Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 5, 2024 Special Election Administrative File - Charter (2) Preview Ballot O 01/09/2024 14:40:00 O Presidential Primary Election Precinct 32208 March 5,2024 Orange County DEMOCRATIC PARTY BALLOT Page 3 of 3 j� 9 AUTHORIZES$6.38 BILLION^IN Charter Amendment Measure Vote for One BONDS TO BUILD MENTAL No.2 Q DAN JACOBSON HEALTH TREATMENT FACILITIES Shall proposed Charter Amendment Attorney FOR THOSE WITH MENTAL No.2,which provides that the only Q JASON BAEZ HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE USE flags to be displayed by the City on Deputy District Attorney,County of CHALLENGES;PROVIDES City property are the United States Orange HOUSING FOR THE HOMELESS. Flag,the State of California Flag,the LEGISLATIVE STATUTE. County of Orange Flag,the City of Amends Mental Health Services Act Huntington Beach Flag,the POW- to provide additional behavioral MIA Flag,the six Armed Forces 1 :�: 41 F ,1, health services.Fiscal Impact Shift Flags,the Olympic Flag during the w„, e ��r *', roughly$140 million annually of Summer Olympic Games,and any , , Vote for One existing tax revenue for mental other flag if authorized by a health,drug,and alcohol treatment unanimous vote of the CityCouncil, Q RICHARD ZIMMER Deputy District Attorney,County of from counties to the state. be approved? (61)°If Orange Increased state bond repayment Supporters:Tony Strickland,Mayor; Q BINH DANG costs of$310 million annually for Gracey Van Der Mark,Mayor Pro 1/�Deputy Public Defender,County of 30 years.Supporters:California Tem;Pat Burns,City Council Los Angeles Professional Firefighters;CA Assoc. Member;Casey McKeon,City Q of Veteran Service Agencies; Council Member 41 0/3-`k National Alliance on Mental Illness- Opponents:Dan Kalmick,City w * ,, CA Opponents:Mental Health Council Member;Natalie Moser, /� America of California;Howard Jarvis City Council Member;Rhonda .� 0 �, Taxpayers Association;CalVoices Bolton,City Council Member 0 /� Vote for One L/ /, Q Yes Q Yes Q WHITNEY BOKOSKY Deputy District Attorney,County of =I No I=1 No Orange QDANIELJ.KERN " Attorney at Law 4 �lt_ _, eti„, Charter Amendment Measure Charter Amendment Measure No.3 No.1 Shall proposed Charter Amendment Shall proposed Charter Amendment No.3 to:commencing in 2026, COUNTY OF ORANGE No.1,which provides that require the City to adopt a two-year commencing in 2026,for all budget;update the procedures to F; cancel a regular CityCouncil municipal elections,the City:may g Note for One require Voter Identification for meeting;update the process to fill a elections;provide more in-person City Council vacancy;and amend Q KIMBERLY HO voting locations;and monitor ballot outdated phrases,syntax,dates, City of Westminster Councilmember/ Entrepreneur drop-boxes,be approved? pronouns,and titles be approved? Supporters:Tony Strickland,Mayor Supporters:Tony Strickland,Mayor Q VAN TRAN Huntington Beach Orange County Supervisor's Chief Huntington Beach;Gracey Van Der 9 Mark,Mayor Pro Tem Opponents:Dan Kalmick,City Q MICHAEL VO Council Member;Natalie Moser, Small Business Owner Opponents:Dan Kalmick,City Council Member;Natalie Moser, City Council Member;Rhonda Q JANET NGUYEN City Council Member;Rhonda Bolton,City Council Member — State Senator/Businesswoman Bolton,City Council Member =I Yes Q FRANCES MARQUEZ Yes =No Cypress City Councilmember Q Q No MEASURES SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0 Section Ballot Measures-A 12 A City of Huntington Beach, Charter Amendment Measure No. 1 Shall proposed Charter Amendment No. 1,which provides that commencing in 2026,for all municipal elections,the City: may require Voter Identification for elections; provide more in-person voting locations; and monitor ballot drop-boxes, be approved? What your vote means YES NO A"yes" vote on this measure would add new Section 705 A "no" vote on this measure would not add new Section to the Charter, and add the conflict resolution language 705, and leave Section 702 in place as it currently exists. to current Section 702. For and against FOR AGAINST Tony Strickland Dan Kalmick Mayor City Council Member Gracey Van Der Mark Natalie Moser jibs Q/ Mayor Pro Tem City Council Member Rhonda Bolton City Council Member qfkAltr- 41\77,-n IA v)-°' Section Ballot Measures-A 11 Full Text of Measure A City of Huntington Beach EXHIBIT A CHARTER AMENDMENT MEASURES PROPOSED ADDITIONS SHOWN AS UNDERLINED PROPOSED DELETIONS SHOWN AS STRICT'IROUGI I Charter Amendment Measure No.1 Section 702. PROCEDURE FOR HOLDING ELECTIONS. All elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California,as the same now exists or hereafter may be amended, for the holding of municipal elections, so far as the same are not in conflict with this Charter. In the event of such conflict, the provisions of this Charter shall control and prevail,in accordance with Section 103 of this Charter. Section 705. SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS As in Section 300, the City Charter shall determine the term of the City's elective officers, the length of term, and the election cycle in which the election for those offices occur for the City's elective officers. (a) Beginning in 2026,for all municipal elections: (1)"Elector"means a person who is a United States citizen 18 years of age or older,and a resident of the City on or before the day of an election. (2)The