard work, and new years or (b) a married couple if one spouse is over the age
buyers, many of whom are young families, will be able to of 55 years.
enjoy the homes that served,the seniors so well for so (3) Eligible for the homeowners' exemption.
many years. (4) Purchased within two years of the sale of the origi-
Unfortunately, today, our property tax system leads to nal property.
just the opposite result. State law requires residential Local government and schools will not lose revenue
property to be assessed at its full cash value upon change from this measure. This is true because when seniors sell
of ownership or when it has been newly constructed. their larger homes for current market prices it will create
That's good for seniors who want to remain in their new property tax revenue. That new revenue will offset
present homes because it keeps their property tax bill low. any loss from the lower assessments on the seniors' new
But it's bad for seniors who wish to sell their homes and residences.
move to a new address because they are likely to find a By approving Proposition 60, we can help increase our
much higher property tax assessment when they get senior citizens' freedom to live where they choose and
there. And it's bad for a lot of would-be first-time home help many young families have the opportunity to achieve
buyers who cannot afford newly built homes but would the American dream of home ownership.
gladly buy a senior citizen's house and move into an estab-
lished neighborhood. DAVE ELDER
The solution is to let seniors who want to sell their Member of the Assembly,57th District
homes take their current property tax assessment to their GRAY DAVIS
new place of residence. Member of the Assembly, 43rd District
If approved by the voters, Proposition 60 would do just PAUL CARPENTER
that by amending the State Constitution to authorize the State Senator,33rd District
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 60
Proposition 13 has had the beneficial effect of holding, loan and spend most of their monthly income to buy a
down property taxes for some homeowners,landlords and house in today's market? First-time home buyers have no
businesses. house to sell and"trade up."Why should they be addition-
However,Proposition 13 was poorly written.The courts ally burdened with sky-high property taxes? They should
have been forced to give definition to terms the authors not.
never defined and the infamous automatic reassessment Not only is Proposition 60 unfair to younger persons but
provision has created perhaps the most unfair property tax it actually does NOT guarantee any exemption for home-
system in the entire United States. owners over 55. The measure states that "the Legislature
The Legislature and Governor should have offered vot- may provide"for such an exemption.
ers a comprehensive amendment to Proposition 13 long Furthermore, if a person over 55 were to purchase a
ago. Instead, they continue to propose exemptions from more expensive home or any home in another county,the
reassessment for the privileged few. Maybe the aim is to exemption would not apply!The new home would be reas-
divide and conquer California taxpayers. sessed and higher property taxes imposed.
Certainly, older persons (and 55 is ancient!) should be Proposition 60 is not the answer.Let's stick together and
allowed to move without facing reassessment and higher demand a comprehensive amendment:
property taxes. GARY B. WESLEY
But what about younger persons who must qualify for a Attorney at Law
34 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Taxation. Replacement Residences 60
Argument Against Proposition 60
This measure is another proposal by the Legislature to proposes in this measure to retain the basic flaw but give
amend Proposition 13,a constitutional limitation on prop- itself the authority to exempt some persons from the un-
erty taxes approved by voters in 1978. fair tax burden the automatic reassessment provision
Proposition 60 would permit,but not require,the Legis- places upon ALL new owners and renters of residential
lature to allow `any person over the age of55"to move "to property.
any replacement dwelling of equal or lesser value located There would be no need to exempt persons over the age
within the same county"and transfer to the new home the of 55 from automatic reassessment if the Legislature
tax base (i.e., "assessed value") established for the former would allow voters to decide whether to eliminate this
home. aspect of Proposition 13 altogether.
The Legislature is continuing to tinker with Proposition I challenge the proponents of this measure to explain to
13 instead of offering voters a comprehensive amendment voters why the Legislature has refused to offer voters a
which would eliminate all of the inequities caused by its comprehensive amendment to Proposition 13 such as:
automatic reassessment provision. (1) Equalize the assessed value of all property at the
Under Proposition 13 (now Article XIII A of the Califor- 1975 levels established for some owners under Proposition
nia Constitution),assessed property values generally are 13. Homes built since 1975,for example,would be taxed at
frozen at their 1975 levels;however,property is reassessed a level reflective of the area's lower property values in
and higher property taxes are imposed each time the 1975.
property is "purchased,newly constructed, or a change in (2) Periodically reassess all property but provide for an
ownership has occurred after the 1975 assessment." automatic reduction in the tax rate so that government
As a result of this reassessment each time property does not get more money just because overall property
changes hands, new owners are required to pay far more values increase.
in property taxes than do their neighbors whose property If proponents of this measure have any other ideas'for
has the same value but was purchased,earlier when prop- making our property tax system fairer to ALL Californi-
erty values were lower. ans, those ideas should be included in their rebuttal.
In addition, this automatic reassessment provision has In my opinion, a"no"vote on this measure may send a
caused a gradual but massive shift of the overall property message to the Legislature and Governor that voters want
tax burden from owners of commercial and industrial to be offered a comprehensive amendment to Proposition
property (which is often leased but seldom sold) to own- 13.
ers (and renters) of residential property. Persons of all ages are hurt by automatic reassessment.
Instead of offering voters an amendment to Proposition GARY B. WESLEY
13 which would correct these inequities, the Legislature Attorney at Law
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 60 .
The opponent of Proposition 60 is right on one count. current property tax laws while maintaining the tax relief
Proposition 60 will not make major changes in the voter- provided by Proposition 13.
approved measure known as Proposition 13. Proposition By voting for Proposition 60 we can help give senior
60, like Proposition 13, eases the property tax burden for citizens freedom to live where they choose in their county
senior citizens. area.
Republicans and Democrats agree that Proposition 60 Please remember that Proposition 60 stands for fairness.
encourages the transfer of underused,_larger homes to Proposition 60 helps our seniors and at the same time it
younger, growing families. helps young families. We urge you to support Proposition
. Not one taxpayer association has opposed Proposition 60. On November 4 vote yes on 60.
60 because it will allow senior citizens to improve their VIOLA J:THOMAS
housing without being penalized by excessive taxation. Chairperson, California State Legislative Committee,
. The American Association of Retired Persons sup- American Association of Retired Persons
ports Proposition 60 because it will allow older Californi- JIM KEYSOR
ans the freedom to sell their homes and move within their Deputy County Assessor, County of Los Angeles
county without paying excessive property taxes. HENRY J. MELLO
. Republican and Democratic legislative leaders back State Senator, 17th District
Proposition 60'because it corrects an unfairness in our Chairman, Senate Subcommittee on Aging
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 35
61 Compensation of Public Officials, Employees, Individual Public ,
Contractors. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
COMPENSATION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, INDIVIDUAL PUBLIC CONTRACTORS. INITIATIVE
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. Sets Governor's annual salary at$80,000;other"Constitutional"
officers at $52,500. Limits maximum compensation of elected or appointed state and local government employees and
individual public contractors to 80% of Governor's salary. Requires people's vote to increase salaries of constitutional
officers, members of Board of Equalization, legislators,judiciary, and specified local elected officers. Prohibits public
officials and employees from accruing sick leave or vacation from one calendar year to another. Summary of Legislative
Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact:Public official and employee salary and benefit-related
reductions would amount to $125 million in the first year at the state level and roughly the same amount at the local
level.These reductions would not necessarily result in comparable savings.They would be offset to some extent or could
be outweighed by the need to pay various costs depending on unknown factors relating to (1) how the measure is
interpreted, (2) possible payment of vested sick and vacation leave at a one-time cost of about $7 billion, (3) how the
measure would be implemented, (4) its effect on governmental efficiency resulting from its limitation on pay for officers,
employees and contractors. Net fiscal impact is unknown.
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
law,these salaries also would have increased in the coming
Background year.)
Currently, the state and local govenments have discre- In addition, the measure limits the salaries of all other
lion in setting the salaries and fringe benefits of elected state and local elected officials to 80 percent of the Gover-
officials and public employees.These governments set the nor's salary. On November 5, 1986, this limit would be
salaries of elected officials (such as the Governor,judges $64,000. In the future, these salaries could be increased
and city council members), and the salaries may be in- only with the voters' approval, but the new salaries still
creased without voter approval. For public employees, could not exceed 80 percent of the Governor's salary:The
state and local governments can pay the amounts neces- measure provides one exception to this limit by allowing
sary to attract and retain qualified persons.With regard to local voters, through an initiative, to approve salaries for
fringe benefits, virtually all public employees earn vaca- local officials (elected or appointed) which exceed the
tion and sick leave, and governments allow most of them limit.
to carry over at least some portion of unused leave from State and Local Government Employees. This initia-
year to year. tive also limits the pay of all state and local government
State and local governments may contract with in- employees to 80 percent of the Governor's salary. The
dividuals for services. While the law places some restric- measure uses both the terms "compensation" and "sal-
tions on the kinds of services governments may provide ary." "Compensation" typically includes salary plus em-
through contracts, generally there are no specific limita- ployer payments for health, retirement and other bene-
tions on either the amount or length of contracts. fits. The courts, however, probably would interpret this
Proposal pay provision as a salary limit. If so, the highest allowable
p salary for any public employee would be frozen at$64,000
This constitutional amendment changes substantially until the people voted to increase the Governor's salary.
the laws governing compensation for state and local elect- If, however, the courts were to interpret this measure as
ed officials and employees. It also places restrictions on placing a limit on "compensation" (which would include
contracting that affect both state and local governments. fringe benefits), the highest allowable salary would be
The proposed amendment, however, contains many frozen at.about the $50,000 level.
phrases which are either unclear or subject to different The initiative would not allow public employees to carry
interpretations. Consequently,this analysis is based on as- over unused vacation and sick leave from one calendar
sumptions about how the courts would interpret the initia- year to another. It is unclear, however, whether this re-
tive. striction would apply only to leave earned in the future or
The main provisions of this measure are as follows: whether it also would apply to leave earned prior to this
Elected Officials. This measure increases the Gover- election. Given that the law generally protects an em-
nor's annual salary from$49,100 to$80,000 and adds a new ployee's right to already earned benefits,the courts proba-
provision requiring that the voters approve any future bly would interpret this restriction as applying only to
increases. (Under existing law, this salary would have in- future vacation and sick leave.
creased to $85,000 on January 5, 1987.) The initiative also State and Local Government Contracts. The initiative
sets an annual salary of$52,500 for all other constitutional prohibits public agencies from paying individuals under
officers (such as the State Treasurer and Controller) and contract more than 80 percent of the Governor's annual
members of the Board of Equalization. (Under existing 'salary. In addition, these individuals could not receive
36 G86
compensation greater than $75 per hour, nor could their pay packages competitive with those of other public and
contracts exceed two years in length. Under "special cir- private employers.
cumstances," the Legislature could approve—by a two- Any net savings from the salary reductions also would be
thirds vote—state contracts for individuals which provide offset to some extent by other costs. For instance, the
compensation in excess of the limit, as long as the con- prohibition on the carry-over of vacation and,sick leave
tracts did not exceed four years in length. The measure probably would result in increased use of leave time,espe-
does not define "special circumstances," and does not al- cially toward the end of a calendar year. As a result, gov-
low this provision to be used by local governments. ernments would incur,unknown costs each year to pay
Fiscal Effect substitute workers in essential public programs, such as
police, fire, and education services. This analysis assumes
The initiative would have several fiscal effects on state that the carry-over restrictions imposed on vacation and
and local governments, many of which are difficult to sick leave would not apply to unused leave time earned
measure. The salary limit would affect about 9,000 state prior to the amendment's effective date (November 5,
employees, an unknown—but probably similar—number 1986). If the courts were to rule to the contrary,state and
of local government employees, and a relatively small local governments could face one-time costs of about $7
number of elected officials. Most of the affected em- billion to buy out these protected benefits. A major por-
ployees fall into one of the following categories: (1) top- tion, but not all, of this cost otherwise would be paid.out
level managers (such as executive directors of state agen- to employees over a period of many years.
cies, city managers, and police and fire chiefs); (2) medi- An important, immediate and long-term effect of this
cal personnel (such as doctors at county hospitals and Uni- initiative would be its impact on the public sector's ability
versity of California medical school staff);' (3) legal to hire and retain qualified and experienced employees.
positions (such as state judges,district attorneys and their State and local governments compete for these employees
senior prosecutors, and staff counsel to state depart- with other employers in the public and private sectors.
ments);and (4) University of California personnel (senior Presumably, these governments are now paying salaries
professors and administrators). above $64,000 in order to attract and keep competent in-
The salary and benefit-related reductions associated dividuals. Under the salary limit, governments in many
with these positions would be about $125 million at the cases would be forced to rely on less qualified or ex-
state level, with local government reductions of roughly perienced employees and contractors.This,in turn,would
the same amount. These reductions, however, would not lead to less efficient, more costly government services.
result in comparable savings,for at least two reasons.First, These costs cannot be estimated, but they would be sub-
at the state level, the Legislature could use the "special stantial.
circumstances" provision to approve contracts with em- In summary,this measure would result in unknown sav-
ployees affected by the limit to provide compensation ap- ings to state and local governments from salary reductions.
proaching the former salary levels. It is unknown how These savings,however,would be offset to some extent—
often, or how extensively, this provision would be used. and could even,be outweighed—by various costs.The net
Second, governments would be allowed to increase non- fiscal impact is unknown because it would depend on how
salary forms of compensation in an attempt to keep total the measure is interpreted and implemented.
Text of Proposed Law
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in {g} Gamfnissietter- of the Higk-�%,ay Patre1:
accordance with the provisions of Article 11, Section 8 of +4 Seer-etary of Youth and Alt Ger-r-eetional Ageney.
the Constitution. {i} viieetor. of Feed aHd Agr-iekltor-e.
This initiative measure expressly repeals, adds, and 9rt July 4-, the annual eetnpensatiett p-vT=k= by this
amends existing provisions of the Constitution, and re- seetiee skall be l eased iri airy €iseal yeaf iit wkieh a
peals provisions of the Government Code; therefore, eestle€Eli ir3g i e is p e ided state e�T
provisions proposed to be deleted are printed in sty tt atneunt of tke ieer-ease provided by dos section 913all be
type and new provisions proposed to be added are printed a nd by multiplyittg the tkeo eurrent eampettsed
in italic type to indicate that they are new. 4efr by the pie of the general eestEa€E1 salary
PROPOSED LAW pf-eyided for et--ate employees dig that bseal
SECTION 1: Sections 11550 through 11569 of the Cali- 11651. Er�eetive jantiftry &-, 4987-, ffn atintia} salfffy of
fornia Government Code are hereby repealed! eighWfive tkeesand dellars $85,000) 4w4 be pftid to the
ArS-tiele 4- Salaries of Speei€ied Pesitions 3er-:
11550. E` e'J*4-,4lA4;aft aftnual salary of sever the��� ���� �"`o€eaeb new tear;the anal
tyltwe theusaed five hundred dellar-s ($72,600) shah be pr-evided by this seetion shall be increased
paid to eaek of the€ellewiog- wed on the eeAle€/hvi g ioer-eases pr-e�+ided €ef state
fa} ter- e€Finamee. employees ever the previous fear years. The arxetint of
J* S�of Less; ar3d Housing the ine ease by this seetio�3 shall be 'w ed
the tkerr eerrent eempensatieft by the
y �- nation e€ of the general eestEe€E g
*d+ 4� a ""„�lfare �previded state��tl3e IeErr previl
{e} Seeretary,of State and Gensrimer�Ageoey. ass fi-sea1
{ } mreeter of Industrial Relations. Continued on page 59
G86 37
Compensation of Public Officials, Employees, Individual Public
61 Contractors. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute
Argument in Favor of Proposition 61
The only way to stop the salaries from skyrocketing is to lure. And elected officials will simply have to get voter
limit the salaries, which PROPOSITION 61 does. approval when they vote themselves a raise.
Your elected officials don't like that and neither do the Is that so bad?
ublic employee union bosses. They want no limits. They It is clear that what the bureaucrats and politicians are
believe they have a right to whatever pay raises they wish really mad about'is that, from now on, salaries must be
to vote themselves. And you, the taxpayer, should have discussed and voted upon in the clear light of day.
nothing to say about it! And one thing I've learned, bureaucrats don't like the
Even more galling,the politicians are trying to scare you light.
with dire predictions about losing qualified teachers. But The bureaucrats and politicians have a sweet little deal
what they fail to tell you is that the salary limit for class- going and they don't want you, or anybody else, "rocking
room teachers is $64,000 a year! the boat."
Teachers don't make that.kind of money; only the Well,I say"rock it" or "dock it."We're through paying
bureaucrats do. the bills. Vote YES on Proposition 61.
Can salaries ever be raised above these limits? Sure!
It just requires a two-thirds roll-call vote of the Legisla- PAUL GANN
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 61
Gann claims the pay limitations of Prop. 61 would save sonable pay limitations would DEVASTATE OUR
taxpayer dollars. PROGRESS TOWARD EXCELLENCE IN EDUCA-
That's NOT TRUE.! Actually.it could COST TAXPAY- TION.
ERS BILLIONS. I • It would cause a loss of high-tech jobs in California as
Proposition 61's COST TO STATE AND LOCAL TAX- highly qualified and experienced university researchers in
PAYERS COULD BE ABOUT $7 BILLION, according to medicine, agriculture, and computers leave the state.
the official impact report by Legislative Analyst John L. DON'T BE FOOLED!
