HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Position on Legislation pending before Congress (25) - APPPOVQ� 7-0
�,eroI y�l I r gNED /Tzm(i/V R I 3 - -7 Dept. ID AD-17-027 Page 1 of 2
SG��l!✓ � PG7L)250V/ P6SFY-&eEV/G,I /`N 41) - Meeting Date: 12/18/2017
_ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
REQUEST FOR. CITY COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING DATE: 12/18/2017
SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Fred A. Wilson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Antonia Graham, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: City Council Position on Legislation pending before Congress and the State
Legislature as recommended by the City Council Intergovernmental Relations
Committee (IRC) as recommended by Council Liaison's, Mayor Posey and
Councilmembers Delgleize and Hardy
Statement of Issue:
On November 29, 2017, the Intergovernmental Relations Committee met and members
recommended an "oppose" position on draft bill language limiting local authority over
wireless facilities and a "support" position on the State Assembly Constitutional
Amendment (ACA) 10 which lowers the voting age from 18 to 17. This action requests the
City Council authorization for the Mayor to sign City position letters.
Financial Impact:
There is no fiscal impact.
Recommended Action:
A) Approve a City position of oppose on draft bill language limiting local authority over
wireless facilities; and,
B) Approve a City position of support of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10.
Alternative Action(s):
Do not approve the recommended actions and direct staff accordingly.
Analysis:
On Wednesday, November 29, 2017, the Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC)
met to discuss pending State and Federal legislation. The Committee reviewed the 2017
State Legislative Matrix provided by the City's State Advocate, Townsend Public Affairs.
The Committee also discussed the pending Federal Tax and Jobs Act. Due to timing of the
bill on both floors of Congress, the IRC voted to direct the Mayor to sign letters on behalf of
the IRC opposing the elimination of the tax-exempt status of private activity bonds and the
elimination of the SALT deduction.
➢ Draft Bill Language presented before the United States Senate Commerce
Committee on Wireless Facilities
Item 7. - 1 xB -76-
Dept. ID AD-17-027 Page 2 of 2
Meeting Date: 12/18/2017
Similar to Senate Bill 649, the wireless industry has introduced bill language at the
Federal level aimed at forcing local governments to lease out publically owned
infrastructure, eliminate reasonable local environmental and design review, and to
eliminate the ability for local governments to negotiate fair leases or public benefits
for the installation of "small cell" wireless equipment on taxpayer-funded property.
While local governments and other stakeholders were able to defeat the wireless
industry's attempt to do this in California with a veto from Governor Brown, the
industry is now aiming for Congress. It is critical for cities to voice their concerns
and the IRC voted unanimously to send a letter of opposition to our Federal
representatives.
➢ Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 10 (Low)
This proposal would amend the California Constitution to allow a United States
citizen who is at least 17 years of age and a resident of California to vote. Briana
Spainhour, Chair of the Huntington Beach Youth Board, presented her point of view
on the lowering of the voting age stating that many of her peers were in favor.
Council Member Jill Hardy made a motion to support, seconded by then Mayor
Barbara Delgleize. The motion was opposed by then Mayor Pro Tem Mike Posey.
The item passed and was referred on to the City Council for a vote of support.
The Intergovernmental Relations Committee, comprised of Mayor Delgleize, Mayor Pro
Tem Posey, and Council Member Jill Hardy, approved an oppose position on draft wireless
infrastructure bill language and Mayor Delgleize and Council Member Hardy approved a
support position of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10 with Mayor Pro Tem Posey
voting no on ACA 10.
Environmental Status:
Not applicable.
