Official Voter Information Guide, November 8, 2016, General Election

Certiﬁcate of Correctness

I, Alex Padilla, Secretary of State of the State of California, do hereby

certify that the measures included herein will be submitted to the electors

of the State of California at the General Election to be held throughout

the State on November 8, 2016, and that this guide has been correctly

prepared in accordance with the law. Witness my hand and the Great Seal

of the State in Sacramento, California, this 15th day of August, 2016.

Alex Padilla, Secretary of State

Polls Are Open From 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Election Day!

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

OFFICIAL VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

California

General

Election

Tuesday

November 8, 2016

IF YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE BEEN DENIED ANY OF THESE RIGHTS, CALL THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S

CONFIDENTIAL TOLL-FREE VOTER HOTLINE AT (800) 345-VOTE (8683).

VOTER BILL OF

RIGHTS

YOU HAVE THE FOLLOWING RIGHTS:

The right to vote if you are a registered voter.

You are eligible to vote if you are:

• a U.S. citizen living in California

• at least 18 years old

• registered where you currently live

• not in prison or on parole for a felony

The right to vote if you are a registered voter

even if your name is not on the list. You

will vote using a provisional ballot. Your

vote will be counted if elections ofﬁcials

determine that you are eligible to vote.

The right to vote if you are still in line when

the polls close.

The right to cast a secret ballot without

anyone bothering you or telling you how to

vote.

The right to get a new ballot if you have made

a mistake, if you have not already cast your

ballot. You can:

Ask an elections ofﬁcial at a polling place

for a new ballot; or

Exchange your vote-by-mail ballot for a

new one at an elections ofﬁce, or at

your polling place; or

Vote using a provisional ballot, if you

do not have your original vote-by-mail

ballot.

The right to get help casting your ballot

from anyone you choose, except from your

employer or union representative.

The right to drop off your completed

vote-by-mail ballot at any polling place in the

county where you are registered to vote.

The right to get election materials in a

language other than English if enough people

in your voting precinct speak that language.

The right to ask questions to elections

ofﬁcials about election procedures and

watch the election process. If the person

you ask cannot answer your questions, they

must send you to the right person for an

answer. If you are disruptive, they can stop

answering you.

The right to report any illegal or fraudulent

election activity to an elections ofﬁcial or

the Secretary of State’s ofﬁce.

 On the web at www.sos.ca.gov

✆ By phone at (800) 345-VOTE (8683)

 By email at [email protected]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

QUICK-REFERENCE GUIDE 7

PROPOSITIONS

51 School Bonds. Funding for K–12 School and Community College Facilities. Initiative Statute. 18

Medi-Cal Hospital Fee Program. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute

. 24

53 Revenue Bonds. Statewide Voter Approval. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. 30

54 Legislature. Legislation and Proceedings. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. 36

55 Tax Extension to Fund Education and Healthcare. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. 40

56 Cigarette Tax to Fund Healthcare, Tobacco Use Prevention, Research, and Law Enforcement. Initiative

Constitutional Amendment and Statute. 46

57 Criminal Sentences. Parole. Juvenile Criminal Proceedings and Sentencing. Initiative Constitutional

Amendment and Statute. 54

58 English Proﬁciency. Multilingual Education. Initiative Statute. 60

59 Corporations. Political Spending. Federal Constitutional Protections. Legislative Advisory Question. 64

60 Adult Films. Condoms. Health Requirements. Initiative Statute. 68

61 State Prescription Drug Purchases. Pricing Standards. Initiative Statute. 72

62 Death Penalty. Initiative Statute. 78

63 Firearms. Ammunition Sales. Initiative Statute. 84

64 Marijuana Legalization. Initiative Statute. 90

65 Carryout Bags. Charges. Initiative Statute. 100

66 Death Penalty. Procedures. Initiative Statute. 104

67 Ban on Single-Use Plastic Bags. Referendum. 110

OVERVIEW OF STATE BOND DEBT 114

UNITED STATES SENATE CANDIDATE STATEMENTS 117

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS 118

INFORMATION PAGES

Voter Bill of Rights 2

Assistance for Voters with Disabilities 4

Voter Registration 4

Voter Registration Privacy Information 4

Ways to Vote 5

Provisional Voting 5

Letter from the Secretary of State 6

Online Resources 16

Audio & Large Print Voter Information Guides 16

Find Your Polling Place 16

Elections in California 17

Top Contributors to Statewide

Candidates and Ballot Measures 17

Information About Candidate Statements 116

U.S. Presidential Candidates 116

Dates to Remember 223

Assistance for Voters with Disabilities

State and federal laws require polling places to be physically accessible to voters with disabilities. County elections

ofﬁcials inspect each site and often make temporary modiﬁcations for Election Day. Every person who works in a

polling place is trained in election laws and voter rights, including the need to make reasonable modiﬁcations of

policies and procedures to ensure equal access.

State and federal laws require that all voters be able to cast their ballots privately and independently. Each polling

place must have at least one voting machine that allows all voters, including those who are blind or visually impaired,

to cast a ballot without assistance. The voting machine permits voters to verify their vote choices and, if there is an

error, allows voters to correct those choices before submitting their ballot.

Check your sample ballot

Your county sample ballot booklet will:

• Describe how persons with disabilities can vote privately and independently

• Display a wheelchair symbol if your polling place is accessible to voters with disabilities

At the polling place

If you need help marking your ballot, you may choose up to two people to help you. This person cannot be:

• Your employer or anyone who works for your employer

• Your labor union leader or anyone who works for your labor union

Curbside voting allows you to park as close as possible to the voting area. Elections ofﬁcials will bring you a roster to

sign, a ballot, and any other voting materials you may need, whether you are actually at a curb or in a car.

Contact your county elections ofﬁce to see if curbside voting is available at your polling place.

Voter Registration

If you have already registered to vote, you do not need to reregister unless you change your name, home address,

mailing address or if you want to change or select a political party.

You can register to vote online at RegisterToVote.ca.gov. Or call the Secretary of State’s free Voter Hotline at

(800) 345-VOTE (8683) to get a form mailed to you.

Voter registration forms can be found at most post ofﬁces, libraries, city and county government ofﬁces, county

elections ofﬁces, and the California Secretary of State’s Ofﬁce.

Voter Registration Privacy Information

Safe at Home Conﬁdential Voter Registration Program: Certain voters facing life-threatening

(i.e. domestic violence, stalking victims) situations may qualify for conﬁdential voter status. For more

information, contact the Secretary of State’s Safe at Home program toll-free at (877) 322-5227 or visit

http://www.sos.ca.gov/registries/safe-home/.

Voter Information Privacy: Information on your voter registration afﬁdavit will be used by elections ofﬁcials to

send you ofﬁcial information on the voting process, such as the location of your polling place and the issues and

candidates that will appear on the ballot. Commercial use of voter registration information is prohibited by law and

is a misdemeanor. Voter information may be provided to a candidate for ofﬁce, a ballot measure committee, or other

person for election, scholarly, journalistic, political, or governmental purposes, as determined by the Secretary of

State. Driver license and social security numbers, or your signature as shown on your voter registration card, cannot

be released for these purposes. If you have any questions about the use of voter information or wish to report

suspected misuse of such information, please call the Secretary of State’s Voter Hotline at (800) 345-VOTE (8683).

Provisional Voting

If your name is not on the voter list at your polling place, you have the right to vote a provisional ballot.

What Is a Provisional Ballot?

A provisional ballot is a regular ballot that is placed in a special envelope prior to being put in the ballot box.

Who Casts a Provisional Ballot?

Provisional ballots are ballots cast by voters who:

• Believe they are registered to vote even though their names are not on the ofﬁcial voter registration list at the polling place.

• Vote by mail but did not receive their ballot or do not have their ballot with them, and instead want to vote at a polling place.

Will My Provisional Ballot Be Counted?

Your provisional ballot will be counted after elections ofﬁcials have conﬁrmed that you are registered to vote in that

county and you did not already vote in that election.

You may vote a provisional ballot at any polling place in the county in which you are registered to vote, however, only

the elections contests you are eligible to vote for will be counted.

How Can You Check the Status of Your Provisional Ballot?

Every voter who casts a provisional ballot has the right to ﬁnd out from their county elections ofﬁcial if the ballot

was counted and, if not, the reason why it was not counted.



Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot- status/ for a list of county contacts and information on how to

check the status of your provisional ballot.

Ways to Vote

Vote by Mail

• Request a vote-by-mail ballot by November 1.

• Return by mail—must be postmarked on or before November 8 and received by your county

elections ofﬁce no later than November 14.

• Return in person—to your county elections ofﬁce or any polling place in your county before

8:00 p.m. on November 8.

Vote Early in Person

Some counties offer early voting at a few locations before Election Day. Contact your county

elections ofﬁce to see if they offer early voting. County contact information can be found at:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/county-elections-ofﬁces/.

Vote at the Polls on Election Day

• Polls are open on Election Day: November 8 from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

• The location of your polling place is printed on the back page of the sample ballot booklet your

county elections ofﬁcial mailed to you. You can also ﬁnd your polling place:

✆ By calling (800) 345-VOTE (8683)

 Online at www.sos.ca.gov/elections/polling-place

By texting Vote to GOVOTE (468683)

Dear Fellow Californians,

There is no greater right than the right to vote. Through voting, you help select

your local, state, and national leaders, and ensure that your voice is heard. The

Presidential General Election is fast approaching. I encourage you to participate in

your most fundamental right as a citizen of the United States of America.

This Voter Guide can help you make informed decisions. It includes impartial

analysis, arguments in favor and against the many ballot measures, declarations of the

candidates, the Voter Bill of Rights, and other important information.

All of the information is presented here as a reference for you. This guide

is also available online on the California Secretary of State website:

www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov.

Please take the time to read the information in this guide carefully as we approach

Election Day. If you would like to know who is ﬁnancing each of the campaigns, you

can search campaign ﬁnance information at: http://powersearch.sos.ca.gov/.

If you have any questions about how to vote, or how to register to vote, you can contact

the ofﬁce of the Secretary of State by calling toll-free 1-800-345-VOTE (8683).

To obtain the contact information of your local county elections ofﬁcials, you can visit

the Secretary of State website at: www.sos.ca.gov/county-elections-ofﬁces.

Thank you for your commitment to the future of both our state and nation. The

Presidential General Election is Tuesday, November 8. Your vote is important.

Remember that your vote is your voice. Be heard. VOTE!

Secretary of State

Polls Are Open From 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Election Day!

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

OFFICIAL VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

California

General

Election

Tuesday

November 8, 2016

• Polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on

Election Day.

• Instructions on how to vote can be obtained from

a poll worker or by reading your sample ballot

booklet.

• New voters may be asked to provide identiﬁcation

or other documentation according to federal law.

You have the right to cast a provisional ballot,

even if you do not provide the documentation.

• Only eligible voters can vote.

• It is against the law to tamper with voting

equipment.

This quick reference guide

contains summary and

contact information for

each state proposition

appearing on the

November 8, 2016, ballot.

SUMMARY

Authorizes $9 billion in general obligation bonds for new

construction and modernization of K–12 public school

facilities; charter schools and vocational education facilities;

and California Community Colleges facilities. Fiscal Impact:

State costs of about $17.6 billion to pay off both the

principal ($9 billion) and interest ($8.6 billion) on the

bonds. Payments of about $500 million per year for

35 years.

PROP

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

CON

Prop. 51 was

created for greedy

developers to exploit

taxpayers for proﬁt. Prop. 51

stops legislators from

providing fair school funding.

Disadvantaged schools are

left behind. There’s no

improvement in taxpayer

accountability. It does

nothing to ﬁght waste, fraud

and abuse. Governor Brown

opposes Prop. 51. Vote NO

on 51.

PRO

Our children

deserve safe

schools where they can learn,

but many schools and

community colleges need

repairs to meet health and

safety standards. Prop. 51

will ﬁx deteriorating schools,

upgrade classrooms, and

provide job-training facilities

for veterans and vocational

education. All projects are

accountable to local

taxpayers.

ARGUMENTS

A NO vote on this

measure means: The

state would not have the

authority to sell new general

obligation bonds for K–12

public school and community

college facilities.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means:

The state could sell $9 billion

in general obligation bonds

for education facilities

($7 billion for K–12 public

school facilities and

$2 billion for community

college facilities).

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

SUMMARY

Extends indeﬁnitely an existing statute that imposes fees on

hospitals to fund Medi-Cal health care services, care for

uninsured patients, and children’s health coverage. Fiscal

Impact: Uncertain ﬁscal effect, ranging from relatively little

impact to annual state General Fund savings of around

$1 billion and increased funding for public hospitals in the

low hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

CON

Removes all

accountability and

oversight of over $3 billion of

taxpayer dollars. Gives

$3 billion to hospital CEOs

with no independent audit

and no requirement the

money is spent on health

care. Public funds can be

spent on lobbyists, perks and

salaries for hospital

bureaucrats instead of

children and seniors.

PRO

YES on Proposition

52 extends the

current state Medi-Cal

hospital fee program, which

generates over $3 billion a

year in federal matching

funds that pay for health care

services for children, seniors

and low-income families.

Proposition 52 prohibits the

Legislature from diverting this

money for other purposes

without voter approval.

ARGUMENTS

A NO vote on this

measure means: An

existing charge imposed on

most private hospitals would

end on January 1, 2018

unless additional action by

the Legislature extended it.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means: An

existing charge imposed on

most private hospitals that is

scheduled to end on

January 1, 2018 under

current law would be

extended permanently. It

would be harder for the

Legislature to make changes

to it. Revenue raised would

be used to create state

savings, increase payments

for hospital services to low-

income Californians, and

provide grants to public

hospitals.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Yes on Proposition 51—

Californians for Quality

Schools

info@californiansforqualityschools.com

www.californiansforqualityschools.com

AGAINST

G. Rick Marshall, Chief

Financial Ofﬁcer

California Taxpayers Action

Network

621 Del Mar Avenue

Chula Vista, CA 91910

(310 ) 346-7425

rick@StopProp51.org

StopProp51.org

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Yes on Proposition 52, a

coalition of California

Association of Hospitals and

Health Systems and

non-proﬁt health care

organizations.

info@yesprop52.org

www.yesprop52.org

AGAINST

George M. Yin

Californians for Hospital

Accountabilty and Quality

Care—No on 52, Sponsored

by Service Employees

International Union—United

Healthcare Workers West

777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite

4050, Los Angeles, CA 90017

(213) 452-6565

gyin@kaufmanlegalgroup.com

www.noon52.com

QUICK-REFERENCE GUIDE

PROP

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

Quick-Reference Guide

SUMMARY

Requires statewide voter approval before any revenue bonds

can be issued or sold by the state for certain projects if the

bond amount exceeds $2 billion. Fiscal Impact: State and

local ﬁscal effects are unknown and would depend on which

projects are affected by the measure and what actions

government agencies and voters take in response to the

measure’s voting requirement.

PROP

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

CON

Prop. 53 erodes

local control by

requiring statewide vote on

some local infrastructure

projects. Empowers voters in

faraway regions to reject your

community’s needs. Prop. 53

jeopardizes water supply,

bridge safety, other repairs.

No exemption for

emergencies/disasters.

California Professional

Fireﬁghters, cities, counties,

Association of California

Water Agencies urge No on

53. www.NoProp53.com

PRO

Proposition 53

requires voter

approval for state

megaprojects costing over

$2 billion in state revenue

bonds—like the bullet train.

Doesn’t impact local

projects. Increases

transparency so taxpayers

know the true cost. Holds

politicians accountable and

stops blank checks. If

taxpayers have to pay, they

should have a say!

ARGUMENTS

A NO vote on this

measure means: State

revenue bonds could

continue to be used without

voter approval.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means:

State revenue bonds totaling

more than $2 billion for a

project that is funded,

owned, or managed by the

state would require statewide

voter approval.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

SUMMARY

Prohibits Legislature from passing any bill unless published

on Internet for 72 hours before vote. Requires Legislature to

record its proceedings and post on Internet. Authorizes use

of recordings. Fiscal Impact: One-time costs of $1 million to

$2 million and ongoing costs of about $1 million annually to

record legislative meetings and make videos of those

meetings available on the Internet.

CON

A NO vote

continues free

Internet & TV access for any

California citizen to see how

laws are made. A NO vote

also prevents special

interests like tobacco, oil,

and drug companies from

delaying passage of state

laws. A NO vote also limits

political “attack” ads.

PRO

Prop. 54 stops

special-interest,

surprise legislation from

passing either legislative

house without 72 hours for

review. Prop. 54 posts all the

Legislature’s public meetings

online, so voters can review

legislators’ public actions. A

bipartisan coalition of good-

government, taxpayer,

minority, business, and

environmental groups backs

Prop. 54. Requires no new

tax money.

ARGUMENTS

A NO vote on this

measure means: Rules

and duties of the Legislature

would not change.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means:

Any bill (including changes to

the bill) would have to be

made available to legislators

and posted on the Internet

for at least 72 hours before

the Legislature could pass it.

The Legislature would have

to ensure that its public

meetings are recorded and

make videos of those

meetings available on the

Internet.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Yes on 53—Stop Blank Checks

925 University Ave.

Sacramento, CA 95825

(916) 500-7040

Info@StopBlankChecks.com

www.YESon53.com

AGAINST

No on Prop. 53—Californians

to Protect Local Control

info@NoProp53.com

NoProp53.com

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Yes on 54—Voters First, Not

Special Interests,

sponsored by out-

of-state plastic companies

from South Carolina and

Texas. They don’t care about

California’s environment, they

just want to confuse voters

and distract from the real

issue: the need to phase out

plastic grocery bags. 65 is

deceptive and doesn’t

deserve your vote.

PRO

YES ON 65—

PROTECT THE

ENVIRONMENT. In a deal

brokered by special interest

lobbyists, the Legislature

REQUIRED grocery stores to

CHARGE and KEEP fees on

certain bags at checkout.

Grocers get $300 million

richer, while shoppers lose

$300 million. Prop. 65

redirects those fees to

environmental projects, not

grocer proﬁts.

ARGUMENTS

A NO vote on this

measure means: If

charges on carryout bags are

required by a state law, that

law could direct the use of

the resulting revenue toward

any purpose.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means: If

state law (1) prohibits giving

customers certain carryout

bags for free and (2) requires

a charge for other types of

carryout bags, the resulting

revenue would be deposited

in a new state fund to

support certain

environmental programs.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

SUMMARY

Changes procedures governing state court challenges to

death sentences. Designates superior court for initial

petitions and limits successive petitions. Requires appointed

attorneys who take noncapital appeals to accept death

penalty appeals. Exempts prison ofﬁcials from existing

regulation process for developing execution methods. Fiscal

Impact: Unknown ongoing impact on state court costs for

processing legal challenges to death sentences. Potential

prison savings in the tens of millions of dollars annually.

A NO vote on this

measure means:

There would be no changes

to the state’s current court

procedures for legal

challenges to death

sentences. The state would

still be limited to housing

condemned inmates only at

certain state prisons.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means:

Court procedures for legal

challenges to death

sentences would be subject

to various changes, such as

time limits on those

challenges and revised rules

to increase the number of

available attorneys for those

challenges. Condemned

inmates could be housed at

any state prison.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Yes on 65

2350 Kerner Blvd., Suite 250

San Rafael, CA 94901

info@SayYesOn65.com

www.SayYesOn65.com

AGAINST

Mark Murray

Californians Against Waste

921 11th Street, Ste. 420

Sacramento, CA 95814

(916) 443-5422

murray@cawrecycles.org

cawrecycles.org

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Kermit Alexander

Californians for Death Penalty

Reform and Savings

520 Capitol Mall, Ste. 630

Sacramento, CA 95814

(800) 372-6417

info@noprop62yesprop66.com

www.noprop62yesprop66.com

AGAINST

No on 66—Californians for

Fair Justice

39 Drumm St.

San Francisco, CA 94111

campaign@cafairjustice.org

www.NoonCAProp66.org

QUICK-REFERENCE GUIDE

PROP

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

CON

Prop. 66 is not real

reform. We don’t

know all of its consequences,

but we do know this: it adds

more layers of government

bureaucracy causing more

delays, costs taxpayers

money, and increases

California’s risk of executing

an innocent person. Prop. 66

is a costly experiment that

makes matters worse.

PRO

Our death penalty

system is bogged

down by decades of appeals.

We need to reform it, not

repeal it, by passing

Proposition 66. Prop. 66

saves millions, brings closure

to victims’ families and

justice to brutal murderers.

Innocent persons won’t be

executed under Prop. 66.

Victims’ families, DAs and

law enforcement support

Proposition 66.

ARGUMENTS

Quick-Reference Guide

SUMMARY

A “Yes” vote approves, and a “No” vote rejects, a statute

that prohibits grocery and other stores from providing

customers single-use plastic or paper carryout bags but

permits sale of recycled paper bags and reusable bags.

Fiscal Impact: Relatively small ﬁscal effects on state and

local governments, including a minor increase in state

administrative costs and possible minor local government

savings from reduced litter and waste management costs.

PROP

BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC BAGS.

REFERENDUM.

CON

DON’T BE

FOOLED. Prop. 67

is a $300 million annual

HIDDEN TAX on consumers

who will be forced to pay

$.10 for every grocery bag at

checkout. Not one penny

goes to the environment. All

$300 million goes to grocer

proﬁts. Stop the bag

tax . . . VOTE NO ON

PROP. 67.

PRO

YES on 67 protects

California’s

successful efforts to PHASE

OUT PLASTIC GROCERY

BAGS. Plastic bags strangle

wildlife, litter communities,

raise clean-up costs, clog

recycling machines. Bans on

plastic grocery bags are

WORKING IN 150

CALIFORNIA

COMMUNITIES. Don’t let

out-of-state plastic

companies stop California.

YES on 67.

ARGUMENTS

A NO vote on this

measure means:

Stores could continue to

provide single-use plastic

carryout bags and other bags

free of charge unless a local

law restricts the use of such

bags.

YES

A YES vote on this

measure means:

Most grocery stores,

convenience stores, large

pharmacies, and liquor stores

would be prohibited from

providing single-use plastic

carryout bags. Stores

generally would be required

to charge at least 10 cents

for any other carryout bag

provided to customers at

checkout. Stores would keep

the resulting revenue for

speciﬁed purposes.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

FOR

Mark Murray

California vs Big Plastic

921 11th Street, Ste. 420

Sacramento, CA 95814

(916) 443-5422

murray@cawrecycles.org

protectplasticbagban.org

AGAINST

No on 67

2350 Kerner Blvd., Suite 250

San Rafael, CA 94901

QUICK-REFERENCE GUIDE

Quick-Reference Guide

Visit the Secretary of

State’s Website to:

• Research campaign contributions and lobbying

activity

cal-access.sos.ca.gov OR

powersearch.sos.ca.gov

• View this voter guide in other languages

www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov

• Find your polling place on Election Day

www.sos.ca.gov/elections/polling-place

• Get vote-by-mail ballot information

www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration/vote-mail

• Read helpful information for ﬁrst-time voters

www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-california

• Watch live election results after polls close on

Election Day

http://vote.sos.ca.gov

Audio & Large Print Voter

Information Guides

This guide is available at no cost in English, Chinese,

Hindi, Japanese, Khmer, Korean, Spanish, Tagalog,

Thai, and Vietnamese.

To order:

✆ Call the Secretary of State’s toll-free voter hotline

at (800) 345-8683

 Visit www.sos.ca.gov

Download an audio MP3 version at

www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/audio

Find Your Polling Place

Polling places are established by county elections

ofﬁcials. When you receive your county sample ballot

booklet in the mail a few weeks before Election Day,

look for your polling place address on the back cover.

You may also visit the Secretary of State’s website at

www.sos.ca.gov/elections/polling-place or call the toll-

free Voter Hotline at (800) 345-VOTE (8683).

You can also text Vote to GOVOTE (468683) to ﬁnd

the location of your polling place.

Elections in California

California law requires the following information to be printed in this guide.

Party-Nominated/Partisan Ofﬁces

Political parties may formally nominate candidates for party-nominated/partisan ofﬁces at the primary election.

A nominated candidate will represent that party as its ofﬁcial candidate for the speciﬁc ofﬁce at the general

election and the ballot will reﬂect an ofﬁcial designation. The top vote-getter for each party at the primary

election moves on to the general election. Parties also elect ofﬁcers of county central committees at the

primary election.

A voter can only vote in the primary election of the political party he or she has disclosed a preference for

upon registering to vote. However, a political party may allow a person who has declined to disclose a party

preference to vote in that party’s primary election.

Voter-Nominated Ofﬁces

Political parties are not entitled to formally nominate candidates for voter-nominated ofﬁces at the primary

election. A candidate nominated for a voter-nominated ofﬁce at the primary election is the nominee of the

people and not the ofﬁcial nominee of any party at the general election. A candidate for nomination to a voter-

nominated ofﬁce shall have his or her party preference, or lack of party preference, stated on the ballot, but

the party preference designation is selected solely by the candidate and is shown for the information of the

voters only. It does not mean the candidate is nominated or endorsed by the party designated, or that there is

an afﬁliation between the party and candidate, and no candidate nominated by the voters shall be deemed to

be the ofﬁcially nominated candidate of any political party. In the county sample ballot booklet, parties may

list the candidates for voter-nominated ofﬁces who have received the party’s ofﬁcial endorsement.

Any voter may vote for any candidate for a voter-nominated ofﬁce, if they meet the other qualiﬁcations required

to vote for that ofﬁce. The top two vote-getters at the primary election move on to the general election for the

voter-nominated ofﬁce even if both candidates have speciﬁed the same party preference designation. No party

is entitled to have a candidate with its party preference designation move on to the general election, unless the

candidate is one of the two highest vote-getters at the primary election.

Nonpartisan Ofﬁces

Political parties are not entitled to nominate candidates for nonpartisan ofﬁces at the primary election, and a

candidate at the primary election is not the ofﬁcial nominee of any party for the speciﬁc ofﬁce at the general

election. A candidate for nomination to a nonpartisan ofﬁce may not designate his or her party preference, or

lack of party preference, on the ballot. The top two vote-getters at the primary election move on to the general

election for the nonpartisan ofﬁce.

Top Contributors to Statewide

Candidates and Ballot Measures

When a committee (a person or group of people who receive or spend money for the purpose

of inﬂuencing voters to support or oppose candidates or ballot measures) supports or opposes

a ballot measure or candidate and raises at least $1 million, the committee must report its top

10 contributors to the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). The committee

must update the top 10 list when there is any change.

These lists are available on the FPPC website at http://www.fppc.ca.gov/transparency/top-contributors.html.

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

California Has 8.3 Million Students Enrolled

in Public K–14 Education. The public

school system from kindergarten through

grade 12 (K–12) currently has about

6.2 million students, 10,000 schools

(including 1,100 charter schools),

950 school districts, and 58 county

ofﬁces of education. The California

Community Colleges currently have

2.1 million students at 113 campuses

operated by 72 community college

districts. The community colleges offer

courses in English, other basic skills, and

citizenship, as well as provide workforce

training, associate degrees, and

preparation for transfer to universities.

K–12 Public School Facility Projects

Approved Through State Review Process.

Under the state’s existing School

Facilities Program, schools submit

project proposals to the state’s Ofﬁce

of Public School Construction. The

project proposals may be for buying

land, constructing new buildings, and

modernizing (that is, renovating) existing

buildings. Schools are eligible for new

construction funding if they do not

have enough space for all current and

projected students. Schools are eligible

for modernization funding for buildings

that are at least 25 years old.

Program Based Upon State and Local

Partnership. In most cases, schools that

receive state grant funding for approved

projects must contribute local funding for

those projects. For buying land and new

construction projects, the state and local

shares are each 50 percent of project

costs. For modernization projects, the

state share is 60 percent and the local

share is 40 percent of project costs. If

schools lack sufﬁcient local funding,

they may apply for additional state grant

• Authorizes $9 billion in general

obligation bonds: $3 billion for

new construction and $3 billion for

modernization of K–12 public school

facilities; $1 billion for charter schools

and vocational education facilities; and

$2 billion for California Community

Colleges facilities.

• Bars amendment to existing authority

to levy developer fees to fund school

facilities, until new construction bond

proceeds are spent or December 31,

2020, whichever is earlier.

• Bars amendment to existing State

Allocation Board process for allocating

school construction funding, as to

these bonds.

• Appropriates money from the General

Fund to pay off bonds.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S

ESTIMATE OF NET STATE AND LOCAL

GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• State costs of about $17.6 billion

to pay off both the principal

($9 billion) and interest ($8.6 billion)

on the bonds. Payments of about

$500 million per year for 35 years.