Vickerman. Staggering tax increases and municipal bank- PROPOSITION 61 WON'T CORRECT PENSION
ruptcies could result. ABUSES, WON'T SAVE YOU ONE CENT,BUT WOULD
Proposition 61 prohibits public employees from ac- COST YOU A BUNDLE!
cumulating earned sick leave and vacation time. This VOTE NO ON PROP. 61!
would encourage absenteeism. Accumulation of this time
is good because employees could use it in the event of RICHARD P. SIMPSON
serious illnesses. California Taxpayers'Association
In addition:
. According to California's chief legal counsel, Prop. 61 JOE A. DUARDO
is so poorly and ambiguously written it would cause years President, California School Boards Association
of litigation in the state courts just to figure out what it JACK BOLING
means! President, California Association of Highway Patrolmen
. State School Superintendent Bill Honig says unrea- (CHP)
38 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Compensation of Public Officials, Employees, Individual Public
Contractors. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute 6 l
Argument Against Proposition 61
DON'T BE MISLED! forever. ABSENTEEISM WOULD FLOURISH. Flexibili
Proposition 61 is NOT ABOUT PENSION REFORM ty in times of emergency would become impossible. Cali-
and IT WOULD NOT SAVE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS! fornia doesn't need more regulations which are harmful to
It doesn't contain one word about lowering the outra- both management and employees.
geous pensions of former elected officials! Furthermore,the contradictory and confusing language
In fact,Proposition 61 would DRASTICALLY REDUCE used throughout Prop. 61 would leave interpretation and
the QUALITY OF GOVERNMENT SERVICES in Califor- control in the hands of the courts or, worse, to the politi-
nia and could COST TAXPAYERS BILLIONS.! cians in Sacramento!
Prop. 61 IS unfair, arbitrary and unworkable. Prop.61 puts unworkable limits on government's ability
It puts a straitjacket on California's economic future. to contract with the private sector for important services,
We no longer would be able to hire and retain the best like highway construction, emergency services and toxic
police chiefs,prosecutors,university presidents,scientists, cleanup. These services cost millions of dollars, yet Prop.
toxic experts, school officials and medical personnel. 61 prohibits contracts-exceeding$64,000 annually without
And our state and local governments would find it dif- a vote of the Legislature.
ficult, if not impossible, to contract with private business, As a result, such services would have to be performed
even for such vital functions as highway construction, either by full-time civil service bureaurats—at great cost
flood and fire control and toxic cleanup. to the state—or, worse yet, the Legislature will meddle in
An exaggeration? NO! Take a look.' every large contract. THESE DECISIONS SHOULD
The mandatory pay limit in Prop. 61 will REDUCE NOT BE MADE IN THE BACK ROOMS OF SACRA-
PAYCHECKS of thousands of our best and brightest pub- MENTO!
lic employees, including: Would this initiative save' taxpayers money? Not a
. Top LAW ENFORCEMENT experts,the very people chance!Government would be far less efficient and effec-
we depend on to keep us safe. tive, public management mediocre and waste would in-
. Top EDUCATORS, including the University of Cali- crease.AND THE IMMEDIATE COST TO TAXPAYERS
fornia president, Nobel Laureate professors, and superin- COULD BE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS because state cof-
tendents of our largest school districts. fers would be drained to compensate employees for leave
. Renowned DOCTORS AND RESEARCHERS who time they have already earned.
provide Californians with the best and most advanced Hardworking and talented people have made California
medical care. great;but Prop. 61 restricts our ability to compete for and
CALIFORNIA WOULD LOSE its best public servants keep the best and the brightest.
to better paying jobs in OTHER STATES and private busi- For the sake of our future, VOTE NO ON PROP. 61!
ness. We'd be stuck with mediocre management.
The UNFAIR SALARY LIMIT violates basic principles RICHARD P. SIMPSON
of our American system: that skilled and talented people California Taxpayers Association
can earn their way up, and that competition determines LINDA BRODER
salaries, not senseless regulation. President,League of Women Voters of California
Under Prop.61 workers would be mandated to use their BILL HONIG
earned sick leave and vacation time each year or lose it State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 61
Did they just say that Paul Gann is going to raise the cost All PROPOSITION 61 says is the people have the right
of government? to set maximum salary limits for their elected and appoint-
If you believe that,I've got a little swampland in Florida ed officials—that limit is $64,000.
you might be interested in! That's right, I said $64,000 a year. Does that sound like
For years, I've been sponsoring initiatives to cut waste- we're turning these public officials out into the streets?
ful government spending, and I'm not about to switch I think not.
now. Then, why are elected politicians so upset?
My initiatives have saved California taxpayers literally Because if PROPOSITION 61 passes and they want a
tens of billions of dollars, without cutting vital services. salary increase, it must be approved by the voters.
And they've all passed by huge margins for two reasons: And it gives the people the right,by initiative,to change
(1) Each solved a problem the Legislature refused to any of these public officials' salaries, up or down.
correct. Now you.can see what all the fuss is really about!
(2) Each did it fairly,treating both workers and taxpay- This is why I urge you to vote "YES" ON PROPOSI-
ers with respect. TION 61!
That's what PROPOSITION 61 does.
It simply puts a reasonable limit on government salaries. PAUL GANN
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 39
62
Taxation. Local Governments and Districts. Initiative Statute
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
TAXATION. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND DISTRICTS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Enacts statutes regarding new or
increased taxation by local governments and districts. Imposition of special taxes, defined as taxes for special purposes,
will require approval by two-thirds of voters. Imposition of general taxes, defined as taxes for general governmental
purposes,will require approval by two-thirds vote of legislative body;submission of proposed tax to electorate;approval
by majority of voters. Contains provisions governing election conduct. Contains restrictions on specified types of taxes.
Restricts use of revenues. Requires ratification by majority vote of voters to continue taxes imposed after August 1, 1985.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: The measure prevents
imposition of new or higher general taxes by local agencies without voter approval. It also could reduce existing tax
revenues to local agencies, if a majority of their voters do not ratify the continuation of new or higher taxes adopted
after August 1,1985.As this is a statutory,not a constitutional,initiative,the provisions of this measure imposing penalties
and requiring voter approval cannot be applied to charter cities.
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
Background information. For example, the ordinance must state the
Under the State Constitution, charter cities have broad method of collection and the proposed use of the special'
authority to impose new or higher taxes.General law cities tax revenues.
have been granted similar authority by the Legislature. 3. Penalizes local agencies that fail to comply with the
Counties and certain special districts,including transit dis- above requirements.The measure requires a reduction in
tricts, have limited authority to impose new or higher the agency's property tax allocations equal to the revenues
taxes. derived from the new or higher tax.
The taxes imposed by these local government agencies 4. Requires local agencies to stop collecting any new or
are classified as either general or special taxes. A general higher general tax adopted after July 31, 1985, unless a
tax raises money for general governmental purposes.Con- majority of the voters approve-the tax by November 5,
versely, the revenue generated by a special tax must be 1988.
used for a specific purpose. Because this measure is not a constitutional amend-
New or higher general taxes must be approved by at ment,the approval requirements for the adoption of new
least a majority of the local agency's governing body. In or higher general taxes,and the penalty provisions,would
some cases, approval also must be given by a majority of not apply to charter cities. Thus, this measure does not
the voters. New or higher special taxes must generally be change the constitutional authority of charter cities to im-
approved by at least two-thirds of the voters. pose new or higher general taxes by a majority vote of the
city council.
Proposal
This measure establishes new requirements for the Fiscal Effect
adoption of new or higher general and special taxes by This measure would prevent the imposition of new or
local agencies. In particular, this measure: higher general taxes without voter approval by local agen-
1. Requires all proposals for a new or higher general tax cies other than charter cities. The measure also could
to be approved by two-thirds of the local agency's govern- reduce the amount of tax revenues collected by local
ing body, and by a majority of the voters. agencies in the future, if a majority of their voters do not
2. Requires all local ordinances or resolutions proposing authorize the continuation of new or higher taxes adopted
a new or higher general or special tax to contain specific after August 1, 1985.
Be a ballot boxer. Vote.
David Eaton, Roseville
40 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in the election on any tax proposed pursuant to this Article
accordance with the provisions of Article Il, Section 8 of shall be held at any date otherwise permitted by law. The
the Constitution. local government or district shall bear the cost of any
This initiative measure adds sections to the Govern- election held pursuant to this subdivision.An election held
ment Code; therefore, the new provisions proposed to be pursuant to this subdivision shall be deemed at the request
added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are of the local government or district calling such election,
new. and shall not be deemed a state mandate.
PROPOSED LAW (e) .The revenues from any special tax shall be used
only for the purpose or service for which it was imposed,
Article 3.7 is hereby added to Chapter 4 (Financial Af- and for no other purpose whatsoever.
fairs) of Part 1 (Powers and Duties Common to Cities, 53725. .(a) Except as permitted in Section I of Article
Counties and other agencies) of Div. 2 (Cities, Counties XIII A of the California Constitution,no local government
and other Agencies) of Title 5 (Local Agencies) of the or district may impose any ad valorem taxes on real prop-
Government Code, commencing with Section 53720. erty. ,No local government or district may impose any
ARTICLE 3.7 transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property
VOTER APPROVAL OF TAXES within the city, county or district.
(b) Taxes permitted by Subdivision (b) of Section I of
53720. DEFINITIONS. Article XIII A of the California Constitution shall not be
As used in this Article: subject to the vote requirements prescribed by this Arti-
(a) "local government" means any county, city, city cle.
and county, including a chartered city or county, or any 53726. Except as set forth in Section 53727, this Article
public or municipal corporation;.and, shall not be construed to repeal or affect any statute enact-
(b) "district"means an agency of the state,formed pur- ed prior to August 1, 1985 which authorizes the imposition
suant to general law or special act, for the local perform- of a special tax.
ante of governmental or proprietary functions within lim- 53727. (a) Neither this Article, nor Article XIII A of
ited boundaries. the California Constitution,nor Article 3.5 of Division 1 of
53721. All taxes are either special taxes or general. Title 5 of the Government Code (commencing with Sec-
taxes. General taxes are taxes imposed for general govern- tion 50075) shall be construed to authorize any local gov-,
mental purposes. Special taxes are taxes imposed for spe- ernment or district to impose any general or special tax
cific purposes. , which it is not otherwise authorized to impose;provided,
53722. No local government or district may impose any however, that any special tax imposed pursuant to Article
special tax unless and until such special tax is submitted to 3.5 of Division I of Title 5 of the Government Code prior
the electorate of the local government, or district and to August 1, 1985 shall not be affected by this section.
approved by a two-thirds vote of the voters voting in an (b) Any tax imposed by any local government or dis-
election on the issue. trict on or after August 1, 1985, and prior to the effective
53723. No local government,or district, whether or not date of this Article, shall continue to be imposed only if
authorized to levy a property tax,may impose any general approved by a majority vote of the voters voting in an
tax unless and until,such general tax is submitted to the election on the issue ofimposition, which election shall be
electorate of the local government, or district and ap- held within two years of the effective date of this Article.
proved by a majority vote of the voters voting in an elec- Any local government or district which fails to seek or
tion on the issue. obtain such majority approval shall cease to impose such
53724. (a) A tax subject to the vote requirements pre- tax on and after November 15, 1988.
scribed by Section 53722 or Section 53723 shall be 53728. If any local government or district imposes any
proposed by an ordinance or resolution of the legislative tax without complying with the requirements of this Arti-
body of the local government or district. The ordinance or cle, or in excess of its authority as clarified by Section
resolution proposing such tax shall include the type of tax 53727, whether or not any provision of Section 53727 is
and rate of tax to be levied, the method of collection, the held not applicable to such jurisdiction, the amount of
date,upon which an election shall be held on the issue, property tax revenue allocated to the jurisdiction pursu-
and, if a special tax, the purpose or service for which its ant to Chapter 6 of part 0.5 of Division 1 of the Revenue
imposition is sought. . and Taxation Code (commencing with Section 95) shall be
(b) No tax subject to the vote requirement prescribed reduced by one dollar ($1.00) for each one dollar ($1.00)
by Section 53723 shall be presented at an election unless of revenue attributable to such tax for each year that the
the ordinance or resolution proposing such taxis approved tax is collected. Nothing in this section shall impair the
by a two-thirds vote of all members of the legislative body right of any citizen or taxpayer to maintain any action to
of the Total government or district. invalidate any tax imposed in violation of this Article.
(c) Except as provided in subdivision (d), the election 53729. This Article may only be amended by vote of
on any tax proposed pursuant to this'Article shall be con- the electorate of the State'of California.
solidated with a statewide primary election, a statewide 53730. If any provision of this Article, or the applica-
general election, or a regularly scheduled local election at tion thereof to any person, organization, local govern-
which all of the electors of the local government or district ment, district, or circumstance is held invalid or unconsti-
are entitled to vote. tutional, the provision to other persons, organizations,
(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (c), the legislative local governments, districts, or circumstances shall not be
body of the local government or district may provide that affected thereby but shall remain in full force and effect.
G86 41
62 Taxation. Local Governments and Districts. Initiative Statute
Argument in Favor of Proposition 62
A YES vote on Proposition 62 gives back your right to the beginning unless we stop them now with Proposition
vote on any tax increases proposed by your local govern- 62.
ments. You can take back your right to vote on your new or
Proposition 62 will decide whether government con- increased local taxes by voting "YES" on Proposition 62,
trols the people, or people control the government. the Taxpayers' Voting Rights Act.
In 1978, Proposition 13 returned the power to control Proposition 62 requires new or increased local, general
tax increases to the people, where it belongs. However, purpose taxes be approved by a majority vote at an elec-
the State Supreme Court twisted the language of Proposi- tion, after a two-thirds vote by a legislative body of the
tion 13 in a 1982 decision (City and County of San Fran- local government or agency puts the tax on the ballot.
cisco vs. Farrell) which took away your right to vote on Proposition 62 gives you the right to vote on new taxes
city and county tax increases. as well as increases in existing taxes.
Since the Supreme Court decision, politicians in over Guarantee your right to vote on your taxes. VOTE YES
108 cities already have increased taxes over 300 million ON PROPOSITION 62.
dollars without a vote,of the people. In all, 138 taxes have HOWARD JARVIS
been increased, and the figures are growing. Author of Proposition 13
Chairman, California Tax Reduction Movement
When politicians can raise taxes on their own without a PAUL CARPENTER (D)
vote of the people, you can bet your bottom dollar those State Senator,33rd District
taxes are going to go up and up. They have already risen JOHN J. LYNCH
sharply in communities all over California. And that's just Deputy Assessor,Los Angeles County
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 62
Those claims for Proposition 62 are misleading. Sacramento
Proponents say taxes have risen "sharply" since 1982. San Bernardino
With 20,900,000 people in California cities, their estimate San Diego
averages $14.35 each—not enough to take a family of four San Francisco
to the movies. It's hardly evidence that city councils are San Jose .
running wild raising taxes. Santa Ana
This proposition is so poorly written that it wouldn't do, Santa Barbara
what proponents claim. Stockton
It probably wouldn't require a vote on tax increases. It Sunnyvale
would require a complex process to impose new taxes,but Torrance
says nothing about a vote to increase existing taxes. Nor Ventura
does it apply to fees or assessments. Like others before it, That leaves mostly small- and medium-sized cities,
Proposition 62 would lead to years of costly lawsuits. which already generally have lower taxes than charter
The authors even neglected to make this a constitution- cities.
al amendment. That means they've left out charter cities, On the other hand, Proposition 62 will cost California
which have constitutional authority to govern themselves. cities millions in extra interest costs. Investors will be
They've left out 82 cities, including: reluctant to buy California municipal bonds because
Anaheim . Proposition 62 will make it difficult for noncharter cities
Bakersfield to resolve any future fiscal crisis.
Downey Proposition 62 is unnecessary.
Fresno It wouldn't do what proponents claim.
Glendale It would increase interest costs.
Huntington Beach And it would keep lawyers busy for years to come.
Irvine VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION 62.
Long Beach TED COOKE
Los Angeles President, California Police Chiefs Association
Marysville BILL TEIE
Oakland President, California Fire Chiefs Association
Pasadena ROY ULRICH
Riverside California Common Cause
42 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Taxation. Local Governments and Districts. Initiative Statute 62
Argument Against Proposition 62
WE URGE YOU TO VOTE `NO"ON PROPOSITION Current law provides little flexibility in financing local
62, needs when existing revenue sources fall short, some ex-
• because it unnecessarily interferes with local control, ceptional need arises, or the people demand more or bet-
• because it would prevent local government from ter services.
meeting critical local needs, and During the recent recession, cities throughout Califor-
• because it imposes a cumbersome and unworkable nia worked hard to maintain adequate levels of police,fire
process on our system of representative government. and paramedic protection and other basic services. They
There's no indication a need exists for a statewide law economized, dropped programs, laid off workers, and
to further limit your city's ability to provide the level of delayed repairs of streets and other public structures.
police and fire protection and the quality of parks, street When no other means could be found, some cities had to
maintenance and other services you want. raise revenues to keep police officers and firefighters on
If taxes are too high in any one community, voters can the job.
use the initiative process at the local level to reduce their Take away that flexibility and you leave your city coun-
own taxes—or turn their elected officials out of office. cil with all the responsibility for meeting your needs, but
Why restrict all California cities, when local voters al- none of the authority they must have to get the job done.
ready have the authority to control the amount of local Not all Californians are alike,nor are all California cities.
taxes they pay? Why treat them as if they come from the same mold?
Why impose a statewide law when a local initiative will, DON'T put statewide restrictions on all California cities
do? when local problems should be solved by local laws.
The fact is Proposition 62 goes far beyond the taxpayer DON'T tie the hands of the people you elect to repre-
protections of current law.It requires an overly restrictive sent you.
and cumbersome two-step process. In practice, it.would DON'T make it harder to get what you need from City
prevent local government from raising necessary reve- Hall.
nues—no matter how great the need. DO make sure your city council has the tools it needs to
Your city council members already are prohibited by meet your needs.
law from raising the property tax or sales tax. They can't VOTE "NO" ON PROPOSITION 62.
impose an income tax. They may charge fees for some
services, but only,enough to cover the cost of providing LINDA BRODER
President,League of Women Voters of California
those services. State law also limits how much your city
can spend. LENNY GOLDBERG
And your city council members know they will face Executive Director, California Tax Reform Association
your wrath at the next election if they've misjudged your DANIEL A.TERRY
wishes. President,Federated Firefighters of California
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 62
The argument against Proposition 62 says nothing at all more than 300 million dollars with no vote of the people.
about the real objective of Proposition 62. The real objec- Unless Proposition 62 passes,you can expect much higher
tive is winning back your right to vote. taxes from local government every year and you won't
Lincoln said it best: "Government of, by and for the have a say.
people." It is in your interest to vote YES ON PROPOSITION 62.