Strategic Plan Goal:
Non-Applicable — Administrative Item
Attachment(s):
1. Committee Draft Wireless Infrastructure Bill Language
2. Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10
HB -77- Item 7. - 2
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
1. SEC. 1. HARMONIZING SHOT CLOCKS; REASONABLE RATES.
2 (a) ILLRIVIONIZING SNOT CLOCKS.—Sectioll
3 332(c)(7)(B) of the Caimnunications Act of 1934 (47
4 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)) is amended-
5 (1) in clause (i)(I), by inserting "the smile serv-
6 ice or of" after "of";
7 (2) by striking clause (ii) and inserting the fol-
8 loZ,N-ing:
9 "(ii) Regulation by a State or local
10 govermnent or instrumentality thereof
11 shall be deemed to prohibit or have the ef-
12 feet of prohibitilig the provision of «fireless
13 ser\ices for purposes of clause (i)(II) if the
14 regulation consists of an action that-
15 "(I) restricts access to a pole,
16 right-of-way, or other facility owned
17 by the State or local goveriunent or
18 insti,-Limentaht�r to support equipment
19 for use by providers of 11111reless serv-
20 ices except in the case of insufficient
21 capacity, or for reasons of-
22 "(aa) safety;
23 "(bb) reliability; or
24 "(cc) generally applicable—
Item 7. - 3 HB -78-
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
2
1 "(AA) engineering pur-
1 poses;
3 "(BB) ol3jective design
4 standards for decorative
5 utility poles; or
6 "(CC) reasonable con-
7 eeahnent requirements;
8 "(II) grants exclusive or pref-
9 erential rise to a pole, right-of-way, or
10 other property oNwied or managed by
11 the State or local goverranent or in-
12 strumentality to-
13 "(aa) a particular provider
14 of VN71reless service;
15 "(bb) a class of providers of
16 wreless service; or
17 "(cc) any entity or class of
18 emit,) to which access is provided
19 under section 224(f)(1);
20 "(III) requires a demonstration
21 of need for a wireless service facility,
22 or other�i ise evaluates radio frequency
23 signal strength or existence, the ade-
24 quacy of or demand for service cov-
25 erage, capacity, or quality, or ari ap-
HB -79_ Item 7. - 4
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
3
1 plicant's business decision on the
2 technical or operational characteris-
3 tics, type, and. location of Ni ireless
4 ser«ce facilities, support strictures,
5 poles, or teclrnology deployed;
6 "(IV) limits the ability of a pro-
7 i ider of wireless service to snake tech-
8 nolop, or capacity upgT ales, updates,
9 or enhancements to its existing tivire-
10 less service, unless those III-nitations
11 are consistent «6th this subsection;
12 "(V) imposes an express or de
13 facto moratorium on the acceptance
14 or processing of permits or other per-
15 missions to deploy iireless service fa-
16 cilities;
17 "(VI) grants the State or local
18 government or instrumentality discre-
19 tion to approve or den37 permits or
20 other permissions to deploy Avzreless
21 service facilities vithout reasonable,
22 objective, and non-discriminatory
23 . guidelines regarding the. approval or
24 denial;
Item 7. - 5 H_B -80-
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
4
1 "(VII) requires removal or re-
2 placement of a ii ireless service facility
3 due to the passage of time or the
4 availability of alternative technolog37
5 or design, if the wireless service facil-
6 1ty continues to be used b3T a, provider
7 of NN ireless service for non-de minims
8 purposes;
9 "(V111) prohibits the placement
10 of an emergency backup poNver system
I that otherwise co-inplies with Federal
12 and. State-
13 "(aa) environmental regula-
14 tions;
15 "(bb) safety regulations; and
16 "(cc) generally applicable-
17 "(A_A_) engineering
18 Standards;
19 "(BB) objective design
20 standards; and
21 "(CC) reasonable con-
22 ceahnent requirements; or
23 "(A) requires i6reless service
24 providers to demonstrate an actual.
25 pt-olibition of service.";
FIB -81- Item 7. - 6
OLL1.7609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
5
1 (3) by redesignating clauses (iii) thmigh (v) as
2 clauses (ii) through (viii), respectively;
3 (4.) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
4 "(iii) The actions described in sub-
5 clauses (I) through (IX) of clause (ii.) shall
6 not be construed to be ali exhaustive list of
7 regulations by a State or local government
8 or instrumentality thereof that prohibit or
9 have the effect of prohibiting the provision.