For the full text of Proposition 51, see page 118. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

funding, up to 100 percent of the project

cost, thereby reducing or eliminating

their required local contributions.

A Few Special Program Components for Two

Types of K–12 Facility Projects. Most of

the basic program rules apply to career

technical education and charter school

facilities, but a few program components

differ. Although the state pays 60 percent

of project costs for most modernization

projects, it pays 50 percent for career

technical education and charter school

modernization projects. (Shares for new

construction are the same.) For career

technical education, state grants also are

capped at $3 million for a new facility

and $1.5 million for a modernized

facility. For charter school projects,

proposals also must undergo a special

state review to determine if the charter

school is ﬁnancially sound. In addition to

these special rules, schools that cannot

cover their local share for these two types

of projects may apply for state loans

(rather than additional grant funding).

Schools must repay their career technical

education loans and charter school loans

over maximum 15-year and 30-year

periods, respectively.

Community College Facility Projects

Approved in Annual Budget. Though

community colleges also may receive

state funding for buying land,

constructing new buildings, and

modernizing existing buildings, the

process for submitting and approving

projects is different than for K–12

facilities. To receive state funding,

community college districts must submit

project proposals to the Chancellor of

the community college system. The

Chancellor then decides which projects to

submit to the Legislature and Governor,

with projects approved as part of the

state budget process and funded in the

annual state budget act.

Local Contributions Vary for Community

College Facilities. Unlike for K–12

facilities, state law does not specify

certain state and local contributions for

community college facilities. Instead,

the Chancellor of the community college

system ranks all submitted facility

projects using a scoring system. Projects

for which community colleges contribute

more local funds receive more points

under the scoring system.

State Primarily Funds Public School and

Community College Facilities Through

General Obligation Bonds. The state

typically issues general obligation bonds

to pay for facility projects. A majority of

voters must approve these bonds. From

1998 through 2006, voters approved

four facility bonds that provided a

total of $36 billion for K–12 facilities

and $4 billion for community college

facilities. Voters have not approved new

state facility bonds since 2006. Today,

the state has virtually no remaining

funding from previously issued school

and community college facility bonds.

(For more information on the state’s use

of bonds, see the “Overview of State

Bond Debt” later in this voter guide.)

State Retires Bonds Over Time by Making

Annual Debt Service Payments. In

2016–17, the state is paying $2.4 billion

to service debt from previously issued

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

state general obligation bonds for

school facilities and $300 million for

community college facilities.

Districts Raise Local Funding for Facilities

Mainly Through Local General Obligation

Bonds. School and community college

districts may sell local general obligation

bonds to help cover the cost of facility

projects. Districts must get at least

55 percent of their voters to approve

the sale of these local bonds. Since

1998, school and community college

districts have sold about $64 billion and

$21 billion, respectively, in local general

obligation bonds for facility projects.

A Few Other Local Funding Sources. In

addition to local bonds, school districts

can raise funds for school facilities by

charging fees on new development.

Since 1998, school districts have

raised $10 billion from developer fees.

(Community colleges do not have this

revenue-raising option.) School and

community college districts both can

raise local funding for facilities using

various other methods, including parcel

taxes, but they use these other methods

much less frequently.

PROPOSAL

As shown in Figure 1, this measure

allows the state to sell $9 billion of

general obligation bonds for public school

and community college facilities.

K–12 School Facilities. As shown in

the ﬁgure, the $7 billion for K–12

school facilities is designated for four

types of projects: new construction,

modernization, career technical

education facilities, and charter school

facilities. The rules of the state’s existing

school facility program would apply to

these funds.

Community College Facilities. The

$2 billion community college funding

is for any facility project, including

buying land, constructing new buildings,

modernizing existing buildings, and

purchasing equipment. Consistent

with existing practice, the Legislature

and Governor would approve speciﬁc

community college facility projects to

be funded with the bond monies in the

annual budget act.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Measure Would Increase State Debt Service

Costs. The cost to the state of issuing

the proposed bonds would depend on

the timing of the bond sales, the interest

rates in effect at the time the bonds are

sold, and the time period over which the

bonds are repaid. The state likely would

issue these bonds over a period of about

ﬁve years and make principal and interest

PROPOSITION

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

For the full text of Proposition 51, see page 118. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

payments from the state's General Fund

(its main operating account) over a period

of about 35 years. If the bonds were sold

at an average interest rate of 5 percent,

the total cost to pay off the bonds would

be $17.6 billion ($9 billion in principal

plus $8.6 billion in interest). The

average payment per year would be about

$500 million. This amount is less than

half of 1 percent of the state’s current

General Fund budget.

Measure Would Have Some Impact on Local

Revenue-Raising and Facility Spending.

Passage of a new state bond would

likely have some effect on local district

behavior. This is because school and

community college districts typically

are required to make local contributions

to their facilities if they want to obtain

state funding. The exact effect on local

behavior is uncertain. On the one hand,

some school and community college

districts might raise and spend more

locally given the availability of additional

state funds. As a result, more overall

facility activity might occur in these

districts over the next several years. In

contrast, other school and community

college districts might raise and

spend less locally as the availability of

additional state funds means they would

not need to bear the full cost of their

facility projects. These districts might

complete the same number of projects as

they would have absent a new state bond.

They would use the newly available state

funding to offset what they otherwise

would have raised locally.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 51

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 51

★

This guarantees developers don’t pay their fair share.

ALLOWS RECKLESS SPENDING:

Bonds are expensive. Two tax dollars are required to

payback every dollar borrowed. Bonds should be used for

things that last decades. Incredibly, Prop. 51 funds can

be spent on equipment with a 10-year “average useful

life.” Bond payments will last decades longer.

This is like buying your lunch with a 30-year mortgage

and paying for it many times over.

Prop. 51 may be the most self-serving, devious measure

ever put before California voters. It was created by the

construction industry to beneﬁt the construction industry.

Visit StopProp51.org. See who’s behind the Yes campaign.

Vote NO on 51!

G. RICK MARSHALL, Chief Financial Ofﬁcer

California Taxpayers Action Network

WENDY M. LACK, Director

California Taxpayers Action Network

Since 2001, we’ve approved over $146 billion in state

and local bonds to ﬁx California schools. Yet Prop. 51

supporters still claim our schools don’t “meet basic health

and safety standards.”

Where did the money go?

INVITES FRAUD:

The last statewide school bond audit by the California

Department of Finance found BILLIONS AT RISK of “being

used for unintended purposes . . . if left unresolved . . . will

continue to adversely affect bond accountability.”

Because spending safeguards are not implemented or not

working bond funds can be misused.

Both Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala

Harris have raised this concern.

Prop. 51 keeps this ﬂawed system in place.

BLOCKS REFORMS:

Prop. 51 ties the hands of legislators and locks in current

rules. It hijacks our democracy by barring legislators from

correcting rules that deny disadvantaged schools the help

they need.

PROP. 51 MAKES PROTECTING STUDENTS A TOP PRIORITY.

Many schools and community colleges are outdated and need

repairs to meet basic health and safety standards—including

retroﬁtting for earthquake safety, ﬁre safety, and removing

asbestos and lead paint and pipes. Prop. 51 will help make

sure our local schools are updated and safe for students.

PROP. 51 WILL HELP ALL CALIFORNIA STUDENTS GET

A QUALITY EDUCATION.

“Nothing is more disheartening than teaching students

when our classrooms are falling apart and don’t provide

access to student’s basic academic needs. To help

students succeed, Prop. 51 will repair outdated and

deteriorating schools and upgrade classroom technology,

libraries, and computer and science labs.”—Tim Smith,

2014 California Teacher of the Year, Florin High School

IMPROVING VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND HELPING

RETURNING VETERANS.

“Prop. 51 allows local schools and community colleges

to upgrade vocational education classrooms so students

can train for good-paying careers and contribute to

California’s growing economy. And, we owe it to our

veterans to provide training and help them transition to

the workplace.”—Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of

Public Instruction

INCREASE ACCESS TO AN AFFORDABLE COLLEGE

EDUCATION.

“By upgrading and repairing our community college

facilities, we can increase access to quality, affordable

higher education for all Californians. Our community

colleges contribute to the economic and social strength of

local communities throughout the state, and help college

students avoid thousands of dollars in debt. We need to

show our support to California’s students.”—Jonathan

Lightman, Executive Director, Faculty Association of

California Community Colleges

CALIFORNIA FACES A LONG BACKLOG OF

NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECTS.

“School nurses are aware of the need for improved

school facilities, the overcrowding, plumbing and other

environmental issues requiring modiﬁcations necessary

to maintain optimum health and safety of the students,

faculty, and staff will be addressed by Prop. 51.’’—Kathy

Ryan, President, California School Nurses Organization

PROTECTS LOCAL CONTROL OVER EVERY PROJECT.

“Prop. 51 will protect local control by requiring funding

only be used for school improvement projects approved

by local school and community college boards. All of

the money must be spent locally, where taxpayers can

have a voice in deciding how these funds are best used

to improve their neighborhood schools.”—Chris Ungar,

President, California School Boards Association

A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE WAY TO UPGRADE AND REPAIR

SCHOOLS WITH TOUGH TAXPAYER ACCOUNTABILITY.

“A statewide bond is the best option for meeting

California’s school construction needs, because education

is a statewide concern. Without this bond, local

taxpayers will face higher local property taxes that create

inequalities between schools in different communities,

treat taxpayers differently, and lack strong accountability

provisions.”—Teresa Casazza, President, California

Taxpayers Association

WE CAN’T WAIT ANY LONGER.

We haven’t passed a statewide school bond in ten years,

and now we face a massive backlog of local school

projects. Our schools are in desperate need of upgrades

and repairs to keep our students safe and ensure they

have facilities where they can learn.

Prop. 51 will help our students and veterans succeed.

PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING YES ON PROP. 51.

JUSTINE FISCHER, President

California State PTA

KEN HEWITT, President

California Retired Teachers Association

LARRY GALIZIO, Chief Executive Ofﬁcer

Community College League of California

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

SCHOOL BONDS. FUNDING FOR K–12 SCHOOL AND

COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 51

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 51

★

Prop. 51 ensures that every California student has the

opportunity to learn in safe, up-to-date schools while also

protecting taxpayers.

PROP. 51 IS NOT A TAX INCREASE.

Prop. 51 is a bond that will be repaid from a very small

amount of the state’s EXISTING annual revenue to repair

and upgrade local schools. It does NOT raise taxes.

PROTECTS TAXPAYERS FROM HIGHER LOCAL TAXES.

Without matching dollars from a statewide school bond,

taxpayers will face higher local property taxes to pay for

school repairs and upgrades, and some school districts

may never be able to afford ﬁxing schools on their own.

This partnership between the state and local school

districts has fairly funded school repairs for all students.

REQUIRES TOUGH ACCOUNTABILITY.

Prop. 51 puts local voters in control of how school bond

monies are spent. It requires annual audits and tough

accounting standards.

PROP. 51 MAKES PROTECTING STUDENTS A PRIORITY.

Many schools and community colleges are outdated and

need repairs to meet basic health and safety standards—

including retroﬁtting for earthquake safety, ﬁre safety,

and removing asbestos and lead paint and pipes. These

repairs are critical to keeping every student safe.

YES ON PROP. 51.

Prop. 51 will help every California student get a quality

education, increase access to an affordable college

education, and improve vocational training for veterans

and students preparing for the workplace.

Prop. 51 is supported by taxpayer groups, teachers,

business, Republicans, and Democrats. See for yourself

at www.californiansforqualityschools.com

Please join us in supporting Prop. 51.

CHRIS UNGAR, President

California School Boards Association

TERESA CASAZZA, President

California Taxpayers Association

LARRY GALIZIO, Chief Executive Ofﬁcer

Community College League of California

Bonds are debts that must be repaid with interest, over

time.

Since 1998, California voters have approved $35 billion

in state school construction bonds. All were placed on

the ballot by the Legislature and backed by the Governor.

Proposition 51 is different. The Legislature did not put

Proposition 51 on the ballot. And the Governor opposes it.

We join the Governor in opposition because Proposition

51 is:

UNAFFORDABLE:

Californians already pay $2 billion each year on state

school bonds. Proposition 51 would cost an additional

$500 million each year—money the state doesn’t have.

In total, California has over $400 billion in debt and

ﬁnancial commitments. Governor Brown calls this a

“wall of debt.” Borrowing more money we can’t afford is

reckless.

UNACCOUNTABLE:

With local school bonds, communities control spending.

With state school bonds, bureaucrats and their cronies

call the shots. Local control is the best way to minimize

government waste.

UNNECESSARY:

For school construction, local bond measures work better

than statewide bonds. Last June voters approved over

90% of local school bonds on the ballot, providing over

$5.5 billion for school construction.

School enrollment is expected to decline over the next

10 years. Proposition 51 wastes money favoring construction

of new schools over remodeling existing schools.

INEQUITABLE:

Proposition 51 funding would go to those ﬁrst in line.

Large wealthy districts would receive the “lion’s share”

because they have dedicated staff to ﬁll out paperwork.

This shuts out smaller, poorer districts that need help

most. This is morally wrong.

REFORM FIRST:

Proposition 51 does nothing to change the bureaucratic,

one-size-ﬁts-none state bond program. Small, needy

school districts can’t afford expensive consultants used

by the big, wealthy schools. Program reforms are needed

so disadvantaged districts get the money they deserve.

Last February Governor Brown told the Los Angeles

Times, “I am against the developers’ $9-billion

bond . . . [it] squanders money that would be far better

spent in low-income communities.”

Brown also said beneﬁt promises to state employees

are “liabilities so massive that it is tempting to ignore

them . . .. We can’t possibly pay them off in a year or

two or even 10. Yet, it is our moral obligation to do so—

particularly before we make new commitments.”

We agree.

Proposition 51 is supported by businesses and politicians

who beneﬁt from more state spending. Yes on 51 has

already raised over $6 million from those who would proﬁt

most, including the Coalition for Adequate School Housing

(CASH) and California Building Industry Association.

California Taxpayers Action Network is an all-volunteer,

non-partisan, non-proﬁt that promotes ﬁscal responsibility

and transparency in local government. We combat

government secrecy, waste and corruption and seek to

ensure everyone receives good value for their tax dollars.

We’re people just like you who support quality schools

and want ﬁscal responsibility in government without

waste.

Join us in voting NO on Proposition 51.

www.caltan.org

G. RICK MARSHALL, Chief Financial Ofﬁcer

California Taxpayers Action Network

WENDY M. LACK, Director

California Taxpayers Action Network

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Overview of Medi-Cal and Hospitals

Medi-Cal Provides Health Care Beneﬁts to

Low-Income Californians. The Medi-Cal

program provides health care beneﬁts to

low-income Californians who meet certain

eligibility requirements. These health care

beneﬁts include services such as primary

care visits, emergency room visits, surgery,

and prescription drugs. Currently, Medi-

Cal provides health care beneﬁts to over

13 million Californians. Total spending

on Medi-Cal in 2015–16 was roughly

$95 billion, of which about $23 billion was

from the state’s General Fund (its main

operating account).

Cost of Medi-Cal Is Shared Between the State

and the Federal Government. For most costs

of the Medi-Cal program, the state and

the federal government each pay half of

the costs. In some instances, the federal

government pays a greater share of the costs

than the state. In order to receive federal

funding for Medi-Cal, the state must follow

various federal laws and requirements.

Public and Private Hospitals Provide Care to

People Enrolled in Medi-Cal. There are about

450 private and public general acute care

hospitals (“hospitals”) licensed in California

that provide services such as emergency

services, surgery, and outpatient care to

Californians, including those enrolled in

Medi-Cal. About four-ﬁfths of the hospitals

are private and about one-ﬁfth of the

hospitals are public. Public hospitals are

owned and operated by public entities such

as counties or the University of California.

Private hospitals are owned and operated by

• Extends indeﬁnitely an existing statute

that imposes fees on hospitals to obtain

federal matching funds.

• Uses fees to fund Medi-Cal health care

services, care for uninsured patients, and

children’s health coverage.

• Requires voter approval to change use of

fees or funds.

• Permits other amendments or repeal by

Legislature with a two-thirds vote.

• Declares fee proceeds do not count as

revenue toward state spending limit or

Proposition 98 funding requirement.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF

NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• The ﬁscal effect of this measure is

uncertain primarily because it is not

known whether the Legislature would

have extended the hospital fee absent the

measure.

• If the Legislature would have extended

the hospital fee absent this measure,

the measure would likely have relatively

little ﬁscal effect on the state and local

governments.

• If the Legislature would not have extended

the hospital fee absent the measure, the

measure could result in state General

Fund savings of around $1 billion annually

and increased funding for public hospitals

in the low hundreds of millions of dollars

annually.

For the full text of Proposition 52, see page 122. Title and Summary / Analysis

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

private entities, which can be nonproﬁt or

for-proﬁt.

Hospital Quality Assurance Fee

In recent years, the state has imposed a

special charge on most private hospitals.

This charge is called the Hospital Quality

Assurance Fee (“hospital fee”). It has been

collected since 2009. The charging of

the hospital fee by the state is set to end

on January 1, 2018. Figure 1 depicts the

collection and use of hospital fee revenue

in 2015–16. The fee revenue is used for

two purposes: (1) to fund the state share of

increased Medi-Cal payments for hospitals

and grants for public hospitals ($3.7 billion

in 2015–16) and (2) to generate state

General Fund savings ($850 million in

2015–16). The hospital fee revenue used

for increased Medi-Cal payments was

matched with $4.4 billion in federal Medi-

Cal funding, resulting in $8.1 billion in total

Medi-Cal payments and grants to hospitals in

2015–16.

Hospital Fee Results in a Net Beneﬁt to

Hospital Industry. As shown in Figure 1, the

hospital industry received in 2015–16 a net

beneﬁt of $3.5 billion as a result of the fee

State Savings and Hospital Net Benefit

Resulting From the Hospital Fee in 2015–16

Figure 1

Hospital Fee Paid to State

$4.6 Billion

Medi-Cal Payments

and Grants to Hospitals

$3.7 Billion

General Fund

Savings

$0.9 Billion

Total Payments and Grants Received $8.1 Billion

Federal Government Matches

State Medi-Cal Payments

$4.4 Billion

Private Hospitals

State Government

Public and

Private Hospitals

$3.7 Billion $4.4 Billion

The state and the federal government share the costs of Medi-Cal. When the state spends money

on Medi-Cal, the federal government generally provides federal funding to pay for the federal share

of the costs.

Hospital Industry Net Benefit = $8.1 Billion payments received

− 4.6 Billion fees paid

$3.5 Billion net benefit

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

because the hospitals received $8.1 billion

in payments and paid $4.6 billion in fees.

Public hospitals in particular received

a beneﬁt of $235 million in 2015–16,

comprised of grants and increased Medi-Cal

payments. (While the hospital industry as a

whole received a net beneﬁt, a small number

of private hospitals paid more in fee revenue

than they received in Medi-Cal payments.)

Money From Hospital Fee Results in State

Savings. As shown in Figure 1, fee revenue is

used to generate state General Fund savings.

These savings occur because hospital

fee revenue is used to pay for children’s

health care services in Medi-Cal that would

otherwise be paid using state General

Fund money. (The state General Fund is

supported primarily through taxes such as

income and sales taxes.) The amount of fee

revenue used to generate state General Fund

savings is based on a formula in state law.

In 2015–16, the state General Fund savings

was about $850 million.

Legislature Has Extended Hospital Fee Several

Times in the Past. Since the fee began in

2009, the Legislature has extended it four

times from the date that the fee was to end

under law in place at the time. Consistent

with this past practice, the Legislature could

potentially enact a new law to extend the

current hospital fee beyond January 1, 2018

(the date when the current fee ends).

Any Extension of Hospital Fee Must Be

Approved by Federal Government. If the fee

is extended beyond January 1, 2018 by the

Legislature or by voters, the extension must

also be approved by the federal government

to receive federal funding. Federal

government approval is required because the

state uses hospital fee revenue to fund the

state share of Medi-Cal payment increases to

hospitals, and the federal government also

pays for part of these payment increases.

PROPOSAL

Makes Hospital Fee Permanent. While the

hospital fee would otherwise end under

current state law on January 1, 2018,

Proposition 52 extends the current fee

permanently. As with any extension of

the hospital fee, the extension under this

measure requires federal approval.

Makes It Harder for the State to End Hospital

Fee. Under the measure, the state could end

the hospital fee if two-thirds of each house

of the Legislature votes to do so. Under

current law, the fee can be ended with a

majority vote in each house.

Makes It Harder to Change the Hospital Fee.

Under the measure, changes to the hospital

fee generally would require future voter

approval in a statewide election. Under

current law, changes to the fee can be

made by the Legislature. For example, the

Legislature can change the formula used to

generate state General Fund savings. The

measure does allow the Legislature—with

a two-thirds vote of each house—to make

certain speciﬁc changes, such as those

necessary to obtain federal approval of the

hospital fee.

Excludes Money From Hospital Fee in Annual

Calculation of School Funding. The State

Constitution requires certain formulas to

be used to calculate an annual minimum

funding level for K–12 education and

California Community Colleges. These

formulas take into account the amount

of state General Fund revenue. As under

current practice, the measure excludes

money raised by the hospital fee in these

calculations. The measure provides for this

For the full text of Proposition 52, see page 122. Title and Summary / Analysis

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

exclusion in an amendment to the State

Constitution.

FISCAL EFFECTS

The ﬁscal effect of this measure is uncertain

primarily because it is not known whether

the Legislature would have extended the

hospital fee absent the measure. To date,

the Legislature has extended the fee four

times. Therefore, given past practice, it is

possible the Legislature would have extended

the hospital fee beyond January 1, 2018 in

any case. There are also recent changes to

federal law that may require changes to the

structure of the hospital fee, and these could

affect the ﬁscal impact of the hospital fee.

Below, we describe the ﬁscal effect of this

measure under two main scenarios:

• If Legislature Would Have Extended

Hospital Fee Absent the Measure. In this

case, the measure would likely have

relatively little ﬁscal effect on the state

and local governments (for the period

over which the Legislature extended the

fee). This is because the state would

already be generating General Fund

savings and providing funding to public

hospitals. We note, however, that absent

this measure the Legislature could

change the structure of the hospital

fee such that the General Fund savings

and public hospital beneﬁt could be

different from what it has been.

• If Legislature Would Not Have Extended

Hospital Fee Absent the Measure. In

this case, the measure would have a

major ﬁscal effect on the state and

local governments. The ﬁscal effects

under this scenario would likely be

similar to those experienced recently

(as adjusted for growth over time):

(1) annual General Fund savings of

about $1 billion and (2) annual funding

to the state and local public hospitals in

the low hundreds of millions of dollars.

The state and local governments also

would realize some increased revenues

as a result of the added federal funds

brought into the state by the fee. These

impacts, however, could be affected

by new federal requirements that may

require changes to the hospital fee. At

this time, it is unclear what changes to

the hospital fee would be necessary to

comply with federal requirements. Any

such changes could increase, decrease,

or not change at all the impacts on the

state and local governments.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 52

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 52

★

PROP. 52 DOESN’T HELP ANYONE BUT HOSPITAL

CEOs AND LOBBYISTS.

PROP. 52 IS A BAIT-AND-SWITCH: The money it claims

to provide for children and seniors? They already get that

money. California law already provides the more than

$3,000,000,000 in funding for healthcare services.

Prop. 52 won’t change that.

What Prop. 52 really does is change our Constitution

to permanently remove any accountability, oversight,

or guarantee that the $3,000,000,000 be spent on

healthcare by these CEOs and their lobbyists.

Why are they spending tens of millions on Prop. 52?

Because they keep getting caught misusing our money:

• Hospital corporations proﬁting from Prop. 52 have

been ﬁned hundreds of millions of dollars for

fraudulent, unnecessary, or excessive Medi-Cal or

Medicare billing.

• Other hospital CEOs took those tax dollars meant for

the poor and elderly and spent them on luxury car

leases, country club memberships, and multi-million

dollar salaries for executives.

• Hospital CEOs sponsoring Prop. 52 make as much as

$153,000 EVERY WEEK.

All Prop. 52 does is remove any accountability or

oversight on the very CEOs who have committed fraud

and wasted precious tax dollars on luxury perks for

themselves.

Don’t get fooled by this complicated, unnecessary

change to our Constitution. It is a special interest trick

designed to eliminate oversight of greedy hospital CEOs

and their lobbyists—at the expense of taxpayers and

vulnerable Californians.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 52

www.No0n52.com

VIRGINIA ANDERS-ELLMORE, Nurse Practitioner

MICHELLE ROSS, Healthcare Worker

JOVITA SALCEDO, Medi-Cal Beneﬁciary

YOUR YES VOTE ON PROPOSITION 52 WILL KEEP A

GOOD IDEA WORKING—ONE THAT’S DOING A LOT OF

GOOD FOR A LOT OF GOOD PEOPLE WHO NEED THE

HELP.

WHAT DOES PROPOSITION 52 DO?

It does two things.

First, it extends the current Medi-Cal hospital fee

program that generates more than $3 billion a year

in federal matching funds that would not be available

otherwise. This money helps provide Medi-Cal health

care services to over 13 million Californians, including:

• 6.7 million children;

• 1.6 million seniors with chronic diseases;

• 4.5 million low-income working families whose wages

can’t sustain them; and

• persons with disabilities.

Second, Proposition 52 strictly prohibits the Legislature

from using these funds for any other purpose without a

vote of the people.

That’s it.

WHO IS BEHIND THIS INITIATIVE AND WHY IS IT ON

THE BALLOT?

The Medi-Cal hospital fee program was initially enacted

as a bi-partisan program by the Legislature in 2009.

It has been renewed three times, but each time there

have been attempts to divert the money to some other

use. It has been placed on the ballot by California’s over

400 local community hospitals in order to ensure that

California continues to receive its fair share of federal

matching funds for Medi-Cal in order to serve our most

vulnerable citizens and to prevent the diversion of the

funds for any other purpose.

WHO IS SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 52?

This Initiative has generated the unprecedented support

of virtually all major health care, business, labor, and

community organizations throughout the state. It is

unlikely that a consensus coalition like this has ever

been achieved before. For example, the California

Teachers Association, California Building Trades Council,

California Professional Fireﬁghters and the Teamsters

Union and over 30 local unions have joined with

the California Chamber of Commerce, the California

Business Roundtable, as well as advocacy organizations

for children, seniors and the disabled. Additionally, it

has been endorsed by both the state Democratic and

Republican parties. In today’s very contentious political

environment, this alone is an amazing development.

HOW DOES PROPOSITION 52 IMPACT CALIFORNIA

TAXPAYERS?

This measure GENERATES OVER $3 BILLION IN

AVAILABLE FEDERAL FUNDS WITH NO STATE COST TO

CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS.

By extending the current state Medi-Cal hospital fee the

state will continue to receive more than $3 billion a year

in available federal matching funds for Medi-Cal. Without

it, the shortfall will cause some community safety net

hospitals to close.

Please VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 52 TO KEEP A

GOOD IDEA WORKING—THAT’S DOING A LOT OF

GOOD FOR A LOT OF GOOD PEOPLE.

C. DUANE DAUNER, President

California Hospital Association

THERESA ULLRICH, MSN, NP-C President

California Association of Nurse Practitioners

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

MEDI-CAL HOSPITAL FEE PROGRAM.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 52

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 52

★

What Proposition 52 IS . . . and what it’s NOT.

Prop. 52 is about providing access to Medi-Cal health

care services for children, seniors and low-income

families.

It simply EXTENDS the CURRENT state Medi-Cal

hospital fee that generates over $3 billion a year in

federal matching funds that pay for that care.

Proposition 52 IS NOT ABOUT COMPENSATION OR

SALARIES.

Who is FOR Proposition 52 . . . who is AGAINST?

Go to www.YesProp52.org for the entire list of nearly

1,000 supporters, but here is a representative sample:

California Hospital Association; California Teachers

Association; California Chamber of Commerce; California

Building Trades Council; California State Association

of Counties; California Labor Federation; the California

Business Roundtable; California Professional Fireﬁghters;

as well as advocacy organizations for children, seniors

and the disabled.

There is ONLY ONE SMALL ORGANIZATION FUNDING

OPPOSITION TO 52. Its representative testiﬁed to

lawmakers that the LEGISLATURE SHOULD HAVE THE

POWER TO DIVERT HEALTH CARE DOLLARS to other

purposes.

We vigorously disagree.

Proposition 52, PROHIBITS THE LEGISLATURE FROM

DIVERTING these funds to any other purposes WITHOUT

a VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.

Medi-Cal has been caring for Californians for over 50

years. Today over thirteen million are touched, cared-for,

healed and made healthier because of Medi-Cal and it’s

made stronger by a good idea that’s working.

That good idea is Proposition 52.