The opponents' argument makes it clear— It will bring back rights the State Supreme Court took
1. They want to deny the people's right to vote on tax away from us, which we won with Proposition 13.
raises the people would have to pay. ' HOWARD JARVIS
2. They want government to control the people by un- Author of Proposition 13
limited taxation rather than people controlling the gov- Chairman, California Tax Reduction Movement
ernment. PAUL CARPENTER (D)
3. They say this proposition "interferes with local con- state Senator,33rd District
trol." Local control by whom? Certainly, not the people. JOHN J. LYNCH
Recently,some 108 local governments have raised taxes Deputy Assessor,Los Angeles County
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 43
63 Official State Language. Initiative Constitutional Amendment
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
OFFICIAL STATE LANGUAGE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Provides that English is the
official language of State of California. Requires Legislature to enforce this provision by appropriate legislation. Requires
Legislature and state officials to take all steps necessary to ensure that the role of English as the common language of
the state is preserved and enhanced. Provides that the Legislature shall make no law which diminishes or ignores the
role of English as the common language. Provides that any resident of or person doing business in state shall have
standing to sue the state to enforce these provisions. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local
government fiscal impact: This measure would have no direct effect on the costs or revenues of the state or local
governments.
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
Background
The California Constitution does not confer any special
status on the English language.
Proposal
This constitutional amendment declares that English is
the official language of the State of California. It directs
the Legislature to enact appropriate legislation to pre- .
serve the role of English as the state's common language.
In addition, it prohibits the Legislature from passing laws,
which diminish or ignore the role of English as the state's
common language.
Fiscal Effect
This measure would'have no effect on the costs or reve-
nues of the state and local governments.
Make the power connection . . . register and vote!
Norma Webb, Redding
44 G86
Text of.Proposed Law
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in
accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8 of
the Constitution.
This initiative measure amends the Constitution by add-
ing sections thereto; therefore, new provisions proposed
to be added are printed in italic type to indicate that they
are new.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III
Section 1. Section 6 is added to Article III of the Con-
stitution to read as follows:
SEC. 6. (a) Pur se.
English is the common language of the people of the
United States of America and the State of California. This
section is intended to preserve, protect and strengthen
the English language, and not to supersede any of the
rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution.
(b) English as the Official Language of California.
English is the official language of the State of California.
(c) Enforcement.
The Legislature shall enforce this section by appropri-
ate legislation. The Legislature and officials of the State of
California shall take all steps necessary to insure that the.
role of English as the common language of the State of
California is preserved and enhanced. The Legislature
shall make no law which diminishes-or ignores the role of
English as the common language of the State of California.
(d) Personal Right of Action and Jurisdiction of Courts.
Any person who is a resident of or doing business in the
State of California shall have standing to sue the State of
California to enforce this section,and the Courts of record
of the State of California shall have jurisdiction to hear
cases brought to enforce this section. The Legislature may
provide reasonable and appropriate limitations on the
time and manner of suits brought under this section.
Section 2. 'Severability
If any provision of this section,or the application of any
such provision to any person or circumstance,shall be held
invalid, the remainder of this section to the extent it can
be given effect shall not be affected thereby, and to this
end the provisions of this section are severable.
It does make a difference. Show your interest, . . . Vote.
Jerrie Bruce, San Diego'
G86 45
I
63 Official State Language. Initiative Constitutional Amendment
Argument in Favor of Proposition 63
The State of California stands at a crossroads. It can health,safety and justice require the use of other lan-
move toward fears and tensions of language rivalries and guages;
ethnic distrust. Or it can reverse that trend and . by weighing the effect of proposed legislation on the
strengthen our common bond, the English language. role of English; and
Our immigrants learned English if they arrived•not . by preserving and enhancing the role of English as
knowing the language. Millions of immigrants now living our common language.
have learned English or are learning it in order to partici- Californians have already expressed themselves deci-
pate in our culture.With one shared language we learn to sively.More than a million Californians asked to place this
respect other people, other cultures, with sympathy and measure on the ballot,the third largest number of petition
understanding. signatures in California history. In 1984, 70+ percent of
Our American heritage is now threatened by language California voters, 6,300,000, approved Proposition 38,
conflicts and ethnic separatism. Today, there is a serious "Voting Materials in English ONLY."
erosion of English as our common bond.This amendment This amendment sends a clear message: English is the
reaffirms California's oneness as a state,and as one of fifty official language of California. To function, to participate
states united by a common tongue. in our society, we must know English. English is the lan-
This amendment establishes a broad principle: English guage of opportunity,of government,of unity. English,in
is the official language of California. It is entitled to legal a fundamental sense, is US.
recognition and protection as such. No other language can Every year California's government makes decisions
have a similar status. This amendment recognizes in law which ignore the role of English in our state; some may
what has long been a political and social reality. cause irreversible harm. Government's bilingual activities
Nothing in the amendment prohibits the use of lan- cost millions of taxpayers' dollars each year. This amend-
Ott other than English in unofficial situations, such as ment will force government officials to stop and think
family communications, religious ceremonies or private before taking action.
business. Nothing in this amendment forbids teaching for- The future of California hangs in the balance—a state
eign languages. Nothing in this amendment removes or divided or a state united—a true part of the Union. YES
reduces any Californian's constitutional rights. is for unity—for what is right and best for our state,for our
The amendment gives guidance to the Legislature, the country, and for all of us.
Governor and the courts. Government must protect Eng- PLEASE VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 63—ENG-
lish: LISH AS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF CALIFOR-
. by passing no law that ignores or diminishes English; NIA.
. by issuing voting ballots and materials in English only S. I. HAYAKAWA, Ph.D.
(except where required by federal law); ` United States Senator, 1977-1982
. by ensuring that immigrants are taught English as J. WILLIAM OROZCO
quickly as possible (except as required by federal Businessman
law); STANLEY DIAMOND
. by functioning in English, except where public Chairman, California English Campaign
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 63
Proposition 63 doesn't simply make English our "o€fi- ceptions the proponents claim. It has no exception for use
cial" language; it seeks to make it California's only lan- of foreign languages where public health, safety and jus-
guage. It does nothing positive to increase English profi- tice require.
ciency. It only punishes those who haven't had a fair Inevitable disputes over the meaning of Proposition 63's
opportunity to learn it. sweeping language will mean our government will be
Proposition 63 threatens to isolate those who haven't yet dragged into countless, costly lawsuits at taxpayers' ex-
mastered English from essential government services pense.
such as 911 emergency operators, public service an- America's greatness and uniqueness lie in the fact that
nouncements, schools, and courts. By preventing them we are a nation of diverse people with a shared commit-
from becoming better,more involved citizens while mak- ment to democracy, freedom and fairness. That is the
ing the transition into American society, Proposition 63 common bond which holds our nation and state together.
will discourage rather than encourage the assimilation of It runs much deeper than the English language.
new citizens. Proposition 63 breeds intolerance and divisiveness. It
Worse et because Proposition 63 amends the Constitu- betrays our democratic ideals.
tion, its harmful effects will be virtually permanent and Vote NO on Proposition 63!
unchangeable. All governmental bodies, from the State THE HONORABLE DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Legislature to local school boards,police and hospitals will Mayor, San Francisco
be powerless to meet the changing and varying needs of ART TORRES
the public. State Senator,24th District
Proposition 63 is inflexible. It does not contain the ex- STATE COUNCIL OF SERVICE EMPLOYEES
46 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Official State Language. Initiative Constitutional Amendment 63
Argument Against Proposition 63
This summer we celebrated the 100th anniversary of the. waiting lists for English courses at community colleges and
Statue of Liberty. That glorious 4th of July brought all adult schools. But this initiative does nothing positive to
Americans together. Now, four months later, Proposition help.For instance,it provides for no increase in desperate-
63 threatens to divide us and tarnish our proud heritage of ly needed night and weekend English classes.
tolerance and diversity. The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, when
This proposition,despite its title,does not preserve Eng- faced with a negative local measure like this one, firmly
lish as our common language. Instead, it undermines the and wisely rejected it by a unanimous,bipartisan vote. On
efforts of new citizens of our state to contribute to and April 21, 1986, they said in part:
enter the mainstream of American life. "English as the official language resolutions will not
English is and will remain the language of California. help anyone learn English.They will not improve human
Proposition 63 won't change that. What it will do is pro- relations, and they will not lead to a better community.
duce a nightmare of expensive litigation and needless re- They will create greater intergroup tension and ill will,
sentment. encourage resentment and bigotry, pit neighbor against
Proposition 63 could mean that state and local govern- neighbor and group against group. They reflect our worst
ment must eliminate multilingual police, fire, and-emer- fears, not our best values.
gency services such as 911 telephone operators, thereby "In many areas . . . non-English-speaking persons have
jeopardizing the lives and safety of potential victims. sometimes represented a problem for schoolteachers,ser-
It could mean that court interpreters for witnesses, vice providers, law enforcement officers, who are unable
crime victims, and defendants have to be eliminated. to understand them.The problem will be solved over time
It could outlaw essential multilingual public service in- as newcomers learn English. It has happened many times '
formation such as pamphlets informing non-English- before in our history. In the meanwhile . . . common sense
speaking parents how to enroll their children in public . . good will, sensitivity, and humor will help us through
schools. this challenging period."
Even foreign street signs and the teaching of languages Well said by public officials representing both sides of
in public schools could be in jeopardy. the political spectrum.
We can hope that sensible court decisions will prevent Proposition 63 is unnecessary.It is negative and counter-
these consequences. But Proposition 63 openly invites productive. It is, in the most fundamental sense, tin-
costly legal attempts to seek such results.It is certain to set American. Vote NO on Proposition 63!
Californian against Californian with tragic consequences.
What makes this especially troubling is that the over- JOHN VAN DE KAMP
whelming majority of immigrants want to learn English. Attorney General
In fact,a recent study shows that 98% of Latin parents say WILLIE L. BROWN,JR.
it is essential for their children to read and write English Speaker, California State Assembly
well. DARYL F. GATES
Asians, Latinos and other recent immigrants fill long Police Chief,Los Angeles Police Department
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 63
When this country was founded, immigrants from all stead, Proposition 63 will serve as a directional marker
over the world streamed to our shores with one hope—a towards which we as society can point our new immi-
chance at success. People with divergent backgrounds grants.
were forced into close contact,yet the assimilation of these The official language proposition is not an attempt to
cultures was remarkably constructive. This assimilation isolate anyone. Indeed, it is the opposite. We want all
into one nation gave us a diversity, a strength and a immigrants to assimilate into our country. We believe to
uniqueness that today we treasure. Every schoolchild be a success in California and in the United States, you
learns to marvel at the miracle of the American melting must be proficient in English. We want to cherish and
pot. preserve the ethnic diversity that adds strength and fiber
But the melting pot was not an accident. There was a to our society. Yet we remember the common thread
common thread that tied society together. The common binding us together as Americans is the English language.
thread in early.America and current California was the The melting pot has served this nation for 200 years. The
English language. Proposition 63 will strengthen the Eng- ingredients may have varied,but this is no time to change
lish language and invigorate our melting pot. It will not the recipe. Vote yes on Proposition 63.
eliminate bilingual police and fire services. It will not pro- FRANK HILL
hibit the teaching of foreign languages in our schools. In- Member of the Assembly,52nd District
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 47
64, Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
Initiative Statute
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
ACQUIRED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY SYNDROME (AIDS). INITIATIVE STATUTE. Declares that AIDS is an infec-
tious, contagious and communicable disease and that the condition of being a carrier of the HTLV-III virus is an
infectious, contagious and communicable condition. Requires both be placed on the list of reportable diseases and
conditions maintained by the director of the Department of Health Services.Provides that both are subject to quarantine
and isolation statutes and regulations.Provides that Department of Health Services personnel and all health officers shall
fulfill the duties and obligations set forth in specified statutory provisions to preserve the public health from AIDS.
Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: The fiscal effect of the
measure could vary greatly depending upon how it would be interpreted by public health officers and the courts. If
only existing discretionary communicable disease controls were applied to the AIDS disease, given the current state of
medical knowledge, there would be no substantial change in state and local costs as a direct result of this measure. If
the measure were interpreted to 'require added control measures, depending upon the level of activity taken, the cost
of implementing these measures could range to hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
port cases of certain listed communicable diseases to local
Background health officers who, in turn, report the cases to the State
Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is a dis- Department of Health Services. At the time this analysis
ease that impairs the body's normal ability to resist harm- was prepared, AIDS was not on the list of communicable
ful diseases and infections.The disease is caused by a virus diseases that must be reported to local health officers.
that is spread through intimate sexual contact or exposure However, AIDS is being reported under a regulation
to the blood of an infected person. As of the preparation which requires an unusual disease, not listed as a com-
of this analysis, there was no readily available method to municable disease, to be reported by local health officers.
detect whether a person actually has the AIDS virus.A test Under other provisions of law,hospitals are required to
does exist to detect whether a person has ever been infect- report cases of AIDS to local health officers who, in turn,
ed with the AIDS virus and as a result has developed report the cases to the State Department of Health Serv-
antibodies to it. A person infected with the AIDS virus ices. Counties also report to the state the number of cases
may or may not develop the AIDS disease after a period in which blood tests performed at certain facilities reveal
of several years. There is no known cure for AIDS, which the presence of antibodies to the AIDS virus, indicating
is ultimately fatal. that a person has been infected with the virus.Existing law
As of June 30, 1986, there were 5,188 cases of AIDS and does not allow the release of the names or other identify-
2,406 deaths from the disease in California. The State De- ing information for persons who take the AIDS antibody
partment of Health Services estimates that up to 500,000 test.
persons in California are infected with the AIDS virus,and According to the State Department of Health Services,
that by 1990 there will be approximately 30,000 cases of persons who have AIDS and persons who are capable of
AIDS in the state. spreading the AIDS virus are subject to existing communi-
Existing Laws Covering Communicable Diseases. Lo- cable disease laws. However, no health officer has ever
cal health officers have broad authority to take measures taken any official action to require persons infected with
they believe are necessary to protect public health and the AIDS virus to be isolated or quarantined, because
prevent the spread of disease-causing organisms. Howev- there is no medical evidence which demonstrates that the
er,this broad authority is limited to situations where there •AIDS virus is transmitted by casual contact with an infect-
is a reasonable belief that the individual affected has or ed person.In addition,no health officer has recommended
may have the disease and poses a danger to the public.The excluding persons with AIDS,or those who are capable of
kind of measure taken by health officers varies,depending spreading AIDS, from schools or jobs.
on how easily an organism is spread from one person to
another. For example, to prevent the spread of a disease, Proposal
local health officers may require isolation of infected or This measure declares that AIDS and the "condition of
diseased persons and quarantine of exposed persons. In being a carrier" of the virus that causes AIDS are com-
addition,persons infected with a disease-causing organism municable diseases. The measure also requires the State
may be excluded from schools for the duration of the in- Department of Health Services to add these conditions to
fection and excluded from food handling jobs. In some the list of diseases that must be reported. Because AIDS
cases,these measures may be applied to persons suspected cases are already being reported, the measure would re-
of having the infection or the disease. quire the reporting of those who are"carriers of the AIDS
Current AIDS Reporting Requirements. Physicians virus." Currently, no test to make this determination is
and other health care providers are now required to re- readily available.
48 G86
The measure also states that the Department of Health communicable disease controls were applied to the AIDS
Services and all health officers"shall fulfill all of the duties disease, there would be no substantial net change in state
and obligations specified"under the applicable laws"in a and local costs as_a direct result of this measure.Thus,the
manner consistent with the intent of this act." Although primary effect,of this measure would be to require the
the meaning of this language could be subject to two dif- reporting of persons.who are carriers of the virus which
ferent interpretations, it most likely means that the laws causes AIDS. Very few cases would be reported because
and regulations which currently apply to other communi- no test to confirm that a person carries the virus is readily
cable diseases"shall also apply to AIDS and the "condition available. If such a test becomes widely available in.the
of being a carrier"of the AIDS virus.Thus,health officers future, more cases would be reported.
would continue to exercise their discretion in taking ac- The fiscal impact could be very substantial if the meas-
tions necessary to control this disease. Based on existing ure were interpreted to require changes in AIDS control
medical knowledge and health department practices,few, measures by state and local health officers, either volun-
if any,AIDS patients and carriers of the AIDS virus would tarily or as a result of a change in medical knowledge on
be,placed in isolation or under quarantine.Similarly,few, how the disease is spread, or as a result of court decisions
if any, persons would be excluded from schools or food which mandate certain control measures. Ultimately; the
handling jobs. If, however, the language is interpreted as fiscal impact would depend on the level of activity that
placing new requirements on health officers, it could re- state and local health officers might undertake with re-
sult in new actions such as expanding testing programs for spect to: (1) identifying, isolating and quarantining per-
the AIDS virus, imposing isolation or quarantine of per- sons infected with the virus,or having the disease,and (2)
sons who have the disease,and excluding persons infected excluding those persons from schools or food handling
with the AIDS virus from schools and food handling posi- positions. The cost of implementing these actions could
tions. range from millions of dollars to hundreds of millions of
dollars per year. .
Fiscal Effect In summary, the net fiscal impact of this measure is
The fiscal effect of this measure could vary greatly, de- unknown—and could vary greatly, depending. on what
pending on how it would be interpreted by state and local actions are taken by health officers and the courts to im-
health officers and the courts. If existing discretionary plement this measure. .