10 of wireless services for purposes of cla- se
11 (i)(II) of this subparagraph.
12 "(iv)(I) A State or local government
13 or instrtiunentality thereof shall act on any
14 request for authorization to place, con-
15 strict, or modify wireless service facilities
16 after the request is duly filed «pith the gov-
17 errnrrent or instrumentality, taking into ae-
18 count the nature and scope of such re-
19 quest, in accordance v6th this clause.
20 "(II) A State or local government or
21 instrtirxnentality thereof shall act on any re-
22 quest described in subelause (I) that eon-
23 stitutes collocation of wireless service facili-
24 ti.es, as that term is defined by the Com-
Item 7. - 7 HB -82-
OLIA7609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
6
1 mission, not later than 60 clays after the
2 date on which the request is duly filed.
3 "(III) A State or local government or
4 instrumentality thereof shall act, on any
5 other request described in subelause (I)
6 that is not described in subelause (II) not
7 later than 90 days after the date on which
8 the request is duly filed.
9 "(IV) The timeframes specified under
1a subelauses (II) and (III) shall apply collee-
11 tively to all proceedings required by a
12 State or local government or .instr unien-
13 tality thereof for the approval of the re-
14 quest.
15 "(V) The tiriieframes specified under
16 subelauses (II) and (III) may not be tolled
17 by any moratorium, -whether ax-press or de
18 facto, imposed by a State or local govern-
19 ment or instr umentalit3T thereof on the
20 consideration of any request for arrthoriza-
21 tion to place, construct, or niodil�y wireless
22 service facilities.
23 "(v) If a State or local government or
24 instrumentality thereof fails to act on a re-
25 quest to place, constrict, or modify wire-
HB -83- Item 7. - 8
oLL17$09 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
7
1 less service facilities within the applicable
2 period of tinge Linder clause (iv), or denies
3 such a request in a. maiuier inconsistent
4 with clause (6), and the applicant provides
5 written notice of the failure or delual to
6 the government or instrumentality after
7 the ax-piration of the applicable period-
8 "(I) the request shall be deemed
9 granted on the date that is 31 clays
10 after the date on AiThich the govern-
11 meat or instrumentality receives the
1.2 itritten notice; and
13 "(II) ai;y additional rights an ap-
14 plicant may have under this section or
15 other�Ase based on the failure or de-
16 vial shall be preseiwed.";
17 (5) in clause (vi), as so redesignated, by insert-
18 ing before the period the folio«Ting: "that is publielsT
19 released eontemporaneousl�)T with the denial" and
20 (6) by adding at the end the following:
21 "(ix) Nothing in this subparagraph
22 shall be construed to affect the authority
23 of a _State or local government or instru-
24 mentality thereof to—
Item 7. - 9 HB -84-
OLIA17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
8
1 "(I) manage access to and use of
2 poles, nights-of-way, or other property
3 owned or managed by the State or
4 local government or insti-inlentality
5 for wireless service facilities or to re-
6 quire fair and reasonable compensa-
7 tion for that access or use if-
8 "(aa) the compensation is
9 competitively neutral, tecluiolog�y
10 neutral, and nondiscrinunatory;
11 "(bb) the government or in-
12 struznentality publicly discloses
1.3 the compensation;
14 "(cc) the compensation is
15 based on actual and direct costs,
16 ezcept for compensation for a
17 pole attachment prm ided under
18 section 224, which shall be cal-
19 culated in accordance with that
20 section; and
21 "(dd) the management and
22 access, including the requirement
23 of fair. and reasonable conipensa-
24 tion, is not inconsistent NvIth
25 State la-; or
HB -85- Item 7. - 10
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
9
1 "(II) charge a fee to consider a
2 request for the placement, constime-
3 tion, or modification of N�rireless serv-
4 ice facilities within the jurrisdictiorl of
5 the State or local govermilent or in-
6 strumentality thereof if the fee is
7 based on actual aild direct costs of-
8 "(aa) issuing and processing
9 pernuts;
10 "(bb) revieNINTilig plans; and
11 "(cc) conducting physical in-
12 spections related to issuing and
13 processing permits.".