City may verify the eligibility of Electors by voter identification. (3)The City may provide at least 20 Americans with Disabilities Act compliant voting locations for in-person voting dispersed evenly throughout the City,in addition to any City facility voting locations. (4)The City may monitor ballot drop boxes located within the City for compliance with all applicable laws. Impartial Analysis City of Huntington Beach Measure A CITY ATTORNEY'S IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE 1 This proposed Charter amendment,if adopted,would amend the Charter related to City elections.Huntington Beach is a Charter City which is authorized by the State Constitution to determine how it conducts City elections.The Charter currently provides that all elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the California Elections Code,so far as they do not conflict with the Charter. This ballot measure proposes to amend Section 702 of the Charter to provide that in the event of a conflict between the Elections Code and the Charter,the provisions of the Charter shall control and prevail.This ballot measure also proposes to add new Section 705 to the Charter,which would: reaffirm the Charter's authority over the term of the City's elective officers,their length of term and their election cycle;and beginning in 2026,define the qualifications of an Elector in a City election as a United States citizen at least 18 years of age,and a resident of the City on or before the day of an election. This ballot measure would also authorize, but not require,the City to:verify the eligibility of Electors by voter identification; provide at least 20 ADA compliant voting locations for in-person voting dispersed throughout the City,in addition to any City facility voting locations;and monitor ballot drop boxes located within the City for compliance with all applicable taws. The adoption of this Measure may result in additional, currently undetermined costs to the City, because the City does not currently perform the described election activities;if the Measure is adopted,and the City chooses to implement the described election activities,it will increase the City's election related costs in an amount that cannot be precisely determined at this time. A"yes"vote on this measure would add new Section 705 to the Charter,and add the conflict resolution language to current Section 702.A"no"vote on this measure would not add new Section 705,and leave Section 702 in place as it currently exists. This Measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council. 1/1441(4/1 3 Section Ballot Measures-A 11 Argument in Favor of Measure A Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Measure A Huntington Beach voters deserve the right to know that our elections are Our elections are ALREADY SECURE,overseen by the award-winning, secure.It is crucial for our democracy that voters have faith in our election ISO-certified Orange County Registrar of Voters. Measure 1 misleads results. That trust in the outcome of elections comes into question when voters,threatening this security by potentially forcing Huntington Beach we can't always be certain who is voting. to conduct its own elections,a task for which the city is UNPREPARED and LACKS INFRASTRUCTURE.This could cost millions,an unnecessary California's Constitution gives Charter Cities like Huntington Beach the financial burden. power to govern how local elections are conducted.Some cities,like San Francisco,have used that power to let illegal immigrants cast ballots.And Claims that this measure requires government-issued photo identification now those extreme policies have been spreading and are being pushed are MISLEADING; this requirement is absent from the amendment. as close as Santa Ana. Federal law already requires accessibility at all polling places for those with disabilities, making additional ADA-compliant locations This Charter Amendment Measure would permanently protect the REDUNDANT. The proposed monitoring of ballot drop boxes is a form election process in Huntington Beach by requiring three things. It would of VOTER INTIMIDATION,creating fear and uncertainty.These items are require voters to provide any government issued photo identification, it all subject to challenge under state and federal taw.Again, more of our adds more handicapped accessible polling locations throughout the City money flowing out of the city,spent on needless court costs. so everyone has a polling place nearby,and it requires monitoring of all ballot drop boxes up through Election Day. The argument that San Francisco allows non-citizens to vote in municipal elections is FACTUALLY INCORRECT.Non-citizens are only permitted in Enshrining these simple steps into our City Charter would forever protect school board elections.This misrepresentation reveals the true intent of Huntington Beach's elections.There are no excuses for failing to protect Measure 1:rooted in FEAR and DIVISIVENESS,not in enhancing election our votes. security. Please,vote YES on Charter Amendment Measure 1. Using the term "illegal immigrant" is outdated and indicative of the s/Tony Strickland measure's intent—to sow division.Our current election system is secure, Mayor efficient, and cost-effective. There is NO EVIDENCE of voter fraud in Huntington Beach that justifies such a drastic,costly,and risky overhaul. s/Gracey Van Der Mark Mayor Pro Tem , For our city's stability, fiscal responsibility, and the integrity of our elections,VOTE NO on Measure 1. s/Dan Kalmick City Council Member s/Natalie Moser City Council Member s/Rhonda Bolton City Council Member k , ,,,,A;,(1.ev- . q/6-f"`""" ,(.v ' . - , „v..