Please vote YES on 52.

ANN-LOUISE KUHNS, President

California Children’s Hospital Association

GARY PASSMORE, Vice President

Congress of California Seniors

DR. SHANNON UDOVIC-CONSTANT, Trustee

California Medical Association

“Our health care dollars should be treating patients, not

funding lavish perks for millionaire CEOs. Prop. 52 takes

resources from patients and communities and siphons

it into the pockets of rich special interests, with no

oversight, no accountability, and no guarantee it is even

spent on health care. That’s wrong and makes nurses’

and doctors’ jobs harder.”—Virginia Anders-Ellmore,

Nurse Practitioner

• Prop. 52 gives hospital CEOs a check worth more than

$3 billion—with no strings attached, no oversight, and

no requirement the money is spent on health care.

• Prop. 52 gives more than $3,000,000,000 to the

same CEOs already being paid millions and using our

tax dollars for perks like luxury car leases and golf

fees, with zero accountability.

• Prop. 52 is great for hospital CEOs and their lobbyists,

but bad for patients, low-income women and children,

seniors, and veterans.

The wealthy hospital CEOs and their lobbyists are

spending millions—including our tax dollars—to trick

you into believing Prop. 52 helps Medi-Cal patients.

It doesn’t. It hurts the people who need it most and only

helps hospital lobbyists and their overpaid CEOs.

This is what it really does:

• Prop. 52 frees hospital CEOs and lobbyists from any

oversight or accountability for how they spend the

$3,000,000,000 of taxpayer dollars they receive to

treat low-income residents.

• Forces the state to give billions in federal low-income

health care beneﬁts to hospitals with no oversight, no

accountability, and no guarantee it will be spent on

health care at all, let alone health care for low-income

women, children, and seniors.

• These same CEOs and lobbyists have spent millions

intended for low-income health care on overpriced

CEO salaries, luxury boxes at sporting events, country

club memberships, payments to Wall Street investors,

and other perks.

Here is what advocates for low-income patients say:

“This initiative takes money from needy Californians and

gives it to rich millionaires instead, with no oversight

and no requirement it be spent on health care for poor

people, or even health care at all. Our healthcare system

is already broken—and this no-strings attached money

grab by rich CEOs will only make it worse.”—Michelle

Ross, Healthcare Worker

“I’m already struggling to make ends meet and can’t

afford to take my children to the doctor. Now they

want to take what little I have and give it to the special

interests and corporations who run for-proﬁt hospitals, no

questions asked.”—Jovita Salcedo, Medi-Cal Patient

The corporate-funded California Hospital Association

wrote Prop. 52 in order to permanently guarantee more

than $3,000,000,000 of our federal and state health

care dollars go to them no matter what, with no oversight

and no guarantee it be spent on health care.

It rigs the system in favor of corporations and

millionaires and hurts low-income women, children,

and seniors. It eliminates oversight of how this

$3,000,000,000 in our tax money is spent and asks us

to trust the CEOs and lobbyists instead.

We need more oversight of CEOs, not less.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 52

www.No0n52.com

VIRGINIA ANDERS-ELLMORE, Nurse Practitioner

MICHELLE ROSS, Healthcare Worker

JOVITA SALCEDO, Medi-Cal Beneﬁciary

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

State Pays for Infrastructure Projects

Using Cash and Borrowing. The state

builds various types of infrastructure

projects like bridges, dams, prisons,

and ofﬁce buildings. In some cases,

the state pays for projects on a pay-

as-you-go basis using tax revenues

received each year. In other cases, the

state borrows money to pay for projects,

especially for larger projects.

State Borrows Money Using Bonds. The

main way the state borrows money is by

selling bonds to investors. Over time,

the state pays back these investors with

interest. The state sells two main types

of bonds: general obligation bonds

and revenue bonds. The state repays

general obligation bonds using the state

General Fund, which is funded primarily

by income and sales taxes. In contrast,

the state usually repays revenue bonds

using revenue from fees or other

charges paid by the users of the project

(such as from bridge tolls). Figure 1

shows how a state revenue bond

generally works. (For more information

on the state’s use of bonds, see the

“Overview of State Bond Debt” later in

this voter guide.)

Voter Approval Not Required for State

Revenue Bonds. Under the California

Constitution, state general obligation

bonds need voter approval before the

state can use them to pay for a project.

State revenue bonds do not need voter

approval under existing state law.

• Requires statewide voter approval

before any revenue bonds can be

issued or sold by the state for certain

projects if the bond amount exceeds

$2 billion.

• Applies to any projects that are

ﬁnanced, owned, operated, or

managed by the state, or by a joint

agency formed between the state and

a federal government agency, another

state, and/or a local government.

• Prohibits dividing projects into

multiple separate projects to avoid

statewide voter approval requirement.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S

ESTIMATE OF NET STATE AND LOCAL

GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Fiscal impact on state and local

governments is unknown and would

depend on which projects are affected

by the measure, whether they are

approved by voters, and whether

any alternative projects or activities

implemented by government agencies

have higher or lower costs than the

original project proposal.

For the full text of Proposition 53, see page 123. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

PROPOSAL

Requires Voter Approval of Certain State

Revenue Bonds. The measure requires

statewide voter approval of revenue

bonds that meet all of the following

conditions:

• State Sells the Revenue Bonds.

Revenue bonds are sold by the

state, as well as certain associations

that the state creates or in which

the state is a member. The

statewide voting requirement does

not apply to bonds sold by cities,

counties, schools, community

colleges, and special districts.

• Bonds Sold for State Project. The

revenue bonds are sold for a project

that is funded, owned, operated, or

managed by the state. The measure

also contains provisions to prevent a

single project from being separated

into multiple projects to avoid voter

approval.

• Bonds for the Project Exceed

$2 Billion. The revenue bonds

sold for a project total more than

$2 billion. Under the measure, this

amount would be adjusted every

year for inﬂation.

How a State Revenue Bond Works

Figure 1

State constructs project

Users of project pay fees/tollsState repays investors

State borrows money from

investors by selling revenue bond

ProjectStateInvestors

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

FISCAL EFFECTS

The measure’s ﬁscal effects on state

and local governments are unknown.

It is unlikely there would be very many

projects large enough to be affected

by the measure’s requirement for voter

approval. However, for those projects

that are affected, the ﬁscal effects

would depend on what actions the

state, local governments, and voters

take in response to this measure’s

voting requirement.

Measure Likely to Cover

Relatively Few Projects

Few Projects Cost Over $2 Billion.

Relatively few state projects are likely to

be large enough to meet the measure’s

$2 billion requirement for voter

approval. Two state projects that are

over $2 billion and might use revenue

bonds are (1) the California “WaterFix”

project, which would build two tunnels

to move water through the Sacramento-

San Joaquin River Delta; and (2) the

California High-Speed Rail project. It

is possible other large projects could

be affected in the future, such as new

bridges, dams, or highway toll roads.

Uncertain Which Projects Would Be

Affected. While it is unlikely that very

many projects would be large enough

to be affected by the measure, there

is some uncertainty regarding which

projects would be affected. This is

because the measure does not deﬁne

a “project.” As a result, the courts and

the state would have to make decisions

about what they consider to be a single

project. For example, in some cases a

project could be narrowly deﬁned as a

single building (like a hospital). In other

cases, a project could be more broadly

deﬁned as including multiple buildings

in a larger complex (like a medical

center). A broader deﬁnition could

result in more projects meeting the

$2 billion requirement, thus requiring

voter approval.

How Government Agencies and Voters

Respond Would Affect Costs

Government and Voters Could Take

Different Actions. When a proposed

project meets this measure’s

requirements for voter approval,

governments and voters could respond

in different ways. These responses, in

turn, would determine the ﬁscal effects,

if any, of this measure:

• On the one hand, if the state held

an election and voters approved the

project, the state could proceed

with the project as planned using

revenue bonds. As a result, there

would be little ﬁscal effect from

this measure.

• On the other hand, if voters rejected

the project or the state chose not

to hold an election as required

by this measure, the state would

not be able to use revenue bonds

for the project. Without access to

revenue bonds, the state and/or

PROPOSITION

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

For the full text of Proposition 53, see page 123. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

local governments might take other

actions to meet the concerns the

project was intended to address.

They might (1) replace the large

project with other smaller projects,

(2) perform other activities that

would reduce the need for the

project, or (3) ﬁnd other ways to

pay for the project instead of using

revenue bonds. These actions could

result in either higher or lower net

costs depending on the speciﬁc

alternatives that governments

pursued and how they compared to

the original project proposal.

Some Actions Could Result in Higher

Costs. Some types of government and

voter response to this measure could

result in higher costs for the state and

local governments. For example, it

could be more expensive in some cases

for state and local governments to

complete several smaller projects than

it would have been for the state to build

the original large project. This could

happen if the large project was a more

efﬁcient way to meet the concerns that

the project addressed.

The state also could fund a project in a

different way than revenue bonds that

might be more expensive. For example,

the state could partner with a private

company that would sell bonds to fund

the project. The state would then have

to pay back the private company. This

could result in higher costs for the state

because the private company would

need to make a proﬁt on the project.

Also, the private company would

probably pay higher interest rates than

the state. The private company would

likely pass these higher borrowing costs

on to the state.

Some Actions Could Result in Lower

Costs. Other types of responses could

result in lower state and local costs. For

example, state and local governments

might ﬁnd ways to make better use of

existing infrastructure. For instance,

local water agencies might implement

water conservation measures, which

could reduce the need to build new

dams or other projects to provide more

water. If existing infrastructure could

meet the state’s needs adequately with

these types of actions, there would be

savings from not having to spend the

money to build a new project.

The state also could fund a project

in a way that might be cheaper than

using revenue bonds. For example, the

state could borrow money using general

obligation bonds. While state general

obligation bonds require voter approval,

there would be some savings because

they have lower interest rates than

revenue bonds.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 53

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 53

★

Prop. 53 doesn’t give you a say. Quite the opposite.

Prop. 53 erodes your voice and the voice of your

community. Please read it for yourself.

PROP. 53 ERODES LOCAL CONTROL BY FORCING

STATEWIDE VOTES ON SOME LOCAL PROJECTS

Local government groups representing California’s cities,

counties and local water districts, including the League

of California Cities and Association of California Water

Agencies, oppose this measure, warning it could give

voters in faraway regions the power to deny local projects

your community needs.

PROP. 53 DOES NOT INCLUDE AN EXEMPTION FOR

EMERGENCIES/DISASTERS

California Professional Fireﬁghters warns Prop. 53’s failure

to contain an exemption for emergencies “could delay our

state’s ability to rebuild critical infrastructure following

earthquakes, wildﬁres, ﬂoods or other natural disasters.”

PROP. 53 WOULD JEOPARDIZE MUCH NEEDED

REPAIRS TO WATER SUPPLY, BRIDGES, AND OTHER

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Prop. 53 will jeopardize your community’s ability to ﬁx

aging infrastructure, including improving water supply,

making bridge and freeway safety repairs, and renovating

hospitals to make them earthquake safe.

PROP. 53 IS A SELF-INTEREST ABUSE OF THE

INITIATIVE PROCESS

Prop. 53 is a multi-million dollar attempt to stop one

single project. We cannot allow one well-ﬁnanced

individual to abuse the initiative process and jeopardize

vital infrastructure and safety projects around the state.

PROP. 53 IS OPPOSED BY A BROAD, BIPARTISAN

COALITION OF ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDING:

• California Professional Fireﬁghters • California State

Sheriffs’ Association • Association of California Water

Agencies • California Hospital Association • League of

California Cities • Fireﬁghters, paramedics, family farmers,

environmentalists, nurses, cities, counties, local water

districts, and law enforcement.

www.NoProp53.com

LOU PAULSON, President

California Professional Fireﬁghters

KEITH DUNN, Executive Director

Self-Help Counties Coalition

SHERIFF DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, President

California State Sheriffs’ Association

Proposition 53, the Stop Blank Checks initiative, is

simple. It only does two things:

1) It requires California voter approval for STATE projects

that would use over $2 billion in state revenue bonds.

2) BEFORE THAT VOTE, it ensures full disclosure of the

TOTAL COST of any state revenue bond project greater

than $2 billion.

Currently, other state bonds for water, school and

transportation projects require voter approval. But a

loophole in state law allows politicians and unaccountable

state agencies to circumvent a public vote and borrow

BILLIONS in state revenue bond debt for massive state

projects WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL.

Proposition 53 will STOP POLITICIANS FROM ISSUING

BLANK CHECK DEBT to complete billion dollar state

boondoggles. Take California’s bullet train. They told us it

would cost California taxpayers $10 billion. Now we know

it’s going to cost more than $60 billion! Yet, you don’t

have a right to vote on that huge increase!

Right now, there is NO VOTE BY THE LEGISLATURE

OR THE PEOPLE required to issue these massive

state mega-bonds. Unelected and unaccountable state

bureaucrats have all the power and you have to pay

through higher water rates or increased fees!

Proposition 53 says IF YOU HAVE TO PAY, YOU SHOULD

HAVE A SAY.

Proposition 53 just GIVES YOU A VOICE, A VOTE,

added TRANSPARENCY, and it HOLDS POLITICIANS

ACCOUNTABLE. That’s it! Read the initiative for yourself.

Proposition 53 STOPS POLITICIANS FROM LYING about

the real cost of state mega-projects. Willie Brown, once

the state’s most powerful politician, wrote that lowballing

initial budgets is commonplace with public projects. He

said, “The idea is to get going. Start digging a hole and

make it so big, there’s no alternative to coming up with

the money to ﬁll it in.”

Despite the scare tactics of the politicians, bureaucrats

and corporations that feed off of the state’s public debt,

Proposition 53 DOES NOT IMPACT LOCAL PROJECTS, the

University of California, freeway construction or needed

response after a natural disaster.

Proposition 53 SIMPLY APPLIES THE LONG-STANDING

CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION against politicians

imposing higher debt without voter approval to MASSIVE

STATE REVENUE BONDS.

Proposition 53 just ENSURES FULL BUDGET

DISCLOSURE AND VOTER APPROVAL of state revenue

bonds for California’s mega-bucks projects that will affect

future generations.

Join California’s leading state and local taxpayer

organizations, small businesses, working families and

nearly one million Californians who put Proposition 53 on

the ballot. Vote YES on 53!

DINO CORTOPASSI, Retired farmer

JON COUPAL, President

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

JOHN MCGINNESS, Elected Sheriff (Retired)

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

REVENUE BONDS. STATEWIDE VOTER APPROVAL.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 53

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 53

★

Proposition 53 trusts voters. Proposition 53’s opponents

are afraid of voters.

OPPONENTS INCLUDE SPECIAL INTERESTS WHO

HAVE FOUGHT TAX REFORM FOR DECADES, EVEN

PROPOSITION 13. They include insiders who proﬁt from

massive state revenue bond projects, and politicians and

bureaucrats who don’t trust you to decide whether to

approve boondoggles like the $64 billion bullet train and

the $6 billion Bay Bridge ﬁasco that now requires $6 tolls.

IF TAXPAYERS HAVE TO PAY, THEY SHOULD HAVE A

SAY! Prop. 53 holds politicians accountable by giving you a

vote on state mega-projects paid for by state revenue bonds

over $2 billion. Voters will have the right to decide, just

as we do with all other kinds of state bonds. And Prop. 53

ﬁnally unmasks the true cost of all multibillion dollar state

bonds.

PROP. 53 TRUSTS VOTERS to decide whether to approve

the massive multibillion dollar increase in the bullet

train’s price tag.

PROP. 53 TRUSTS VOTERS—California taxpayers—to

decide by a simple majority whether to spend $17 billion

to tunnel water under the Delta to Southern California.

PROP. 53 WOULD HAVE TRUSTED VOTERS to decide

whether extravagant design changes on the Bay Bridge

were worth $5 billion in cost overruns and outrageous tolls

that working families can’t afford.

Prop. 53 clearly exempts local projects. Read it yourself at

www.YESon53.com.

The Sacramento Bee said Prop. 53 won’t hurt disaster

relief because “ . . . emergency repairs are traditionally

paid for by the federal government or other sources—not

revenue bonds.”

IF YOU TRUST TAXPAYERS AND VOTERS more than

lobbyists, politicians and bureaucrats, VOTE YES ON

PROPOSITION 53!

JON COUPAL, President

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

KAREN MITCHOFF, Contra Costa County Supervisor

MAURY HANNIGAN, California Highway Patrol Commissioner

(Retired)

PROP. 53 ERODES LOCAL CONTROL AND CONTAINS NO

EXEMPTION FOR EMERGENCIES/NATURAL DISASTERS

Prop. 53 is opposed by a broad, bipartisan coalition of

organizations including California Professional Fireﬁghters,

California Chamber of Commerce, California Hospital

Association, ﬁreﬁghters, paramedics, family farmers,

environmentalists, nurses, law enforcement, and local

governments because it would erode local control

and jeopardize vital infrastructure improvements in

communities across California.

ERODES LOCAL CONTROL BY REQUIRING STATEWIDE VOTE

FOR SOME LOCAL PROJECTS

Groups representing California’s cities, counties and local

water agencies, including League of California Cities

and Association of California Water Agencies, all oppose

Prop. 53. Under this measure, cities and towns that come

together to form a joint powers agency or similar body

with the state to build needed infrastructure could have to

put their local project on a statewide ballot. That means

voters in faraway regions could veto some local projects

your community needs and supports—like water storage or

bridge safety repairs—even though those voters don’t use

or care about your local improvements.

NO EXEMPTION FOR EMERGENCIES OR NATURAL DISASTERS

California Professional Fireﬁghters, representing 30,000

ﬁreﬁghters and paramedics, warns: “Prop. 53 irresponsibly

fails to contain an exemption for natural disasters or major

emergencies. That ﬂaw could delay our state’s ability

to rebuild critical infrastructure following earthquakes,

wildﬁres, ﬂoods or other natural or man-made disasters.”

THREATENS WATER SUPPLY AND DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS

The Association of California Water Agencies says:

“Prop. 53 could threaten a wide range of local water

projects including storage, desalination, recycling and

other vital projects to protect our water supply and access

to clean, safe drinking water. Prop. 53 will deﬁnitely

impede our ability to prepare for future droughts.”

JEOPARDIZES ABILITY TO REPAIR OUTDATED

INFRASTRUCTURE

Our communities already suffer from a massive backlog

of local infrastructure needs, including improving water

supply and delivery, making safety repairs to bridges,

overpasses and freeways, and renovating community

hospitals to make them earthquake safe. Prop. 53 will

jeopardize local communities’ ability to repair aging

infrastructure. The California State Sheriffs’ Association

says: “Reliable infrastructure is critical to public safety.

This measure erodes local control and creates new hurdles

that could block communities from upgrading critical

infrastructure such as bridges, water systems and hospitals.”

FINANCED AND PROMOTED BY MULTI-MILLIONAIRE WITH A

PERSONAL AGENDA

This measure is ﬁnanced entirely by one multi-millionaire

and his family, who are spending millions in an attempt to

disrupt a single water infrastructure project. Irrespective

of one’s position on that single project, his initiative has

far-reaching, negative implications for other infrastructure

projects throughout California. We cannot allow one

multi-millionaire to abuse the initiative system to push his

narrow personal agenda.

OPPOSED BY A BROAD BIPARTISAN COALITION:

• California Professional Fireﬁghters • California State

Sheriffs’ Association • Association of California Water

Agencies • League of California Cities • California Hospital

Association • California Chamber of Commerce

Prop. 53 is a misguided measure that:

• Erodes local control by requiring a statewide vote

on some local projects. • Disrupts our ability to build

critically needed water storage and supply. • Contains no

exemptions for emergencies/natural disasters.

www.NoProp53.com

LOU PAULSON, President

California Professional Fireﬁghters

TIM

QUINN, Executive Director

Association of California Water Agencies

ARK GHILARDUCCI, Director

California Ofﬁce of Emergency Services

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

LEGISLATURE. LEGISLATION AND PROCEEDINGS.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

State Legislature Makes Laws. The

California Legislature has two houses:

the Senate and the Assembly. Legislative

rules guide the process by which bills

become laws. In this process, legislators

discuss bills in committee hearings and

other settings. They often change bills

based on these discussions. Typically,

legislators take several days to consider

these changes before they vote on

whether to pass the bill. Sometimes,

however, legislators take less time to

consider these changes.

Legislature’s Public Meetings. The State

Constitution requires meetings of the

Legislature and its committees to be

open to the public, with some exceptions

(such as meetings to discuss security

at the State Capitol). Live videos of

most, but not all, of these meetings are

available on the Internet. The Legislature

keeps an archive of many of these videos

for several years. The Legislature does

not charge fees for the use of these

videos. The Legislature spends around

$1 million each year on recording,

posting, and storing these videos. Under

current state statute, recordings of

Assembly meetings cannot be used for

political or commercial purposes.

Legislature’s Budget. The Constitution

limits how much the Legislature can

spend on its own operations. This limit

increases with growth in California’s

population and economy. This year,

the Legislature’s budget is about

$300 million—less than 1 percent of

total spending from the General Fund

(the state’s main operating account).

PROPOSAL

Proposition 54 amends the Constitution

to change the rules and duties of the

• Prohibits Legislature from passing any

bill unless it has been in print and

published on the Internet for at least

72 hours before the vote, except in

cases of public emergency.

• Requires the Legislature to make

audiovisual recordings of all its

proceedings, except closed session

proceedings, and post them on the

Internet.

• Authorizes any person to record

legislative proceedings by audio or

video means, except closed session

proceedings.

• Allows recordings of legislative

proceedings to be used for any

legitimate purpose, without payment of

any fee to the State.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE

OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL

IMPACT:

• One-time costs of $1 million to

$2 million and ongoing costs of about

$1 million annually to record legislative

meetings and make videos of those

meetings available on the Internet.

For the full text of Proposition 54, see page 125. Title and Summary / Analysis

LEGISLATURE. LEGISLATION AND PROCEEDINGS.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Legislature. Figure 1 summarizes

the proposition’s key changes. The

Legislature’s costs to comply with these

requirements would be counted within

the Legislature’s annual spending limit.

Changes How State Legislature Makes

Laws. If Proposition 54 passes, a bill

(including changes to that bill) would

have to be made available to legislators

and posted on the Internet for at least

72 hours before the Legislature could

pass it. In an emergency, like a natural

disaster, the Legislature could pass bills

faster. This could only happen, however,

if the Governor declares a state of

emergency and two-thirds of the house

considering the bill votes to pass the bill

faster.

Changes Rules of Legislature’s Public

Meetings. If Proposition 54 passes,

videos of all of the Legislature’s public

meetings would have to be (1) recorded,

(2) posted on the Internet within

24 hours following the end of the

meeting, and (3) downloadable from the

Internet for at least 20 years. (These

requirements would take effect beginning

January 1, 2018.) In addition, members

of the public would be allowed to record

and broadcast any part of a public

legislative meeting. Proposition 54 also

changes state statute so that anyone

could use videos of legislative meetings

for any legitimate purpose and without

paying a fee to the state.

FISCAL EFFECTS

The ﬁscal impact of Proposition 54 would

depend on how the Legislature decides

to meet these new requirements. The

main costs of the proposition relate to

the recording of videos of legislative

meetings and storage of those videos

on the Internet. The state would likely

face: (1) one-time costs of $1 million

to $2 million to buy cameras and other

equipment and (2) annual costs of

about $1 million for more staff and

online storage for the videos. These

costs would be less than 1 percent of

the Legislature’s budget for its own

operations.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

LEGISLATURE. LEGISLATION AND PROCEEDINGS.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 54

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 54

★

Democrats, Republicans and Independents agree it’s time

to PUT VOTERS FIRST, NOT SPECIAL INTERESTS.

THAT’S WHY DIVERSE GROUPS LIKE the League

of Women Voters of California, California Chamber of

Commerce, California State Conference of the NAACP, Latin

Business Association, California Common Cause, Howard

Jarvis Taxpayers Association, League of California Cities,

California Forward, Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce,

California Planning and Conservation League, and many

others, URGE YOU TO VOTE “YES” ON PROP. 54.

PROP. 54 WILL:

• Require every bill to be posted online and distributed

to lawmakers at least 72 hours before each house of

the Legislature is permitted to vote on it (except when

the Governor declares an emergency). • Prohibit any

bill passed in violation of this 72-hour requirement from

becoming law. • Make audiovisual recordings of ALL

public legislative meetings. • Post those recordings online

within 24 hours, to remain online for at least 20 years.

• Guarantee the right of every person to also record and

broadcast any open legislative meetings. • Require NO

new taxpayer money. The Legislature’s existing budget will

cover this measure’s minor costs.

Proposition 54 makes our state government more transparent

by STOPPING THE PRACTICE OF WRITING LAWS PROMOTED

BY SPECIAL INTERESTS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND

PASSING THEM WITH LITTLE DEBATE OR REVIEW.

“We have long opposed the California Legislature’s practice

of making last minute changes to proposed laws before

legislators, the press, and the public have had a chance

to read and understand them. Such practices make a

mockery of democracy.”—Peter Scheer, FIRST AMENDMENT

COALITION

“Proposition 54 gives all people the opportunity to review,

debate, and contribute to the laws that impact us all.”—Alice

Huffman, CALIFORNIA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP

Proposition 54 will stop the immediate passage of legislation

that has been “gutted and amended”—a practice that

replaces, at the last minute, every word of a bill with new,

complex language secretly written by special interests,

thereby making major policy changes with no public input.

“Proposition 54 ﬁnally gives voters the upper hand, not

the special interests, and improves the way business

is done at our State Capitol.”—Ruben Guerra, LATIN

BUSINESS ASSOCIATION

Special interests and the political establishment fear voters

might track from home what happens in the Legislature’s

public meetings. Sacramento lobbyists don’t believe the people

can be trusted with this information—or with time to act on it.

Yet sixty-nine California cities representing 15 million

people, and thirty-seven county boards of supervisors

representing 27 million people, already post recordings of

their meetings online.

Our Legislature should catch up.

“Proposition 54 will create a more open, honest, and

accountable government. It’s time to give voters a voice

in the political process.”—Kathay Feng, CALIFORNIA

COMMON CAUSE

CHECK IT OUT FOR YOURSELF at YesProp54.org. YES

O N P RO P. 54 is supported by good government, minority,

taxpayer, and small business groups, seniors, and voters

from every walk of life, every political persuasion, and

every corner of the state.

PROPOSITION 54 was written by constitutional scholars

and has been carefully reviewed and vetted by good

government organizations who all agree Prop. 54 will

increase transparency. That’s why special interests

vigorously oppose it.

PROPOSITION 54 will reduce special interest inﬂuence

by ensuring every proposed new law is subject to public

review and comment BEFORE legislators vote on it.

Vote YES on Proposition 54.

HELEN HUTCHISON, President

League of Women Voters of California

HOWARD PENN, Executive Director

California Planning and Conservation League

ALLAN ZAREMBERG, President

California Chamber of Commerce

BIG MONEY IS BEHIND PROP. 54: DON’T BE FOOLED

Just look at its main backer: the California Chamber of

Commerce. This group—whose members include big oil,

tobacco and drug companies—spent a record-shattering

$4.3 MILLION lobbying the Legislature last year,

according to the Secretary of State.

Prop. 54 will give these special interests even MORE

power in Sacramento.

That’s the reason one billionaire, backed by big, out-of-

state corporations, is bankrolling Prop. 54.

STAND UP TO BIG MONEY. VOTE NO ON PROP. 54.

California’s most signiﬁcant achievements often occur

when our elected representatives come to the table willing

to ﬁnd areas of compromise. Sometimes, powerful special

interests don’t get everything they want.

One example is the bipartisan 2009 state budget

agreement, historic action that saved California from

bankruptcy. That bipartisan compromise was updated

through the ﬁnal hours prior to the vote. It earned the

four Legislative Leaders that negotiated it the prestigious

“Proﬁles in Courage Award” from the John F. Kennedy

Library Foundation.

If Prop. 54 was in place, California might well have gone

bankrupt.

The Legislature needs to work better, not be hamstrung

by red tape. Prop. 54 unnecessarily requires the

Legislature to wait 3 days before passing a measure in its

“second house,” allowing special interests to defeat it.

California’s legislative work is transparent. Any citizen,

at any time, can view any bill via the Internet. Audio and

video is online free of charge.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 54. STOP THE SPECIAL INTEREST

POWER GRAB.

ART TORRES, State Senator (Retired)

JERILYN STAPLETON,

California National Organization for Women (NOW)

STEVE HANSEN, City Council Member

City of Sacramento

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

LEGISLATURE. LEGISLATION AND PROCEEDINGS.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 54

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 54

★

Proposition 54 is on your ballot solely because one

California billionaire, after spending millions of dollars

trying to inﬂuence California policy and elections, is now

using our citizen initiative process to pursue his own

political agenda.