Text of Proposed Law
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in Section 2.
accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8 of Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is an
the Constitution. infectuous, contagious and communicable disease and the
This initiative measure proposes to add new provisions condition of being a carrier of the HTLV-III virus is an
to the law; therefore, the new provisions proposed to be infectuous, contagious and communicable condition and
added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are both shall lie placed and maintained by the director of the
new. Department of Health Services on the list of reportable
PROPOSED LAW diseases and conditions mandated by Health and Safety
Section 1. Code Section 3123, and both shall be included within the
The purpose of this Act is to: provisions of Division 4 of such code and the rules and
A. Enforce and confirm the declaration of the Califor- regulations set forth in Administrative Code Title 17, Part
nia Legislature set forth in Health and Safety Code Section 1, Chapter 4, Subchapter 1, and all personnel of the De-
195 that acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is partment of Health Services and all health officers shall
.serious and life threatening to men and women from all fulfill all of the duties and obligations specified in each and
segments of society, that AIDS is usually lethal and that it all of the sections of said statutory division and administra-
is caused by an infectuous agent with a high concentration tive code subchapter in a manner consistent with the in-
of cases in California; tent of this Act,as shall all other persons identified in said
B. Protect victims of acquired immune deficiency syn- provisions.
drome (AIDS), members of their families and local com- Section 3.
munities, and the public health at large; and In the event that any section, subsection or portion
C. Utilize the existing structure of the State Depart- thereof of this Act is deemed unconstitutional by a proper
ment of Health Services and local health officers and the court of law, then that section, subsection or portion
statutes and regulations under which they serve to pre- thereof shall be stricken from the Act and all other sec-
serve the public health from acquired immune deficiency tions, subsections and portions thereof shall remain in
syndrome.(AIDS). force, alterable only by the people, according to process.
G86 49
i
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) .
64 Initiative Statute
Arguments iri Favor of Proposition 64
Proposition 64 extends existing public health codes for The medical facts are clear. The law is clear. Common
communicable diseases to AIDS and AIDS virus carriers. sense agrees. You and your family have the right" to be
This means that the same public health codes that already protected from all contagious diseases, including AIDS—
protect you and your family from.other dangerous diseases the deadliest of them all. If you agree,vote YES on Propo-
will also protect you from AIDS. Proposition 64 will keep sition 64.'
AIDS out of our schools,out of commerical food establish- KHUSHRO GHANDHI
ments, and will give health officials the power to test and California Director, National Democratic Policy Committee
quarantine where needed. These measures are not new; (NDPC),and Member-elect,Los Angeles County
they are the same.health measures applied, by law, every Democratic Party Central Committee
day,'to every other dangerous contagious disease. JOHN GRAUERHOLZ,M.D.,FCAP
Today AIDS is out of control. There are at least 300,000 (Fellow, College of American Pathologists)
AIDS carriers in California,and the number of cases of this
highly contagious disease is doubling every 6 to 12 months. California law today makes it illegal for public health
The number of "unexplained"AIDS cases—cases not'in authorities to be informed of a large number of those
"high-risk" groups, such as.homosexuals and intravenous (about 385,000) who can spread the deadly AIDS virus to
drug users—continues to grow at alarming rates. Indeed, others. How can they take the necessary steps to slow its
the majority of cases worldwide fall into no identifiable spread as long as this is true?
"risk group" whatsoever. The AIDS virus has been found Under existing law, a physician who encounters any of
living in many bodily fluids,including blood, saliva, respi- 58 reportable diseases is required to report to health offi-
ratory fluids,sweat, and tears, and it can survive upwards cials.Included are several venereal diseases,such as syphi-
of seven days outside the body. There presently exist no lis and gonorrhea. Contact tracing is conducted. But, for
cure for the sick and no vaccination for the healthy. It is those with the AIDS virus, not yet developed into AIDS,
100%, lethal. a special state law passed at the request of the male homo-
AIDS is the gravest public health threat our nation has sexual lobby prohibits contact tracing. Proposition 64 will
ever faced. The existing law of California clearly states - require that those with the AIDS virus be reported as are
that certain proven public Health measures must be taken other communicable diseases. It does not require quaran-
to protect the public from any communicable disease,and tine.
no competent medical professional denies that AIDS is The cost of the AIDS epidemic in California, it is es-
"communicable." Despite these facts, politicians and spe- timated,will be at least 59,400 lives by 1991 and almost $6
cial interest groups have circumvented the public health billion to be paid by insurance and/or taxpayers. Let's
laws. For the first time in our history, a deadly disease is reduce those statistics by voting YES on Proposition 64.
being treated as a "civil rights" issue, rather than as a WILLIAM E. DANNEMEYER
public health issue. Member of Congress,39th District
Rebuttal to Arguments in Favor of Proposition 64
Would you let a stranger with no medical training or restaurant,grocery store,or in the workplace. Think for a
medical background diagnose a disease or illness that you moment. If it were true that AIDS is casually transmitted,
have? Would you let a political extremist dictate medical clearly many more men,women and children would be ill.
policy? OF COURSE NOT. This is just not the fact.
The followers of Lyndon LaRouche suggest that the The followers of Lyndon LaRouche are at it again!Using
hands of the medical community have been tied. THIS IS partial truths and falsehoods, they are attempting to cre-
NOT TRUE! In fact, the California Medical Association, ate panic in California. Say NO to PANIC. Vote NO on
the'California Nurses Association, the California Hospital Proposition 64.
Association and other health professionals believe that HELEN MIRAMONTES, R.N.,M.S.,CCRN
Proposition 64 would seriously hurt their.ability to treat President, California Nurses Association
and find a cure for AIDS. These health professionals are C. DUANE DAUNER
seriously concerned that years of research will be under- President, California Hospital Association
mined by fear generated by this irrational proposition. GLADDEN V. ELLIOTT,M.D.
NO ONE has contracted AIDS from casual contact at a' President, California Medical Association
1
50 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
' I
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) .
Initiative Statute 64
Argument Against Proposition 64
Proposition b4 must be defeated for the safety and pub- billions of dollars to quarantine and isolate AIDS carriers
lic health of all Californians. It is an irrational,inappropri- and could require public health officials to do so. Quaran-
ate and misguided approach to a serious public health tine would serve no medical purpose because there are-no
problem. The proponents of.this measure are followers of documented cases of AIDS ever being transmitted by
extremist Lyndon LaRouche. They want to create an at- casual contact.
mosphere of fear, misunderstanding, inadequate health Californians from all walks of life know they must unite
care and panic. In fact, the acronym of their campaign to end this dreadful epidemic. Californians can be proud
committee is PANIC. that doctors and public health officials have acted in a
Public health decisions must be left in the hands of-the professional, rational and responsible manner to protect
medical profession and public health officials or we will the health of Californians and have taken all appropriate
endanger the lives of Californians. The California Medical precautions as they are needed. This kind of initiative can
Association and county public health officials recognize only divide, create panic and force thousands not to get
the danger of allowing political extremists to dictate state tested or treated because of fear.
public health and medical policy. Join us,the Los Angeles Times, The Los Angeles Herald
This type of repressive and discriminatory action forced Examiner, San Francisco Examiner, the California Medi-
upon Californians by followers of Lyndon LaRouche will cal Association,and many others in opposing the extremes
not-serve to limit the problem, but rather could prolong of followers of Lyndon LaRouche.Vote NO on Proposition
the spread of this terrible disease. The fear of quarantine 64!
or other discriminatory measures, including loss of jobs, GLADDEN V. ELLIOTT, M.D.
will make people reluctant to be tested. Fearing social President, California Medical Association
isolation,individuals at risk will avoid early medical inter- ED ZSCHAU
vention,,or even infection testing, driving AIDS under Member of Congress, 12th District
ground. . ALAN CRANSTON
Enforcement of this measure could cost the taxpayers United States Senator
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 64
Opponents of Proposition 64 have spent a great deal of not. The majority of cases have never been studied.
rhetoric, while avoiding medical issues. . Many health officials are demanding public health
The facts: measures. Dr. Kizer, California's top health official, has
. Health officials' failure to implement existing public called for more reporting and testing powers.
health laws has resulted in nearly 500,000 people infected . The AIDS virus exists in many bodily effluents and
in California, each capable of infecting others. survives outside the body.
. AIDS is the most rapidly spreading lethal disease in Proposition 64 implements the existing health laws;laws
the country. scientifically designed to protect your health; laws which
. Of those infected,between 40% and 99% will proba- have been ruled constitutional by courts for decades.
bly die—between 200,000 and 500,000 deaths in California Don't gamble with human life.Vote YES on Proposition
—and AIDS is doubling every year. 64.
. The vast majority of AIDS cases worldwide lie outside GUS S. SERMOS
"high risk" groups. The victims are not homosexuals, and Former Centers for Disease Control Public Health Adviser
are not intravenous drug users. In Haiti, three years ago, with AIDS Program in Florida
70% of AIDS cases were in"high risk"groups.Today,over NANCY T. MULLAN,M.D.
70% are not in "high risk" groups. Could this happen Burbank
here? It can and it will, unless we stop it. JOHN GRAUERHOLZ,M.D.,FCAP
. Do we know with certainty how AIDS spreads?We do (Fellow, College of American Pathologists)
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 51
r15of Restrictions on Toxic Discharges into Drinking Water; Requirement
Notice of Persons' Exposure to Toxic§. Initiative Statute
Official Title and Summary Prepared by the Attorney General
RESTRICTIONS ON TOXIC DISCHARGES INTO DRINKING WATER; REQUIREMENT OF NOTICE OF PER-
SONS' EXPOSURE TO TOXICS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Provides persons doing business shall neither expose in-
dividuals to chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning,
nor discharge such chemicals into drinking water. Allows exceptions. Requires Governor publish lists of such chemicals.
Authorizes Attorney General and, under specified conditions, district or city attorneys' and other persons to seek
injunctions and civil penalties. Requires designated government employees obtaining information of illegal discharge
of hazardous waste disclose this information to local board of supervisors and health officer. Summary of Legislative
Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: Costs of enforcement of the measure by state and
local agencies are estimated at $500,000 in 1987 and' thereafter would depend on many factors, but could exceed
$1,000,000 annually. These costs would be partially offset by fines collected under the measure.
Analysis by the Legislative Analyst,
Background businesses employing 10 or more people.First,it generally
Currently,the state has a number of programs designed would prohibit those businesses from knowingly releasing
to protect people against possible exposures to harmful into any source of drinking water.any chemical .in an
chemicals. The major programs involve the regulation of: amount that is known to cause cancer or in an amount that
. Waste Discharges. The State Water Resources Con- exceeds 111,000th of the amount necessary for an observa-
trol Board and the regional water quality control ble effect on "reproductive toxicity." The term "i•epro-
boards regulate the discharge of wastes into state wa- ductive toxicity"is not defined. Second, the measure gen-
ters, including rivers, streams, and groundwater that erally would require those businesses to warn people
may be used as sources of drinking water. The De- before knowingly and intentionally exposing them to
partment of Health Services regulates the disposal chemicals that cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The
and cleanup of hazardous waste,including hazardous measure would require the state to issue lists of substances
waste that may contaminate drinking water. that cause cancer or reproductive toxicity.
. Drinking Water. Current law prohibits local water Because these new requirements would result in more
agencies from supplying drinking water to the public stringent standards, the practical effect of the require-
that contains dangerous levels of certain harmful ments would be to impose new conditions for the issuance
chemicals. Local water agencies must inform custom- of permits for discharges into sources of drinking water.In
ers when the level of these chemicals exceeds certain order to implement the new requirements,state agencies
limits. The Department of Health Services enforces that are responsible for issuing permits would be required
these limits. to alter state regulations and develop new standards for
. Workplace Hazards. The Department of Industrial the amount of chemicals that may be discharged into
Relations regulates exposure to cancer-causing sources of drinking water.
materials,and other harmful substances in the work- The measure also would impose civil penalties and in-
place. Current law also requires employers to inform crease existing fines for toxic discharges. In addition, the
workers of possible exposure to dangerous substances. measure would allow state or local governments, or any
. Pesticides. The Department of Food and Agricul- person acting in the public interest, to sue a business that
ture regulates the use of pesticides in agriculture and violates these rules.
in other business applications,such as maintenance of
landscaping and golf courses. Fiscal Effect
These regulatory agencies must make judgments about It is estimated that the administrative actions resulting
the amounts of harmful chemicals-that can be released from the enactment of this measure would cost around
into the environment. In doing so, they try to balance $500,000 in 1987. Starting in 1988,the costs of these actions
what it costs to prevent the release of chemicals against are unknown and would depend on many factors, but
the risks the chemicals pose to public health and safety.As these costs could exceed $1 million annually.
the level of allowable exposure goes down, the cost of In addition,the measure would result in unknown costs
prevention typically goes up. The risk that some sub- to-state and local law enforcement agencies. A portion of
stances pose to health is not always known. Often, scien- these,costs could be offset by increased civil penalties and
tists cannot determine precisely the health impact of low- fines collected under the measure.
level exposures that occur over 20 or 30 years. Beyond these direct effects of the measure, state and
local governments may strengthen enforcement activities
Proposal to ensure compliance with the new requirements. The
This measure proposes two additional requirements for costs of any additional enforcement could be significant.
52 G86
Text of Proposed Law
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in court of competent jurisdiction.
accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8 of (c) Actions pursuant to this section maybe brought by
the Constitution. the Attorney General in the name of the people of the
This initiative measure amends'and adds sections to the State of California or by any district attorney or y any city
Health and Safety Code; therefore, existing provisions attorney of a city having a population in excess of 750,000
proposed to be deleted are printed in str-ileeaut #fie and or with the consent of the district attorney by a city prose-
new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic cutor in any city or city and county having a full-time city
type to indicate that they are new. prosecutor, or as provided in subdivision (d).
(d) Actions pursuant to this section maybe brought by
PROPOSED LAW any person in the public interest if(1) the action is com-
SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC menced more than sixty days after the person has given
ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1986 notice of the violation which is the subject of the action to
SECTION 1. The people of California find that haz- the Attorney General and the district attorney and any
P p city attorney in whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged
ardous chemicals pose a serious potential threat to their to occur and to the alleged violator, and (2) neither the
health and well-being, that state government agencies Attorney General nor any district attorney nor any city
have failed to provide them with adequate protection,and attorney or prosecutor has commenced and is diligently
that these failures have been serious enough to lead to prosecuting an action against such violation.
investigations by federal agencies of the administration of 25249.8 List Of Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or
California's toxic protection programs. The people there- Reproductive Toxicity.
fore declare their rights: (a) On or before March 1, 1987, the Governor shall
(a) To protect themselves and the water they drink cause to be published a list of those chemicals known to
against chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, or - the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity within
other reproductive harm. the meaning of this chapter,and he shall cause such list to
(b) To be informed about exposures to chemicals that be revised and republished in light of additional knowl-
cause cancer, birth defects,or other reproductive harm. edge at least once per year thereafter. Such list shall in-
(c) To secure strict enforcement of the laws controlling clude at a minimum those substances identified by refer-
hazardous chemicals and deter actions that threaten ence in Labor Code Section 6382(b) (1) and those
public health and safety. substances identified additionally by reference in Labor
(d) To shift the cost of hazardous waste cleanups more Code Section 6382(d).
onto offenders and less onto law-abiding taxpayers. I (b) A chemical is known to the state to cause cancer or
reproductive toxicity within the meaning of this chapter
The people hereby enact the provisions of this initiative in if in the opinion of the state's qualified experts it has been
furtherance of these rights. clearly shown through scientifically valid testing accord-
SECTION 2. Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section ing to generally accepted,principles to cause cancer or
25249.5) is added to Division 20 of the Health and Safety reproductive toxicity; or if a body considered to be au-
Code, to read: thoritative by such experts has formally identified it as
CHAPTER 6.6. causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, or if an agency of
SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC ' the state or federal government has formally required it
ENFORCEMENT ACT to be labeled or identified as causing cancer or reproduc-
tive toxicity.
25249.5. Prohibition On Contaminating Drinking Wa- (c) On or before January 1, 1989, and at least once per
ter With Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer or Re ro uc- year,thereafter, the Governor shall cause to be published
tive Toxicity. No person in the course of doing business a separate list of those chemicals that at the time of publi-
shall knowingly,discharge or release a chemical known to cation are required by state or federal law to have been
the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into wa- tested for potential to cause cancer or reproductive toxic-
ter or onto or into land where such chemical passes or ity but that the state's qualified experts have not found to
probably will pass into any source of drinking water, not- have been adequately tested as required.
withstanding any other provision or authorization of law (d) The Governor shall identify and consult with the
except as provided in Section 25249.9. states qualified experts as necessary to carry out his duties
25249.6. Re uired Warning Before Ex osure To under this section.
Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive Tox- . (e) In carrying out the duties of the Governor under
i& ty. No person in the course of doing business shall this section, the Governor and his designates shall not be
knowingly and intentionally expose any individual to a considered to be adopting or amending a regulation with-
chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproduc- in the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act as
tive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable defined in Government Code Section 11370.
warning to such individual, except as provided in Section 25249.9 Exemptions from Discharge Prohibition.
25249.10. (a) Section 25249.5 shall not apply to any discharge or
25249.7. Enforcement. release that takes place less than twenty months subse-
(a) Any person violating or threatening to violate Sec- quent to the listing of the chemical in question on the list
tion 25249.5 or Section 25249.6 may be enjoined in any required to be published under subdivision (a) of Section
court of competent jurisdiction. 25249.8.