- ‘.t v ,P rod s res-A Section Ballot M e a u 12 Argument Against Measure A Rebuttal to Argument Against Measure A VOTE NO on Measure 1. Here are the issues every citizen should Opponents of ensuring safe and fair elections in Huntington Beach have understand before casting their vote: exposed just how weak their arguments are. Instead of sticking to the facts, they've resorted to lies and attempts to mislead voters. It makes COSTLY and RISKY: Our city is UNPREPARED for this shift.The Orange you wonder whose side they're on? County Registrar of Voters implied Huntington Beach may have to manage its OWN separate elections.With NO prior experience,this could The truth is the Registrar of Voters has made NO such comments about become a logistical NIGHTMARE. the future of governing elections in Huntington Beach. Not a word on cost.Not a word on managing our own elections.Not a word,period. LEGAL CONCERNS:California's Attorney General and Secretary of State have ALERTED Huntington Beach that this measure could be UNLAWFUL. The opponents of Voter ID are simply making this up,shamefully lying to This uncertainty poses legal and financial RISKS for our city. Huntington Beach voters.The best they can do is cite that the Bay Area liberal Attorney General disagrees with us is in itself incredibly telling. UNCERTAIN COSTS: With the rush to put this on the ballot, very little Of course he disagrees; he's someone who has long advocated letting financial analysis was completed. The financial implications remain felons vote! UNKNOWN. The potential for costs running into the MILLIONS looms large.Is a move away from our current RELIABLE and economical system Instead of protecting our elections from potential fraud,would opponents worth this? rather we follow Bonta's lead and let felons vote in Huntington Beach? AMBIGUOUS TERMS: The term "voter identification" is GLARINGLY Another way to tell that opponents have nothing is all the equivocation undefined in this measure. Such vagueness is a DANGEROUS precedent they display: "Implied," "may have to," "could become," "could be," and could COMPROMISE our citizens'constitutional right to vote. "potential," "could compromise." These are all just ways of avoiding making any concrete arguments against Voter ID. POLITICAL MANEUVERING: Mayor Tony Strickland's recent arrival and quick push for this change raises eyebrows.Is this truly for the betterment The truth is that voters in Huntington Beach deserve to know, without of Huntington Beach,or a POLITICAL PLAY? question, that their elections are secure. And that is what Measure 1 is about. WHY FIX WHAT ISN'T BROKEN?:There has been NO evidence of voter fraud presented to justify this drastic shift. Our current system is SECURE Please join Mayor Tony Strickland, Mayor Pro-Tem Gracey Van Der Mark, and PROVEN.Why fix what's NOT BROKEN? Councilmember Casey McKeon, Councilmember Pat Burns, and City Attorney Michael Gates in supporting Voter ID for Huntington Beach. WASTEFUL SPENDING:The Council Majority has already SPENT nearly $500,000 just to place this measure on the ballot. Is it WORTH further More information,please visit:www.yesonhbcharter.com uncertain costs? s/Tony Strickland For the sake of Huntington Beach's STABILITY and FISCAL RESP SIBILITY, Mayor VOTE NO on Measure 1. (` s/Gracey Van Der Mark s/Dan Kalmick 1, Mayor Pro Tem City Council Member s/Natalie Moser Cj 1>J4 City Council Member 0/11‘fr s/Rhonda Bolton O7 111 City Council Member I� 0/Vic\ 11 A-City of Huntington Beach, Charter Amendment Measure No. 1 Shall proposed Charter Amendment No. 1, which provides that commencing in 2026, for all municipal elections, the City: may require Voter Identification for elections; provide more in-person voting locations; and monitor ballot drop-boxes, be approved? Supporters:Tony Strickland, Mayor Huntington Beach; Gracey Van Der Mark, Mayor Pro Tern Opponents: Dan Kalmick, City Councilmember; Natalie Moser, City Councilmember; Rhonda Bolton, City Councilmember Full Text of Measure_ City of Huntington Beach EXHIBIT A CHARTER AMENDMENT MEASURES PROPOSED ADDITIONS SHOWN AS UNDERLINED PROPOSED DELETIONS SHOWN AS.STRII(CTI IPOUCI Charter Amendment Measure No.1 Section 702.PROCEDURE FOR HOLDING ELECTIONS. All elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California,as the same now exists or hereafter may be amended,for the holding of municipal elections,so far as the same are not in conflict with this Charter. In the event of such conflict,the provisions of this Charter shall control and prevail,in accordance with Section 103 of this Charter. Section 705.SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS As in Section 300,the City Charter shall determine the term of the City's elective officers,the Length of term, and the election cycle in which the election for those offices occur for the Citv's elective officers. (a)Beginning in 2026,for all municipal elections: (1)"Elector"means a person who is a United States citizen 18 years of age or older,and a resident of the City on or before the day of an election. (2)The City may verify the eligibility of Electors by voter