What is Prop. 54? It is a complicated measure that

introduces unnecessary new restrictions on the way

laws are crafted by the Legislature. It empowers special

interests under the guise of “transparency.”

Rather than promoting accountability, Prop. 54 will slow

down the ability for legislators to develop bipartisan

solutions to our state’s most pressing problems.

For example, many bipartisan balanced budget

agreements, the Fair Housing Act (which ended housing

discrimination), and last year’s bond measure to address

California’s drought likely never would have happened if

this measure had been enacted.

Prop. 54 will throw a monkey wrench into the ability of

our elected ofﬁcials to get things done. It will give special

interests more power to thwart the will of our elected

ofﬁcials. It makes it more difﬁcult to address state

emergencies.

DON’T GIVE SPECIAL INTERESTS EVEN MORE POWER.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 54.

While it sounds good, requiring the Legislature to wait

three days before voting on a bill will give powerful

lobbyists and well-funded special interests time to launch

campaigns to attack bipartisan compromises. Special

interests already have too much power in Sacramento.

Prop. 54 will give them more.

PROP. 54 WILL CAUSE UNNECESSARY DELAYS

Anytime a comma is changed in a bill, lawmakers will now

be forced to wait three days to vote on it. That will mean

unnecessary delays.

PROP. 54 WILL INCREASE POLITICAL ATTACK ADS

Current law prohibits the use of Legislative proceedings

in political campaign ads. Prop. 54 eliminates that rule,

paving the way for millions of dollars in ugly campaign

attack ads that will ﬂood your screen before each

election.

DON’T LET A BILLIONAIRE REWRITE CALIFORNIA’S

CONSTITUTION FOR POLITICAL GAIN.

Who’s behind this measure? Charles Munger, Jr.—a

billionaire with a long history of contributing millions to

candidates that oppose increased education funding, the

minimum wage, plans to make higher education more

affordable, and other progressive issues—is the only

donor to Prop. 54. He has spent more than $5.5 million

to put this measure on the ballot.

Don’t let a single wealthy Californian bypass the

Legislature to rewrite our state’s constitution to his

own liking. Even the California Newspaper Publishers

Association, which supports many of the concepts in

this measure, has told the Capitol Weekly newspaper, it

“doesn’t feel the initiative process is a good way to deal

with public policy.”

Prop. 54 is opposed by the California Democratic Party,

dozens of elected ofﬁcials, environmental, labor, and

other groups.

Vote NO on Prop. 54. Get the facts on

www.No0nProposition54.com and follow us on Twitter

@NoProp54

STEVEN MAVIGLIO,

Californians for an Effective Legislature

A bill every legislator and every Californian has had 72 hours

to read will be a better bill than one that they haven’t.

This shouldn’t be a partisan question: it’s just common

sense.

In 2006 then-Senator Barack Obama sponsored, and

then-Senator Hillary Clinton co-sponsored, the “Curtailing

Lobbyist Effectiveness Through Advance Notiﬁcation,

Updates, and Posting Act,” or “CLEAN UP Act,” which

called for each bill in the U.S. Senate to be “available

to all Members and made available to the general public

by means of the Internet for at least 72 hours before its

consideration”.

What would work for the U.S. Senate, will work for the

California Legislature.

That is why PROP. 54 IS ENDORSED BY A LARGE

BIPARTISAN COALITION including the League of Women

Voters of California, California Common Cause, California

State Conference of the NAACP, League of California

Cities, California Chamber of Commerce, Californians

Aware, First Amendment Coalition, California Forward,

Planning and Conservation League, California Black

Chamber of Commerce, California Business Roundtable,

National Federation of Independent Business/California,

Latin Business Association of California, Hispanic 100,

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, California Taxpayers

Association, Small Business Action Committee, San Jose/

Silicon Valley NAACP, Monterey County Business Council,

and the Los Angeles Area, San Francisco and Fresno

Chambers of Commerce.

As the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE declared about

Prop. 54, “Let the record also show that this was

no partisan effort. Its advocates include a long list

of respected reform groups such as Common Cause,

California Forward and the League of Women Voters.”

Special interests sit through every committee meeting in

Sacramento. They already know what bills live and die and

why, and who votes with a special interest or against it.

The way to level the playing ﬁeld is to record the public

meetings and post them online. Then we too will know.

Prop. 54 requires no new tax money. Prop. 54’s minor

costs come out of the Legislature’s operating budget.

To learn more, see YesProp54.org.

Vote YES on Prop. 54.

TERESA CASAZZA, President

California Taxpayers Association

TOM SCOTT, State Executive Director

National Federation of Independent Business/California

KATHAY FENG, Executive Director

California Common Cause

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

State Budget

Over Half of State Budget Spent on Education. The state

collects taxes and fees from people and businesses

and uses these revenues to fund programs in the state

budget. This year, the state plans to spend about

$122 billion from its main operating account, the

General Fund. As shown in Figure 1, over half of this

spending is for K–12 schools, community colleges,

and the state’s public universities. About another

one-quarter of this spending is for health and human

services programs, the largest of which is the state’s

Medi-Cal program. Most of the spending shown in the

ﬁgure for “various other programs” pays for prisons,

parole programs, and the courts.

Taxes

Personal Income Tax Provides Most General Fund

Monies. The state’s General Fund is supported

primarily by three taxes: the personal income tax, the

sales tax, and the corporate income tax. (We refer to

the personal income tax simply as “income tax” in

this analysis.) The income tax is the most important

for the state budget, as it provides about two-thirds

of all General Fund revenues. The tax applies to most

forms of income—such as salaries, wages, interest

income, and proﬁts from the sales of stocks and other

assets. It consists of several “marginal” tax rates,

which are higher as income subject to the tax, or

“taxable income,” increases. For example, in 2011

the tax on a married couple’s taxable income was

1 percent on the ﬁrst $14,632 but 9.3 percent on all

taxable income over $96,058.

Proposition 30. Proposition 30, approved by voters in

November 2012, increased income tax rates on high-

income taxpayers. As shown in Figure 2, depending

on their income levels, high-income taxpayers pay

an extra 1 percent, 2 percent, or 3 percent tax on

part of their incomes. These higher rates are in effect

through 2018. This year’s state budget assumes that

the Proposition 30 income tax increases will raise

about $7 billion in revenue. Proposition 30 also

increased the state sales tax rate by one-quarter cent

from 2013 through 2016.

Education

Annual Required Spending on Education. The State

Constitution requires the state to spend a minimum

amount on K–12 schools and community colleges

each year. This “minimum guarantee” grows over

time based on growth in state tax revenues, the

economy, and student attendance. This year, the state

• Extends by twelve years the temporary personal

income tax increases enacted in 2012 on earnings

over $250,000 (for single ﬁlers; over $500,000 for

joint ﬁlers; over $340,000 for heads of household).

• Allocates these tax revenues 89% to K–12 schools

and 11% to California Community Colleges.

• Allocates up to $2 billion per year in certain years

for healthcare programs.

• Bars use of education revenues for administrative

costs, but provides local school boards discretion

to decide, in open meetings and subject to annual

audit, how revenues are to be spent.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF

NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Increased state revenues ranging from $4 billion to

$9 billion each year (in today’s dollars) from 2019

through 2030, depending on the economy and the

stock market.

• Increased funding for schools and community

colleges of roughly half of the revenue raised by

the measure.

• Increased funding for health care for low-income

people ranging from $0 to $2 billion each year,

depending on decisions and estimates made by the

Governor’s main budget advisor.

• Increased budget reserves and debt payments

ranging from $60 million to roughly $1.5 billion

each year (in today’s dollars), depending primarily

on the stock market.

For the full text of Proposition 55, see page 128. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

General Fund will provide over $50 billion toward

the minimum guarantee. Local property taxes also

contribute to the minimum guarantee.

Medi-Cal

Serves Low-Income People in California. The Medi-Cal

program provides health care services to low-income

people. These services include primary care visits,

emergency room visits, surgery, and prescription

drugs. The program serves over 13 million people in

California—roughly one-third of the population. This

year, the state will spend about $23 billion from the

General Fund on Medi-Cal. In addition, the program

relies heavily on federal funding and receives some

support from other state sources.

Budget Reserves and Debt Payments

“Rainy-Day” Reserves. Governments use budget

reserves to save money when the economy is good.

When the economy gets worse and revenues decline,

governments use money that they saved to reduce the

amount of spending cuts, tax increases, and other

actions needed to balance their budgets.

Constitution Requires Minimum Amount Used for Debt

Payments and Budget Reserves. The Constitution

requires the state to save a minimum amount each

year in its rainy-day fund and spend a minimum

amount each year to pay down state debts faster.

The annual amounts used for debts and budget

reserves depend primarily upon state tax revenues.

In particular, revenues from capital gains—money

people make when they sell stocks and other types of

property—are an important factor in estimating how

much the state must use for these purposes.

PROPOSAL

This measure (1) extends for 12 years the additional

income tax rates established by Proposition 30 and

(2) creates a formula to provide additional funds to

the Medi-Cal program from the 2018–19 state ﬁscal

year through 2030–31.

Taxes

Income Taxes Increased on High-Income Taxpayers.

Proposition 55 extends from 2019 through 2030

K–12 Education

Community Colleges

Universities

Other Programs

Other Health and

Human Services

Medi-Cal

Education Makes Up Over Half of $122 Billion State Budget

2016–17 General Fund

Figure 1

TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

the Proposition 30 income tax rate increases shown

in Figure 2. These increases affect high-income

taxpayers in the state. Speciﬁcally, the measure

affects the roughly 1.5 percent of taxpayers with the

highest incomes.

Amount of Tax Increase Depends Upon Taxable Income.

The amount of increased taxes paid by high-income

taxpayers would depend upon their taxable income.

For example, if this measure passes, a single person

with taxable income of $300,000 would pay an

extra 1 percent on their income between $263,000

and $300,000. This works out to a tax increase

of $370 for this person. A married couple ﬁling a

joint tax return with taxable income of $2,000,000

also would see their taxes increased under this

measure. Speciﬁcally, this couple would pay another

1 percent on their income between $526,000 and

$632,000, an extra 2 percent on their income

between $632,000 and $1,053,000, and an extra

3 percent on their income between $1,053,000

and $2,000,000. This works out to a tax increase of

$37,890 for this couple. (These examples would be

somewhat different by 2019 because tax brackets

would be adjusted annually for inﬂation.)

Does Not Extend Sales Tax Increase. Proposition 55

does not extend the one-quarter cent increase in the

sales tax rate that voters approved in Proposition 30.

In other words, whether or not voters pass this

measure, Proposition 30’s sales tax increase will

expire at the end of 2016.

Medi-Cal

Creates Formula for Medi-Cal. Proposition 55 includes

a new state budget formula to provide more funding

for the Medi-Cal program. The measure requires the

Director of Finance, the Governor’s main budget

advisor, to determine each year from 2018–19

through 2030–31 whether General Fund revenues

exceed (1) constitutionally required education

spending and (2) the costs of government programs

that were in place as of January 1, 2016. If revenues

exceed these spending amounts, 50 percent of the

excess (up to a maximum of $2 billion) would be

allocated to Medi-Cal. (This additional allocation

could be reduced somewhat in difﬁcult budget years.)

The measure states that these Medi-Cal monies

should not replace existing General Fund support for

the program.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Figure 3 summarizes Proposition 55’s ﬁscal effects.

The measure’s increased revenues would be used for

K–12 schools and community colleges, health care

services for low-income people, budget reserves, and

debt payments. After satisfying these constitutional

PROPOSITION

TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

O:\Workload\2016\160361\Figure 2_Income Tax Rates Under Proposition 30.indd (06/08/2016,

01:33 pm)

Figure 2

Income Tax Rates Under Proposition 30

Single Filer’s

Taxable Income

Joint Filers’

Taxable Income

Marginal Tax Rate

Base Rate Proposition 30 Increase Total Rate

$0 to $8,000 $0 to $16,000 1.0% — 1.0%

8,000 to 19,000 16,000 to 37,000 2.0 — 2.0

19,000 to 29,000 37,000 to 59,000 4.0 — 4.0

29,000 to 41,000 59,000 to 82,000 6.0 — 6.0

41,000 to 52,000 82,000 to 103,000 8.0 — 8.0

52,000 to 263,000 103,000 to 526,000 9.3 — 9.3

263,000 to 316,000 526,000 to 632,000 9.3 1.0% 10.3

316,000 to 526,000 632,000 to 1,053,000 9.3 2.0 11.3

Over 526,000 Over 1,053,000 9.3 3.0 12.3

Income brackets shown are rounded to the nearest thousands of dollars. Brackets are in effect for 2015 and are adjusted for inﬂation in future

years.

Single ﬁlers include married individuals and registered domestic partners (RDPs) who ﬁle taxes separately.

Joint ﬁlers include married and RDP couples who ﬁle jointly, as well as qualiﬁed widows or widowers with a dependent child.

Note: Income brackets for head-of-household ﬁlers are not listed, but those ﬁlers with taxable income of $357,981 and greater (as of 2015) also

are subject to 10.3 percent, 11.3 percent, or 12.3 percent marginal tax rates under Proposition 30. Tax rates listed exclude the mental health tax

rate of 1 percent for taxable income in excess of $1 million.

For the full text of Proposition 55, see page 128. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

requirements, remaining amounts, if any, would be

available for any state budget purpose.

Taxes

Revenue Raised by Measure Would Depend on Economy

and Stock Market. The exact amount of state revenue

raised by Proposition 55 would depend on several

factors that are difﬁcult to predict. A large share of

high-income taxpayers’ earnings comes from capital

gains. These revenues depend heavily on future stock

market and other asset values, which are difﬁcult to

predict. In addition, high-income taxpayers’ earnings

ﬂuctuate with the economy. Thus, in a bad economic

and stock market year, the measure might raise

around $4 billion in revenue. When the economy

and stock market are good, the measure might raise

around $9 billion in annual revenue. In most years,

the amount of revenue raised by the measure would

be in between these amounts. (These amounts are in

today’s dollars and would tend to grow over time.)

Education

Increases in Education Spending. Higher state tax

revenues generally result in increased education

spending. The exact amount that the state must

spend on schools and community colleges in the

future depends on several factors that are difﬁcult

to predict. It is reasonable to assume, however, that

roughly half of the revenue raised by Proposition 55

would go to schools and community colleges.

Medi-Cal

May Increase Medi-Cal Funding. The formula for

added Medi-Cal funding would require the Director of

Finance to estimate annually revenues and spending.

As noted earlier, General Fund revenues are difﬁcult

to predict. Similarly, in order to produce the spending

estimates required by the measure, the Director of

Finance would have to make

assumptions about how

spending on programs that

were in place as of January 1,

2016 would have changed

over time. Additional Medi-Cal

funding under the measure,

therefore, would depend

on decisions and estimates

made by the Director of

Finance. The amount of any

additional Medi-Cal funding

under the measure could vary

signiﬁcantly each year, ranging

from $0 to $2 billion.

Budget Reserves and

Debt Payments

Increases Budget Reserves and

Debt Payments. As described

above, Proposition 55

increases state tax revenues. Higher revenues increase

required debt payments and budget reserve deposits.

The exact amount that the state would have to use for

paying down state debts and building budget reserves

depends largely on capital gains revenues, which

are difﬁcult to predict. In bad stock market years,

Proposition 55 could increase debt payments and

budget reserves by $60 million. In good stock market

years, Proposition 55 could increase debt payments

and reserve deposits by $1.5 billion or more.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 55

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 55

★

TEMPORARY SHOULD MEAN TEMPORARY

Voters supported higher income and sales taxes in 2012

because Governor Jerry Brown made the commitment

that they would be temporary.

The state budget has a surplus, and these temporary

taxes should go away, just like the Governor promised.

PROP. 55 WILL HURT SMALL BUSINESS AND KILL

JOBS.

Prop. 55 will kill jobs, close businesses, and hurt

the economy. It will raise taxes on California’s small

businesses, and make it even harder for them to create

good-paying jobs.

WE CAN’T TRUST THE POLITICIANS AND SPECIAL

INTERESTS

The politicians and special interests know California is

NOT facing cuts to programs. They just want to grow

government bigger by passing Prop. 55. And they are

using our kids and schools to scare voters into supporting

it. Don’t be fooled.

SCHOOLS ARE FULLY FUNDED

Education spending has grown by $24.6 billion since

2012—a 52% increase.

Schools are funded, and the state budget is balanced.

We have a $2.7 billion surplus and over $9.4 billion in

budget reserves.

Prop. 55’s new and higher taxes aren’t needed.

DON’T BE FOOLED BY SCARE TACTICS, PROP. 55 IS

NOT NEEDED.

Ofﬁcial budget estimates by the state’s non-partisan

Legislative Analyst show that higher taxes are NOT

needed to balance the budget and fully fund schools.

California can fund education, health care and state

government without new or higher taxes.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 55

JON COUPAL, President

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

TOM SCOTT, State Executive Director

National Federation of Independent Business—California

TERESA CASAZZA, President

California Taxpayers Association

Proposition 55 prevents billions in budget cuts without

raising taxes by ensuring the wealthiest Californians

continue to pay their share. 55 requires strict

accountability and transparency to ensure funds get to

the classroom. We can’t afford to go back to the days of

devastating cuts and teacher layoffs.

Fact 1: Proposition 55 does not raise anyone’s taxes.

• Does not raise taxes on anyone. Proposition 55

maintains the current income tax rate on couples earning

over $500,000 a year. • Only affects the wealthiest

Californians who can most afford it, ensuring they

continue to pay their share of taxes. • Lower sales tax.

Under Proposition 55 all Californians’ sales tax are

reduced.

Fact 2: Proposition 55 has strict transparency and

accountability requirements to ensure education funds

get to the classroom.

• Money goes to local schools and the Legislature can’t

touch it. Strict accountability requirements ensure

funds designated for education go to classrooms, not to

bureaucracy or administrative costs. Authorizes criminal

prosecution for any misuse of money. • Mandatory

audits and strict transparency requirements. Local

school districts must post annual accounting online to

guarantee that Californians know exactly how and where

funds are spent. • Provides local control over school

funding. Proposition 55 gives control to local school

boards to determine student needs.

Fact 3: Proposition 55 prevents up to $4 billion in cuts

to schools and continues to restore funding cut during

the recession.

• Proposition 55 helps address California’s looming

teacher shortage. The state needs an estimated 22,000

additional teachers next year alone. Proposition 55

gives local school districts the money they need

to hire teachers and prevent overcrowded classes.

• Proposition 55 helps restore arts and music. Arts and

music programs faced deep cuts during the recession.

Proposition 55 will help protect and restore those

programs. • Makes college more affordable. Proposition

55 prevents cuts to California community colleges,

preventing tuition increases and helping make classes

more available to California’s 2.1 million community

college students. • Expands health care access for

children. Healthier children are healthier students. Too

many families can’t afford basic health care, meaning

children miss school or come to class sick. Proposition

55 helps kids come to school healthy and ready to learn,

because all children deserve access to quality health

care, not just the wealthiest Californians.

California needs to keep moving forward, we can’t afford

to go back to the days of devastating cuts to public

schools, colleges, and health care.

30,000 teachers were laid off, class sizes grew, and the

cost of community colleges doubled.

Governor Jerry Brown has said that we’ll face even more

cuts if Proposition 55 doesn’t pass.

Proposition 55 gives Californians a clear choice: voting

YES protects our schools and children from massive cuts;

voting NO costs our schools up to $4 billion a year.

California’s schools are starting to come back. Passing

Proposition 55 will ensure that our children won’t face

another round of cuts. The future of California depends

on the future of our children.

Because our children and schools matter most.

Details at www.YesOn55.com

JUSTINE FISCHER, President

California State PTA

ALEX JOHNSON, Executive Director

Children’s Defense Fund—California

TOM TORLAKSON, California State Superintendent of

Public Instruction

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 55

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 55

★

Vote YES on 55. Help our children thrive.

Prop. 55 makes sure we won’t go back to massive cuts in

school funding. It protects the education and health of

our children.

Proposition 55 does not raise anyone’s taxes:

• Prop. 55 maintains current tax rates on the

wealthiest Californians to ensure couples earning

more than $500,000 a year continue paying their

share. • Proposition 55 does not raise taxes on small

businesses. • Under Proposition 55 the state sales tax is

reduced as planned at the end of 2016.

Proposition 55 prevents up to a $4 billion per year cut in

public school funding:

• Proposition 55 helps address the teacher shortage

and continues to restore the school funding that was

cut during the recession. • California’s high school

graduation rate rose for the sixth year in a row. Prop. 55

will help continue the progress.

Yes on 55 has strict accountability and ﬁscal

requirements to ensure education funds go straight to

the classroom:

• Revenue is guaranteed in the Constitution to go into

a special account for schools and children’s health

care that the Legislature can’t touch. • Money will

be audited every year. Audit ﬁndings are posted at

http://trackprop30.ca.gov/ so taxpayers can see how their

money is spent. • There are strict requirements that

funding must go to the classroom, not administration or

Sacramento bureaucracy. • Proposition 55 authorizes

criminal prosecution for misuse of money. • The

continuation of the current tax rates on the wealthiest is

subject to the vote and will of the people.

ERIC C. HEINS, President

California Teachers Association

BETTY T. YEE, California State Controller

ANN-LOUISE KUHNS, President

California Children’s Hospital Association

In 2012, voters approved Proposition 30 tax increases

because we were promised they’d be temporary and end

in 2017.

Now special interests want to break that promise and

extend these tax hikes 12 more years.

That’s not temporary.

Here’s the ofﬁcial title from the 2012 measure:

Prop. 30: TEMPORARY taxes to fund education,

guaranteed local public safety funding. Initiative

Constitutional Amendment.

TEMPORARY SHOULD MEAN TEMPORARY

Voters supported higher income and sales taxes in 2012

only because Governor Jerry Brown promised they would

be temporary:

“THAT’S A TEMPORARY TAX AND, TO THE EXTENT

THAT I HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT, WILL REMAIN

TEMPORARY.”—Governor Brown, Sacramento Bee, 10/7/14

Governor Brown promised the higher taxes would only last

a few years and then end. Now, special interests want to

extend them 12 more years—that’s not “temporary.”

California’s economy has recovered and we now have a

BUDGET SURPLUS.

WE DON’T NEED HIGHER TAXES

California has a balanced budget, we’ve reduced debt,

increased school spending, put billions into California’s

“rainy day fund” and still have a $2.7 billion budget

surplus.

California takes in more tax dollars than we need each

year—that’s why the state budget recovered from a

$16 billion deﬁcit in 2012 to a $2.7 billion surplus in

2016.

Education spending has soared by $24.6 billion since

2012—a 52% increase.

Medi-Cal spending has increased by $2.9 billion—a

13% increase.

WE CAN FUND EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE, AND STATE

GOVERNMENT WITHOUT NEW OR HIGHER TAXES

Governor Brown has stated and budget estimates from

the Legislative Analyst show that higher taxes are not

needed to balance the budget.

We have adequate funds for schools and other critical

requirements—we just need politicians with the

backbone to cut waste and prioritize our spending.

What we don’t need is the largest tax hike in California

history, sending billions more to Sacramento with no

accountability to voters.

PROP. 55 TARGETS CALIFORNIA’S SMALL

BUSINESSES WITH HIGHER TAXES FOR 12 YEARS

This measure targets small businesses who often pay

taxes on their business income through their personal

tax return. Prop. 55 will kill jobs, close businesses and

damage the economy.

THE SPECIAL INTERESTS JUST WANT MORE MONEY

TO SPEND TODAY

It’s a fair bet that Prop. 55 money will be spent to pay

pension beneﬁts and other state debt rather than making

it to the classroom or building roads. It’ll be just like the

lottery—we’ll never know where the money went.

WE CAN’T TRUST THE POLITICIANS AND SPECIAL

INTERESTS

The politicians and special interests know California is

NOT facing cuts to any programs now. They just want to

grow government by passing Prop. 55—the largest state

tax increase ever.

Check it yourself: California has a $2.7 billion surplus,

and over $9.4 billion in budget reserves.

New and higher taxes aren’t needed.

CALIFORNIA SHOULD KEEP ITS WORD: TEMPORARY

MEANS TEMPORARY

VOTE NO ON PROP. 55—IT’S A BROKEN PROMISE

JON COUPAL, President

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

TOM SCOTT, State Executive Director

National Federation of Independent Business—California

HON. QUENTIN L. KOPP, Retired Superior Court Judge

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Cigarette and Tobacco Products

People currently consume different types of cigarette

and tobacco products:

• Cigarettes. Smoking cigarettes is the most

common way to use tobacco.

• Other Tobacco Products. Other tobacco products

can be consumed by smoking or other forms

of ingestion. These include cigars, chewing

tobacco, and other products made of or

containing at least 50 percent tobacco.

• Electronic Cigarettes (E-Cigarettes). These are

battery-operated devices that turn specially

designed liquid, which can contain nicotine,

into a vapor. The vapor is inhaled

by the user. Some e-cigarettes are

sold with the liquid, while others

are sold separately from the liquid.

These products are subject to excise

taxes (which are levied on a particular

product) and sales taxes (which are

levied on a wide array of products). The

excise tax is levied on distributors (such

as wholesalers) while the sales tax is

imposed at the time of purchase. As

shown in Figure 1, cigarettes and other

tobacco products currently are subject to

state and federal excise taxes as well as

state and local sales and use taxes (sales

taxes). E-cigarettes are only subject to

sales taxes.

Existing State Excise Taxes on Cigarettes.

The current state excise tax is 87 cents

for a pack of cigarettes. Figure 2 shows

how the tax has increased over time and

how these revenues are allocated for

different purposes. Existing excise taxes are estimated

to raise over $800 million in 2015–16.

Existing State Excise Taxes on Other Tobacco Products.

While excise taxes on other tobacco products are

based on the excise tax on a pack of cigarettes,

they are somewhat higher due to the provisions of

Proposition 10. Currently, the excise taxes on other

tobacco products are the equivalent of $1.37 per

pack of cigarettes. Revenues from excise taxes

on other tobacco products are allocated solely to

Proposition 99 (1988) and Proposition 10 (1998)

funds for various purposes, as described in Figure 2.

Under current law, any increase in cigarette excise

taxes automatically triggers an equivalent increase in

excise taxes on other tobacco products.

• Increases cigarette tax by $2.00/pack, with

equivalent increase on other tobacco products and

electronic cigarettes containing nicotine.

• Allocates revenues primarily to increase funding

for existing healthcare programs; also for tobacco

use prevention/control programs, tobacco-related

disease research/law enforcement, University

of California physician training, dental disease

prevention programs, and administration. Excludes

these revenues from Proposition 98 education

funding calculation requirements.

• If tax causes decreased tobacco consumption,

transfers tax revenues to offset decreases to

existing tobacco-funded programs and sales tax

revenues.

• Requires biennial audit.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Increased net state revenue of $1 billion to

$1.4 billion in 2017–18, with potentially lower

annual revenues over time. These funds would be

allocated to a variety of speciﬁc purposes, with

most of the monies used to augment spending on

health care for low-income Californians.

Includes cigars, chewing tobacco, and other products made of or containing at least

50 percent tobacco.

Figure 1

Cigarettes

Other Tobacco

Products

Electronic

Cigarettes

Federal

Excise Taxes

State

Excise Taxes

State and Local

Sales Taxes

Battery-operated devices that turn specially designed liquid, which can contain nicotine,

into vapor.

Current Taxes on Tobacco

Products and Electronic Cigarettes

For the full text of Proposition 56, see page 134. Title and Summary / Analysis

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Existing Federal Excise Taxes on Tobacco Products.

The federal government also levies excise taxes on

cigarettes and other tobacco products. Currently, the

federal excise tax is $1.01 per pack of cigarettes and

varying amounts on other tobacco products.

Existing Sales Taxes on Tobacco Products and

E-Cigarettes. Sales taxes apply to the sale of

cigarettes, other tobacco products, and e-cigarettes.

Sales taxes are based on the retail price of goods,

which includes the impact of excise taxes. The

average retail price for a pack of cigarettes in

California is close to $6. Currently, the sales tax

ranges from 7.5 percent to 10 percent of the retail

price (depending on the city or county), with a

statewide average of around 8 percent. Thus, sales tax

adds roughly 50 cents to 60 cents to the total cost

for a pack of cigarettes. The sales taxes on cigarettes,

other tobacco products, and e-cigarettes raises about

$400 million annually, with the proceeds going both

to the state and local governments.

Adult Smoking Trends and

E-Cigarette Use in California

Most tobacco users in California smoke cigarettes.