(b) Any person who has violated Section 25249.5 or Sec- (b) Section 25249.5 shall not apply to any discharge or
tion 25249.6 shall be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed release that meets both of the following criteria:
$2500 per day for each such violation in addition to any ' (1) The discharge or release will not cause any signifi-
other penalty established by law. Such civil penalty may cant amount of the discharged or released chemical to
be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought in any Continued on page 62
G86 53
65 Restrictions on Toxic Discharges into Drinking Water; Requirement
of Notice of Persons' Exposure to Toxics. Initiative Statute
'Argument in Favor of Proposition 65
Nearly every week sees a new toxic catastrophe. Children in these same chemicals without first giving us a clear warning.We
Fullerton,Riverside,McFarland,Sacramento,and San Jose have each have a right to know, and to make our own choices about
already been exposed to chemicals that may make them sterile being exposed to these chemicals.
or give them cancer. TOUGHER ENFORCEMENT
There are certain chemicals that are scientifically known—not Roth public prosecutors and ordinary citizens can enforce
merely suspected,but known—to cause cancer and birth defects. these health protections directly in court.
Proposition 65 would: Proposition 65 also toughens enforcement for criminal laws
. Keep these chemicals out of our drinking water. already on the books. Fines and jail terms are doubled for toxic
. Warn us before we're exposed to any of these dangerous crimes like midnight dumping. Police and prosecutors are given
chemicals. extra rewards for enforcing toxics laws. -
. Give private citizens the right to enforce these laws in court. Proposition 65's new civil offenses focus only on chemicals that
. Make government officials tell the public when an illegal are known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive disorders.
discharge of hazardous waste could cause serious harm. Chemicals that are only suspect are not included.The Governor
The cost to taxpayers will be negligible,according to the Attor- must list these chemicals, sifter full consultation with the state's
ney General's official estimate. qualified experts.At a minimum,the Governor must include the
Our present toxic laws aren't tough enough. Despite them, chemicals already listed as known carcinogens by two organiza-
polluters contaminate our drinking water and expose us to ex- lions of the most highly regarded national and international
tremely toxic chemicals without our knowing it. The health of scientists: the U.S.'s National Toxicology Program and the U.N.'s
innocent people is jeopardized.And the public must pay massive .International Agency for Research on Cancer.
costs for cleanup. These new laws will not take anyone by surprise. They apply
The Governors Toxics Task Force found: only to businesses that know they are putting one of the chemi-
. Toxic chemicals can cause cancer,birth defects,and genetic cals out into the environment, and that know the chemical is
damage. actually on the Governor's list.
. Much of our drinking water is polluted by toxic chemicals. Proposition 65 will give California the clearest,most effective
Exposure to toxics costs Californians more than $1.3 billion toxic control laws in the nation.
per year in medical care, lost income, and deaths. VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 65.
Proposition 65 turns that report into action,with requirements
that are clear, simple, and straightforward. IRA REINER
Proposition 65 gets tough on toxics. District Attorney, Los Angeles County
SAFE DRINKING WATER
Proposition 65 singles out chemicals that are scientifically ART TORRES
known to cause cancer or reproductive disorders (such as birth State Senator,24th District
defects). Effectively, it tells businesses: Don't put these chemi- . Chair, Senate Toxics and Public Safety
cals into our drinking water supplies. Managernent Colninttee
WARNING BEFORE EXPOSURE PENNY NEWMAN
Proposition 65 also tells businesses: Don't expose us to any of Chair,Concerned Neighbors in Action (Stringfellow Acid Pits)
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 65
WE JOIN"SCIENTISTS, HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AND the last four years.
FARMERS IN URGING A"NO"VOTE ON PROPOSITION 65. FACT: The toxics cleanup budget has increased nearly 150%
Everybody wants safe drinking water. Proposition 65 simply in the last four years.
won't give it to us. FACT: Several million dollars in fines have already been col-
PROPOSITION 65 WILL NOTPRODUCE SAFE DRINKING lected, used for cleanup and future enforcement.
WATER. Proposition 65 will take environmental regulation out of the
FACT: Proposition 65 EXEMPTS the biggest water polluters hands of lawmakers algid prosecutors and create a system of vigi-
in the state. lante justice with bountv hunters seeking rewards.
FACT: Propbsition 65 limits funds available to district attor- PROPOSITION 65 IS FILLED TVITH EXCEPTIONS,HURTS
neys to enforce the law. • . FARAIF,RS,AAfD 417ILL NOT GIVE US SAFE DRINKING WA-
FACT: IT UNDERMINES CALIFORNIA TOXICS LAW— TER.
THE TOUGHEST IN THE COUNTRY. VOTE NO on the Toxics Initiative.
PROPOSITION 65 WON'T PRODUCE USEFUL I47ARN- VOTE NO on Proposition 65.
INGS.
It requires "warnings" on millions of ordinary and safe items. EDWARD R.JAGELS
We won't know what products are really dangerous anymore. District Attorney, Kern County
THE WARNINGS WE REALLY NEED WILL GET LOST IN rIICIIELI, REIGEL CORASII
LOTS OP' WARNINGS WE DON'T NEED.
PROPOSITION 65 IS THE WRONG APPROACH. F'ornicr General Counsel
A leading spokesman for the proponents recently said, "We U.S. Environinental Protection Agency
have plenty, of laws on the books already . . . you can't clean up CATIIIE WRIGHT
anything by loading on more legislation." Alenlber of the Assenlbiv,371h District
We couldn't agree more. Alcnlber, Assemb/v Conlnlittee on Environmental
FACT: Toxics enforcement personnel has increased 48% in Safety and Toxic Alaterials
54 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency G86
Restrictions on Toxic Discharges into Drinking Water; Requirement
of Notice of Persons' Exposure to Toxics. Initiative Statute 65
Argument Against Proposition 65
TOXIC POLLUTION IS A SERIOUS MATTER REQUIRING handed to private lawyers and judges.
SERIOUS ATTENTION. Proposition 65 is a simplistic response WE HAVE THE LAWS,• WE NEED BETTER ENFORCE
to a complex problem. MENT.
As scientists,health professionals,and farmers,we are on solid We have many thoughtful laws relating to toxic pollution on
ground when we say that Proposition 65 is Faulty from a scientific the books. They include:
point of view,is so full of exemptions as to be meaningless from Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act.
a health point of view, and is unfair and devastating to farmers: Toxic Air Contaminants Program.
FACT: UNDER PROPOSITION 65 THE GOVERNMENT Water Supply Testing Program.
AND MANY BUSINESSES ARE EXEMPT. .,Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act.
. Publicly owned nuclear power plants ARE EXEMPT. Birth Defect Prevention Act.
. Cities which dump raw sewage into freshwater streams ARE Toxics Pit Clean-up Act.
EXEMPT.! Over 50 new laws have been passed in the last two years to
• Public water systems ARE EXEMPT.! control chemicals and toxics.
• Military bases which contaminate residential drinking water We need to build on the system we have, not abandon it in
ARE EXEMPT! favor of extreme "solutions."
• County landfills ARE EXEMPT.! The simple scientific fact of the matter is that manmade car-
. Thousands of businesses WOULD BE EXEMPT. cinogens represent only a tiny fraction of the total carcinogens
• A GOOD LAW APPLIES EVENLY AND EQUALLY TO we are exposed to,most of which are natural substances such as
EVERYONE. tobacco, alcohol, and chemicals in green plants. Significant
. This is a bad law made worse because it is loaded with ex- amounts of manmade carcinogens are highly regulated in Cali-
emptions. fornia under the most stringent laws in the United States. This
FACT:PROPOSITION 65 UNFAIRLY TARGETS CALIFOR- initiative will result in chasing after trivial amounts of manmade
NIA FARMERS. carcinogens at enormous cost with minimal benefit to our health.
Normally,manufacturers—not users—must prove the safety of We're concerned about safer, cleaner-drinking water. And
their product. But Proposition 65 puts that burden on farmers. we're concerned that we get there in an intelligent,rational and
Many common fertilizers, weed and pest control materials— fair manner.
perfectly safe when properly used—would be effectively banned Proposition 65 just won't do that.
for most farmers—but allowed for many nonfarmers. . We urge you to VOTE NO ON THE TOXICS INITIATIVE.
FARMERS MAY EVEN HAVE TO STOP IRRIGATING. Vote no on PROPOSITION 65.
Farmers are having a ton gh time as it is providing quality food,
in adequate supply, at the lowest possible price. Proposition 65 DR. BRUCE AMES
would add to their burden and may be the final straw to break Chairman,Department of Biochemistry,
the back of many. University of California,Berkeley
FACT:PROPOSITION 65 S BOUNTY HUNTER PROVISION HENRY VOSS
IS A BONANZA FOR PRIVATE LAWYERS. President, California Farm Bureau
Proposition 65 creates a lawyer's paradise: anyone can sue;
almost anyone can be sued. People who sue will get a reward ALICE OTTOBONI,Ph.D.
from penalties collected. Thus, environmental regulation is tak- Toxicology Staff Toxicologist, California
en from the hands ofgovernment regulators and prosecutors and Department of Health Services,Btd.
Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 65
Who's really against Proposition 65? • Proposition 65 treats farmers exactly the same as everyone
The big oil and chemical companies are leading the opposition else—no tougher,no easier. Small family farms,like other small
—because they know they would be forced to stop dumping businesses, are exempt.
extremely dangerous chemicals into-your drinking water if • Proposition 65 is based strictly on scientific testing, more
Proposition 65 passes.The existing laws don't stop them.Proposi- than any existing toxics law.
tion 65 will.That's why they're spending millions of dollars on a • Proposition 65 does not apply to insignificant (safe) amounts
misleading media campaign. of chemicals.
DON'T BE FOOLED. • Proposition 65 will not in any way weaken any of California's
Proposition 65 simply says that businesses shouldn't put chemi- existing protections in toxics law.
cals that are scientifically known to cause cancer, or birth de- DON'T BE FOOLED BY THE BIG POLLUTERS.
fects, into your drinking water. And that they must warn you Vote YES on Proposition 65!
.before they expose you to such a chemical. GET TOUGH ON TOXICS!
. Proposition 65 means tougher law enforcement. It will help
prosecutors put polluters in jail. That's why the California Dis- ARTHUR C.UPTON,M.D.
trict Attorneys Association has endorsed it. Former Director,National Institutes of Health
. Proposition 65 applies equally to all-businesses in California,
except for the smallest businesses (those with fewer than 10 NORMAN W.FREESTONE,JR.
employees). Farmer, Visalia
•.Proposition 65 applies to the big businesses that produce
more than 90% of all hazardous waste in California (according ALBERT H. GERSTEN,JR.
to official state estimates). Businessman;Member,Little Hoover Commission
G86 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency 55
Proposition 53 Text of Proposed Law ized by this chapter, all provisions of Chapter 22 (com-
Continued from page 5 mencing with Section 17700) shall apply.
17696.95. Out of the first money realized from the sale
tive maturity dates of the bonds then offered forsale at the of bonds under this chapter, there shall be repaid any
coupon rate or rates specified in the bid, the computation moneys advanced or loaned to the State School Building
to be made on a 360-day-year basis. I Lease-Purchase Fund under any act of the Legislature,
17696.7. The committee may authorize the Treasurer together with interest provided for in that act.
to sell all or any part of the bonds herein authorized at 17696.96. Not more than three hundred sixty million
such time or times as may be fixed by the Treasurer. dollars ($360,000,000) of the moneys authorized by this
17696.8. All proceeds from the sale of the bonds herein chapter shall be reserved for the reconstruction or mod-
authorized deposited in the fund, as provided in Section ernization of facilities within the meaning of Chapter 22
16757ofthe Government Code,except those derived from (commencing with Section 17700).
premium and accrued interest, shall be available for the 17696.98. An amount not to exceed 5 percent of the
purpose herein provided, but shall not be available for proceeds from the sale of bonds pursuant to this chapter
transfer to the General Fund pursuant to Section 17695.25 may be used to purchase and install air-conditioning
to pay principal and interest on bonds. equipment and insulation materials pursuant to Section
17696.9. With respect to the proceeds of bonds author- 17717.6.
Proposition 55 Text of Proposed Law able, and (E) to provide for payment of the supplier's
Continued from page 13 share of the cost of the project, if any.
(d) Bond proceeds maybe used for a grant program in
the committee may act for the committee. accordance with this chapter, with grants provided to
13895.7. There is in the State Treasury the California suppliers that are political subdivisions of the state that are
Safe Drinking Water Fund, which fund is hereby created. otherwise unable to meet minimum safe drinking water
13895.8. The committee may create a debt or debts, standards established pursuant to Chapter 7 (commenc-
liability or liabilities, of the State of California,in an aggre- ing with Section 4010) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Health
gate amount of one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) and Safety Code. The total amount of grants made pursu-
in the manner provided in this chapter. The debtor debts, ant to this chapter shall not exceed twenty-five million
liability or liabilities, shall be created for the purpose of dollars ($25,000,000).
providing the money to be used for the objects and works (e) Notwithstanding any other provision, the proceeds
specified in Section 13895.9. of any bonds authorized to be issued under the California
13895.9. (a) An aggregate amount 'of one hundred Safe Drinking Water Bond'Law of 1976 (Chapter 10.5
million dollars ($100,000,000) of the moneys in the fund (commencing with Section 13850)), and the California
are hereby continuously appropriated and shall be used Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1984 (Chapter 10.2
for the purposes set forth in this section and Section 13898. (commencing with Section 13810)) which are unissued
(b) The department may enter into contracts with and uncommitted on the effective date of this chapter,
suppliers having authority to construct, operate, and shall be used for loans and grants to suppliers in accord-
maintain domestic water systems,for loans to suppliers to ance with the terms,conditions,and purposes of this chap-
aid in the construction of projects which will enable the ter. Loans made after November 6, 1984, pursuant to
supplier to meet,at a minimum,safe drinking water stand- Chapter 10.2 (commencing with Section 13810) shall carry
ards established pursuant to Chapter 7(commencing with an interest rate calculated as prescribed in Section 13897.3.
Section 4010) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Health and 13896. (a) The department may make state grants to.
Safety Code. suppliers that are political subdivisions of the state, from
(c) Any contract entered into pursuant to this section moneys in the fund available for that purpose pursuant to
may include provisions as agreed by the parties thereto, subdivision (d) of Section 13895.9, to aid in the construc-
and the contract shall include, in substance, all of the fol- tion of projects which will enable the public agency to
lowing provisions: meet, at a minimum, safe drinking water standards estab-
(1) An estimate of the reasonable cost'of the project. lished pursuant to Chapter 7 (commencing with Section
(2) An agreement by the department to loan to the 4010) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Health and Safety Code.
supplier, during the progress of construction or following A grant may be made by the department only upon the
completion of construction as agreed by the parties, an specific approval of the Legislature, by an act enacted
amount which equals the portion of construction costs after the receipt of a report filed pursuant to Section
found by the department to be eligible for a state loan. 13896.2
(3) An agreement by the supplier to repay the state (b) Any contract for a grant entered into pursuant to
over a period'not to exceed 50 years, (A) the amount of this chapter may include provisions as agreed by the par-
the loan, (B) the administrative fee as described in Sec- ties thereto, and the contract shall include, in substance,
tion 13897, and (C) interest on the principal, which is the all of the following provisions:
amount of the loan plus the administrative fee. (1) An estimate of the reasonable cost of the project.
(4) An agreement by the supplier, (A) to proceed ex- (2) An agreement by the department to grant to the
peditiously with, and complete, the project, (B) to com- public agency, during the progress of construction or fol-
mence operation of the project upon completion thereof, lowing completion of construction as agreed by the par-
and to properly operate and maintain the project in ac- ties, an amount which equals the portion of construction
cordance with the applicable provisions of law, (C) to costs found by the department to be eligible for a state
apply for, and make reasonable efforts to secure, federal grant.
assistance for the project, (D) to secure approval of the (3) An agreement by the public agency, (A) to proceed
department and of the State Department of Health Serv- expeditiously with,and complete, the project, (B) to com-
ices before applying for federal assistance in order to maxi- mence operation of the project upon completion thereof,
mize and best utilize the amounts of that assistance.avail- and-to properly operate and maintain the project in ac-
56" G86
cordance with the applicable provisions of law, (C) to approval by the State Department of Health Services that
apply for, and make reasonable efforts to secure, federal the proposed project is consistent with Chapter 7 (com-
assistance for the project, (D) to secure approval of the mencing.with Section 4010) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the
department and of the State Department of Health Serv- Health and Safety Code.
ices before applying for federal assistance in order to maxi- 13896.5. First priority for grants shall be granted.to
mize and best utilize the amounts.of that assistance avail- ppublic agencies having immediate health related prob-
able, and (E) to provide for*payment of the public lems,as certified by the State Department of Health Serv-
agency's share of the cost of the project, if any. ices. Additional high priority shall be granted to projects
13896.1. Applications for grants under this chapter to correct immediate problems, as opposed to grants for
shall be-made to the department in the form and with the construction of projects to meet future growth needs,
supporting material as prescribed by the department. 13896.6. First priority for loans shall be given to sup-
13896.2. The department'shall prepare a report on pliers with the most critical public health problems.Prior-
each grant application pursuant to this chapter. The ity for loans shall also be given to suppliers which have a
port shall be filed with the Legislature,if it is in session or, lesser capability to reasonably finance system improve-
if it is not in session, with the Joint Rules Committee. The ments.
department shall be authorized to make the grant only 13896.7. Preliminary design work,including a cost esti-
upon the specific approval of the grant by the Legislature, mate for the project, shall be completed before a loan or
by an act enacted after the receipt of the report from the grant is awarded. Operation and maintenance costs shall
by
e the responsibility of the supplier and may not be con-
13896.3. (a) Loans and grants may be made only for sidered as part of the project cost. Costs for planning and
projects for domestic water systems. The State Depart- preliminary engineering studies may be reimbursed fol-
ment of Health Services may make reasonable allowance lowing the receipt of a loan or grant, subject.to approval
for future water supply needs and'may provide for addi- by the department and the State Department of Health
tional capacity when excessive costs would be incurred by Services.