14 (b) DEFINITION or, 11TIRELESS SERVICE.—Section
1.5 332(c)(7) of the Coliummications Act of 1.934 (47 U.S.C.
16 332(c)(7) is ainended-
17 (1) by striking "persoiial" each place that term
18 appears; and
19 (2) iii subparagraph (C)---
20 (A) by strikhig clause (i) and inserting the
21 followilig:
22 "(i) the terns `mireless service' means
23 the .transmission by radio. communication
24 of voice, -c ideo, or data communications
25 services, including Internet Protocol or any
Item 7. - 11 HB -86-
oLL1.7609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
10
1 successor protocol-enabled services, or any
2 combination of those ser�%ices, including
3 milicensed wireless services;";
4 (13) in clause (ii), by striking "and" at the
5 end;
6 (C) by reclesignating clause (ih) as clause
7 (W); and
S (D) by inserting after clause (ii) the fol-
9 lowing:
10 "(iii) the terin `replation' inchides a
11 law, ordinance, rule, decision, policy, prac-
12 tiee, franchising requirement, contract, re-
13 striction, or irnpedinieru.t, including the fail-
14 ure to act, or other legal requirement;
1.5 and'.
16 (e) REMOVAL or B AR.RrERS To ENTRY.—Section 253
17 of the Comin-anications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 253) is
1S amended
19 (1) by striping subsection (c);
20 (2) by redesiguating subsections (b), (d), (e),
21 and (f) as subsections (c), (e), (f), and (g);
22 (3) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol-
23 lowing:
24 "(b) STATE OR LocAL REQUIREMENTS 1_DENTI-
25 FIED.---
HB -87- Item 7. - 12
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
11
IN GENERAL.—For purposes of subsection
2 (a)
3 "(A) the term `State or local legal require-
4 ment' includes any law, regulation, decision,
5 policy, practice, franchising requirement, con-
6 tract, restriction, or impediment, including the
7 failure to act, of any State or local government
S or i11strumentality thereof related to the use of
9 or access to a. pole, right-of-way, or other prop-
1.0 erty owned by the State or local government or
11 iustrunientality, by a provider of teleconununi-
12 cations selirice, including a provider of zirireless
13 service; and
14 "(B) a State or local legal requirement
15 shall be deemed to prohibit or have the effect
16 of prohibiting the ability of an entity to projride
17 any interstate or intrastate telecomin-mications .
18 senriee if the legal requirement constitutes an
19 action that would be described in section
20 332(c)(7)(B)(h) if that section were applied by
21 sul,)stihating `interstate or intrastate tele-
22 communications service' for `mireless service'.
. 23 "(2) LIST NOT EXHAUSTnTE.—For purposes of
24 paragraph (1)(B), the actions described in sub-
25 clauses (I) through (IX) of section 332(c)(7)(B)(ii)
Item 7. - 13 Ha -88-
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
12
1 shall not be construed to be an ex-haustive list of a.c-
2 Lions that prohnibi.t or have the effect of prohibiting
3 the provision of interstate or intrastate teleconimuni-
4 cations service.";
5 (4) by inserting after subsection (c), as so re-
6 designated, the follo-v ing;
7 "(d) RULE of CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing ii1 this sec-
8 Lion shall be conn.sti.tiied to affect the authority of a State
9 or a local government or instrumentality thereof to---
10 "(1) apply acid enforce its zoning and other
11 land use regulations to the ax-tent consistent mrith
12 this section a.ncl section 332(c)(7);
13 "(2) manage access to and use of poles, rights-
14 of-Zvay, or other property awned or managed by the
15 State or local gover nnient or instrumentality, for
16 telecommunications service facilities, including NN ire-
17 less sei-6ce facilities; or
18 "(3) require fair and reasonable compensation
19 for access or use described in paragraph (2), con-
20 sistent With section 332(c)(7)(B)(i<L).";
21 (5) in subsection (e), as so reclesigizated, by
22 striking "subsection (a) or (b)" and inserting "sub-
23 section (a), (b), (c), or.(d) of this section or sections
24 332(c)(7)(B)(1)(11)"; and
25 (6) by adding at the end the following:
HB -89- Item 7. - 14
014141.7609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
13
1 "(h) DEFINITIONS.—In this seetion-
2 "(1) the term `pole' means an upright pole or
3 structure, used or capable of being used in whole or
4 in part to provide electric distribution, lighting, traf-
5 fie control, signage, or a similar fiinctim'i;
6 "(2) the term. `telecommunications service pro-
7 eider' includes a provider of ii- ireless service;
8 "(3) the terns `wireless service' n.eans the
9 transmission by radio communication of voice, i deo,
10 or data communications sej-bees, including Internet
11 Protocol or any successor protocol-enabled services,
12 or any combination of those services, including unli-
13 ceased «Tireless service (as that term is defined in
14 section 332(c)(7)(C)(iii)); and
15 "(4) the term `wireless service facility' means a
16 facility for the provision of iireless service.".