According to the California Department of Public

Health (DPH), California has one of the lowest adult

cigarette smoking rates in the country. The DPH

reports that about 12 percent of adults smoked

cigarettes in 2013, compared to about 24 percent

of adults in 1988. While cigarette smoking rates in

California have steadily declined over the past couple

decades for a variety of reasons, this trend appears

to have stalled in recent years according to DPH.

As the number of individuals smoking cigarettes in

California has decreased, so has the total amount of

cigarette purchases by California consumers. As a

result, revenues from taxes on these purchases also

have declined.

The DPH reports that e-cigarette use among California

adults was about 4 percent in 2013, nearly doubling

compared to the prior year. Because e-cigarettes

are relatively new products, however, there is

little information to determine longer-term use of

e-cigarettes.

State and Local Health Programs

Medi-Cal. The Department of Health Care Services

administers California’s Medi-Cal program, which

provides health care coverage to over 13 million low-

income individuals, or nearly one-third of Californians.

With a total estimated budget of nearly $95 billion

(about $23 billion General Fund) for 2015–16, Medi-

Cal pays for health care services such as hospital

inpatient and outpatient care, skilled nursing care,

prescription drugs, dental care, and doctor visits.

Some of the services provided in the Medi-Cal

program are for prevention and treatment of tobacco-

related diseases.

Public Health Programs. The DPH administers and

oversees a wide variety of programs with the goal of

optimizing the health and well-being of Californians.

The department’s programs address a broad range

of health issues, including tobacco-related diseases,

maternal and child health, cancer and other chronic

diseases, infectious disease control, and inspection

of health facilities. Many public health programs and

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

services are delivered at the local level, while the

state provides funding, oversight, and overall strategic

leadership for improving population health. For

example, the DPH administers the California Tobacco

Control Program—a Proposition 99 program—that

funds activities to reduce illness and death from

tobacco-related diseases with a budget of about

$45 million in 2015–16.

Recent Changes in Tobacco-Related Laws

The Legislature recently passed, and the Governor

signed in May 2016, new tobacco-related legislation

that made signiﬁcant changes to state law. Figure 3

describes these changes. Also in May 2016, the U.S.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued new rules

that extend the FDA’s regulatory authority to include

e-cigarettes, cigars, and other tobacco products.

These recent changes do not directly affect the state

taxes on these products or the programs that receive

funding from these taxes.

State Spending Limit and

Minimum Funding Level for Education

The State Constitution contains various rules

affecting the state budget. Proposition 4, passed

by voters in 1979, establishes a state spending

limit. Proposition 98, passed in 1988, establishes a

minimum level of annual funding for K–12 education

and the California Community Colleges.

PROPOSAL

This measure signiﬁcantly increases the state’s

excise tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products

and applies this tax to e-cigarettes. The additional

revenues would be used for various speciﬁed

purposes. The major provisions of the measure are

described below.

New Taxes Imposed by Measure

Increases Cigarette Tax by $2 Per Pack. Effective

April 1, 2017, the state excise tax on a pack of

cigarettes would increase by $2—from 87 cents to

$2.87.

Raises Equivalent Tax on Other Tobacco Products. As

described earlier, existing law requires taxes on other

tobacco products to increase any time the tax on

cigarettes goes up. Speciﬁcally, state law requires

the increase in taxes on other tobacco products to

be equivalent to the increase in taxes on cigarettes.

Accordingly, the measure would raise the tax on

other tobacco products also by $2—from $1.37

(the current level of tax on these products) to an

equivalent tax of $3.37 per pack of cigarettes.

Imposes New Taxes on E-Cigarettes. As noted above,

the state does not currently include e-cigarettes in

the deﬁnition of other tobacco products for purposes

of taxation. The measure changes the deﬁnition of

“other tobacco products” for purposes of taxation to

include e-cigarettes that contain nicotine or liquid

with nicotine (known as e-liquid). Changing the

deﬁnition in this way causes the $3.37 equivalent tax

to apply to these products as well.

For the full text of Proposition 56, see page 134. Title and Summary / Analysis

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

How Would Revenues From New Tobacco and

E-Cigarette Taxes Be Spent?

Revenues from the cigarette, other tobacco product,

and e-cigarette excise taxes that are increased by

this measure would be deposited directly into a new

special fund. Revenues deposited in this fund would

only be used for purposes set forth in the measure, as

described below. (Revenues from applying the $1.37

per pack rate on e-cigarettes, however, would support

Proposition 99 and Proposition 10 purposes. This

would be new revenue to these funds.)

As shown in Figure 4, the revenues would be

allocated as follows:

Figure 4

How New Tax Revenue Would Be Spent

Program or Entity Amount Purpose

Step 1: Replace Revenues Lost

Existing Tobacco Tax Funds

Determined by BOE

Replace revenues lost due to lower tobacco consumption

resulting from the excise tax increase.

State and Local Sales and Use Tax

Determined by BOE

Replace revenues lost due to lower tobacco consumption

resulting from the excise tax increase.

Step 2: Tax Administration

BOE—administration 5 percent of

remaining funds

Costs to administer the tax.

Step 3: Speciﬁc Amounts for Various State Entities

a,b

Various state entities—enforcement

$48 million Various enforcement activities of tobacco-related laws.

UC—physician training $40 million Physician training to increase the number of primary care and

emergency physicians in California.

Department of Public Health—

State Dental Program

$30 million Educating about preventing and treating dental disease.

California State Auditor $400,000 Audits of agencies receiving funds from new taxes, at least every

other year.

Step 4: Remaining Funds for State Health Programs

Medi-Cal —DHCS

82 percent of

remaining funds

Increasing the level of payment for health care, services, and treatment

provided to Medi-Cal beneﬁciaries. DHCS cannot replace existing

state funds for these same purposes with these new revenues.

California Tobacco Control Program—

Department of Public Health

11 percent of

remaining funds

Tobacco prevention and control programs aimed at reducing

illness and death from tobacco-related diseases.

Tobacco-Related Disease

Program—UC

5 percent of

remaining funds

Medical research into prevention, early detection, treatments, and

potential cures of all types of cancer, cardiovascular and lung disease,

and other tobacco-related diseases. The UC cannot replace existing

state and local funds for this purpose with these new revenues.

School Programs—

California Department of Education

2 percent of

remaining funds

School programs to prevent and reduce the use of tobacco

products by young people.

The measure would limit the amount of revenues raised by the measure that could be used to pay for administrative costs, to be deﬁned by the State

Auditor through regulation, to not more than 5 percent.

Predetermined amounts would be adjusted proportionately by BOE annually, beginning two years after the measure went into effect if BOE determines

that there has been a reduction in revenues resulting from a reduction in the consumption of cigarette and tobacco products due to the measure.

Funds distributed to Department of Justice/Ofﬁce of Attorney General ($30 million), Ofﬁce of Attorney General ($6 million), Department of Public Health

($6 million), and BOE ($6 million).

BOE = Board of Equalization; UC = University of California; and DHCS = Department of Health Care Services.

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

• Step One. The measure requires that new

revenues raised by the measure ﬁrst be used

to replace revenue losses to certain sources

(existing state tobacco funds and sales taxes)

that occur as a result of the measure. These

revenue losses would occur due to lower

consumption of tobacco products due to the

higher excise taxes.

• Step Two. The State Board of Equalization would

then receive up to 5 percent of the remaining

funds to pay for administrative costs to

implement the measure.

• Step Three. The measure provides speciﬁed state

entities with ﬁxed dollar amounts annually for

speciﬁc purposes, as described in Figure 4.

• Step Four. The remaining funds would be

allocated—using speciﬁc percentages—for

various programs, primarily to augment spending

on health care services for low-income individuals

and families covered by the Medi-Cal program.

Other Provisions

Required Audits. The California State Auditor would

conduct audits of agencies receiving funds from the

new taxes at least every other year. The Auditor, who

provides independent assessments of the California

government’s ﬁnancial and operational activities,

would receive up to $400,000 annually to cover costs

incurred from conducting these audits.

Revenues Exempt From State Spending Limit and

Minimum Education Funding Level. Proposition 56

amends the State Constitution to exempt the measure’s

revenues and spending from the state’s constitutional

spending limit. (This constitutional exemption is

similar to ones already in place for prior, voter-approved

increases in tobacco taxes.) This measure also exempts

revenues from minimum funding requirements for

education required under Proposition 98.

FISCAL EFFECTS

This measure would have a number of ﬁscal effects

on state and local governments. The major impacts of

this measure are discussed below.

Impacts on State and Local Revenues

New Excise Taxes Would Increase State Revenue by

Over $1 Billion in 2017–18. This measure would raise

between $1.3 billion and $1.6 billion in additional

state revenue in 2017–18—the ﬁrst full year of the

For the full text of Proposition 56, see page 134. Title and Summary / Analysis

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

measure’s implementation. The excise tax increase

would result in higher prices for consumers. As a

result, consumers would reduce their consumption

of cigarettes and other tobacco products, including

e-cigarettes. (Many consumers might also change the

way they buy these products to avoid the tax.) The

range in potential new revenue reﬂects uncertainty

about how much consumers will reduce their

purchases in response to higher prices. The low-range

estimate ($1.3 billion) assumes consumers have a

stronger response to the tax than under the high-range

estimate ($1.6 billion). In future years, revenues

may decline relative to 2017–18 due to changes in

consumer choices.

Applying Excise Taxes on E-Cigarettes Also Would

Generate Additional Revenue for Existing Tobacco Funds.

As noted earlier, the measure expands the deﬁnition

of other tobacco products to include e-cigarettes. This

change makes e-cigarettes subject to the taxes passed

by voters in Proposition 99 and Proposition 10. As a

result, the funds supported by those two propositions

would receive additional revenue due to this measure.

This additional revenue likely would be in the tens of

millions of dollars annually.

Over $1 Billion in Increased Funding in 2017–18, Mostly

for State Health Programs. Figure 5 estimates the

amount of funding each program and government

agency would receive from the new tax revenues in

2017–18. After covering revenue losses resulting

from the measure, the revenue available for speciﬁc

activities funded by the measure—mostly health

programs—would be between $1 billion and

$1.4 billion. If cigarette use continues to decline,

these amounts would be somewhat less in future

years. In addition, much of the added spending on

health programs would generate additional federal

funding to the state. As a result, state and local

governments would collect some additional general

tax revenue.

Potentially Little Effect on State and Local Sales

Tax Revenue. Higher cigarette and other tobacco

product prices would increase state and local sales

tax revenue if consumers continued to buy similar

amounts of these products. However, consumers

would buy less of these products as prices increase

due to the measure’s taxes. As a result, the effect of

the measure on sales tax revenue could be positive,

negative, or generally unchanged, depending on how

consumers react. Under the measure, if the state or

local governments received less sales tax revenue as

a result of the measure’s taxes, those losses would be

replaced by the revenue raised by the measure.

Effects on Excise Tax Collection. As described in

Figure 4, the measure would provide additional

funding to various state agencies to support state law

enforcement. These funds would be used to support

increased enforcement efforts to reduce tax evasion,

counterfeiting, smuggling, and the unlicensed sales

of cigarettes and other tobacco products. Such

enforcement efforts would increase the amount of

tax revenue. The funds also would be used to support

efforts to reduce sales of tobacco products to minors,

which would reduce revenue collection. As a result,

the net effect on excise tax revenue from these

enforcement activities is unclear. In addition, while

cigarettes and other tobacco products—as currently

deﬁned—are covered by federal laws to prevent tax

evasion, e-cigarettes are not covered. As a result,

enforcement of state excise taxes on e-cigarettes may

be more challenging if consumers purchase more of

these products online to avoid the new taxes.

Impact on State and Local Government

Health Care Costs

The state and local governments in California incur

costs for providing (1) health care for low-income

and uninsured persons and (2) health insurance

coverage for state and local government employees

and retirees. Consequently, changes in state law such

as those made by this measure that affect the health

of the general population would also affect publicly

funded health care costs.

For example, as discussed above, this measure would

result in a decrease in the consumption of tobacco

products as a result of the price increase of tobacco

products. Further, this measure provides funding for

tobacco prevention and cessation programs, and to the

extent these programs are effective, this would further

decrease consumption of tobacco products. The use of

tobacco products has been linked to various adverse

health effects by the federal health authorities and

numerous scientiﬁc studies. Thus, this measure would

reduce state and local government health care spending

on tobacco-related diseases over the long term.

This measure would have other ﬁscal effects that

offset these cost savings. For example, state and local

governments would experience future health care and

social services costs that otherwise would not have

occurred as a result of individuals who avoid tobacco-

related diseases living longer. Further, the impact of a

tax on e-cigarettes on health and the associated costs

over the long term is unknown, because e-cigarettes

are relatively new devices and the health impacts of

e-cigarettes are still being studied. Thus, the net long-

term ﬁscal impact of this measure on state and local

government costs is unknown.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 56

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 56

★

PROP. 56 CHEATS SCHOOLS

Prop. 56 deceptively cheats schools out of at least

$600 million per year by amending the State Constitution

to bypass California’s minimum school funding guarantee.

In fact, cheating schools is the only reason Prop. 56

amends the Constitution.

WEALTHY SPECIAL INTERESTS SHOULDN’T GET AWAY

WITH USING PROP. 56 TO ENRICH THEMSELVES AT

THE EXPENSE OF FUNDING SCHOOLS, FIXING ROADS

AND FIGHTING VIOLENT CRIME.

Follow the money for the truth at

www.NoOnProposition56.com and then please join us in

voting NO on Prop. 56.

MIKE GENEST, Former Director

California Department of Finance

TOM BOGETICH, Former Executive Director

California State Board of Education

LEW UHLER, President

National Tax Limitation Committee

Prop. 56 was speciﬁcally written to ﬁnancially beneﬁt

health insurance companies and other wealthy special

interests. It’s just one more example of special interest

ballot box budgeting. Over $16 million has already been

contributed to pass it.

They want you to believe it is about helping people stop

smoking, but that’s not where most of the money goes:

Only 13% of this new tax money goes to treat smokers or

stop kids from starting (Section 30130.55(b) of Prop. 56).

82% of this new tax money—$1 billion a year—goes to

insurance companies and other wealthy special interests

(Section 30130.55(a)) and they don’t have to treat one

more patient to get the money.

Nearly 10% can be spent on administration and overhead

(Section 30130.57(a)&(f)).

Prop. 56 has virtually no taxpayer accountability for how

health insurance companies and other providers spend

the money. CEOs and senior executives could reward

themselves with higher pay and proﬁts from our tax dollars.

The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network,

American Lung Association in California and American

Heart Association are sponsoring Prop. 56 because taxing

tobacco saves lives by getting people to quit or never start

smoking.

Get the facts at Yes0n56.org.

VOTE YES ON PROP. 56 TO KEEP KIDS FROM

SMOKING AND REDUCE TOBACCO-RELATED

HEALTHCARE COSTS

Tobacco remains a DEADLY, COSTLY product that hurts

all Californians—even those who don’t smoke.

• Each year, tobacco causes more deaths than guns,

car accidents, HIV, alcohol, and illegal drugs combined.

Tobacco is the #1 cause of preventable death—killing

40,000 Californians annually. • Each year, tobacco-related

healthcare costs Californian taxpayers $3.58 BILLION.

At the same time, Big Tobacco has made billions in

proﬁts off California and is still trying to hook future

generations into a lifetime of addiction. They know

Prop. 56 will prevent youth smoking. That’s why they’ll

spend millions of dollars to defeat Prop. 56: to protect

their proﬁts at our expense.

PROP. 56 WORKS LIKE A USER FEE, TAXING TOBACCO TO

HELP PAY FOR TOBACCO-RELATED HEALTHCARE COSTS

Prop. 56 increases the tax on cigarettes and other

tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes.

The only people who will pay are those who use tobacco

products, and that money will fund already existing

programs to prevent smoking, improve healthcare and

research cures for cancer and tobacco-related diseases.

PROP. 56 IS ABOUT FAIRNESS—IF YOU DON’T USE

TOBACCO, YOU DON’T PAY

California taxpayers spend $3.58 BILLION every year—

$413 per family whether they smoke or not—paying

medical costs of smokers. Prop. 56 is a simple matter

of fairness—it works like a user fee on tobacco products

to reduce smoking and ensure smokers help pay for

healthcare costs.

PROP. 56 HELPS PREVENT YOUTH SMOKING

ncreasing tobacco taxes reduces youth smoking according

to the US Surgeon General. Yet California has one of

the lowest tobacco taxes nationwide. This year alone, an

estimated 16,800 California youth will start smokin

one-third of whom will die from tobacco-related diseases.

In every state that has signiﬁcantly raised cigarette taxes

smoking rates have gone down. Prop. 56 is so important

because it helps prevent youth from becoming lifelong

addicts and will save lives for future generations.

PROP. 56 FIGHTS BIG TOBACCO’S LATEST SCHEME TO

TARGET KIDS

Electronic cigarettes are Big Tobacco’s latest effort to get

kids hooked on nicotine. They know that 90% of smokers

start as teens. Teens that use e-cigarettes are twice as

likely to start smoking traditional cigarettes. That’s why

every major tobacco corporation now owns at least one

e-cigarette brand. Some e-cigarettes even target children

with predatory themes like Barbie, Minions and Tinker

Bell, and ﬂavors like cotton candy and bubble gum.

Prop. 56 taxes e-cigarettes just like tobacco products,

preventing our kids from getting hooked on this addictive,

costly, deadly habit.

PROP. 56 INCLUDES TOUGH TRANSPARENCY AND

ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES

Prop. 56 has built-in safeguards, including independent

audits and strict caps on overhead spending and

administrative costs. And Prop. 56 explicitly prohibits

politicians from diverting funds for their own agendas.

SAVE LIVES. VOTE YES ON 56.

JOANNA MORALES, Past Chair of the Board

American Cancer Society, California Division

TAMI TITTELFITZ, R.N., Leadership Board Member

American Lung Association in California

DAVID LEE, M.D., President

American Heart Association, Western States Afﬁliate

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

CIGARETTE TAX TO FUND HEALTHCARE, TOBACCO USE

PREVENTION, RESEARCH, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 56

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 56

★

VOTE YES ON 56: SAVE LIVES. PROTECT KIDS.

REDUCE THE HARMFUL COSTS OF TOBACCO.

Tobacco is still a DEADLY and COSTLY problem.

• Every year, 40,000 Californians die from tobacco-

related diseases. • This year alone, 16,800 California kids

will start smoking. • Each year, California taxpayers pay

$3.58 Billion for tobacco-related healthcare costs. That’s

$413 per family every year, whether you smoke or not.

“Prop. 56 pays for SMOKING PREVENTION so kids don’t

get addicted.”—Matthew L. Myers, President, Campaign

for Tobacco-Free Kids

PROP. 56 WORKS LIKE A USER FEE: SMOKERS WILL

HELP PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF HEALTH CARE COSTS

Under Prop. 56, tobacco users pay to help offset

the $3.58 billion in tobacco-related healthcare costs

taxpayers pay every year.

Prop. 56 has strong accountability and transparency

protections, including strict caps on overhead, ensuring

politicians can’t divert money for their own personal

agendas.

Under Prop. 56, if you don’t use tobacco, you don’t pay.

This is about FAIRNESS. It’s time for tobacco users to

help pay for their healthcare costs instead of leaving it to

taxpayers to foot the bill.

DON’T BUY BIG TOBACCO’S LIES: PROP. 56 DOESN’T

TAKE A DIME FROM SCHOOLS

Tobacco corporations have LIED for years about the

dangers of tobacco. Now they are spending tens of

millions lying so they can keep getting our children and

grandchildren hooked—and protect their bottom line.

“We have carefully vetted Prop. 56. It protects school

funding while helping to keep our kids from getting

hooked on deadly, addictive tobacco.”—Chris Ungar,

President, California School Boards Association

VOTE YES ON 56.

STUART COHEN, M.D., M.P.H., District Chair

American Academy of Pediatrics, California

LORI G. BREMNER, California Grassroots Director

American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network

ALEX M. JOHNSON, Executive Director

Children’s Defense Fund—California

WE ALL WANT TO HELP THOSE WHO WANT TO STOP

SMOKING, BUT PROP. 56 IS NOT WHAT IT APPEARS TO BE.

Prop. 56 is a $1.4 billion “tax hike grab” by insurance

companies and other wealthy special interests to

dramatically increase their proﬁts by shortchanging

schools and ignoring other pressing problems.

Prop. 56 allocates just 13% of new tobacco tax money to

treat smokers or stop kids from starting. If we are going to

tax smokers another $1.4 billion per year, more should be

dedicated to treating them and keeping kids from starting.

Instead, most of the $1.4 billion in new taxes goes to

health insurance companies and other wealthy special

interests, instead of where it is needed.

PROP. 56 CHEATS SCHOOLS OUT OF AT LEAST

$600 MILLION PER YEAR.

California’s Constitution (through Proposition 98),

requires that schools get at least 43% of any new tax

increase. Prop. 56 was purposely written to undermine our

Constitution’s minimum school funding guarantee, allowing

special interests to deceptively divert at least $600 million

a year from schools to health insurance companies and

other wealthy special interests. Not one penny of the new

tax money will go to improve our kids’ schools.

PROP. 56 DOESN’T SOLVE PROBLEMS FACING

CALIFORNIA FAMILIES.

We have many pressing problems in California, like fully

funding our schools, repairing roads, solving the drought

and ﬁghting violent crime. If we are going to raise taxes, we

should be spending this new tax revenue on these problems.

PROP. 56 FATTENS INSURANCE COMPANY PROFITS.

In another deception, health insurance companies and

wealthy special interests wrote Prop. 56 and are spending

millions to pass it so that they can get paid as much

as $1 billion more for treating the very same Medi-Cal

patients they already treat today. They are not required to

accept more Medi-Cal patients to get this money.

Instead of treating more patients, insurance companies

can increase their bottom line and more richly reward

their CEOs and senior executives. In fact, the Prop. 56

spending formula gives insurance companies and other

health care providers 82% of this new tax.

PROP. 56 SPENDS OVER $147 MILLION PER YEAR ON

OVERHEAD AND BUREAUCRACY.

This $147 million can be spent each year with virtually

no accountability to taxpayers. This could lead to massive

waste, fraud, and abuse. In fact, Prop. 56 spends nearly

as much money on administration and overhead as it does

on tobacco prevention efforts!

NO ON PROP. 56

NO to wealthy special interests using our initiative process

just to increase their proﬁts.

NO to cheating schools out of at least $600 million per year.

NO to millions of new tax dollars going to overhead and

administration with the potential for waste, fraud, and abuse.

NO to rewarding health insurance companies and wealthy

special interests with even bigger proﬁts, instead of

solving real problems like roads, violent crime and fully

funding our schools.

PLEASE READ IT FOR YOURSELF AND FOLLOW THE

PROP. 56 MONEY AT:

www.NoOnProposition56.com

Please join us in voting ‘NO’ on Prop. 56.

TOM BOGETICH, Former Executive Director

California State Board of Education

ARNOLD M. ZEIDERMAN, M.D., M.P.H., FACOG,

Former Director, Maternal Health and Family Planning,

Los Angeles County Department of Health

TOM DOMINGUEZ, President

Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

CRIMINAL SENTENCES. PAROLE.

JUVENILE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Adult Offenders

The California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation (CDCR) operates the state prison

system. CDCR is responsible for housing adults

who have been convicted of felonies identiﬁed in

state law as serious or violent, as well as certain

sex offenses. Examples of violent felonies include

murder, robbery, and rape. Examples of serious

felonies include certain forms of assault, such

as assault with the intent to commit robbery.

The department is also responsible for housing

individuals convicted of other felonies (such as

grand theft) in cases where those individuals have

been previously convicted of serious, violent, or

certain sex offenses. As of June 2016, there were

about 128,000 individuals in state prison. Below,

we discuss the sentencing of adult offenders and the

use of parole consideration hearings and sentencing

credits.

Adult Sentencing. Individuals are placed in prison

under an indeterminate sentence or a determinate

sentence. Under indeterminate sentencing,

individuals are sentenced to prison for a term that

includes a minimum but no speciﬁc maximum, such

as 25-years-to-life. Under determinate sentencing,

individuals receive ﬁxed prison terms with a

speciﬁed release date. Most people in state prison

have received a determinate sentence.

Individuals in prison have been convicted of a main

or primary offense. They often serve additional

time due to other, lesser crimes for which they are

convicted at the same time. In addition, state law

includes various sentencing enhancements that can

increase the amount of time individuals serve. For

example, those previously convicted of a serious or

violent offense generally must serve twice the term

for any new felony offense.

Parole Consideration Hearings. After an individual

serves the minimum number of years required for an

indeterminate sentence, the state Board of Parole

Hearings (BPH) conducts a parole consideration

hearing to determine whether the individual is ready

to be released from prison. For example, BPH would

conduct such a hearing for an individual sentenced

to 25-years-to-life after the individual served

25 years in prison. If BPH decides not to release

the individual from prison, the board would conduct

a subsequent hearing in the future. Individuals

who receive a determinate sentence do not need

a parole consideration hearing to be released from

prison at the end of their sentence. However, some

of these individuals currently are eligible for parole

consideration hearings before they have served their

entire sentence. For example, certain individuals

who have not been convicted of violent felonies are

currently eligible for parole consideration after they

have served half of their prison sentence. This was

one of several measures put in place by a federal

court to reduce the state’s prison population.

• Allows parole consideration for persons convicted

of nonviolent felonies, upon completion of prison

term for their primary offense as deﬁned.

• Authorizes Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation to award sentence credits for

rehabilitation, good behavior, or educational

achievements.

• Requires Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation to adopt regulations to implement

new parole and sentence credit provisions and

certify they enhance public safety.

• Provides juvenile court judges shall make

determination, upon prosecutor motion, whether

juveniles age 14 and older should be prosecuted

and sentenced as adults for speciﬁed offenses.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Net state savings likely in the tens of millions of

dollars annually, primarily due to reductions in

the prison population. Savings would depend on

how certain provisions are implemented.

• Net county costs of likely a few million dollars

annually.

For the full text of Proposition 57, see page 141. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Sentencing Credits. State law currently allows CDCR

to award credits under certain conditions to prison

inmates that reduce the time they must serve in

prison. The credits are provided for good behavior

or for participating in work, training, or education

programs. Over two-thirds of inmates are eligible

to receive credits. State law limits the amount that

inmate sentences can be reduced through credits.

For example, more than half of inmates eligible

for credits can only reduce their sentences by

15 percent because they have a conviction for a

violent offense.

Juvenile Justice

Youths accused of committing crimes when

they were under 18 years of age are generally

tried in juvenile court. However, under certain

circumstances, they can be tried in adult court.

Below, we discuss the process for determining

whether a youth is tried in juvenile court versus

adult court.

Youths in Juvenile Court. Juvenile court proceedings

are different than adult court proceedings. For

example, juvenile court judges do not sentence a

youth to a set term in prison or jail. Instead, the

judge determines the appropriate placement and

rehabilitative treatment (such as drug treatment)

for the youth, based on factors such as the youth’s

offense and criminal history. About 44,000 youths

were tried in juvenile court in 2015.

Counties are generally responsible for the youths

placed by juvenile courts. Some of these youths

are placed in county juvenile facilities. However, if

the judge ﬁnds that the youth committed certain

signiﬁcant crimes listed in statute (such as murder,

robbery, and certain sex offenses), the judge can

place the youth in a state juvenile facility. State

law requires that counties generally pay a portion of

the cost of housing youths in these state facilities.

Youths who are released from a state juvenile facility

are generally supervised in the community by county

probation ofﬁcers.

Youths in Adult Court. In certain circumstances,

youths accused of committing crimes when they

were age 14 or older can be tried in adult court and

receive adult sentences. (Individuals accused of

committing crimes before they were age 14 must

have their cases heard in juvenile court.) Such

cases can be sent to adult court in one of the three

following ways:

• Automatically Based on Seriousness of Crime.

If a youth is accused of committing murder

or speciﬁc sex offenses with certain special

circumstances that make the crime more

serious (such as also being accused of torturing

the victim), he or she must be tried in adult

court.

• At the Discretion of Prosecutor Based on Crime

and Criminal History. If a youth has a signiﬁcant

criminal history and/or is accused of certain

crimes listed in statute (such as murder), a

prosecutor can ﬁle charges directly in adult

court. Prosecutors have this ability in more

cases for youths who were age 16 or 17 at the

time the crime was committed than for those

who were age 14 or 15.

• At the Discretion of Judge Based on Hearing. A

prosecutor can request a hearing in which a

juvenile court judge decides whether a youth

should be transferred to adult court. For youths

who were age 14 or 15 when the crime was

committed, the crime must be one of certain

signiﬁcant crimes listed in statute (such as

murder, robbery, or certain sex offenses). For

youths who were age 16 or 17 when the crime

was committed, the prosecutor can seek this

hearing for any crime, but typically will only do

so for more serious crimes or for youths with a

signiﬁcant criminal history.