later enlargement. The loans and grants may be made for 13896.8. No application for a grant maybe madeursu-
all, or any part, of the cost of constructing, improving, or ant to this chapter unless the public agency has alspo ap-
rehabilitating any system when, in the judgment of the plied for a loan pursuant to this chapter. A public agency
State Department of Health Services, improvement or shall be eligible for a grant only to the extent that the
rehabilitation is necessary to provide pure, wholesome, department finds that the agency is found unable to repay
and potable water in adequate quantity at sufficient pres- the full costs of a loan.
sure for health, cleanliness, and other domestic purposes. . If the department has determined that the applicant is
The State Department of Health Services shall determine unable to repay the full costs of a loan, the applicant may
and notify applicants of eligibility of components request- also file for a grant. Upon receipt of a grant application,
ed to be included in the proposed project. The depart- the department shall determine that portion of the full
ment shall use this determination as a basis for disbursing costs that the applicantis capable of repaying. Grantfunds
funds. No single public agency shall receive grants pursu- shall only be provided for that portion that the applicant.
ant to this chapter totaling more than four hundred thou- is not capable of repaying.
sand dollars ($400,000).Loans may be made to provide for 13896.9. Grant funds shall be expended by the public
the purchase of a water system or the purchase of water- agency within three years of the making of the grant. No
shed lands. No loan to an individual supplier shall exceed grant funds maybe expended by the public agency unless
the sum of five million dollars (,$5,000,000), unless the the public agency is able to demonstrate to the depart-
Legislature by an act raises the limit specified in this sec- ment, within one year of the making of the grant,support-
tion. ed by an acceptable bid, that the amount to.be expended
(b) Upon receipt of an application for a grant or loan for the project will be within 20 percent of the public
pursuant to this chapter, the department shall propose to agencys cost estimate for the project.
the applicant improvements to the applicant's water 13897. For the purpose of administering this.chapter,
development, distribution, and utilization system which the total expenditures of the department and the State
will conserve water in a cost-effective manner..These im- Department of Health Services may not exceed 5 percent
provements may include, but need not be limited to,leak of the total amount of the bonds authorized to be issued
detection and repair programs, valve repair and replace- under this chapter. The department shall establish a rea-
ment, meter calibration and replacement, physical im- sonable.schedule of administrative fees for loans, which
provements to achieve corrosion control, distribution and fees shall be paid by the supplier pursuant to Section
installation of water conservation devices and fixtures,and 13895.9, to reimburse the state for the costs of state admin-
other capital improvements which can be demonstrated istration of this chapter.
to conserve water in a cost-effective manner. The depart- Charges incurred by the Attorney General in protecting
ment and applicant may agree to include these capital the state's interests in the use and repayment ofgrant and
improvements in the grant or loan. Failure by the appli- loan funds under this chapter shall be paid from the pro-
cant to include water conservation capital improvements ceeds of bond sales under this chapter. These charges shall
in the gran tor loan applicationsh all notbesuf�cientcause' not be paid from funds allocated for administrative pur-
for the department to refuse to make the grant or loan. poses, but shall be treated as a program expense not to
13896.4. An application for a grant pursuant to this exceed 1.5 percent of the total amount of the bonds au-
chapter shall not be approved by the department, unless thorized to be sold under this chapter.
the department determines that the public agency is oth- 13897.1. As much of the moneys in the fund as maybe
erwise unable to meet minimum safe drinking water necessary shall be used to reimburse the General Obliga-
standards established pursuant to Chapter 7 (commenc-. tion Bond Expense Revolving Fund pursuant to Section
ing with Section 4010) of Part 1 of Division 5 of the Health 16724.5 of the Government Code.
and Safety Code. 13897.2. Repayment of all or part of the principal,
No grant shall be made by the department except upon which is the loan plus the administrative fee, may be de-
approval by the State Department of Health Services of ferred during a development period not exceeding 10
projectplans submitted by the applicant and upon written years within the maximum 50-year repayment period,
G86 57
when, in the departments judgment, the development At the request of the department, the Public Utilities
period is justified under the circumstances.Interest on the Commission shall furnish comments concerning the abili-
principal shall not be deferred. Repayment of principal ty of suppliers subject to its jurisdiction to finance the
which is deferred during a development period may, at project from other sources and the ability to repay the
the option of the supplier, be paid in annual installments loan.
during the remainder of the loan repayment period. 13897.9. All bonds authorized, which have been duly
13897.3. The department shall annually establish the sold and delivered pursuant to this chapter, shall consti-
interest rate for loans made pursuant to this chapter at 50 tute valid and legally binding general obligations of the
percent of the average interestrate,computed by the true State of California,and the full faith and credit of the State
interest cost method,paid by the state on general obliga- of California is hereby pledged for the punctual payment
tion bonds for the prior calendar year. All loans made of both principal and interest thereon.
pursuant to this chapter shall carry the established interest There shall be collected annually in the same manner,
rate for the calendar year in which the funds are commit- and at the same time as other state revenue is collected,
ted to the loan, as of the date of the letter of commitment a sum, in addition to the ordinary revenues of the state,
from the department, and shall remain at that interest that is required,to pay the principal and interest on the
rate for the duration of the loan. bonds, and it is hereby made the duty of all officers
13897.4. (a) The department, after public notice and charged by law with any duty in regard to the collection
hearing and with the concurrence of the State Depart- of that revenue, to do and perform each and every act
ment of Health Services,shall adopt rules and regulations which shall be necessary to collect that additional sum.
necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. The All money deposited in the fund which has been derived
regulations shall include, but not be limited to,criteria and from premium on bonds sold is available for transfer to the
procedures for establishing the eligibility of a supplier. General Fund as a credit to expenditures for bond inter-
(b) The department shall adopt rules and regulations est.
that, in its judgment, will most effectively carry out this 13898. (a) All money repaid to the state pursuant to
chapter in the public interest, to the end that the people any-contract executed under Section 13895.9 shall be de-
of California are most efficiently and most economically posited in the General Fund and, when so deposited,shall
provided supplies of pure, wholesome, and potable do- be applied as a reimbursement to the General Fund on
mestic water. The rules and regulations may provide for account ofprincipal and interest on bonds issued pursuant
the denial offunds when the purposes of this chapter may to this chapter which has been paid from the General
most economically and efficiently be attained by means Fund.
other than the construction of the proposed project. (b) The department may enter into contracts with
(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) or any other provi- suppliers of water for grants or short-term loans for the
sion of law, existing rules and regulations adopted by the purpose of investigating and identifying alternatives for
department pursuant to the California Safe Drinking Wa- system improvements.Any loans orgrantspursuant to this
ter Bond Law of 1984 (Chapter 10.2 (commencing with section shall be made from the fund. No supplier may
Section 13810)) which are in effect on the effective date receive for a single investigation more than twenty-five
of this chapter, may, at the option of the department, be thousand dollars ($25,000) in the form of a 'loan or grant
utilized upon voter approval of this chapter for purposes pursuant to this section. The State Department of Health
of implementing this chapter. The department, with the Services shall review all proposed investigations and shall
concurrence of the State Department of Health Services, determine if they are necessary and appropriate.
may subsequently revise those rules and regulations pur- (c) Any contract entered into pursuant to this section
suant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of shall include terms and conditions consistent with this
Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code as chapter, and any loan contract shall provide for a repay-
necessary to implement provisions of this chapter which ment period not to exceed 24 months.
differ from Chapter .10.2 (commencing with Section (d) Not more than three million dollars ($3,000,000)
13810) or for any other reason to carry out the purposes may be expended for the purposes of this section,of which
of this chapter. not more than one million dollars ($1,000,000) may be
13897.5. The State Department of Health Services used for grants to public agencies. A loan or grant made
shall notify suppliers that may be eligible for loans pursu- for the purposes of this section shall not decrease the max-
ant to this chapter of(a) the purposes of this chapter and imum amount of any other loan or grant which may be
(b), the rules and regulations adopted by the department. made under this chapter, Chapter 10.2 (commencing with
13897.6. (a) The State Department of Health Serv- Section 13810), Chapter 10.5 (commencing with Section
ices, after public notice and hearing and with the advice 13850),or Chapter 10.6(commencing with Section 13880).
of the department, shall, from time to time, establish a 13898.1. There is hereby appropriated from the Gen-
priority list of suppliers to be considered for financing. eral Fund in the State Treasury, for the purpose of this
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) or any other pro- chapter, an amount equal to the sum of the following.
vision of law, the priority list established by the State De- • (a) The amount annually necessary to pay the principal
partment of Health Services pursuant to the California of,and the interest on, the bonds issued and sold pursuant
Safe Drinking Water Bond Law of 1984 (Chapter 10.2 to this chapter, as the principal and interest become due
(commencing with Section 13810)) in effect on the effec- and payable.
tive date of this chapter may, at the option of the State (b) The amount necessary to carry out Section 13898.2,
Department of Health Services, be utilized upon voter which amount is appropriated without regard to fiscal
approval of this chapter until the State Department of years.
Health Services adopts a new priority list. 13898.2.. For the purpose of carrying out this chapter,
. 13897.8. Not more than twenty-five million dollars the Director of Finance may, by executive order, author-
($25,000,000) of state loans for projects shall be authorized ize the withdrawal'from the General Fund of an amount
by the department in a single calendar quarter. No con- or amounts not to exceed the amount of the unsold bonds
tract shall be approved by the department, unless the which the committee has, by resolution, authorized to be
department finds that the supplier has the capacity to sold for the purpose of carrying out this chapter.
repay the loan amounts specified in the contract. Any amounts withdrawn shall be deposited in the fund
58 G86
.and shall be disbursed by the department in accordance and,if so, the amount of bonds then to be issued and sold.
with this chapter. Any money made available under this Successive issues of bonds may be authorized and sold to
section to the department shall be returned by the depart- make those arrangements progressively,and it shall not be
ment to the General Fund plus interest the money would necessary thatall of the bonds authorized to be issued shall
have earned in the Pooled Money Investment Account be sold at any one time.
from money received from the first sale of bonds sold for 13898.4. The committee may authorize the Treasurer
the purpose of carrying out this chapter subsequent to the to sell all or any part of the bonds authorized at the time
withdrawal or times as fixed by the Treasurer.
13898.3. Upon request of the department; supported 13898.5. All proceeds from the sale of bonds, except
by a statement of the proposed arrangements to be made those derived.from premiums and accrued interest, are
pursuant to Section 13895.9 for the purposes stated available for the purpose provided in Section 13898.5, but
therein, the committee shall determine whether or not it are not available for transfer to the General Fund to pay
is necessary or desirable to issue any bonds authorized principal and interest on bonds. The money in the fund .
under this chapter in order to make those arrangements, may be expended only as provided in this chapter.
Proposition 61 Text of Proposed Law ittereases preNided fer state Bering that fiseal
Continued from page 37 year. .
11552.15. E etive jttttttar-y -, 4987- oft ftftttttal of
11554.5: E`27ffeetTPe jftttttar-y 5;4087-, aft annuitl Aalat=y of sevefttyltwo thettsaftd five httttdred dollttr9 ` , 9A) shftH
s�yy -e��� t}-seven �y� five � clews ($7. ) be to eaeh 4 the€i�g!
^J1YLYff be paid to the Atterne5, General. T :etttei'tattt
Upeti eement of eteh ttew terttt;the annual +13 Seeretar�, 4 Smote.
eampeftsation provided by this section 4wU be ineieased {e} Geotttraller-
based oft the eestEe€< i ing inereases pfevided 1af- state +d+ Ti-easuref.
ever the Y-eyietts fear year-9. The att3etatt of {e} of eke Tom.
the itterease by this seetien shall be determined Y}psft ��- ���„� �of eaeh ne"v tee;the a�
by the theft ettr'reot eofnpettgation by the eoeapefteatieft previded by this seetion shah be ittefeased
of pereentages of the getter-a! ee4/41liviog based an the ee4<e€l1iv4ftg ceases €ef state
irtereases presided fer state ettpleyees for the fear pre4 effip}eyees eyer the preyietts €etw years- The affiettttt of
etas €iseeA years. the itterease pfoytded by this Sir shall be a
11562. Effie JtAy 4-, 148 ;aft attfttatl salary of sistyl by tfrt}ltiplying the theft cmietit eettftpensatiett by the
dollars ($68;980) shall be paid to eaeh of � of pereentages of the getter-a! eestloflhVtftg
the Callowing! ^� ifterPaAPs pFoN,ided for state et tpleyees fer the fettr previl
{-a+ Superintend�rt of Battles: errs fiseal yews.
{b} Gofte tissiofter eif Gerperatiotts- 11553. Gffeetive jttly 4-,ice;ae annual salary 4 si
{e} histtrsftee Gemmissien _ five thott9attd dellars{$65;909}wt$be paid to eaeh of the.
+* nireeter of €ellowing!
Sates a�td Bearfl. of the lftsttrattee E
{g} mre�ter of Seeittl Serviees. +66 Ghairpersett of the Agriettitural Gabor Relatiefts
{h} aireeter of Water R eseur-ees. bead:
{i} Oros of Ger-reetiois fie} 42r-esideftt of the Bttblie Utilities
{j} Direetet'ef General Ser-N,iees. {O Ghair-man of toe F44 Pelitieal iTaetiees Ge ist
+k+ Direeter of il4eter VehieleT sieft
{4-•} sireefor of the Youth omits. fie} Ghttirffitm of the Waste N4attttgentenk Boat
{w.} Emeeutfve Offieer of the n=aitehise T-Ew Board. +f+ Ghairperseft of the Gttet-gy Reseurees Genservatien
+mt nireeter of PeN'elopffie t- attd Oevelepment Geftffiission.
{e} teeter of Aleehelie BeN,er-age Gettr-el. {g} Ghairperseft of the Bttblie Empleyfftent Relaters
{p} Oireetor of Housing a-nd Gaffimttnit�- Develep{ Beams
fneftt. +h+ Ghairpevseft of the `xWer-leers' Gettrpensatieft Apt
{q} Tvireetor o(fa�t�'le(e�l�3�e�1 tttt(dxg u L 7�� peas Board. (�7 7
at Oi'ree'ter a the Offiee of C4�Catewide S2C'a�ttt rY'anfiing * �ati Pireeter of the Di isieft of�'
�/ \ ^('�y (` "•,(•',S2CC'[�Qc7rCS t y,L
\�/ �Ot of t4e Dept a-tment of 1D"�,e'Tr''Vo rnnel�l Qn JtAy T the annualeeffipeffift6OR p 'tS by r=
tratieft. section shall be itteieased ift atty fiseal year ift whieh a
{t} sett attd il4ember of the Bowl 4'EqualizaI eestlefl ' itterease is prei+ided for state T
deft- affteunt� itterease provided by this seetien Alta$ be
{tt} $ireeter of Gorffieree. detertninefl by multiplying the theft eft eampensaE
{,-} State Oireeter of Health Sciviees. Bert by the per-eentage of the general east/Wiliviftg AAa y
{w} ate- of Wntal Health. provided fer state empleyees dig that fisea4
{x+ teeter of Sees- ),ear.
�{-y-} State Pubhe T'frder.
Orr July 4; the annual prewided by this three thettsand dellars ($63,099) shall be paid to the felE
seetion shall be iftereased ii3 arty fiseal year ift whieh a lowing!
eest 41hviftg itterease is prodded fer state The {a} 1�4eiftber of the n�latiorfs Beard
aftretint of the iiiereaAe pievided by this seetiett shaft be { } *N4ember of the State Gftergy. Geftser-va<
Eletermifted by the their eur?ent eompensal tiett attd Development Geftmissiert.
tieft by the pereentage of the general eeAtlefl rg salary {e} N4ember of the Bttblie Utilities
Gemffiissien-
G86 59
a { �Y Fa Y �k 3 �� S ��k ; � �Y b � �$ �3Y£ S � €� �3
eest/efiliYi*g inerease is previded fer state employees.The contracted for by agencies in state government in excess
aPi3ettfit of the increase preNYded by this seetiePi shall he of eighty ercent of the Governor's salary if the contract
detertni �ffr�t-ke theft et�ent eewpeesal or contracts in question do not exceed four years in length
40H by getter-al ees4efiliving salart and are approved by both houses by a two- thirds roll call
iPiereases provided far state ePi3pleyees during that fiseal vote.Insofar as this section may conflict with a city,county
or city and county s power to set salaries pursuant to Arti-
A rtiele 2, Appheatien of Salary Previsions cle XI sections 3 through 5, this section shall take prece-
ff the salary speei€ied in Artiele-1 dence.