17 SEC, 2. GAO STUDY OF BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT ON
18 TRIBAL LAND.
19 Not later that. 1 year after the date of enactment
20 of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States
21 shall-
22 (1) study the process for obtaining a, grant of
23 a right-of-way from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to
24 deploy broadband infrastructure on tribal land;
Item 7. - 15 HB -90-
0MA7609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
14
1 (2) in conducting the study udder paragraph
2 (1), consider the unique challenges involved in
3 broadband deployment oil tribal land; and
4 (3) submit to Congress a report on the study
5 conducted under paragraph (1).
6 SEC. 3. PROMOTING DEPLOYMENT OF BROADBAND INFRA-
7 STRUCTURE.
8 It is the sense of Congress that State and local gov-
9 ernments should consult Ai th local and national tele-
10 coinnlunica.tions providers, including telecon7iriunications
11 serNice and equipment providers, and other stakeholders
12 before beginning a highway construction project to deter-
13 aline whether to install broadband conduit under hard Sur-
14 faces as part of the lughivay construction project.
15 SEC. 4. ENSURING A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR CABLE
16 FRANCHISES.
17 (a) C�ENEIi,LL F iuNCHISE RERUIRENIENTS.—Section
18 621 of the Coin;muiications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 541)
t9 is amended—
20 (1) in subsection (a)(2)-
2 t (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A)
22 through (C) as clauses (i) through (Ili);
23 (B) in the inatter preceding clause (i), as
24 so redesignated, by striking "except that" and
25 all that follows and inserting the follo-Mlig:
HB -91- Item 7. - 16
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
15
1 "(B) In using easements tinder subparagrapb
2 (A), the cable operator shall ensure—";
3 (C) by striking "Any franchise" and all
4 that follows through "compatible uses," and in-
5 sorting the folloz-irulg: "(A) Except as provided
6 in subparagraph (B), any franchise shall be
7 construed to authorize-
8 "(i) the construction of a cable system and
9 aily facilities for the provision of teleconununi-
10 cations services or other services that may be
11 attached. to the cable system over public rights-
12 of-way, and through easements, that-
13 "(I) are jvithin the area to be served
14 by the cable s,)Tstem or facilities; and
15 "(II) 1-kave been dedicated for eompat-
16 ible uses; and
17 "(ii) the operation of the system or faeili-
18 ties described in clause (1) to offer cable service,
19 tel.econlnlunications ser\rice, or any other service
20 or capability over the cable system or through.