Relatively few youths are sent to adult court each

year. For example, less than 600 youths were sent

to adult court in 2015. Less than 100 youths were

sent to adult court at the discretion of a judge based

on a hearing. The remainder were sent to adult court

automatically based on the seriousness of their

crime or at the discretion of a prosecutor based on

their crime and/or criminal history.

Youths convicted in adult court when they are

under 18 years of age are typically held in a

state juvenile facility for the ﬁrst portion of their

sentences. When these youths turn age 18, they

are generally transferred to state prison. However,

if their sentences are short enough that they are

able to complete their terms before turning age 21,

they serve their entire sentences in a state juvenile

CRIMINAL SENTENCES. PAROLE.

JUVENILE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

facility. The state pays the entire cost of housing

youths in a state juvenile facility who were convicted

in adult court. After completing their sentences,

these youths are generally supervised in the

community by state parole agents.

PROPOSAL

This measure makes changes to the State

Constitution to increase the number of inmates

eligible for parole consideration and authorizes

CDCR to award sentencing credits to inmates. The

measure also makes changes to state law to require

that youths have a hearing in juvenile court before

they can be transferred to adult court. We describe

these provisions in greater detail below.

Parole Consideration for Nonviolent Offenders. The

measure changes the State Constitution to make

individuals who are convicted of “nonviolent

felony” offenses eligible for parole consideration

after serving the full prison term for their primary

offense. As a result, BPH would decide whether to

release these individuals before they have served any

additional time related to other crimes or sentencing

enhancements.

The measure requires CDCR to adopt regulations to

implement these changes. Although the measure

and current law do not specify which felony crimes

are deﬁned as nonviolent, this analysis assumes a

nonviolent felony offense would include any felony

offense that is not speciﬁcally deﬁned in statute as

violent. As of September 2015, there were about

30,000 individuals in state prison who would be

affected by the parole consideration provisions

of the measure. In addition, about 7,500 of the

individuals admitted to state prison each year

would be eligible for parole consideration under

the measure. Individuals who would be affected by

the above changes currently serve about two years

in prison before being considered for parole and/or

released. Under the measure, we estimate that these

individuals would serve around one and one-half

years in prison before being considered for parole

and/or released.

Authority to Award Credits. The measure also changes

the State Constitution to give CDCR the authority

to award credits to inmates for good behavior and

approved rehabilitative or educational achievements.

The department could award increased credits to

those currently eligible for them and credits to those

currently ineligible. As a result, CDCR could increase

the amount of credits inmates can earn, which

would reduce the amount of time served in prison.

Juvenile Transfer Hearings. The measure changes

state law to require that, before youths can be

transferred to adult court, they must have a hearing

in juvenile court to determine whether they should

be transferred. As a result, the only way a youth

could be tried in adult court is if the juvenile court

judge in the hearing decides to transfer the youth to

adult court. Youths accused of committing certain

severe crimes would no longer automatically be tried

in adult court and no youth could be tried in adult

court based only on the decision of a prosecutor.

In addition, the measure speciﬁes that prosecutors

can only seek transfer hearings for youths accused

of (1) committing certain signiﬁcant crimes listed

in state law (such as murder, robbery, and certain

sex offenses) when they were age 14 or 15 or

(2) committing a felony when they were 16 or 17.

As a result of these provisions, there would be fewer

youths tried in adult court.

FISCAL EFFECTS

This measure would have various ﬁscal effects

on the state and local governments. However, the

magnitude of these effects would depend on how

certain provisions in the measure are interpreted

and implemented. As such, our estimates below are

subject to signiﬁcant uncertainty.

Parole Consideration for Nonviolent Offenders

Net State Savings. To the extent nonviolent

offenders serve shorter prison terms due to the

parole consideration provisions of the measure, it

would reduce state costs as the size of the prison

population would decline. The level of savings would

depend heavily on the number of individuals BPH

chose to release. Based on recent BPH experience

with parole consideration for certain nonviolent

offenders, we estimate that the ongoing ﬁscal impact

of this provision would likely be state savings in the

tens of millions of dollars annually. These savings

would be offset somewhat by additional costs for

BPH to conduct more parole considerations.

The measure would also result in temporary ﬁscal

effects in the near term due to (1) additional savings

PROPOSITION

CRIMINAL SENTENCES. PAROLE.

JUVENILE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

For the full text of Proposition 57, see page 141. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

from the release of offenders currently in prison

who would be eligible for parole consideration and

(2) an acceleration of parole costs to supervise those

individuals who are released from prison earlier than

otherwise.

Acceleration of County Costs. Because the measure

would result in the early release of some individuals

who are supervised by county probation ofﬁcers

following their release from prison, the measure

would likely increase the size of the probation

population in the near term. In the absence of the

measure, counties would have eventually incurred

these probation costs in the future.

Sentencing Credits for Prison Inmates

Net State Savings. To the extent CDCR awards

individuals with additional credits, the measure

would reduce state costs as a result of a lower prison

population. Any level of savings is highly uncertain,

as it would depend on how much average sentence

lengths were reduced by CDCR. If the department

granted enough credits to reduce the average

time inmates serve by a few weeks, the measure

could eventually result in state savings in the low

tens of millions of dollars annually. However, the

savings could be signiﬁcantly higher or lower if the

department made different decisions. Because the

measure could result in the early release of some

individuals who are supervised by state parole agents

following release, the measure could temporarily

increase the size of the parole population. The state,

however, would eventually have incurred these parole

costs even in the absence of the measure.

Acceleration of County Costs. Because the measure

could result in the early release of some individuals

who are supervised by county probation ofﬁcers

following their release from prison, the measure

could increase the size of the probation population

in the near term. In the absence of the measure,

counties would have eventually incurred these

probation costs in the future.

Prosecution of Youth in Adult Court

Net State Savings. If the measure’s transfer hearing

requirements result in fewer youths being tried and

convicted in adult court, the measure would have

a number of ﬁscal effects on the state. First, it

would reduce state prison and parole costs as those

youths would no longer spend any time in prison

or be supervised by state parole agents following

their release. In addition, because juvenile court

proceedings are generally shorter than adult court

proceedings, the measure would reduce state court

costs. These savings would be partially offset by

increased state juvenile justice costs as youths

affected by the measure would generally spend a

greater amount of time in state juvenile facilities.

(As noted earlier, a portion of the cost of housing

these youths in state juvenile facilities would be

paid for by counties.) In total, we estimate that the

net savings to the state from the above effects could

be a few million dollars annually.

County Costs. If fewer youths are tried and convicted

as adults, the measure would also have a number

of ﬁscal effects on counties. First, as discussed

above, counties would be responsible for paying a

portion of the costs of housing these youths in state

juvenile facilities. In addition, county probation

departments would be responsible for supervising

these youths following their release. Since juvenile

court proceedings are generally shorter than adult

court proceedings, the above county costs would be

partially offset by some savings. For example, county

agencies involved in court proceedings for these

youths—such as district attorneys, public defenders,

and county probation—would experience a reduction

in workload. In total, we estimate that the net costs to

counties due to the above effects would likely be a few

million dollars annually.

Other Fiscal Effects

The measure could also affect crime rates in varying

ways. On the one hand, if the measure results in

offenders spending less time in prison and more

time in the community, it could result in these

offenders committing additional crimes or crimes

sooner than they otherwise would have. On the other

hand, the measure could lead to more offenders

participating in educational and rehabilitative

programs that reduce the likelihood of them

committing crimes in the future. The net effect of

the above factors is unknown.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

CRIMINAL SENTENCES. PAROLE.

JUVENILE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

CRIMINAL SENTENCES. PAROLE.

JUVENILE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 57

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 57

★

The authors of Prop. 57 are not telling you the truth. IT

APPLIES TO VIOLENT CRIMINALS, will increase crime

and make you less safe. Vote NO.

FACT: Prop. 57 authorizes EARLY PAROLE for a RAPIST

who drugs and rapes a victim, because its authors call

him non-violent.

FACT: Prop. 57 AMENDS CALIFORNIA’S

CONSTITUTION to give these new early parole rights to

criminals who are convicted of many violent and horrible

crimes, including:

RAPE of an unconscious victim; HUMAN SEX

TRAFFICKING; ASSAULT with a deadly weapon; LEWD

ACTS against a 14-year-old; HOSTAGE TAKING; HATE

CRIMES causing injury.

More FACTS:

• Thousands of dangerous criminals have already been

released early. We are paying the price. The violent crime

rate was up 10% last year and Rape up 37%. • Prop. 57

would authorize the IMMEDIATE RELEASE of thousands

of dangerous criminals. • Those previously convicted

of MURDER, RAPE and CHILD MOLESTATION would

be eligible for early parole. • Releasing thousands of

dangerous criminals will not save money. In addition to

the human costs of increased crime, counties and cities

will be forced to hire more police, sheriff deputies, victim

counselors and expand courts. • Prop. 57 overturns

important provisions of the Crime Victims Bill of Rights,

our 3-Strikes Law and Marsy’s Law—strong measures

enacted by voters.

The weakening of California’s anti-crime laws has gone

too far. Don’t amend California’s Constitution to give

even more rights to criminals.

Crime Victims, Police, Sheriffs, Judges and Prosecutors

urge a NO vote on 57.

HONORABLE JAMES ARDAIZ, Presiding Judge

5th District Court of Appeal (Ret.)

SANDRA HUTCHENS, Sheriff

Orange County

COLLENE THOMPSON CAMPBELL, Founder

Memory of Victims Everywhere

VOTE YES on PROPOSITION 57

California public safety leaders and victims of crime

support Proposition 57—the Public Safety and

Rehabilitation Act of 2016—because Prop. 57 focuses

resources on keeping dangerous criminals behind bars,

while rehabilitating juvenile and adult inmates and

saving tens of millions of taxpayer dollars.

Over the last several decades, California’s prison

population exploded by 500% and prison spending

ballooned to more than $10 billion every year.

Meanwhile, too few inmates were rehabilitated and most

re-offended after release.

Overcrowded and unconstitutional conditions led the

U.S. Supreme Court to order the state to reduce its

prison population. Now, without a common sense, long-

term solution, we will continue to waste billions and risk

a court-ordered release of dangerous prisoners. This is an

unacceptable outcome that puts Californians in danger—

and this is why we need Prop. 57.

Prop. 57 is straightforward—here’s what it does:

• Saves taxpayer dollars by reducing wasteful spending on

prisons. • Keeps the most dangerous offenders locked up.

• Allows parole consideration for people with non-violent

convictions who complete the full prison term for their

primary offense. • Authorizes a system of credits that can

be earned for rehabilitation, good behavior and education

milestones or taken away for bad behavior. • Requires

the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation to certify that these policies are consistent

with protecting and enhancing public safety. • Requires

judges instead of prosecutors to decide whether

minors should be prosecuted as adults, emphasizing

rehabilitation for minors in the juvenile system.

We know what works. Evidence shows that the more

inmates are rehabilitated, the less likely they are to

re-offend. Further evidence shows that minors who

remain under juvenile court supervision are less likely to

commit new crimes. Prop. 57 focuses on evidence-based

rehabilitation and allows a juvenile court judge to decide

whether or not a minor should be prosecuted as an adult.

No one is automatically released, or entitled to release

from prison, under Prop. 57.

• To be granted parole, all inmates, current and future,

must demonstrate that they are rehabilitated and

do not pose a danger to the public. • The Board of

Parole Hearings—made up mostly of law enforcement

ofﬁcials—determines who is eligible for release. • Any

individuals approved for release will be subject to

mandatory supervision by law enforcement.

And as the California Supreme Court clearly stated:

parole eligibility in Prop. 57 applies “only to prisoners

convicted of non-violent felonies.”

Prop. 57 is long overdue.

Prop. 57 focuses our system on evidence-based

rehabilitation for juveniles and adults because it is better

for public safety than our current system.

Prop. 57 saves tens of millions of taxpayer dollars.

Prop. 57 keeps the most dangerous criminals behind

bars.

VOTE YES on Prop. 57

www.Vote4Prop57.com

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor of California

MARK BONINI, President

Chief Probation Ofﬁcers of California

DIONNE WILSON, widow of police ofﬁcer killed in the line

of duty

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

CRIMINAL SENTENCES. PAROLE.

JUVENILE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AND SENTENCING.

INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 57

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 57

★

YES on Proposition 57

Opponents of Prop. 57 are wrong.

Prop. 57 saves tens of millions of taxpayer dollars by

reducing wasteful prison spending, breaks the cycle

of crime by rehabilitating deserving juvenile and adult

inmates, and keeps dangerous criminals behind bars.

Don’t be misled by false attacks. Prop. 57:

• Does NOT automatically release anyone from prison.

• Does NOT authorize parole for violent offenders. The

California Supreme Court clearly stated that parole

eligibility under Prop. 57 applies, “only to prisoners

convicted of non-violent felonies.” (Brown v. Superior

Court, June 6, 2016). Violent criminals as deﬁned in

Penal Code 667.5(c) are excluded from parole. • Does

NOT and will not change the federal court order that

excludes sex offenders, as deﬁned in Penal Code 290,

from parole. • Does NOT diminish victims’ rights. • Does

NOT prevent judges from issuing tough sentences.

Prop. 57:

• WILL focus resources on keeping dangerous criminals

behind bars. • WILL save tens of millions of taxpayer

dollars. • WILL help ﬁx a broken system where inmates

leave prison without rehabilitation, re-offend and cycle

back into the system. • WILL be implemented through

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation regulations

developed with public and victim input and certiﬁed as

protecting public safety.

San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis—a Prop. 57

supporter—knows it is imperative to provide inmates with

tools to stop the revolving door to prison. (Daily Journal,

July 14, 2016).

And that makes our communities safer.

Join law enforcement ofﬁcials, victims of crime and

religious leaders: vote YES on Prop. 57.

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor of California

MARK BONINI, President

Chief Probation Ofﬁcers of California

DIONNE WILSON, widow of police ofﬁcer killed in the line

of duty

Proposition 57 will allow criminals convicted of RAPE,

LEWD ACTS AGAINST A CHILD, GANG GUN CRIMES and

HUMAN TRAFFICKING to be released early from prison.

That’s why Proposition 57 is OPPOSED by California

Law Enforcement—District Attorneys, Sheriffs, Police,

Courtroom Prosecutors, Crime Victims and local

community leaders.

Here are the facts:

The authors of Proposition 57 claim it only applies to

“non-violent” crimes, but their poorly drafted measure

deems the following crimes “non-violent” and makes the

perpetrators eligible for EARLY PAROLE and RELEASE

into local communities:

• Rape by intoxication • Rape of an unconscious person

• Human Trafﬁcking involving sex act with minors

• Drive-by shooting • Assault with a deadly weapon

• Hostage taking • Attempting to explode a bomb at a

hospital or school • Domestic violence involving trauma

• Supplying a ﬁrearm to a gang member • Hate crime

causing physical injury • Failing to register as a sex

offender • Arson • Discharging a ﬁrearm on school

grounds • Lewd acts against a child 14 or 15 • False

imprisonment of an elder through violence. *partial list

Here are ﬁve more reasons to VOTE NO on 57:

1) 57 authorizes state government bureaucrats to reduce

many sentences for “good behavior,” even for inmates

convicted of murder, rape, child molestation and human

trafﬁcking. 2) 57 permits the worst career criminals to

be treated the same as ﬁrst-time offenders, discounting

strong sentences imposed by a judge. 3) “57 effectively

overturns key provisions of Marsy’s Law, ‘3-Strikes and

You’re Out,’ Victims’ Bill of Rights, Californians Against

Sexual Exploitation Act—measures enacted by voters

that have protected victims and made communities

safer”—Susan Fisher, Former Chairwoman State Parole

Board 4) 57 forces victims trying to put their lives back

together to re-live the crimes committed against them

over and over again, with every new parole hearing.

5) 57 will likely result in higher crime rates as at least

16,000 dangerous criminals, including those previously

convicted of murder and rape, would be eligible for early

release.

Finally, Prop. 57 places all these new privileges and rights

for convicted criminals into the California Constitution,

where they cannot be changed by the Legislature.

Make no mistake. If Prop. 57 passes, every home, every

neighborhood, every school will be less safe than it is today.

Ask yourself these questions:

Should a criminal who RAPES AN UNCONSCIOUS

PERSON be allowed early release from prison? How about

a 50-year old child molester who preys on a child?

Should criminals convicted of HUMAN TRAFFICKING

involving sex acts with a child, be allowed back on the

streets before serving their full sentence?

Should a criminal who attempts to EXPLODE A BOMB

at a hospital, school or place of worship, be allowed to

leave prison early?

If you answered NO to these questions, then join District

Attorneys, Courtroom Prosecutors, Police, Sheriffs, Crime

Victims, Superior Court Judges and community leaders in

voting NO on 57.

Violent crime was up 10% last year in California. Don’t

allow more violent and dangerous criminals to be

released early. VOTE NO on 57.

MARTIN HALLORAN, President

San Francisco Police Ofﬁcers Association

GEORGE HOFSTETTER, President

Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs

STEPHEN WAGSTAFFE, President

California District Attorneys Association

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY. MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

BACKGROUND

About One in Five California Students Is an English

Learner. In 2015–16, about 2.7 million California

public school students in the elementary and

secondary grades spoke a language other than English

at home. Schools classiﬁed about 1.4 million of these

students as English learners, meaning they were

not yet ﬂuent in English. English learners make up

22 percent of all public school students in California.

More than 80 percent of English learners in California

are native Spanish speakers.

Schools Must Help All Students Learn English. Public

schools are required by law to teach English learners

how to speak and read in English in addition to

teaching them other subjects such as math and

science. Across the country, schools tend to teach

English learners in either English-only or bilingual

programs. In English-only programs, students learn

English and other subjects from teachers who speak

only in English. In bilingual programs, students

learn their subjects from teachers who speak both in

English and in their native language. Many bilingual

programs are designed to last between three and six

years, after which students attend classes taught only

in English. Some bilingual programs continue to teach

English learners in their native language for at least

part of the day even after the students become ﬂuent

English speakers.

California Requires Schools to Teach English Learners

Mostly in English. In response to some concerns

over how English learners were being taught,

California voters passed Proposition 227 in 1998.

Proposition 227 generally requires English learners to

be taught in English and restricts the use of bilingual

programs. Proposition 227 generally requires public

schools to provide English learners with one year

of special, intensive English instruction before

transitioning those students into other English-only

classes. Proposition 227 remains in effect today.

Schools Can Run Bilingual Programs Under Certain

Conditions. Under Proposition 227, parents of English

learners must come to school and sign a waiver if

they want their children considered for bilingual

instruction. Schools may approve these waivers for

students meeting one of three conditions: (1) English

learners who have attended an English-only classroom

for at least 30 days and whose teachers, principal,

and district superintendent all agree would learn

better in a bilingual program; (2) students who are at

least ten years old; or (3) students who are already

ﬂuent English speakers. If 20 or more students in any

grade get approved waivers, their school must offer

a bilingual class or allow students to transfer to a

school that has such a class.

Since 1998, Fewer Schools Have Offered Bilingual

Programs. The year before Proposition 227 was

enacted, about 30 percent of California’s English

• Preserves requirement that public schools ensure

students become proﬁcient in English.

• Requires school districts to solicit parent

and community input in developing language

acquisition programs to ensure English acquisition

as rapidly and effectively as possible.

• Requires that school districts provide students with

limited English proﬁciency the option to be taught

English nearly all in English.

• Authorizes school districts to establish dual-

language immersion programs for both native and

non-native English speakers.

• Allows parents/legal guardians of students to select

an available language acquisition program that best

suits their child.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• No notable ﬁscal effect on school districts or state

government.

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

FINAL VOTES CAST BY THE LEGISLATURE ON SB 1174 (PROPOSITION 58)

(CHAPTER 753, STATUTES OF 2014)

Senate: Ayes 25 Noes 10

Assembly: Ayes 53 Noes 26

For the full text of Proposition 58, see page 146. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

learners were taught in bilingual programs. Ten years

later, about 5 percent of California’s English learners

were taught in bilingual programs.

School Districts and County Ofﬁces of Education Must

Engage Their Communities in a Yearly Planning Process.

The state requires school districts and county ofﬁces

of education to publish yearly plans describing

the services they will provide for certain groups of

students, including English learners. Before adopting

these plans, school ofﬁcials must talk to parents

and other community members about what types of

programs they would like their schools to run.

PROPOSAL

This measure repeals key provisions of

Proposition 227 and adds a few new provisions

regarding English language instruction, as described

below.

Removes Restrictions to Bilingual Programs. Under

this proposal, schools would no longer be required

to teach English learners in English-only programs.

Instead, schools could teach their English learners

using a variety of programs, including bilingual

programs. In addition, parents of English learners

would no longer need to sign waivers before their

children could enroll in bilingual programs.

Requires Districts to Respond to Some Parental Demands.

While schools generally could design their English

learner programs however they wanted, they still

would have to provide intensive English instruction to

English learners if parents requested it. Additionally,

school districts would be required to offer any speciﬁc

English learner program requested by enough parents.

Speciﬁcally, if at any school either (1) 20 or more

parents of students in any single grade or (2) 30 or

more parents overall ask for a speciﬁc kind of English

learner program, that school would have to offer such

a program to the extent possible.

Requires Districts to Talk to Community Members About

Their English Learner Programs. This proposal requires

school districts and county ofﬁces of education to ask

parents and other community members how English

learners should be taught (for example, by using an

English-only or bilingual program). School districts

and county ofﬁces of education would ask for this

feedback as part of their regular yearly planning

process. (Some districts likely already discuss these

issues in their yearly planning process, but this

proposal makes soliciting feedback on these issues a

requirement for all districts.)

FISCAL EFFECTS

The measure would have no notable ﬁscal effect on

state government. However, it likely would result

in changes to the way some school districts teach

English learners. These changes would have little

effect on local costs. We discuss the measure’s

programmatic and ﬁscal effects on schools below.

Signiﬁcant Programmatic Impact for Some English

Learners. Though the measure generally does not

require school districts to change how they teach

English learners, it makes starting or expanding

bilingual programs easier for all districts. The exact

effect of this measure would depend upon how

parents and schools respond to it. Over time, bilingual

programs could become more common, with some

English learners taught in bilingual programs who

otherwise would have been taught in English-only

programs. For these school districts and students,

the programmatic impact of the measure would be

signiﬁcant.

Minor Effect on Schools’ Ongoing and One-Time Costs.

The bilingual programs created or expanded due

to the measure would not necessarily be more or

less expensive overall than English-only programs,

as annual costs for both types of programs depend

mostly on factors like class size and teacher pay.

Any school creating a bilingual program would incur

some one-time costs for developing new curriculum,

purchasing new instructional materials, training

teachers on the new curriculum and materials, and

informing parents about the program. These costs,

however, would not necessarily be added costs, as

schools routinely revise curriculum, purchase new

materials, train teachers, and keep parents apprised

of important school issues.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY. MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY. MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 58

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 58

★

Twenty years ago California schools were forcing

hundreds of thousands of children into mandatory

Spanish-almost-only classes. Students, their parents,

and employers don’t want to return to those days, but

the bilingual education “lobby” and teacher unions do,

and so do the politicians who put Proposition 58 on the

ballot.

We are two of the many Legislators who voted against it

and urge you to vote NO as well.

In 1998, California voters approved an initiative

requiring that children be taught English in our schools,

unless their parents disagreed. They did this because

children who were not native English speakers were

struggling too long in “bilingual” classes and never

moving up.

The results have been spectacular. Children are learning

English faster than when they were forced into “bilingual

programs” that dragged on for years. Because they are

learning English faster and at an earlier age, record

numbers of immigrant students are gaining admission to

our state colleges and universities.

Those supporting Prop. 58 want to change that because

these so-called “language teachers” have jobs in our

schools only so long as students stay in bilingual classes.

The teachers and their unions beneﬁt, but not the

children.

Proposition 58 is not about modernizing the way we

teach English, it’s about forcing a failed method of

English instruction on immigrant children against the

wishes of their parents.

Proposition 58 eliminates current parental rights to an

English-language education for their children.

Vote NO on this deceptive ballot measure.

SHANNON GROVE, Assemblywoman

Bakersﬁeld

JOEL ANDERSON, Senator

San Diego County

PROPOSITION 58 ENSURES ALL STUDENTS CAN ACHIEVE

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

Too many California students are being left behind and

not given the opportunity to learn English with the most

effective teaching methods possible. This is because of

an outdated nearly 20-year-old law, Proposition 227,

which restricts the instructional methods school districts

can use to teach English.

Proposition 58 revises Proposition 227 to remove these

restrictions so schools are able to use the most up-to-date

teaching methods possible to help our students learn.

Proposition 58: • Requires local school districts

to identify in their annual K–12 Local Control and

Accountability Plans the instructional methods they

will offer to help ensure all students become proﬁcient

in English as rapidly as possible. • Requires schools to

offer a structured English immersion program to English

learners. But schools also can adopt other language

instruction methods based on research and stakeholder

input. • School districts must seek input from educators,

parents and the community.

PROPOSITION 58 ALSO EXPANDS OPPORTUNITIES FOR

ENGLISH SPEAKERS TO LEARN A SECOND LANGUAGE.

Proposition 58 removes barriers hurting students by

discouraging schools from expanding multilingual

education. Proposition 58 encourages school districts to

provide instruction programs so native English speakers

can become proﬁcient in a second language:

• School districts must include in their annual K–12

Local Control and Accountability Plans programs giving

English-speaking students the opportunity to achieve

proﬁciency in a second language. • District choices of

non-English languages must reﬂect input from parents,

the community and the linguistic and ﬁnancial resources

of schools. • Research shows that students participating

in programs taught in more than one language attain

higher levels of academic achievement.

PROPOSITION 58 RESTORES LOCAL CONTROL TO OUR

SCHOOLS.

Proposition 58 allows local school districts to choose the

most up-to-date language instruction methods to improve

student outcomes free from legal restrictions imposed on

them by a decades-old law.

PROPOSITION 58 PROVIDES A BETTER FUTURE FOR OUR

CHILDREN AND OUR STATE.

The world economy is changing rapidly. Today,

technology allows even the smallest businesses to have a

global reach. Students proﬁcient in English and a second

language will be more employable, start out earning

higher wages, and make California’s workforce better

prepared to compete for jobs in the global economy.

PROPOSITION 58 HAS BROAD-BASED SUPPORT FROM LOCAL

SCHOOL DISTRICTS, EDUCATORS, PARENTS AND EMPLOYERS.

Giving local schools the tools they need to improve

outcomes for students is not a partisan or political issue.

Proposition 58 was placed on the ballot by a bipartisan

vote of the legislature. Support for Proposition 58’s

common sense reforms to improve language instruction

in our schools is broad-based and includes: Local school

boards (the California School Boards Association),

Teachers (the California Language Teachers’ Association,

the California Teachers Association, the California

Federation of Teachers), Parents (California State PTA),

and Employers (including the San Jose/Silicon Valley and

Los Angeles Chambers of Commerce).

Proposition 58’s reforms allow schools to adopt the most

up-to-date methods of language instruction to improve

student outcomes and make better use of taxpayer

dollars.

More information at www.SupportProp58.com.

VOTE YES ON 58.

LENORA LACY BARNES, Senior Vice President

California Federation of Teachers

CHRIS UNGAR, President

California School Boards Association

TANYA ZACCONE, Executive Director

California Language Teachers’ Association

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

ENGLISH PROFICIENCY. MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 58

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 58

★

PROPOSITION 58 ENSURES ALL STUDENTS CAN

ACHIEVE ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AS RAPIDLY

AS POSSIBLE. PROPOSITION 58 EXPANDS

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENGLISH SPEAKERS TO

MASTER A SECOND LANGUAGE.

That’s why Proposition 58 is supported by our state’s

leading educators and parent advocates—classroom

teachers, the State PTA, school principals and local

school board members—and Governor Jerry Brown.

PROPOSITION 58 IS NOT A “DISHONEST TRICK.”

Don’t be fooled by opponents’ scare tactics. Prop. 58 is

NOT a “trick” to abandon English instruction in favor of

“mandatory Spanish-almost-only classes.” Here’s what

Prop. 58 actually says:

• School districts must provide their pupils with

“effective and appropriate” language acquisition

programs “designed to ensure English acquisition as

rapidly and as effectively as possible” (Education Code

Sections 305(a)(1) and 306(c)). •

“All California school

children have the right to be provided with a free public

education and an English language public education.”

(Education Code Section 320).