}3 Seetion }}55g)fer�` l Pi r (c) No increase in the salary of any constitutional offi-
t.}aft to salary whieh the ifleeff.1- is reeeiving on cer,member of the Board of Equalization,member of the
date when this ehapter talfes exam he er she shall r-eeeiye Legislature,supreme or'appellate courtjustice or judge of
to h*4teT- arPietint frem aPid arm the first of the a court of record shall become operative unless such in-
menth iPiMediately< felle{vi�3g s effective date crease has been approved by a majority of the voters of the
4the salary�d iff A2SIT2C?C� state voting in a statewide general election.
with Seetiee_11550) for aPiy< potion is} than (d) Notwithstanding any city, county, or city and coun-
the salary whieh the it� reeeiv g eft the date ty charter adopted pursuant to Article XI Section 3 of this
when this ehapter takes r�he Of ee timike to Constitution,no increase in the salary of an elected officer
reeeive the higher ameon acid 4,A 47
of a city, county, city and county or special district which
Wit};Seetian )shall opef/ establishes the salary payable to its members shall become
ative uftt4l a new appet tffiettt. is made fer the effective unless such increase has been approved by a
" prrevist ft pests an�i majority of the voters of the city, county, city and county,
ereage in the during the terms of r�of it position or special district voting on the question at an election.
fer whie ded by this ehapter, seal; (e) On the effective date of this section, the annual
iPierease shall beeeme eperative with the salary for those employees and officials referenced in sub-
of the next s�-�.-=a'-zo tee of eff#ee of seeh position. sections (b) and (c) above, except the Governor, Consti-
The prevtsiePis of this ehapter shall Piet he sit/ tutional officers and members of the Board of Equaliza-
perseded or medi€ied 43,y any subsequePit legislation eat/ tion, shall not exceed eighty percent of the annual salary
eept to the etttePit that seek legislativPi shall de se express/ paid to the Governor as of that date. No elected or ap-
lyj- pointed official, or any employee subject to the provisions
the foregoing previsions of of this section shall be permitted to accumulate sick leave
this ehapter or of atty statPite the salary to he or vacation time from one calendar year to another.
paid to any state o ieer, in ate fiseal yeaw for which the (f) Any public employee on the state or local level who
Legislature additional funds to aegment the serves in more than one paid public position in this state
salaries paid to state r whose salaries are speei€ied may not receive a total aggregate com ensation, includ-
by stfttitte; each sttel2 statutery�salary,few stieh fiseal in ension
shall � the a�ettnt � year g p payments derived in who e or in part from
speei€ied phts an ametint wkieh public funds,in excess of eighty percent of the Governor's
eett `tut a-ft efittaf pereePit—e inerease few eaeh stwh salary.
r�Ne sttek tnerease ska$he to emy a 94 e e r w h a s e (g) The electorate of any city, county, city and county
ialart is � to Seetien 890 4e r Seetien 68203 of the or special district may, by initiative, adjust the salary of
�t Gede. If � ea flreN,isiett pf-e/ any elected or appointed official in that jurisdiction in
vents sttek inerease the terra of,.r�ice of a� excess of the limitation set forth in subsection (f) of this
the inerease shall Piet beeefoe� ve as to sttek Position Section 26.Notwithstanding Article II Section 11 or Article
before of the Pieat sue.=dittg term of XI Section 3, no legislative body shall enact laws which
r� as py-evided tri Seetien 11567. restrict the electorate's right to use the initiative process
The seer-etar-ies aitd ether persentiel of the Governor- to increase or decrease the compensation or the condi-
appeinted pur-suant to Seetien 12004 shall he regarded as tions of any future accruals of employee benefits of their
state ef€ieers fer purposes of the salaries of elected or appointed officials. Any laws existing on the
state ors pur-suant to t1+is seetien aPid the Governer- effective date of this measure which purport to limit the
a7` the } of eaeh stteh petsePi at ae aPi3eunt Piet electorate's right to do so are null and void. Notwithstand-
e eeed for stteh pesitiePi set forth it3 See/ ing any other provision of law, the signatures of not less
t3en ABt�a to the itterease anther/ than 10percent ofthe voters ofanyjurisdiction shall quali-
tized fer Statutory salaries under this�seetionr fy the initiative for the next general election ballot of that
SECTION II: Section 26 is hereby added to Article XX jurisdiction. All other sections of the California Elections
of the California Constitution: Code or a local jurisdiction's Charter shall govern the
Section 26. Public Salary Limitations. process for such initiatives.
(a) On the effective date of this Section, the salary of (h) After the date this section becomes effective, the
the Governor shall be set at $80,000.00 per year and the Legislature shall enact no laws authorizing any public offi-
salary of all other Constitutional officers and members of cial covered by this section to engage the services of pri-
the Board of Equalization shall be set at $52,500.00 per • vate subcontractors wherein the contractual amount of
year subject to adjustment as set forth in subsection (c) of compensation exceeds seventy-five dollars per hour and
this Section 26. no contract may exceed two years in duration, and in no
(b) Notwithstanding Article III Section 4 or,any other event may the total compensation for an individual ex-
section of this Constitution, but subject to subsection (g) teed the amount set forth in subsection (b) of this Section
of this Section, no state, city, county, city and county or 26. Furthermore;no state official or agency shall employ,
special district employee, elected or appointed, which hire, contract with,pay or otherwise compensate any at-
shall include individuals working under contract, may re- torney or legal firm to act on behalf of the state or any
ceive compensation in excess ofeighty percent ofthe Gov- agency thereof where the state or any agency thereofis a
ernor s salary. Under special circumstances the Legisla- plaintiff, defendant, complainant petitioner, respondent
ture may appropriate funds for employee services or real party in interest unless the California Attorney
G86 61
General has formally noted a conflict in representing the SECTION V: Article VI Section 5 of the Constitution
agency. is amended to read as follows:
(i) If any provision of this section or the application ARTICLE VI Section 5 (a) Each county shall be di-
thereof to any person or circumstances is he invalid, vided into municipal court and justice eeur-t districts as
such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this provided by statute, but a city may not be divided into
section which can be given effect without the invalid pro- more than one district. Each municipal and justice court
vision or its application and to this end the provisions of shall have one or more judges.
this section are severable. There shall be a municipal court in each district of more
SECTION III. Article III Section 4(b) of the Constitu- than 40,000 residents and a justice court in each district of
tion is hereby repealed. 40,000 residents or less. The number of residents shall be
+b Beginning eta jftnuar-y 4-, 4.9g}_ the base salary of a ascertained as provided by,statute.
judge of a eeur-t of r-eeerd shall egtm4 the atittual "iffy The Legislature shall provide for the organization and
-a-7-abi-as of July 4-}980-€ew that arm had the judge been prescribe the jurisdiction of municipal and justice courts.
e}eeted its 1978. The may preser-ibe itterettses It shall pteser-ibe prescribed for each municipal court and
itt these salaries durittg a term 4 eram atxd it tttay tefffliE provide for each justice court the number, qualifications,
gate ittereases i t these salar-ies at aay twre and compensation,subject to Article XX Section 26(c), of
during a ter-ffi of effiee, but A shall not reduee the salary judges, officers, and employees. (b) Notwithstanding the
of a judge dur--ing a termer of o iee helew the highest level provisions of subdiN,isiett subdividion (a), any city in San
paid dtt it}g that ter-m of e€€iee. Ins setting the salaries Diego County may be divided into more than one munici-
e€judges shall fret"onstitute a-obligatiet3 of"cvr ct / pal court or justice court district if the Legislature deter-
tra
suat3tto 8eet3ett 9 4 " iele 1 er at}y other-p e+� ! e€lam- mines that unusual geographic conditions warrant such
division.
SECTION IV. Article V Section 12 of the Constitution
is amended to read as follows: SECTION VI: Article VI Section 19 of the Constitu-
ARTICLE V'Section 12 Compensation of the Gover- tion is amended to read as follows:
nor,Lieutenant Governor,Attorney General;Controller, ARTICLE VI Section 19 The Legislature shall pre-
Secretary of State, Superintendent of Public Instruction, scribe compensation for judges of courts of record,subject
and Treasurer shall be prescribed by statute but tftay stet to Article XX Section 26(c) of the Constitution . A judge
be inerettsed er deereased daring a term Article XX Sec- of a court of record may not receive the salary for the
tion 26(a) and modified by the voters of the State of Cali- judicial office held by the judge while any cause before the
fornia pursuant to Article XX Section 26(c) of this Consti- judge remains pending and undetermined for 90 days af-
tution . ter it has been submitted for decision.
Proposition 65 Text of Proposed Law stock company, corporation, company, partnership, and
Continued from page 53 association.
(b) Person in the course of doing business"does not
enter any source of drinking water. include any person employing fewer than ten employees
(2) The discharge or release is in conformity with all in his business;any city, county, or district or any depart-
other laws and with every applicable regulation, permit, ment or agency thereof or the state or any department or
requirement, and order. agency thereof or the federal government or any depart-
In any action brought to enforce.Section 25249.5, the bur- ment or agency thereof; or any entity in its operation of
den of showing that a discharge or release meets the trite- a public water system as defined in Section 4010.1.
ria of this subdivision shall be on the defendant. (c) "Significant amount" means any detectable
25249.10 Exemptions from Warning Requirement. amount except an amount which would meet the exemp-
Section 25249.6 shall not apply to any of the following: tion test in subdivision (c) of Section 25249.10ifan individ-
(a) An exposure for which federal law governs warning ual were exposed to such an amount in drinking water.
in a manner that preempts state authority. (d) "Source of drinking water"means either a present
(b) An exposure that takes place less than twelve source of drinking water or water which is identified or
months subsequent to the listing of the chemical in ques- designated in a water quality control plan adopted by a
tion on the list required to be published under subdivision regional board as being suitable for domestic or municipal
(a) of Section 25249.8. uses.
(c) An exposure for which the person responsible can (e) "Threaten to violate"means to create a condition
show that the exposure poses no significant risk assuming in which there is a substantial probability that a violation
lifetime exposure at the level in question for substances will occur.
known to the state to cause cancer, and that the exposure (f) "Warning" within the meaning of Section 25249.6
will have no observable effect assuming exposure at one need not be provided separately to each exposed individ-
thousand (1000) times the level in question for substances ual and may be provided by general methods such as la-
known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity,based on bels on consumer products,inclusion ofnotices in mailings
evidence and standards of comparable scientific validity to water customers, posting of notices, placing notices in
to the evidence and standards which form the scientific public news media, and the like,provided that the warn-
basis'for the listing of such chemical pursuant to subdivi- ing accomplished is clear and reasonable.In order to mini-
sion (a) of Section 25249.8. In any action brought to en- mize the.burden on retail sellers of consumer products
force Section 25249.6, the burden of showing that an expo- including foods,regulations implementing Section 25249.6
sure meets the criteria of this subdivision shall be on the shall to the extent practicable place the obligation to pro-
defendant. vide any warning materials such as labels on the producer
25249.11 Definitions. or packager rather than on the retail seller, except where
For purposes of this chapter: the retail seller itself is responsible for introducing a
(a) "Person" means an individual, trust, firm, joint chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproduc-
62 G86
tive toxicity into the consumer product in question. jail fornotmore than one year or byimprisonmentin state .
25249.12 Implementation. . The Governor shall desig- prison for not more than three years. The court may also
nate a lead agency and such other agencies as may be impose upon the person a fine of not less than five thou-
required to implement the provisions of this chapter in- sand dollars ($5000) or more than twenty-five thousand
cluding this section.Each agency so designated may adopt dollars ($$25,000). The felony conviction for violation of
and modify regulations, standards, and permits as neces- this section shall require forfeiture of government em-
sary to conform with and implement the provisions of this ployment within thirty days of conviction.
chapter and to further its purposes. (d) Any local health officer who receives information
25249.13 Preservation Of Existing Rights Obligations pursuant to subdivision (b) shall take appropriate action
and Penalties. Nothing in this chapter shall alter or di- to notify local news media and shall make such informa-
minish any legal obligation otherwise required in common tion available to the public without delay.
law or by statute or regulation,and nothingin this chapter SECTION 5. Section 25192 of the Health and Safety
shall create or enlarge any defense in any action to enforce Code is amended to read:
such legal obligation. Penalties and sanctions imposed un- 25192. (a) All civil. and criminal penalties collected
der this chapter shall be in addition to any penalties or pursuant to this chapter or Chapter 6.6(commencing with
sanctions otherwise prescribed by law. Section 25249.5) shall be apportioned in the following
SECTION 3. Subdivision (d) of Section 25189.5 of the manner:
Health and Safety Code is amended to read: (1) Fifty percent shall be deposited in the
(d) The court shall also impose upon a person convict- Waste Central Aeeeeet Hazardous Substance Account in
ed of violating subdivision (b) or (c) a fine of not less than the General Fund.
five thousand dollars ($5,000) or more than€i-one hun- (2) Twenty-five percent shall be paid to the office of
dred thousand dollars ($50,000) (,$10o 000) for each day of the city attorney, city prosecutor, district attorney, or At-
violation except as further provided in,this subdivision. If torney General,whichever office brought the action,or in
the act which violated subdivision (b) or (c) caused great the case of an action brought by a person under subdivi-
bodily injury or caused a substantial probability that death sion (d) of Section 25249.7 to such person .
could result, the person convicted of violating subdivision (3) Twenty-five percent shall be paid to the depart-
(b) or (c) may be punished by imprisonment in the slate ment and used to fund the activity of the local health
prison for up to 36 months, in addition to the term speci- e€€ieers officer to enforce the provisions of this chapter
fied in subdivision (b) or (c),and may be fined up to two pursuant to Section 25180. If investigation by the local
hundred violation fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) for each day of police department or sheriff's office or California High- .
way Patrol led to the bringing of the action, the local
SECTION 4. Section 25180.7 is hereby added to the health officer shall pay a total of forty percent of his por-
Health and Safety Code as follows: tion under this subdivision to said investigating agency or
(a) Within the meaning of this section, a "designated agencies to be used.for the same purpose.Ifmore than one
government employee"is any person defined as a `desig- agency is eligible for payment under this provision, divi-
nated employee"by Government Code Section 82019, as sion ofpayment among the eligible agencies shall be in the
amended. discretion of the local health officer.
(b) Any designated government employee who obtains (b) If a reward is paid to a person pursuant to Section
information in the course of his official duties revealing 25191.7, the amount of the reward shall be deducted from
the illegal discharge or threatened illegal discharge of a the amount of the civil penalty before the amount is ap-'
hazardous waste within the geographical area ofhis juris- portioned pursuant to subdivision (a).
diction and who knows that such discharge or threatened (c) Any amounts deposited in the Hazardous Substance
discharge is likely to cause substantial injury to the public Account pursuant to this section shall be included in the
health or safety must, within seventy-two hours, disclose computation of the state account rebate specified in Sec-
such information to the local Board of Supervisors and to tion 25347.2.
the local health officer. No disclosure of information is SECTION 6. If any provision of this initiative or the
required under this subdivision when otherwise prohibit- application thereof is held invalid, that invalidity shall not
ed by law, or when law enforcement personnel have de- affect other provisions or applications of the initiative
termined that such disclosure would adversely affect an which can be given effect without the invalid provision or
ongoing criminal investigation,or when the information is application, and to this end the provisions of this initiative
already general public knowledge within the locality af- are severable.
fected by the discharge or threatened discharge. SECTION 7. To further its purposes this initiative
(c) Any designated government employee who know- may be amended by statute, passed in each house by a
ingly and intentionally fails to disclose information re- two-thirds vote.
quired to be disclosed under subdivision (b) shall, upon SECTION 8. This initiative shall take effect on Janu-
conviction, be punished by imprisonment in the county ary 1, 1987.
' I
�-.86 _ Photoelectronic composition U('
86 8,790 ('%1APOH\I\nH f(:F()h bT\TN:1'lll\T1\C 63
MARCH FONG EU BULK RATE
Secretary of State U POSTAGE
1230 J STREET PAID
Secretary of
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 State
In an effort to reduce election costs,the State Legislature has authorized the Secretary of
State and counties having this capability to mail only one ballot pamphlet to addresses
where more than one voter with the same surname resides.If you wish additional copies,
you may obtain them by calling or writing to your county clerk or registrar of voters.
CERTIFICATE OF SECRETARY OF STATE
I, March Fong Eu, Secretary of State of the State of California, do hereby certify
that the foregoing measures will be submitted to the electors of the State of Califor-
nia
g g �e IN
� at the GENERAL ELECTION to be held throughout the State on November 4,
1986, and that this pamphlet has been correctly prepared in accordance with law.
1
Witness my hand and the Great Seal of the State in
Sacramento, California,this 13th day-of August 1986.
eP`•of >,
•t 1•�liV W• `�
u
w
x �O
MARCH FONG EU
C"I-'F)R"�P .Secretary of State
1
c
i
I
I
I
1986
i
CALENDAR
O
OF ELECTION Ci I
EVENTSCL
Z
GENERAL
MUNICIPAL v t
ELECTION
Z
TUESDAY
NOVEMBER 4, 1986
i
Q
MARTIN & CHAPMAN CO.
ELECTION SUPPLIERS
2131 BIXBY ROAD
LAKEWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90712
(213) 426-2511
COC.--ILTO ADOPT RESOLUTIONS LAS. jAYTO FILE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMEi, Each ,didate may prepare a candidates's statement on an appropria._ form August 7-August 11
Required: Resolution(s) calling election (Form 3); resolution to Board of Committees primarily formed to support or oppose the qualification of a ballot provided bythe Clerk. Such statement may includethe name, age, occupation, g g
Supervisors requesting consolidation(Form 2). measure and proponents of a state ballot measure who control a committee and a brief description of no more than 200 words of the candidate's education CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF ELECTION WHERE
Optional: Resolution authorizing rebuttal arguments if not previously adopted primarily formed to support or oppose the qualification of a measure shall file a and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself. Such
(Form 4); resolution authorizing Council members to file arguments and/or statement for the period ending 28 days after the deadline for filing petitions,or statement shall be filed at the time nomination papers are filed unless a runoff or CANDIDATES ARE TO BE ELECTED
directing City Attorney to write impartial analysis(Form 5). 28 days after the measure has either qualified or failed to qualify,no later than general election is to occur within 88 days of a primary or first election, the (E-89to75)
35 days after the deadline for filing petitions or 35 days after the measure has statement shall then be filed with the clerk by the third day following the Between these days both days included p
Clerk, as a courtesy to candidates and voters, may publish NOTICE OF either ualified orfailed to qualify,whichever is earlier. governingbody'sdeclaration of the resultsfromthe primaryor first c-lection. It Y ( Y included), ublisha notice of
ELECTION prior to the legal publication period(See E -89), but must also q(Section 84200.5f, overnentCode.) may be ithd wn but not changed during the peod fo filling nomination election once in a newpaperin the City.The notice shall be headed 'Notice of
(
Election"and shall contain a statement of: (a)The time of the election; b)The
publish during the legal publication period. papers and until 5:00 p.m. on the day following the close of nomination. offices to be filled.The noticeshallalso state thatif no one oronly one person
Candidates statements shall remain confidential until the expiration of the filing is nominated for each office the council may appoint someone to the office. If
Jul 14 - August 8 deadline.
June 6 y g there is no newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the city,
(See Sections 10012,10012.7,Elections Code.) the notice shall be typewritten and copies shall be posted conspicuously within
SUGGESTED LAST DAY TO FILE PETITIONS REGARDING S:OOp.m. thattime in at leastthree public places in the city(Form 11).