21 the facilities."; and
22 (D) in subparagraph (B)(i), as so des-
23 ignated, by inserting after ."cable system" the
24 folloAving: "and for the provision of tele-
Item 7. - 17 HB -92-
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
16
1 conarainications services or other services that
2 may be attached to the cable system";
3 (2) in subsection (b)(3)-
4 (A) in subparagraph (A)-
5 (i) in the inatter preceding clause (1),
6 by inserting "or other services or capabili-
7 ties" after "teleconn-nunications sei-N ices";
8 (ii) in clause (1), by striking "a fran-
9 chile Linder this title for the provision of
10 telecommunications services" and inserting
11 "ar y additional franchise for the provision
12 of teleconuniulieations sever ces or other
13 services or capabilities"; and
14 (iii) in clause (ii), by inserting "or
15 other services or capabilities" after "tele-
16 con-uniuiications services";
17 (B) in subparagraph (B)-
18 (i) by striking "under this title"; and
19 (ii) by inserting "or other serN ice or
20 capability" after "a, tel.ecomrnunications
21 service";
22 (C) in subparagraph (C)-
23 (i) in clause (i), by inserting `.`or other
24 serN ice or capability" after "a tele-
25 communications sei vice"; and
HB -93- Item 7. - 18
OLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft S.L.C.
17
1 (ii) in clause (ii), by inserting "or
2 other set-vice or capability" after "a tele-
3 coniumnications service" each place that
4 terin appears; and
5 (D) in subparagraph (D), by inserting "or
6 other service or capability," after "anjT tele-
7 corinnuiucations service or facilities,"; and
8 (3) by adding at the end the following:
9 "(g) For purposes of this section, the term `other
10 seiJTice or capability' inchides-
11 "(1) advanced telecommunications capability
12 (as defined in section 706(d)(1) of the Telecoinm.uni-
13 cations Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 1302(d)(1)));
14 "(2) broadband Internet access service;
15 "(3) private carriage business data services;
16 and
17 "(4) intereoinieeted VoIP service.".
18 (b) FRANCHISE FEEs.—Section 622 of the Commu-
19 nieatioils Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 542) is amended-
20 (1) in subsection (b), in the first sentence, by
21 inserting after "az-13T cable system" the follo-xving:
22 regardless of the services offered over the cable sys-
23 tern or the facilities attached to the cable system,"
24 and
Item 7. - 19 xB -94-
oLL17609 Staff Discussion Draft
18
1 (2) in subsection (g)(1), by striping "solely be-
2 cause of their statics as such" and inserting "for use
3 of the rights-of-way or otherwise".
FIB -95- Item 7. - 20
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2017-18 REGULAR SESSION
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 10
Introduced by Assembly Member Low
(Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Mullin)
(Principal coauthor: Senator Stern)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Berman, Calderon, and Chen)
March 6, 2017
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 10A resolution to
propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the
Constitution of the State, by amending Section 2 of Article II thereof,
relating to elections.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
ACA 10, as introduced, Low. Elections: voter qualifications.
The California Constitution allows a United States citizen who is at
least 18 years of age and a resident of California to vote.
This measure would reduce the minimum voting age to 17.
Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
1 Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the
2 Legislature of the State of California at its 2017-18 Regular Session
3 commencing on the fifth day of December 2016,two-thirds of the
4 membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the
5 people of the State of California, that the Constitution of the State
6 be amended as follows:
7 That Section 2 of Article II thereof is amended to read:
99
Item 7. - 21 HB -96-
ACA 10 —2-
1 SEC. 2. A United States citizen-4-9 who is at least 17 years of
2 age and resident in this State may vote.
O
99
HB -97- Item 7. - 22
Harper, Gloria
From: Estanislau, Robin
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 10:27 AM
To: Harper, Gloria
Cc: Esparza, Patty
Subject: Fwd: City Council meeting 12-18-17 Opposition to support of amendment to lower voting age
to 17
Sent from my Wad
Begin forwarded message:
From: pacj <pacj 03 gyahoo.com>
Date: December 13, 2017 at 11:18:14 PM PST
To: Robin Estanislau<robin.estanislaugsurfcity-hb.org>
Subject: City Council meeting 12-18-17 Opposition to support of amendment to lower
voting age to 17
Reply-To: pacj <paci 03(a�yahoo.com>
Please share this supplemental communication with the Council.