• School districts

“shall, at a minimum, provide English Learners with a

structured English immersion program” (Education Code

Section 305(a)(2)).

THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE

OPPONENTS’ CLAIMS. Opponents claim

Proposition 227 was wildly successful, but a

comprehensive ﬁve-year evaluation by the American

Institutes for Research concluded “there is no conclusive

evidence” to support their claims.

EDUCATORS AND PARENTS ASK YOU TO REJECT

OPPOSITION SCARE TACTICS. Under Prop. 58 local

school districts will decide—with input from parents,

educators and their communities—the most appropriate

language instruction approaches for their students to

achieve English proﬁciency as rapidly as possible and

expand opportunities for English speakers to master a

second language.

SUPPORT OUR CHILDREN AND OUR SCHOOLS. VOTE

YES ON 58.

JUSTINE FISCHER, President

California State PTA

TOM TORLAKSON, State Superintendent of Public

Instruction

RALPH GOMEZ PORRAS, President

Association of California School Administrators

THIS BALLOT MEASURE IS A DISHONEST TRICK BY

THE SACRAMENTO POLITICIANS

• The ofﬁcial title of Proposition 58 is “English

Language Education.” But it actually REPEALS the

requirement the children be taught English in California

public schools. It’s all a trick by the Sacramento

politicians to fool the voters, who overwhelmingly

passed Proposition 227, the “English for the Children”

initiative in 1998. • The worst part of Proposition

58 is hidden away in Section 8, which REPEALS all

restrictions on the California Legislature to make future

changes. This would allow the Legislature to reestablish

SPANISH-ALMOST-ONLY instruction in the public

schools by a simple majority vote, once again forcing

Latino children into those classes against their parents’

wishes. • Teaching English in our public schools is

overwhelmingly supported by California parents, whether

immigrants or non-immigrants, Latinos or Anglos, Asians

or Blacks. That’s why the politicians are trying to TRICK

the voters by using a DECEPTIVE TITLE.

VOTE NO AND KEEP “ENGLISH FOR THE

CHILDREN”—IT WORKS!

• For decades, millions of Latino children were FORCED

INTO SPANISH-ALMOST-ONLY CLASSES dishonestly

called “bilingual education.” It was an educational

disaster and never worked. Many Latinos never learned

how to read, write, or even speak English properly.

• But in 1998, California voters overwhelmingly passed

Prop. 227—the “English for the Children” initiative—

providing sheltered English immersion to immigrant

students and requiring that they be taught English

as soon as they started school. • Jaime Escalante

of Stand and Deliver fame, one of America’s most

successful teachers led the Prop. 227 campaign as

Honorary Chairman, rescuing California Latinos from the

Spanish-only educational ghetto. • It worked! Within four

years the test scores of over a million immigrant students

in California increased by 30%, 50%, or even 100%.

• All the major newspapers, even the national New York

Times, declared the new English immersion system a

huge educational success. • The former Superintendent

of Oceanside Uniﬁed School District announced that

he’d been wrong about bilingual education for thirty

years and became a leading national advocate for

English immersion. • Since “English for the Children”

passed, there has been a huge increase in the number

of Latinos scoring high enough to gain admission to the

prestigious University of California system. • Prop. 227

worked so well in California schools that the whole issue

was forgotten by almost everyone except the bilingual

education activists. Now they’re trying to trick the voters

into allowing the RESTORATION OF MANDATORY

SPANISH-ALMOST-ONLY CLASSES.

Vote NO, keep “English for the Children,” and protect

Jaime Escalante’s educational legacy for California’s

immigrant schoolchildren.

For more information, visit our website at

www.KeepEnglish.org

RON UNZ, Chairman

English for the Children

KENNETH A. NOONAN, Former Superintendent

Oceanside Uniﬁed School District

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

CORPORATIONS. POLITICAL SPENDING.

FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.

LEGISLATIVE ADVISORY QUESTION.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

BACKGROUND

Political Campaign Spending. Many people,

corporations, labor unions, and other

groups spend money to inﬂuence voters’

decisions in political campaigns. This

spending includes:

• Direct Contributions. People can give

money directly to candidates, political

parties, and committees. These direct

contributions are subject to federal,

state, and local limits. In some

cases, federal law does not allow

direct contributions. For example,

corporations and labor unions may not

give money directly to a candidate for

a federal ofﬁce.

• Independent Expenditures. A person

makes an “independent expenditure”

if he or she spends money to inﬂuence

voters with no coordination with a

candidate or campaign. For example, a

person producing a radio commercial

urging people to vote for a candidate

is making an independent expenditure

if the commercial is made without

the involvement of the candidate’s

campaign.

Independent Expenditures Protected by

U.S. Constitution. Before 2010, federal

law limited corporations and labor unions’

abilities to make independent expenditures

in federal elections. Some California local

governments had similar laws for local

elections. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme

Court determined in the Citizens United

case that independent expenditures made

by corporations and labor unions are a form

of speech protected under the Constitution.

Based on this determination and related

• Asks whether California’s elected

ofﬁcials should use their authority to

propose and ratify an amendment to

the federal Constitution overturning the

United States Supreme Court decision

in Citizens United v. Federal Election

Commission.

• Citizens United ruled that laws placing

certain limits on political spending

by corporations and unions are

unconstitutional.

• States that the proposed amendment

should clarify that corporations should

not have the same constitutional rights

as human beings.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE

OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL

IMPACT:

• No direct ﬁscal effect on state or local

governments.

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

FINAL VOTES CAST BY THE LEGISLATURE ON SB 254 (PROPOSITION 59)

(CHAPTER 20, STATUTES OF 2016)

Senate: Ayes 26 Noes 12

Assembly: Ayes 51 Noes 26

For the full text of Proposition 59, see page 148. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

court decisions, government may not limit

the right of corporations and labor unions

to make independent expenditures. This

ruling applies to federal, state, and local

governments.

Two-Step Process to Change the Constitution.

The Constitution may be changed through

a two-step “amendment” process. Under

this process, described below, only the

Congress, state legislatures, and—if

called by the Congress—constitutional

conventions have a role in changing the

Constitution. Since the Constitution

became law in 1789, 33 amendments

have been proposed and 27 amendments

have been approved through this process.

• Step One: The Congress Acts. The

process to change the Constitution

begins with the Congress either

(1) proposing changes or amendments

to the Constitution or (2) calling

a constitutional convention to

propose amendments after the state

legislatures of at least 34 states have

asked for such a convention. No

amendment has been proposed by a

constitutional convention.

• Step Two: The States Act. At least

38 states must approve a proposed

amendment before it becomes law.

Depending on instructions from the

Congress, states approve proposed

amendments through either the state

legislatures or state-level conventions.

Historically, only one amendment—

the 21

Amendment repealing the

prohibition of the sale of alcoholic

beverages—has been approved

through state-level conventions rather

than by state legislatures.

PROPOSAL

Proposition 59 asks if California’s

elected ofﬁcials should use all of their

constitutional authority—including, but not

limited to, amending the Constitution—to:

• Reverse the effects of Citizens United

and related court decisions.

• Allow the regulation and limitation of

political campaign spending.

• Ensure individuals are able to express

political views.

• Make clear that corporations should

not have the same constitutional rights

as people.

Proposition 59 is an advisory measure only.

It does not require any particular action by

the Congress or the California Legislature.

FISCAL EFFECTS

This measure would have no direct ﬁscal

effect on state and local governments.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

CORPORATIONS. POLITICAL SPENDING.

FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.

LEGISLATIVE ADVISORY QUESTION.

PROPOSITION

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

CORPORATIONS. POLITICAL SPENDING.

FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.

LEGISLATIVE ADVISORY QUESTION.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 59

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 59

★

Proposition 59 DOES NOTHING.

Even supporters admit that all this measure does is

“send a message to Congress.”

They admit that corporations “play a vital role in our

economy.”

The Legislature should focus on doing its job and stop

putting meaningless measures on the ballot to ask

Congress to limit free speech by overturning the Supreme

Court.

Corporations give money. Labor unions give money.

People give money. They all do it to support candidates

they like and oppose candidates they don’t.

Supporters of Proposition 59 say the people “should

have the right to set reasonable limits on the raising and

spending of money by candidates and others to inﬂuence

elections.”

Who decides what those reasonable limits are?

THIS CONGRESS?

THIS LEGISLATURE?

Do you really want politicians currently in ofﬁce to have

the power to silence the voice of people or organizations

who want to change the way our government works?

Proposition 59 has NO force of law. It DOES NOTHING.

We’ve all agreed with many Supreme Court decisions.

We’ve all disagreed with many others.

One thing Democrats, Republicans and Non-Partisan

voters CAN agree on is that the Supreme Court should be

above politics and above picking winners and losers.

Proposition 59 is a political statement by a select few

who want to impose their will on the many. Instead of

putting do-nothing advisory measures on the ballot, the

Legislature should focus on transparency and start doing

the people’s business.

Vote NO on Proposition 59 . . . It DOES

NOTHING . . . IT MEANS NOTHING.

JEFF STONE, State Senator

28th District

K.H. ACHADJIAN, Assemblyman

35th District

Vote YES on Proposition 59 to help get big money out

of politics and restore a government of, by, and for the

people.

Corporations and billionaires should not be allowed to

continue to buy our elections.

But that’s exactly what the United States Supreme Court

did in the disastrous Citizens United v. FEC ruling. This

misguided decision gave corporations the same “rights”

as human beings and freed them to spend unlimited

amounts of money in our elections. Other recent

decisions overturned long-standing laws limiting how

much billionaires could spend in an election.

As a result, corporations and their billionaire owners are

spending unprecedented amounts of money to tilt the

outcomes of our elections in their favor.

Corporations and billionaires should not have a greater

voice in our elections than California voters. Corporations

spend huge amounts of money to inﬂuence election

results and make it harder for our voices to be heard.

The Supreme Court was wrong and must be corrected.

Corporations play a vital role in our economy. But

corporations aren’t people. They don’t vote, get sick, or

die in wars for our country. The Constitution was written

to protect human beings, not corporations. The rights

granted to corporations by the Supreme Court allow

them to drown out the voices of real people—as voters,

consumers, workers, and small business owners.

We The People should have the right to set reasonable

limits on the raising and spending of money by

candidates and others to inﬂuence elections.

Vote YES on Prop. 59 and tell Congress to pass an

amendment to the U.S. Constitution that puts an end to

this corrosive political spending.

California voters have used ballot measures to instruct

and improve our state and local governments before.

Prop. 59 allows us to do this on this critical issue.

Real campaign ﬁnance reform can only happen with

a groundswell of grassroots support from across the

country. Let’s do our part and vote YES on Proposition

59.

Help send a message to Congress to act now to

strengthen our democracy.

Vote YES on Proposition 59.

BEN ALLEN, State Senator

MICHELE SUTTER, Co-Founder

Money Out Voters In

KATHAY FENG, Executive Director

California Common Cause

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

CORPORATIONS. POLITICAL SPENDING.

FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.

LEGISLATIVE ADVISORY QUESTION.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 59

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 59

★

DON’T BE FOOLED BY THE OPPONENTS’ MISLEADING

SCARE TACTICS.

Vote YES on Proposition 59 because if we don’t overturn

the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United ruling we

will NEVER be able to enact the reforms that we need

to PREVENT CORPORATIONS AND WEALTHY SPECIAL

INTERESTS FROM BUYING OUR ELECTIONS.

Opponents want you to believe that overturning Citizens

United will affect your First Amendment rights. Only BIG

MONEY INTERESTS who want to control our elections

have anything to fear from overturning Citizens United.

Corporations should not have the same rights as human

beings—they should not be allowed to spend unlimited

amounts of money to control our elections. BUT THAT IS

EXACTLY WHAT THE CITIZENS UNITED DECISION LET

THEM DO! It struck down limits on corporate and union

political spending.

Democrats, Republicans, and independent voters

agree that Citizens United should be overturned with a

constitutional amendment. Vote YES on Proposition 59

to tell Congress to act.

Overturning Citizens United will open the way to

meaningful campaign ﬁnance reform that will return

ownership of our elections back to ordinary Americans!

Voting YES on Proposition 59 will send a clear message

to Congress that We the People want OUR voices heard

during elections.

Don’t let the opponents fool you—corporations and

billionaires should not be allowed to continue to buy our

elections.

Vote YES on Proposition 59 to help get big money out

of politics and restore a government of, by, and for the

PEOPLE.

MARK LENO, State Senator

MICHELE SUTTER, Co-Founder

Money Out Voters In

KATHAY FENG, Executive Director

California Common Cause

PROPOSITION 59 IS A BIG WASTE OF YOUR TIME AND

OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

The LEGISLATURE placed this NON-BINDING

ADVISORY measure on the ballot to say they want

campaign ﬁnance reform and want to curb the power

of special interests in Sacramento, but it actually

does nothing of the kind. Instead, it argues that FREE

SPEECH SHOULD NOT APPLY TO small businesses and

others who choose to incorporate as a corporation. What

this measure fails to accomplish is:

• It FAILS to prohibit or limit corporate contributions to

candidates and elected ofﬁcials.

• It FAILS to prohibit or limit union contributions to

candidates or elected ofﬁcials.

• It FAILS to prohibit or limit corporate contributions to

political parties.

• It FAILS to prohibit or limit union contributions to

political parties.

Instead, Proposition 59 asks the California members of

Congress to change the First Amendment of the United

States Constitution. Do you really want THIS CONGRESS

to tinker with the FIRST AMENDMENT which guarantees

and protects:

• Your right to practice your religion?

• Your right to FREE SPEECH?

• Your right to a FREE PRESS?

• Your right to peaceably assemble and associate with

others?

• Your right to petition your government?

Supporters of Proposition 59 argue that “corporations

aren’t people.” But, many Churches are incorporated.

Newspapers and Television networks are incorporated.

Facebook, Google, and Twitter are incorporated.

Even organizations like Common Cause, the League

of Women Voters, and the American Civil Liberties

Union (ACLU) are incorporated. People shouldn’t lose

their Constitutional rights just because they choose to

become involved in a company or organization that is

incorporated.

Our BALLOTS should NOT be clogged with pointless

NON-BINDING measures.

This is the ﬁrst, but if you vote “yes” it surely won’t be

the last. Instead, your NO VOTE sends a clear message

to the Legislature:

• Stop WASTING OUR MONEY—This measure costs

taxpayers half a million dollars, or more.

• Stop CLOGGING OUR BALLOT with meaningless

measures that DO NOTHING.

• Start DISCLOSING political contributions WITHIN 24

HOURS of receipt year-round.

• Start DOING YOUR JOB. Fix our broken education

system. Fix our broken roads. Protect us from crime.

Nobody likes the current state of Politics in America or

California. But PROPOSITION 59 is just a “feel-good”

measure that does NOTHING to increase disclosure of

money being spent in politics.

Please VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 59. IT DOES

NOTHING.

JEFF STONE, State Senator

28th District

KATCHO ACHADJIAN, State Assemblyman

35th District

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

ADULT FILMS. CONDOMS. HEALTH REQUIREMENTS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

California Is the Leading Adult Film Industry Location.

Many adult ﬁlms are made in the San Fernando

Valley of Los Angeles (a long-time center of adult ﬁlm

production) and elsewhere in California. (Adult ﬁlms

are also commonly called “pornography.”) A number

of media companies produce adult ﬁlms here, which

consumers mostly view over the Internet. Some adult

ﬁlm performers also own businesses that produce,

ﬁnance, or distribute content. These businesses

include websites and social media platforms where

the performers promote their own videos and photos.

State Laws Protect Worker Safety and Health. State law

imposes a variety of requirements on employers to

protect their employees from harm in the workplace.

The state Division of Occupational Safety and Health

(Cal/OSHA) enforces regulations to protect workers

from workplace hazards. A state board, appointed by

the Governor, is responsible for adopting and updating

these workplace health and safety regulations.

Performers and other workers on adult ﬁlm sets, such

as directors and camera operators, may be exposed to

a variety of health and safety hazards while working

there. These range from typical workplace health

and safety issues (like inadequate ﬁrst aid kits in

the workplace) to other risks speciﬁc to adult ﬁlm

sets—such as contact with potentially infectious body

ﬂuids, especially semen, while making or performing

in a ﬁlm.

Cal/OSHA Already Requires Adult Film Condom Use.

Cal/OSHA considers exposure to certain body ﬂuids

a workplace hazard. This is because harmful sexually

transmitted infections (STIs)—like chlamydia,

hepatitis B, and the human immunodeﬁciency virus

(HIV)—spread from infected people to healthy people

through contact with blood and certain other body

ﬂuids. For this reason, current state regulations

generally require employers to provide and ensure that

their employees use protective equipment to prevent

contact with certain body ﬂuids in the workplace. In

enforcing these regulations, Cal/OSHA is requiring

performers to use condoms during sex on adult ﬁlm

sets. Cal/OSHA generally enforces these rules by

responding to complaints. Over the two-year period

of 2014 and 2015, Cal/OSHA cited four production

companies for violations of these regulations.

Los Angeles County Law Speciﬁcally Requires Adult

Film Condom Use. In November 2012, voters in

Los Angeles County approved a ballot measure

(Measure B) that speciﬁcally requires performers to

use condoms during sex on adult ﬁlm sets there.

Industry Practice Varies. Some adult ﬁlm

productions currently require or allow performers

to wear condoms. However, despite state and local

regulations, other producers and performers prefer to

make adult ﬁlms without condoms or other protective

equipment. Parts of the industry instead use regular

STI testing that aims to conﬁrm that performers are

free of harmful infections.

PROPOSAL

Proposition 60 places in the California Labor Code

additional requirements, as summarized in Figure 1,

related to workplace health and safety on adult

ﬁlm sets in this state. This measure speciﬁcally

applies to sexual intercourse on adult ﬁlm sets “in

which performers actually engage in vaginal or anal

penetration by a penis.”

Clariﬁes State Labor Code to Speciﬁcally Require

Condoms. This measure clariﬁes how some key

provisions of existing workplace health and safety

• Requires performers in adult ﬁlms to use condoms

during ﬁlming of sexual intercourse.

• Requires producers of adult ﬁlms to pay for

performer vaccinations, testing, and medical

examinations related to sexually transmitted

infections.

• Requires producers of adult ﬁlms to obtain state

health license, and to post condom requirement at

ﬁlm sites.

• Imposes liability on producers for violations, on

certain distributors, on performers if they have

a ﬁnancial interest in the ﬁlm involved, and on

talent agents who knowingly refer performers to

noncomplying producers.

• Permits state, performers, or any state resident to

enforce violations.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Likely reduction of state and local tax revenues of

several million dollars per year.

• Increased state costs that could exceed $1 million

annually to license and regulate adult ﬁlm

production and to enforce workplace health and

safety rules. These costs would be offset to some

extent by new fee revenue.

For the full text of Proposition 60, see page 148. Title and Summary / Analysis

ADULT FILMS. CONDOMS. HEALTH REQUIREMENTS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

rules apply speciﬁcally to the adult ﬁlm industry. It

puts into the Labor Code a speciﬁc requirement that

adult ﬁlm producers provide condoms and ensure

that performers use them (as opposed to the existing,

general workplace health and safety regulations about

preventing contact with blood and certain other body

ﬂuids). This measure states that the condoms do not

have to be visible in ﬁlms distributed to consumers.

However, adult ﬁlm producers would need to be able

to prove that performers actually used condoms.

Other Requirements on Adult Film Producers. This

proposition requires adult ﬁlm producers to be

licensed by Cal/OSHA every two years and to notify

Cal/OSHA whenever they make an adult ﬁlm. Adult

ﬁlm producers would pay fees to Cal/OSHA to

administer these new requirements. In addition,

adult ﬁlm producers would be required to pay for

the costs of performers’ work-related STI prevention

vaccines, STI tests, and medical examinations. The

measure also requires adult ﬁlm producers to keep

records showing that they complied with the new

requirements.

Expanded Time Frame for Enforcement. Under current

law, Cal/OSHA generally has six months from the time

of a workplace violation to complete its investigation

and issue a citation. The proposition allows

enforcement actions for these adult ﬁlm violations

to be started within one year after the violation is or

should have been discovered.

Expands Liability for Certain Workplace Health and

Safety Violations. In addition to adult ﬁlm producers,

the measure makes adult ﬁlm distributors and talent

agents potentially liable for workplace health and

safety violations placed into law by this measure. The

measure also sets ﬁnancial penalties for violations of

these requirements.

Allows Individuals to Bring Lawsuits on Regulatory

Violations. Under the measure, any California resident

could request Cal/OSHA to address

some alleged adult ﬁlm workplace

health and safety violations. If

Cal/OSHA does not take certain

actions within speciﬁc time frames,

that person could ﬁle a civil action

against the adult ﬁlm producer. If

the individual prevails, he or she

would be able to recover their legal

costs and receive 25 percent of any

penalties paid by a defendant in such

a lawsuit, with the rest being paid

to the state. The measure provides

that its penalties will not apply to

adult ﬁlm performers or employees,

so long as those individuals have no

ﬁnancial interest in a ﬁlm and are not

producers of the ﬁlm.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Likely Reductions in Tax Revenue. Industry participants

would respond to this measure’s increased regulatory

and enforcement requirements in many ways. Some

parts of the adult ﬁlm industry would comply with

the measure while others might choose to relocate

outside of California. It is also possible that some

adult ﬁlm producers would try to evade state and

local law enforcement while continuing to make adult

ﬁlms here. Adult ﬁlm wages and business income

in California would likely decline and, as a result,

the measure would likely reduce state and local tax

revenues by several million dollars per year.

Regulatory and Enforcement Costs and Revenues. The

ongoing state government costs to implement this law

could exceed $1 million annually. Most of the costs

would be covered by new fees on adult ﬁlm producers.

Any penalty revenue would be deposited into the state

General Fund.

Other Public Budget Effects. The measure could have

other ﬁscal effects on California governments. For

example, a reduction in employment in the adult ﬁlm

industry could result in a minor increase in state or

local costs for health or social services programs. The

measure could also result in fewer transmissions of

STIs, which could somewhat reduce state or local

costs for publicly funded health programs. Overall,

the net effect on publicly funded health and social

services programs probably would be minor.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

ADULT FILMS. CONDOMS. HEALTH REQUIREMENTS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 60

★

Prop. 60 is dangerous for workers, and costly to voters

like you. This initiative is the only one opposed by all

major political parties.

One special interest group has spent millions of dollars

drafting Prop. 60 and funding the campaign. Is it a

surprise that this special interest group will also proﬁt

from the proposition? They will be given authority to ﬁle

countless lawsuits against workers in adult ﬁlms and can

pocket special ﬁnes. Every on-set worker could be sued.

Prop. 60 also gives ANY resident of California the ability

to sue adult ﬁlm performers who produce adult ﬁlms.

Even an injured worker. Can you imagine the potential for

abuse and harassment? And the cost. It’s no wonder the

nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce (LAO) estimates

a potential cost to California taxpayers of “millions of

dollars.”

This is what happens when a special interest group

spends millions of dollars on a complex thirteen-page

initiative: a measure with so many ﬂaws and problems

that it negates any positive components. It even weakens

current workplace safety.

OPPOSITION to Prop. 60 is growing, including public

health and civil rights organizations, such as Equality

California, APAC (the largest, independent performer

organization) and LA LGBT Center. The CALIFORNIA

DEMOCRATIC PARTY and CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN

PARTY oppose Prop. 60.

Prop. 60 is an “all-or-nothing” approach funded by a

single special interest group. Worker safety policy should

be written with everyone’s input. VOTE NO ON PROP. 60.

To learn more, visit Californians Against Worker

Harassment at DontHarassCA.com

RACHEL “CHANEL PRESTON” TAYLOR, President of the

Adult Performer Advocacy Committee

JERE INGRAM, CIH, CSP, FAIHA, former Chair of the

California Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board

MARIE LOUISE “NINA HARTLEY” LEVINE, Bachelor of Science

in Nursing

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 60

★

Nobody should have to risk their health in order to keep

their job!

A YES vote for Prop. 60 is a vote to protect California

adult ﬁlm workers from disease. Porn producers refuse to

provide a safe workplace for their performers. As a result,

thousands of workers have been exposed to serious

and life-threatening diseases. It is time to hold the

pornographers accountable for worker safety and health

in California’s adult ﬁlm industry.

Since 1992, the law has required condom use in

all adult ﬁlms produced in California. According to

Cal/OSHA, “Condoms are required to protect adult

ﬁlm workers from exposure to HIV and other sexually

transmitted infections.” Prop. 60 closes loopholes in the

existing law and improves enforcement so pornographers

can more readily be held accountable for the same

workplace protection law that applies to every other

California industry. Prop. 60 only holds adult ﬁlm

producers, directors, and agents accountable—not adult

ﬁlm performers.

The American Medical Association, the American Public

Health Association, and other major medical and public

health institutions support the use of condoms in adult

ﬁlms. But pornographers blatantly ignore the law. They

complain condom use in their ﬁlms will hurt their proﬁts.

They ﬁre and blacklist adult ﬁlm performers who want to

protect themselves with condoms.

When pornographers ignore the law, they expose their

workers to HIV, syphilis, chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes,

hepatitis, and human papillomavirus (HPV). Scientiﬁc

studies show adult ﬁlm performers are far more likely

to get sexually transmitted diseases than the general

population. Thousands of cases of diseases—which can

spread to the larger community—have been documented

within the adult ﬁlm industry in recent years.

Pornographers say adult ﬁlm performers are tested for

disease. But testing (which the workers must pay for!) is

inadequate. It does not effectively identify many sexually

transmitted diseases in a timely manner. Condoms

provide important additional protections. Vote YES on

Prop. 60 for worker safety!

We all pay the price because pornographers refuse to

play by the rules. The lifetime cost to treat HIV is nearly

half a million dollars per person. This industry has cost

California taxpayers an estimated $10 million in HIV

treatment expenses alone. In addition, taxpayers pay

hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to treat

related diseases.

The need to strengthen existing law is particularly urgent

now because the adult ﬁlm industry is struggling to make

proﬁts. As a result, pornographers are more likely than

ever to resist condom use. Prop. 60 provides health

ofﬁcials with the enforcement tools they need to help

ensure the law is enforced and adult ﬁlm workers are

adequately protected.

Pornographers have taken advantage of young working

women and men for too long. Pornographers must not

be allowed to continue to violate the law that protects

these California workers. This is about fairness and

responsibility. Visit FAIR4CA.org for more information.

VOTE YES ON PROP. 60!

CYNTHIA DAVIS, M.P.H., Board Chair

AIDS Healthcare Foundation

GARY A. RICHWALD, M.D., M.P.H., Former Director

Los Angeles County Sexually Transmitted Disease Program

DERRICK BURTS, HIV-Positive Former Adult Film Worker

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

ADULT FILMS. CONDOMS. HEALTH REQUIREMENTS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 60

★

Make no mistake about who opposes Prop. 60. It’s the

greedy porn producers. They routinely put adult ﬁlm

performers’ safety and health at risk by forcing them to

perform without condoms. Recent studies found that one

in four performers have been sick with serious sexually

transmitted diseases. Nobody should have to risk getting

a serious disease to keep their job!

The proﬁts-before-safety lawbreaking in the adult ﬁlm

industry is well documented. California safety and health

ofﬁcials—Cal/OSHA—have issued HUNDREDS OF

THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS in citations against nearly

two dozen pornographers for violating rules that clearly

require condoms in adult ﬁlms.

But Cal/OSHA ofﬁcials have frequently been blocked by

loopholes and enforcement limitations. Prop. 60 will close

the loopholes and strengthen Cal/OSHA’s ability to enforce

existing law. This is about fairness and responsibility!

Prop. 60 is supported by NUMEROUS MEDICAL AND

PUBLIC HEALTH ORGANIZATIONS, including:

• California State Association of Occupational Health Nurses

• California Academy of Preventive Medicine

• Southern California Coalition for Occupational Safety

and Health

• American College of Obstetricians and

Gynecologists—District IX

• American Sexual Health Association

• Beyond AIDS

• California Communities United Institute

Pornographers have abused performers for far too long.

Performers need and deserve the same workplace

safety and health protections that construction workers,

farmworkers, nurses, and millions of other California

employees already enjoy.

VOTE YES ON PROP. 60!

JEFFREY KLAUSNER, M.D., M.P.H., Professor

UCLA School of Medicine

PAULA TAVROW, Ph.D., Director

UCLA Bixby Program on Population and Reproductive Health

AMANDA GULLESSERIAN, Founder

International Entertainment Adult Union (IEAU)

VOTE NO ON PROP. 60: This is what happens when one

special interest group has access to millions of dollars to

fund a political campaign. This 13-page measure is so

poorly drafted it is the only initiative this year OPPOSED

by the CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY and the

CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN PARTY. Even the California

Libertarian Party opposes Prop. 60.