FILING PERIOD FOR NOMINATION PAPERS Not less than 10 calendar days before the clerk submits the official voter's (See Sections 22830, 22831, 22903, Elections Code; Section 6061,
MEASURE pamphlet referred to in Section 10012 for printing,the clerk shall make a copy
(E-151) (E-113 to 88) of the voter's pamphlet available for public examination in the clerk's office. Government Code.)
If a petition is being circulated about the cif to Between these days(both days included),voters may nominate candidates for Any person may obtain a cop of the voter's pamphlet from the clerk for use
In case a of the ensre ure besonce a week for
ted the wo successive
election,esi he a weeks in the
publish e P g y put election by signinga nomination paper. Each candidate shall be proposed by outside of the clerk's office. he clerk may chargeafeetoanypersonobtaining
the election,k h suggested that the petition be filed c this date in order to synopsis shall
the measure once a week election
do successive weeks t the City. The
not less than 20 nor more than 30 voters in a city of 1,000 registered voters or a copy of the material,which fee shall not exceed the actual cost incurred by
allow the clerk the full days to verify the petition and certify it to the Council. more,and not less than 5 nor more than 10 voters in a city of less than 1,000 the clerk in providingthe copy. Clerk shall consolidate the notice of election and the measure to be voted on
registered voters, but only one candidate may be named in any one nomination into one notice ction 22835,Electrons Code;Section 6066,Government Code.)
11).
(See Section
July 7 paper for the same office. No voter may sign more than one nomination paper During the 10-calendar-day examination period provided by this section, any
for the same office,and in the event he does so,his signature shall count only voter of the jurisdiction in which the election is being held,or the clerk, himself
LAST DAY TO ADOPT REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES on the first nomination paper filed which contains his signature. Nomination or herself,mayseekawritof mandateoran injunction requiring any or all of the August 8
STATEMENTS papers subsequently filed and containing his signature shall be considered as material in voter's pamphlet tobeamendedordeleted.
though his signature does not appear thereon. Each seat on the governing (See Section 10013.3,Elections Code.) LAST DAY TO REQUEST CONSOLIDATION
(E-120) body is a separate office. Any person registered to vote at the election may (E-88)
Last day for local agency to adopt or amend regulations regarding charges for circulate a nomination paper. Where there are full terms and short terms to be The Clerk shall give the following items to each candidate or the candidate's Last day for City Clerk to file Resolution Calling Election (Form 3) and
printing candidate's statements,length of statements,etc.,pursuant to Section filled,the term shall bespecified in the nomination paper, representative at the time nomination papersare issued: Resolution Requesting Consolidation(Form 2)with the Board of Supervisors
10012, Elections Code. These regulations shall not be revoked or modified (See Section 22836,Elections Code.) (a) Nomination paper. and the County Election Department.
after this date(Form 6). (b) Candidate's Statement form. (Count Electi,EDepatment.lections .)
(See Section 10012,Elections Code.) For purposes of verifying signatures on any nomination paper,the clerk shall (c) A copy of the regulations regarding charges for printing
determine that the residence address on the paper is the same as the residence candidates statements(Form 6).
JUG7 address on the affidavit of registration. If the addresses are different,or if the (d) Statement of Economic Interests forms to Mayor and Council August 8
y paper does not specify the residence address,the affected signature shall not candidates. State law requires Mayor&Council filing. City
SUGGESTED LAST DAY TO CALL ELECTION FOR CHARTER be counted as valid.Any signature invalidated pursuant to this section shall not codes may require filing for additional officers. 5:00P.M.
AMENDMENTS affect the validityof othervalid signatures on the particular paper. (e) A copyof Section 84305,Government Code.(Section 45,Elections Code.) LAST DAY TO FILE NOMINATION PAPERS
At the time nomination papers are filed,the clerk shall give the candidate a copy
(E-120) (E-88)
Any registered voter of the jurisdiction, including the candidate and/or the of the"Code of Fair Campaign Practices"and a copy of Sections 12500-12526,
Last day for the charter of any city to be proposed,amended or repealed by Last day and Section 22836,228 papers to be tiled with the Clerk.
proposals submitted by the governing body on its own motion or by petition circulator, may sign a nomination paper. The signatures to each nomination Elections Code.Any candidatemaysubscribetothecode byfilinga copy with (See Sections22836,22840,Elections Code.)
signed by 15 percent of the registered voters, or both pursuant to Section Paper shall be appended on the same sheet of paper and each signer shall print the clerk who shall keep it as a public record.
34458,34459,Government Code(Form 3). his or her name and place of residence,giving the street and number, if any; (See Sections 12500-12526,Elections Code.)
otherwise,such designation of his or her place of residence as will enable its August 13
It the petition is signed by not less than 15 percent of the registered electors of location to be readily ascertained. Jul 24-August 8
5•00
the city,or not less than 10 percent of the registered voters of a city and county, (See Sections 53, 22837, Elections Code.) y g P.M.
the legislative bodyshall,within 20 days after itis presented,order an election LAST DAY TO CALL ELECTION FOR BALLOT MEASURES t LAST DAY TO FILE NOMINATION PAPERS-EXTENSION
at which the proposal,without alteration,shall be submitted to a vote of the Every nomination paper shall have annexed an affidavit of the person who (E-103 to 88)
voters of the city or the city and county.The election shall be held at the next Between these days, both days included, the City Council, pursuant to (E-83)
regularly scheduled or established election,at which all the voters of the cif or circulated it to the effect that he saw written all the signatures appended Y Y y P Last day and hour for nomination papers to be filed with the Clerk to nominate
g Y y thereto and knows that the are the signatures of the persons whose names petitions filed under Articles 1 and 2,Chapter 2,Division 5 (commencing with
order f the legislative
A endmc is prop not proposed
by the governing
after the y g P 9 candidates other than the person who was the incumbent when nomination
order of the le islatrve body. Amendments ro osed b the they purport to be and the dates between which all signatures to the paper Section 4000)and Division 16(commencin with Section 27000)may adopt a
g y. p p y governing body p resolution lacin a measure on the ballot papers for an incumbent elective officer of the city were not filed pursuant to
e
were obtained. p g ( orm 3,4,5).
and amendments proposed by petitiona the voters may u submitted at the Sections there
and 22bent Elections Code. This section is not applicable
same election. T he governing body of the city or city and county s hall cause the (See Sections 44,22838,Elections Code.) (See Sections 4010,4011,4020,4055,27231,Elections Code.) where there is no incumbent eligi ble to be elected.
proposed charter amendments or the proposal for charter repeal, to be Each nomination paper shall be accompanied by a verified statement of the The legislative body of the city may submit to the voters,without a petition (See Section22840.5,Elections Code.)
publishedonceintheofficialnewspaperofthecityorcityandcounty and each candidate that he will accept the nomination and also accept the office in the therefor,a proposition to be voted upon at the city election(Form 3,4,5).
edition thereof,during the day of publication,not less than 40,and not more event of his election. (See Section 4017,Elections Code.) August 14
than 60,days prior to the electron. In case there is no official newspaper, the (Section 22839,Elections Code)
.proposals for charter amendment or repeal shall be published in a newspaper of The City Council(under Section 4020, Elections Code)may call an election for SECRETARY OF STATE TO DETERMINE ORDER OF NAMES general circulation within the city or city and county and in all editions thereof, All forms required for nomination and election to all municipal offices shall be ballot measures as early as February 10,1986 if the City's General Municipal ON BALLOT
issued during the day of publication. If the governing votersuse a texts f any furnished only by the City Clerk during regular business hours. At the time of Election is held on November 4, 1986.
proposed charter amendments to a mailed to the voters, the text of the issuance of those forms the City Clerk shall type in the forms the name of the (E-82)
proposed charter amendments may show the difference from existing candidate and the office for which he is a candidate,shall imprint a stamp The Secretary of State shall conduct a drawing of the letters of the alphabet
provisions of law by the use Govern
distinguishing type styles. which reads"Official Filing Form,"and shall affix his signature and date. The constituting a randomized alphabet to be used in determining the order of all
(Section3446t,GovementCode.) forms shall be distributed without charge to all candidates applying forthem. July24 candidates on the ballot. The results of the drawing shall be mailed
If a measure to propose or amend a charter is placed on the ballot by the City
(Section 22842,Elections Code.) POST NOTICE OF LAST DAY FOR FILING ARGUMENTS immediately to each Clerk.
Council, the Clerk shall, within 15 days of the date of the order, cause the E-103 (See Sections 10217,10217.5,Elections Code.)
charter or charter amendment to be ublishedonceintheofficial newspaper of Each candidate for Mayor and Member p the City Council shall file cl later ( )
Pthan the final filing date of nomination papers,his or her statement disclosin If City measures are to be submitted to the voters of the City,it is suggested
y 9 that on or before this day,the Clerk PUBLISH NOTICEOFNOMINEme ES
the at (See Sections 34455.34458.Government Code. his or her investments and his or her interests in real property with the Clerk. The Clerk ashallppear
on the bola list of the names iv the nominees in the order v which
) The Clerk shall make and retain a co and forward the original to the Fair and against City measures and theimpartialanalysisbytheCityAttorney, and a
PYthey appear on the ballot and the respective office for which they have been
Political Practices Commission. notice of the last day for tiling be posted on the City Hall bulletin board.The legal deadlinetorcallinganelectionforadoption,amendmentorrepeal of a Suggested should nominated. It there rino newspaper published and circulated inthe city, the
(See Sections 87201, 87500f, Government Code.) 99 Y approximately ten days after the City Council
charter is August 6,1986(E-90). calls the election butno laterthan the suggested last day below(Form 9). notice shall be typewritten and copies shall be posted conspicuously withal the
time prescribed in at least three public places in the city. Publication shall be
(See Section 5015,Elections Code.) once a week for two successive weeks in the City(Form 12).
(See Section 22833,Elections Code;Section 6066,Government Code.)
August 14 Oc.-oer 5 November 4 �1
SUGGESTED LAST DAY TO FILE ARGUMENTS LAST DAY TO FILE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS ELECTION DAY
(E-82) Polls open 7:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m.
The Clerk shall set a date for filing arguments that is approximately ten days Last day for each candidate and each committee supporting or o (Sections 2550,14206,Elections Code.
PP 9 opposing all a )
after the City Council calls the election but no later than this date in order to candidate or candidates or supporting or opposing a ballot measure or ballot
allow ample time for the 10-calendar-day public examination period, measures to file campaign statements with the Clerk.The closing date shall be
translation, typesetting, printing and mailing to the voter. Arguments may be September30. November 6-December 2
changed or with drawn by their proponents until and including the date fixed by (See Sections 842oo,8,84215e,Government Code.) COUNTY TO CANVASS ELECTION RETURNS
the Clerk(Form 10). 1986
(See Sections 5010-5016,5025,Elections Code.) (E+2to 28)
October 6 Between VOTE these dates(both days included),the County Elections Department
Not less than 10 days before the clerk submits the official election materials LAST DAY TO REGISTER TO shall canvasstheelectron.
reterred to in Sections 4015(arguments),4015.5(rebuttals), 4018 (proposed 1 (Sections 17081,17088-17090,Elections Code.)
ordinances),5011(city attorney analyses),5012,5013,and 5014.5 (arguments), (E-29) ,
for printing, the clerk shall make a copy of such material available for public Affidavits of registration shall be accepted at all times except during the 28 days COUNCILTODECLARERSULTS
examination in the clerk's office. Any person may obtain a copy of such immediately preceding any election, when registration shall cease for that i Upon certification of results E the County Election Department, the City
E
materials from the clerk for use outside of the clerk's office. The clerk may election as to electors residing in the territory within which the election is to be Council shall meetto declare the result of the election.Action may be taken at
charge a fee to any person o blaming a copy of the material,which fee shall not held.Transfers of registration for an election may be made from one CALENDAR
exceed the actual cost incurred b the clerk in providing the cocounty Y precinct to the next regular or adjourned Council meeting or at a special meeting called for 0
Y P 9 PY• in the precinct towhi which
elector eekstanytimewhenregistrationis in progress that purpose. O
in the precinct c which the elector ode.to transfer. (Section 22932,Elections Code.)
During the 10-day examination period provided by this section,any voter of the (See Section 305,Elections Code.) -�
jurisdiction in which the election n being held,or the clerk,himself a herself, The council shall adopt a resolution in accordance with Sections 22932 and
mayseekawritofmandateoraninjunctionrequiringanyorallsuch materials to OF ELECTION
be amended or deleted.A peremptory writ of mandate or an injunction shall be October 6-October 28 state of the Elections Code and the Clerk shall enter in the minutes a
issued only upon clear and convincing proof that the material in question is statement of the results s 229 17).
false,misleading or inconsistent with the requirements of this chapter,and that VOTERS MAY REQUEST ABSENTEE BALLOTS (Sections 22932,22933,Elections Code.)
issuance of the writ or injunction will not substantially interfere with the printing (E-29 to 7) The City Clerk shall immediately issue a Certificate of Election and administer
or distribution of official election materials as provided by law. Between these days(both days included),any voter entitled to vote by absent the oath to each person elected. EVENTS
(Section 5025,Elections Code.) voter ballot may file with the County Election Department,a written application (Section 22934,Elections Code.) Z
for an absent voter ballot. Applications received prior to the 29th day will be
QUgUSt 15 kept and processed ection1002,Electing os Code.. LASTDAYTOFILESTATEMENTOFECONOMICINTERESTS
(Section 1002,Elections Code.)
LAST DAY TO FILE NAMES AND OCCUPATIONS OF Ever� ypersonelectedtotheofficeofMayororMemberoftheCity Council and
persons leaving those offices must file a statement disclosing his investments
CANDIDATES October21 and his interests in real property within 30 days afterassuming or leaving office.
(E-st) LAST DAY TO FILE AS WRITE-IN CANDIDATE (Sections 87202,87204,Government Code.)
Last day for City Clerk to file names g
candidates with the County Elections Department.
and occupational desinations of Last day for any 14)
(Section 23302,Elections Code. y p January 31, 1987 IL
GENERAL
person who desires to have his or her name as written on the I
ballot of the election counted for a particular office to file a statement of LAST DAY TO FILE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS
write-in candidacy which shall contain the candidate's name, residence Last day for each candidate and each committee supporting or opposing a August 25 address,a declaration statingthat he orshe isa write-in candidate,the title of candidate or candidates or supporting or opposing a ballot measure or ballot
14
LAST DAY TO FILE REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS the office for which he or she is running, the date of the election and a I measures to file campaign statements with the Clerk.Theclosingdate shall be
nominating petition with the required number 17100, f signatures. December 31,1986. M U N I C I PA L
(E-72) (See Sections 7300 - 7304, 17100, 17101, 17102, 22603, 22836, (See Sections 84200, 84215e, Government Code.)
Last day to file rebuttal arguments it authorized by the City Council is 10 days Elections Code.)
after primary arguments are due.
(See Sections 4015.5,5014.5.Elections Code.) October 23 ,
September 5-September 25 LAST DAY TO FILE CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE STATEMENTS ELECTION
(E-12) 1
PUBLISH NOTICE OF CHARTER AMENDMENTS Last day for each candidate and each committee supporting or opposing a
as
(E-60 to 40) candidate or candidates or supporting or opposing a ballot measure or ballot
If proposed charter amendments,placed on the ballot by the City Council on its measures to file campaign statements with the Clerk.The closing date shall be
own motion,are to be submitted at the election,the Clerk shall, between these 17 days before the election.
days(both days included),advertise such amendments by publishing once in (See Sections 84200.8,84215e,Government Code.)
the otficial newspaper of the City and each edition thereof during the day of _
°ublica(Se October 25 TUESDAY F■
(See Sections 34455,3445a,34461,Government Code.) LAST DAY TO MAIL SAMPLE BALLOTS AND POLLING PLACE i(�Qc
p ages with over tpamp population, copies of such amendments shall r NOTICES NOVEMBER 4, 1 70V
printed in convenient pamphlet form and mailed to each of the qualified voters
of the Cityand the Clerk shall,until the day fixed forthe election, advertise m (E-10)
one or more newpapers of general circulation in the City a notice that copies Last day for the County Elections Department to mail to each registered voter a
thereof maybe had upon application therefor(Special Form). sample ballot and a polling place notice showing the location of the precinct
(Section 34456,Government Code.) polling place of the voter. A sample ballot shall be mailed,postage prepaid,to
each voter not more than 40 days nor less than 10 days before the election.
September 15 (see sections 10010,Elections Code.)
LAST DAY TO PUBLISH NOTICE AND MEASURE WHERE NO November 3
CANDIDATES ARE TO BE ELECTED LAST DAY FOR COUNCIL TO ADOPT PROCEDURES TO
(E-50) RESOLVE TIE VOTE
Last day to publish notice containing a statement of:(a)The date of the election,
(b)The purpose of the election.(c)The hours the polls are open(Special form). (E-1)
(See Sections 2554.2653.Elections Code.) Last dayfor legislative body,by resolution,to adopt procedures to resolve a tie
vote at a Special Runoff Election(Form 18). The council shall call the Special
(By publishing this notice once per week for two successive weeks,at least one Runoff Election(Form 19)after the Declaration of the Result,recount or judicial MARTIN & CI-IAPMAN CO.
Publication by the deadline,the following requirement is also met): certification of the election which resulted in a tie vote.(See Section2o5o1(b),ElectionsCode.)
The Clerk shall publish a synopsis of the measure once a week for two i
successive weeks in the City. If there is no newspaper of general circulation ELECTION SUPPLIERS
published and circulated in the city,the notice shall be typewritten and copies time
within th
shall be posted conspicuously2131 BIXBY ROAD �-e me prescribed in at least three public
placesintheaty. LAKEWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90712
(See Section 22835,Elections Code;Section 6066,Government Code.) ',
(213) 426-2511