Lowering the voting age is significant. The voters of Huntington Beach should be given an opportunity to vote directly on this issue.
This is not legislation on which the council should take a position on behalf of its citizens.
Thank you.
Patricia Quintana
COMMUNICATION
�
SUPPLEMENTAL
��
C UNICA Ag 1®
Mm"Deft
AqeWa bm No.• 7
i I'I
Mr. Amory Hanson
224 10th Street
Huntington Beach CA 92648
The Honorable
Michael Posey
Mayor of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach CA 92648
Dear Mister Mayor:
I would like to express strong support for Agenda Item 7B, a resolution of support by The
Huntington Beach City Council for Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10.
I take no position on Agenda Item 7A, which deals with the complex issue of wireless facilities.
However, the issue of lowering the voting age to 17 years of age is much simpler, at least in my
opinion.
The Trend of this country has been to expand, and not contract, suffrage. When this country
elected the First President, as well as the First Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States in 1788, the electorate consisted of all white men over 21 years of age who
owned property. In Fact, white men born outside the United States could not even vote in the
1788 election.This resulted in the first federal law regarding voting rights,The Naturalization
Act of 1790, which allowed white men born outside the United States to obtain citizenship and
therefore, the right to vote. Today, our electorate has greatly expanded to include a significant
amount of our citizens.
Voting Rights tend to be thought of as a federal issue.This is not surprising, given the fact that
several federal laws, including the aforementioned Naturalization Act of 1790 and the Voting
Rights Act of 1965, address the issue of voting rights. In Addition, 6 amendments to the United
States Constitution have addressed the issue of voting rights.
However, that does not mean the states should not lead by example in expanding suffrage. to
quote Justice Louis Brandeis' dissenting opinion in New State Ice Company V. Liebmann, "It is
one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its
citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without
risk to the rest of the country."
SUPPLEMENTAL
COMMUNICATION
: /,;,'l,?-/7
141m: 4-7
Mr. Amory Hanson
224 10th Street
Huntington Beach CA 92648
The gradual expansion of suffrage through the state legislatures is not unprecedented. For
example, property qualifications for white men were gradually eliminated by the state
legislatures. Kentucky became the first state to do so in 1792, and North Carolina became the
last state to do so in 1856. It was not until many years later, in 1966, when the Supreme Court
issued a majority opinion by Justice William Douglas in Harper V. Virginia Board of Elections,
which not only banned poll taxes but prohibited property qualifications for all men and women,
that property qualifications were totally eliminated. However, the first step towards eliminating
property qualifications was not imposed by the federal government, but voluntarily made by
several states.
The State of California now has an opportunity to become the first state to lower the voting age
to 17. This will allow more citizens to express their opinion on matters of great importance.
Remember that in California, citizens vote not only to select certain public officials, but also on
certain initiatives and referendums, which are known in California as propositions at the state
level.
Some feel that this decision should be made by the current electorate. I would note that since
The measure to lower the voting age to 17 currently before the California State Assembly is a
California Constitutional Amendment, it requires, not only support from two-thirds of the
California State Assembly and the California State Senate, but also a majority of the state's
voters.
If the Huntington Beach City Council does not wish to sponsor State Constitutional amendment
10, I would strongly urge them to support legislation to allow individuals of 17 years of age to
vote in a primary election should they become 18 years of age before the general election. This
will make sure that those who are eligible to vote in general elections are not forced to choose
between the top two candidates if they had no role in selecting them.
Once again, I urge the Huntington Beach City Council to support Agenda Item 7B.
Sincerely Yours,
Mr. Amory Hanson
Mr. Amory Hanson
224 10th Street
Huntington Beach CA 92648
CC:The Honorable Erik Peterson
CC:The Honorable Patrick Brenden
CC: The Honorable Barbara Delgleize
CC: The Honorable Jill Hardy
CC:The Honorable William O'Connell
CC:The Honorable Lyn Semeta
CC: Mr. Fred Wilson
CC:The Honorable Robin Estanislau