identification. (3)The City may provide at Least 20 Americans with Disabilities Act compliant voting Locations for in-person voting dispersed evenly throughout the City,in addition to any City facility voting locations. (4)The City may monitor ballot drop boxes located within the City for compliance with all applicable laws. i 2 Impartial Analysis City of Huntington Beach Measure_ CITY ATTORNEY'S IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE 1 This proposed Charter amendment,if adopted,would amend the Charter related to City elections.Huntington Beach is a Charter City which is authorized by the State Constitution to determine how it conducts City elections.The Charter currently provides that all elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the California Elections Code,so far as they do not conflict with the Charter. This ballot measure proposes to amend Section 702 of the Charter to provide that in the event of a conflict between the Elections Code and the Charter,the provisions of the Charter shall control and prevail.This ballot measure also proposes to add new Section 705 to the Charter,which would: reaffirm the Charter's authority over the term of the City's elective officers,their length of term and their election cycle;and beginning in 2026,define the qualifications of an Elector in a City election as a United States citizen at least 18 years of age,and a resident of the City on or before the day of an election. This ballot measure would also authorize,but not require,the City to:verify the eligibility of Electors by voter identification;provide at least 20 ADA compliant voting locations for in-person voting dispersed throughout the City,in addition to any City facility voting locations;and monitor ballot drop boxes located within the City for compliance with all applicable laws. The adoption of this Measure may result in additional, currently undetermined costs to the City, because the City does not currently perform the described election activities;if the Measure is adopted,and the City chooses to implement the described election activities,it will increase the City's election related costs in an amount that cannot be precisely determined at this time. A"yes"vote on this measure would add new Section 705 to the Charter,and add the conflict resolution language to current Section 702.A"no"vote on this measure would not add new Section 705,and leave Section 702 in place as it currently exists. This Measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council. . ji6v 12_ elide/ I g" • 4111111 City Huntington Huntin ton Beach A. 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 4W Dan Kalmick City Councilmember November 22, 2023 Robin Estanislau City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main St Huntington Beach CA 92648 RE: Rebuttals to Arguments Against Charter Amendments—Strike Language Request Dear Madam Clerk, I write today as an authorized member of the City Council to draft arguments against, and rebuttals to, arguments for the Charter amendments to appear on the March 2024 ballot. Upon review of the "Rebuttal to Argument Against Charter Amendment Measure 1" ("Re Arg 1") and "Rebuttal to Argument Against Charter Amendment Measure 3" ("Re Arg 3"), I ask you to strike the following language as being "false, misleading or inconsistent" as guided by the California Courts in both Huntington Beach City Council v. Superior Court,94 Cal.App.4th 1417 (2002) and Patterson v. Board of Supervisors, 202 Cal.App.3d 22 (1988) and California Election Code Division 9, Chapter 3. 1) In both "Re Arg 1" and "Re Arg 3", the City Attorney, Michael Gates is being identified as "supporting Voter ID" and "support Measure 3." Please strike "City Attorney Michael Gates" from both Rebuttals. The City Attorney, as department head, signed off on the code language in the charter amendments, the independent analysis of said charter amendments and is now apparently supporting the Charter Amendment. Mr. Gates is not a policy maker in the City of Huntington Beach. It is both misleading and inconsistent with public policy creation to have the Chief Counsel for the policy making board weighing in on public policy that his office drafted and gave independent analysis of. This is confusing to voters and calls into question, ironically, the integrity of the process. If you are not willing to strike, "City Attorney Michael Gates"from these rebuttals, then please remove the independent analysis for Measure 1 and 3 from the voter guide as they clearly are not independent if signed off on by a department head and someone who is supporting them publicly. TELEPHONE(714) 536-5553 2) In "Re Arg 3", the author, Mayor Tony Strickland refers to Councilmembers Bolton, Moser, and me as "Ultra-liberals"without providing any evidence to support this. "Ultra-liberals" in this sense and context is a pejorative.While I support the first amendment,the courts have upheld that personally insulting material or base personal attacks are not allowed.Additionally, the political leanings of the authors of the arguments are irrelevant and do not provide the voters with any more information about the effects of the charter amendments on the City. Please strike the words "Ultra-liberals"from the ballot argument language. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter, Dan Kalmick Councilmember City of Huntington Beach