The proponent wants you to believe it is about worker

safety. However, Prop. 60 is OPPOSED by the ONLY

independent all adult ﬁlm performer organization in the

state, with hundreds of dues paying members. In a letter

to the California Secretary of State, the President of the

Adult Performer Advocacy Committee, Chanel Preston

stated the initiative is dangerous for the health and

safety of performers.

Prop. 60 is also OPPOSED by many civil rights and

public health organizations, including Equality California,

the Transgender Law Center, AIDS Project Los Angeles,

the Los Angeles LGBT Center and the San Francisco

AIDS Foundation.

Prop. 60 is opposed by business leaders such as the

Valley Industry & Commerce Association (VICA).

The proponent wants you to believe this is about worker

safety. But this disguises the real impact of the measure:

the creation of an unprecedented LAWSUIT BONANZA

that will cost taxpayers “millions of dollars” and

threatens the safety of performers.

The initiative creates a new private right of action

authorizing the Proponent AND all 38 MILLION

RESIDENTS OF CALIFORNIA to ﬁle lawsuits directly

against those who produce or distribute adult content,

which could include adult ﬁlm performers, even

injured performers, on-set crew, and cable and satellite

television companies. No other worker in California can

be sued this way. VOTE NO ON PROP. 60.

HERE ARE THE FACTS:

• According to California’s nonpartisan ﬁscal advisor

Prop. 60 could cost taxpayers “MILLIONS OF

DOLLARS” each year; money that could be spent

on education, health care, libraries, police and ﬁre

services.

• The ultimate trial lawyer ballot measure, Prop. 60 gives

EVERY Californian the right to sue those who produce or

distribute adult content, which could include adult ﬁlm

performers, including LGBT performers, on-set workers,

and cable and satellite television companies. The

initiative’s presumption of liability could apply to every

future California-produced adult ﬁlm on cable television.

• Prop. 60 could force adult ﬁlm performers to publicly

disclose private information, including their legal

names and HOME ADDRESSES.

• State employees will have to “review” adult ﬁlms.

• The named proponent is authorized to be “sworn in”

as an agent of the state; only the Legislature can VOTE

him out of the position.

• Married couples who distribute ﬁlms produced in their

own homes could be sued.

Prop. 60 will cost taxpayers millions of dollars, could

violate worker privacy, and even make the Proponent an

agent of the state—indemniﬁed by taxpayers like you.

That’s why you should join performers, business leaders,

the CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY and CALIFORNIA

REPUBLICAN PARTY and VOTE NO ON PROP. 60.

MARK LENO, Senator

11th District

JAY GLADSTEIN, M.D.

Internal Medicine/Infectious Diseases

JESSICA YASUKOCHI, Vice President

Valley Industry & Commerce Association

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 60

★

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

STATE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PURCHASES. PRICING STANDARDS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

The State Payments for Prescription Drugs

State Pays for Prescription Drugs Under Many

Different State Programs. Typically, the state

pays for prescription drugs under programs that

provide health care or health insurance to certain

state populations. For example, the state pays

for prescription drugs through the health care

coverage it provides to the state’s low-income

residents through the Medi-

Cal program and to current

and retired state employees.

The state also provides and

pays for the health care of

prison inmates, including

their prescription drug

costs.

State Pays for Prescription

Drugs in a Variety of Ways.

In some cases, the state

purchases prescription

drugs directly from drug

manufacturers. In other

cases, the state pays

for prescription drugs

even though it is not

the direct purchaser of

them. For example, the

state reimburses retail

pharmacies for the cost

of prescription drugs

purchased by the pharmacies and dispensed to

individuals enrolled in certain state programs.

Annual State Drug Expenditures Totaled Almost

$3.8 Billion in 2014–15. As shown in Figure 1, the

state spent almost $3.8 billion on prescription

drugs in 2014–15 under a variety of state

programs. State funds pay for roughly half of

overall state prescription drug spending, and the

remainder is paid with federal and other nonstate

revenues.

• Prohibits state agencies from buying any

prescription drug from a drug manufacturer

at any price over the lowest price paid for the

same drug by the United States Department of

Veterans Affairs, except as may be required by

federal law.

• Applies to any program where the state agency

is the ultimate payer for a prescription drug,

even if the state agency does not itself buy the

drug.

• Exempts purchases of prescription drugs

under managed care programs funded through

Medi-Cal.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Potential for state savings of an unknown

amount depending on (1) how the measure’s

implementation challenges are addressed

and (2) the responses of drug manufacturers

regarding the provision and pricing of their

drugs.

For the full text of Proposition 61, see page 154. Title and Summary / Analysis

STATE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PURCHASES. PRICING STANDARDS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Prescription Drug Pricing in General

Prices Actually Paid Often Differ From the Drugs’

“List Prices.” Prescription drugs sold in the United

States have list prices that are similar to the

manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) for

automobiles. Purchasers of the drugs typically

negotiate the prices and often receive discounts.

As a result, the ﬁnal price paid for a prescription

drug is typically lower than its list price.

Different Payers Often Pay Different Prices for

the Same Prescription Drug. Often there is no

single price paid by all payers for a particular

prescription drug. Instead, different payers may

regularly pay different prices for the same drug,

which reﬂects the results of negotiations between

the drugs’ buyers and sellers. For example, two

different insurance companies may pay different

prices for the same drug, as may two separate

state agencies such as the California Department

of Health Care Services (DHCS) and the California

Department of Public Health.

Prices Paid for Prescription Drugs Are Often Subject

to Conﬁdentiality Agreements. Prescription drug

purchase agreements often contain conﬁdentiality

clauses that are intended to prohibit public

disclosure of the agreed prices. As a result, the

prescription drug prices paid by a particular

entity, including a government agency, may be

unavailable to the public.

State Prescription Drug Pricing

State Strategies to Reduce Prescription Drug

Prices. California state agencies pursue a

variety of strategies to reduce the prices they

pay for prescription drugs, which typically

involve negotiating with drug manufacturers

and wholesalers. The particular strategies vary

depending on program structure and the manner

in which the state programs pay for drugs. For

example, multiple California state departments

jointly negotiate drug prices with manufacturers.

By negotiating as a single, larger entity, the

participating state departments are able to obtain

lower drug prices. Another state strategy is to

negotiate discounts from drug manufacturers in

exchange for reducing the overall administrative

burden on doctors prescribing these

manufacturers’ drugs.

United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

Prescription Drug Pricing

VA Provides Health Care to Veterans. The

VA provides comprehensive health care to

approximately nine million veterans nationwide.

In doing so, the VA generally purchases the

prescription drugs that it makes available to VA

health care beneﬁciaries.

Programs to Reduce Federal Prescription Drug

Expenditures. The federal government has

established discount programs that place upper

limits on the prices paid for prescription drugs by

selected federal payers, including the VA. These

programs generally result in lower prices than

those available to private payers.

VA Obtains Additional Discounts From Drug

Manufacturers or Sellers. On top of the federal

discount programs described above, the VA

often negotiates additional discounts from drug

manufacturers or sellers that lower its prices

below what other federal departments pay.

Manufacturers or sellers provide these discounts

in return for their drugs being made readily

available to VA patients.

VA Publishes Some of Its Prescription Drug Pricing

Information. The VA maintains a public database

that lists the prices paid by the VA for most of the

prescription drugs it purchases. According to the

VA, however, the database may not display the

lowest prices paid for some of the drugs for which

the VA obtains additional negotiated discounts.

The VA may not publish this pricing information

in the database due to conﬁdentiality clauses

that are included in certain drugs’ purchase

agreements and are intended to prohibit public

disclosure of the negotiated prices.

PROPOSAL

Measure Sets an Upper Limit on Amount State Can

Pay for Prescription Drugs. This measure generally

prohibits state agencies from paying more for a

prescription drug than the lowest price paid by

the VA for the same drug after all discounts are

factored in for both California state agencies and

the VA.

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

STATE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PURCHASES. PRICING STANDARDS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Measure Applies Whenever the State Is the Payer of

Prescription Drugs. The measure’s upper limit on

state prescription drug prices applies regardless

of how the state pays for the prescription drugs. It

applies, for example, whether the state purchases

prescription drugs directly from a manufacturer or

instead reimburses pharmacies for the drugs they

provide to enrollees of state programs.

Measure Exempts a Portion of the State’s Largest

Health Care Program From Its Drug Pricing

Requirements. The state’s Medi-Cal program offers

comprehensive health coverage to the state’s low-

income residents. The state operates Medi-Cal

under two distinct service delivery systems: the

fee-for-service system (which serves approximately

25 percent of Medi-Cal enrollees) and the

managed care system (which serves approximately

75 percent of enrollees). While the measure

applies to the fee-for-service system, it exempts

the managed care system from its drug pricing

requirements described above.

DHCS Required to Verify That State Agencies

Are Complying With Measure’s Drug Pricing

Requirements. The measure requires DHCS to

verify that state agencies are paying the same

or less than the lowest price paid by the VA on a

drug-by-drug basis.

FISCAL EFFECTS

By prohibiting the state from paying more for

a prescription drug than the lowest price paid

by the VA, there is the potential for the state to

realize reductions in its drug costs. There are,

however, major uncertainties concerning (1) the

implementation of the measure’s lowest-cost

requirement and (2) how drug manufacturers

would respond in the market. We discuss these

concerns below.

Potential Implementation Challenges

Create Fiscal Uncertainty

Some VA Drug Pricing Information May Not Be

Publicly Accessible. The measure generally

requires that the prescription drug prices paid

by the state not exceed the lowest prices paid by

the VA on a drug-by-drug basis. As mentioned

above, the VA’s public database information on

the prices of the prescription drugs it purchases

does not always identify the lowest prices the VA

pays. This is because, at least for some drugs,

the VA has negotiated a lower price than that

shown in the public database and is keeping that

pricing information conﬁdential. It is uncertain

whether the VA could be nonetheless required

to disclose these lower prices to an entity—such

as DHCS—requesting such information under

a federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

request. A FOIA exemption covering trade secrets

and ﬁnancial information may apply to prevent

the VA from having to disclose these currently

conﬁdential prices to the state.

Conﬁdentiality of VA Drug Prices Could Compromise

the State’s Ability to Implement the Measure. If

the VA is legally allowed to keep some of its

prescription drug pricing information conﬁdential,

DHCS would be unable to assess in all cases

whether state agencies are paying less than or

equal to the lowest price paid by the VA for the

same drug. This would limit the state’s ability to

implement the measure as it is written. However,

to address challenges in implementing laws,

courts sometimes grant state agencies latitude to

implement laws to the degree that is practicable

as long as implementation is consistent with the

laws’ intent. For example, courts might allow the

state to pay for drugs at a price not exceeding the

lowest known price paid by the VA, rather than

the actual lowest price, to allow the measure to be

implemented.

Potential Conﬁdentiality of Lowest VA Drug Prices

Reduces but Does Not Eliminate Potential State

Savings. The potential conﬁdentiality of at

least some of the lowest VA prices reduces but

does not eliminate the measure’s potential to

generate savings related to state prescription

drug spending. Though pricing information may

be unavailable for some of the VA’s lowest-priced

prescription drugs, publicly available VA drug

prices have historically been lower than the

prices paid by some California state agencies for

some drugs. To the extent that the VA’s publicly

available drug prices for particular drugs are lower

than those paid by California state agencies and

manufacturers choose to offer these prices to the

state, the measure would help the state achieve

prescription drug-related savings.

For the full text of Proposition 61, see page 154. Title and Summary / Analysis

STATE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PURCHASES. PRICING STANDARDS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Potential Drug Manufacturer Responses

Limit Potential Savings

Drug Manufacturer Responses Under Measure

Could Signiﬁcantly Affect Fiscal Impact. In order to

maintain similar levels of proﬁts on their products,

drug manufacturers would likely take actions that

mitigate the impact of the measure. A key reason

why drug manufacturers might take actions in

response to the measure relates to how federal law

regulates state Medicaid programs’ prescription

drug prices. (Medi-Cal is California’s Medicaid

program.) Federal law entitles all state Medicaid

programs to the lowest prescription drug prices

available to most public and private payers in the

United States (excluding certain payers, such

as the VA). If certain California state agencies

receive VA prices, as the measure intends, this

would set new prescription drug price limits at VA

prices for all state Medicaid programs. As a result,

the measure could extend the VA’s favorable drug

prices to health programs serving tens of millions

of additional people nationwide, placing added

pressure on drug manufacturers to take actions to

protect their proﬁts under the measure.

Below are two possible manufacturer responses.

(We note that manufacturers might ultimately

pursue both strategies, while at the same time

offering some drugs at favorable VA prices.)

• Drug Manufacturers Might Raise VA Drug

Prices. Knowing that the measure makes

VA prices the upper limit for what the

state can pay, drug manufacturers might

choose to raise VA drug prices. This would

allow drug manufacturers to continue to

offer prescription drugs to state agencies

while minimizing any reductions to their

proﬁts. Should manufacturers respond in

this manner, potential savings related to

state prescription drug spending would be

reduced.

• Drug Manufacturers Might Decline to Offer

Lowest VA Prices to the State for Some Drugs.

The measure places no requirement on

drug manufacturers to offer prescription

drugs to the state at the lowest VA prices.

Rather, the measure restricts actions that

the state can take (namely, prohibiting the

state from paying more than the lowest VA

prices for prescription drugs). Therefore, if

manufacturers decide it is in their interest

not to extend the VA’s favorable pricing to

California state agencies (for example, to

avoid consequences such as those described

above), drug manufacturers could decline

to offer the state some drugs purchased by

the VA. In such cases, these drugs would be

unavailable to most state payers. Instead,

the state would be limited to paying for

drugs that either the VA does not purchase

or drugs that manufacturers will offer at

the lowest VA prices. (However, to comply

with federal law, Medi-Cal might have to

disregard the measure’s price limits and pay

for prescription drugs regardless of whether

manufacturers offer their drugs at or below

VA prices.) This manufacturer response could

reduce potential state savings under the

measure since it might limit the drugs the

state can pay for to those that, while meeting

the measure’s price requirements, are

actually more expensive than those currently

paid for by the state.

Summary of Overall Fiscal Effect

As discussed above, if adopted, the measure

could generate annual state savings. However,

the amount of any savings is highly uncertain

as it would depend on (1) how the measure’s

implementation challenges are addressed and

(2) the uncertain market responses of drug

manufacturers to the measure. As a result, the

ﬁscal impact of this measure on the state is

unknown. It could range from relatively little

effect to signiﬁcant annual savings. For example,

if the measure lowered total state prescription

drug spending by even a few percent, it would

result in state savings in the high tens of millions

of dollars annually.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

STATE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PURCHASES. PRICING STANDARDS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 61

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 61

★

eading experts have rejected proponents’ claim that Prop.

61 would somehow reduce drug prices. In fact, EXPERTS

WARN P R O P. 61 WILL INCREASE DRUG PRICES.

The California Medical Association, the state’s foremost

medical organization representing 41,000 doctors, says:

“While California’s physicians are profoundly concerned

about the affordability of prescription drugs, we evaluated

this measure and have concluded it is deeply ﬂawed

and unworkable. We believe the measure would likely

increase—not lower—state prescription drug costs.”

The highly-respected, independent California State

Legislative Analyst says Prop. 61 “could raise (state)

spending on prescription drugs.”

The California Taxpayers Association opposes Prop. 61

because it would impose new bureaucracy and red tape, and

cause countless lawsuits—COSTING TAXPAYERS MILLIONS.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), Department of

California urges NO on 61 because it could jeopardize

special discounts given to the U.S. Department of Veterans

Affairs and INCREASE DRUG PRICES FOR VETERANS.

Who’s behind this measure?

Prop. 61 was written by Michael Weinstein, president of

an organization that brings in $1 billion annually selling

prescription drugs and operating HMOs. His group is

spending millions to fund the campaign. But he exempted

his own organization from its drug pricing provisions. He

shouldn’t ask Californians to approve a ﬂawed initiative he

isn’t willing to comply with himself.

Prop. 61 is OPPOSED BY MORE THAN 100 CALIFORNIA

ORGANIZATIONS, including:

• Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council

• California Taxpayers Association • Veterans of Foreign

Wars (VFW), Dept. of California • California NAACP

• American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

(ACOG)—District IX/CA • California Medical Association

Prop. 61 is deeply ﬂawed and costly. Vote NO.

www.NoProp61.com

STEVE MACKEY, President

Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council

WILLIAM M. REMAK, Chairman

California Hepatitis C Task Force

ALICE A. HUFFMAN, President

California NAACP

Drug companies making enormous proﬁts from people’s

illnesses and misery isn’t just a moral issue. Skyrocketing

prescription drug prices are a matter of life and death.

More Americans die of hepatitis C than from all other

infectious diseases—EVEN THOUGH THERE’S A CURE.

One reason? The drug company that controls it charges

more than $1,000 per pill, out of most patients’ reach.

That’s not the only outrageous example of drug-company

price-gouging:

• The price of a common infection-ﬁghting pill was

raised overnight from $13.50 to $750—nearly a 5000%

increase. • The average annual cost of widely-used

specialty drugs is estimated at $53,000—greater than

the nation’s median household income ($52,000) and

almost 3 1/2 times larger than average annual Social

Security beneﬁts of $15,000. • One cancer drug costs

$300,000 a year.

The drug companies put proﬁts over people, returns

for stockholders over cures for patients. What good are

miraculous, life-saving medications, if they’re priced so

high patients can’t afford them—and thousands are dying

as a result?

Proposition 61, The California Drug Price Relief Act,

ﬁghts back against the drug companies’ price-gouging.

And it is expected to save lives. Here’s how it would work:

The Act would require the State of California to negotiate

with drug companies for prices that are no more than the

amounts paid for the same drugs by the U.S. Dept. of

Veterans Affairs (DVA).

Why the Dept. of Veterans Affairs? Because unlike

Medicare, the DVA negotiates for drug prices, and pays

on average 20–24% less for medications than other

government agencies, up to 40% less than Medicare

Part D. The Drug Price Relief Act empowers the State

of California, as the healthcare buyer for millions of

Californians, to negotiate the same or even better deals for

taxpayers, which could save billions in healthcare costs.

Drug companies are planning to spend $100 million to

ﬁght this measure because they know it would cause

downward pressure on ALL drug prices—and cut into their

excessive proﬁts.

Don’t just take our word for it, a publication for drug

executives called Prop. 61 “GROUND ZERO” in the

national ﬁght for lower drug prices, warning:

“If the voters of California approve this

proposition . . . [it] would no doubt cause an immediate

demand for the same VA discount rate to be made

available to other states, the federal government, and

likely private [health plan] entities, as well. IN SHORT [IT]

WOULD BE A PRICING DISASTER FOR THE ENTIRE U.S.

DRUG INDUSTRY.”

But a “pricing disaster” for drug companies would equal

price relief for hard-pressed consumers.

Prop. 61 is strongly supported by the 86,000-member

California Nurses Association—the largest healthcare-

provider organization in the state; AARP, the largest

retirees’ group in California, with 3.3 million members;

the Urban League; the Campaign for a Healthy California,

including many labor unions; Progressive Democrats

of America; Sen. Bernie Sanders; former U.S. Labor

Secretary Robert Reich; and many others.

JOIN US IN FIGHTING AGAINST HIGH DRUG

PRICES AND DRUG COMPANY GREED. VOTE YES

ON PROPOSITION 61. For more information, go to

www.StopPharmaGreed.com.

ZENEI CORTEZ, RN, Co-President

California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing

Committee

NANCY McPHERSON, State Director

AARP California

SENATOR ART TORRES,(Ret.), Chair

California Democratic Party (1996–2009)

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

STATE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PURCHASES. PRICING STANDARDS.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 61

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 61

★

The drug companies want you to believe they’re opposing

Prop. 61 because it wouldn’t cover every drug purchase

in California. That’s as laughable as the NRA saying it

opposes an assault-weapons ban because it doesn’t cover

enough different kinds of guns.

THE DRUG COMPANIES ARE ONLY CONCERNED

ABOUT MAINTAINING THEIR EXORBITANT PRICES AND

PROFITS, PURE AND SIMPLE!

Don’t be fooled by their expected $100-million campaign of

distortion and mistruths. Voting against 61 only allows the

drug companies to continue ripping off you and your family.

Despite what they’re telling voters, there’s a reason the No

on Prop. 61 campaign is FUNDED ALMOST ENTIRELY

BY OUT-OF-STATE DRUG COMPANIES. Here’s what

drugmakers are telling themselves, in publications like

Pharmaceutical Executive:

“It’s pretty clear that if this California pricing proposition

passes, ALL HELL MAY BREAK LOOSE FOR THE AMERICAN

PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY . . . It would shake the

rafters of every single public state drug program in the nation,

as well as the federal Medicaid and Medicare programs.”

Drug companies are also unpatriotically threatening to raise

drug prices for veterans, BUT THAT’S ANOTHER EMPTY

THREAT. Federal law REQUIRES discounts for the Dept.

of Veterans Affairs, drug companies aren’t selling reduced-

price drugs to veterans out of the goodness of their hearts.

Support Prop. 61 along with:

• California Nurses Association • AARP California • The

Urban League • AIDS Healthcare Foundation • VoteVets

Action Fund • Association of Asian Paciﬁc Community

Health Organizations • Progressive Democrats of America

ONLY PROPOSITION 61 ALLOWS ORDINARY CITIZENS

TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST DRUG COMPANY POWER

AND GREED. www.StopPharmaGreed.com.

OTTO O. YANG, M.D., Scientiﬁc Director

AIDS Healthcare Foundation

CAPTAIN SHAWN TERRIS,(Ret.), Chair

California Democratic Party Veterans Caucus

NOLAN V. ROLLINS, President

Los Angeles Urban League/California Association of

Urban Leagues

Proposition 61 is a deeply ﬂawed and costly scheme that

is not what it seems.

Prop. 61 was written and is being promoted by Michael

Weinstein, the controversial president of an organization

that brought in more than $1 billion selling prescription

drugs and HMO policies. Suspiciously, he exempted his

own HMO from having to comply with the measure he

wrote and is promoting.

• The Veterans of Foreign Wars, Department of California

warns Prop. 61 would harm veterans. • The California

Medical Association, representing 41,000 doctors, warns

Prop. 61 would reduce patient access to medicines. • The

California Taxpayers Association warns Prop. 61 would

impose new bureaucracy, red tape and lawsuits—costing

taxpayers millions.

PROP. 61 DOES NOT APPLY TO 88% OF CALIFORNIANS.

BUT IT NEGATIVELY IMPACTS ALL CALIFORNIANS

The proposition only covers an arbitrary group of patients

in certain state government programs, including some

government employees and state prisoners. More than

88% of Californians are excluded. More than 10 million

Medi-Cal low-income patients, 20 million Californians

with private health insurance and Medicare, and millions

of others—ALL EXCLUDED.

PROP. 61 COULD INCREASE PRESCRIPTION DRUG

COSTS FOR VETERANS

The US Department of Veterans Affairs receives special

discounts on prescription drugs for veterans. This

measure could result in eliminating these discounts and

increasing prescription drug prices for veterans. That’s

why the measure is opposed by more than a dozen

veteran groups, including:

• Veterans of Foreign Wars, Department of California

• Vietnam Veterans of America, California State Council

• American Legion, Department of California

• AMVETS, Department of California

DOCTORS AND PATIENT ADVOCATES SAY PROP. 61

WOULD DISRUPT ACCESS TO NEEDED MEDICINES

Prop. 61 would result in a new bureaucratic prior approval process

that would interfere with patient access to needed medicines.

Leading health groups oppose Prop. 61, including:

• California Medical Association • American Congress of

Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)—District IX/CA

• Ovarian Cancer Coalition of Greater California

PROP. 61 WOULD LIKELY INCREASE STATE

PRESCRIPTION DRUG COSTS

Prop. 61 would result in the elimination of drug discounts

the state currently receives—increasing state prescription

costs by tens of millions annually. The state’s nonpartisan

Legislative Analyst says the measure could raise state

spending on many prescription drugs.

INCREASED BUREAUCRACY, RED TAPE AND HIGHER

TAXPAYER COSTS

The California Taxpayers Association opposes Prop. 61.

The measure is completely vague on how it would be

implemented. Passage of this measure would result in more

government bureaucracy, red tape and lawsuits as state

agencies struggle to implement it—costing taxpayers millions.

PROMOTER WROTE IN SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR HIS

OWN ORGANIZATION

The proponent exempted his billion dollar operation and wrote

in provisions giving him a special right to engage in lawsuits

regarding this measure. This provision requires California

taxpayers to pay his lawyers—a virtual blank check.

Proposition 61 is yet another example of a misleading and

costly ballot measure. It would hurt veterans; jeopardize

patient access to needed medicines; increase state

prescription costs; and add more bureaucracy, red tape

and lawsuits—costing taxpayers millions.

JOIN VETERANS, DOCTORS, PATIENT ADVOCATES,

TAXPAYER GROUPS: NO on 61.

www.NoProp61.com

DALE SMITH, Commander

Veterans of Foreign Wars, Department of California

RANDY MUNOZ, Vice Chair, Latino Diabetes Association

GAIL NICKERSON, President

California Association of Rural Health Clinics

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

DEATH PENALTY.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Murder Punishable by Death

First degree murder is generally deﬁned as the

unlawful killing of a human being that (1) is

deliberate and premeditated or (2) takes place

while certain other crimes are committed,

such as kidnapping. It is punishable by a life

sentence in state prison with the possibility

of being released by the state parole board

after a minimum of 25 years. However,

current state law makes ﬁrst degree murder

punishable by death or life imprisonment

without the possibility of parole when “special

circumstances” of the crime have been

charged and proven in court. Existing state law

identiﬁes a number of special circumstances

that can be charged, such as in cases when

the murder was carried out for ﬁnancial gain or

when more than one murder was committed.

Death Penalty Proceedings

Death Penalty Trials Can Consist of Two Phases.

The ﬁrst phase of a murder trial where the

prosecutor seeks a death sentence involves

determining whether the defendant is guilty

of murder and any special circumstances. If

the defendant is found guilty and a special

circumstance is proven, the second phase

involves determining whether the death

penalty or life without the possibility of

parole should be imposed. These murder

trials result in costs to the state trial courts.

In addition, counties incur costs for the

prosecution of these individuals as well as

the defense of individuals who cannot afford

legal representation. Since the current death

penalty law was enacted in California in

1978, 930 individuals have received a death

sentence. In recent years, an average of about

20 individuals annually have received death

sentences.

Legal Challenges to Death Sentences. Under

current state law, death penalty verdicts

are automatically appealed to the California

Supreme Court. In these “direct appeals,” the

defendants’ attorneys argue that violations

of state law or federal constitutional law

took place during the trial, such as evidence

improperly being included or excluded from

the trial. If the California Supreme Court

conﬁrms the conviction and death sentence,

the defendant can ask the U.S. Supreme

Court to review the decision. In addition to

direct appeals, death penalty cases ordinarily

involve extensive legal challenges in both

• Repeals death penalty as maximum

punishment for persons found guilty

of murder and replaces it with life

imprisonment without possibility of parole.

• Applies retroactively to persons already

sentenced to death.

• States that persons found guilty of murder

and sentenced to life without possibility

of parole must work while in prison as

prescribed by the Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation.

• Increases portion of life inmates’ wages that

may be applied to victim restitution.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF

NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Net ongoing reduction in state and county

costs related to murder trials, legal

challenges to death sentences, and prisons

of around $150 million annually within a

few years. This estimate could be higher

or lower by tens of millions of dollars,

depending on various factors.

For the full text of Proposition 62, see page 156. Title and Summary / Analysis

DEATH PENALTY.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

state and federal courts. These challenges,

which are commonly referred to as “habeas

corpus” petitions, involve factors of the case

that are different from those considered in

direct appeals (such as the claim that the

defendant’s attorney was ineffective). All of

these legal challenges—measured from when

the individual receives a death sentence to

when the individual has completed all state

and federal legal challenge proceedings—

can take a couple of decades to complete in

California.

The state currently spends about $55 million

annually on the legal challenges that follow

death sentences. This funding supports the

California Supreme Court as well as attorneys

employed by the state Department of Justice

who seek to uphold death sentences while

cases are being challenged in the courts.

In addition, it also supports various state

agencies that are tasked with providing

representation to individuals who have received

a sentence of death but cannot afford legal

representation.

Implementation of the Death Penalty

Housing of Condemned Inmates. As of April

2016, of the 930 individuals who received

a death sentence since 1978, 15 have been

executed, 103 have died prior to being

executed, 64 have had their sentences

reduced by the courts, and 748 are in state

prison with death sentences. The vast majority

of the 748 condemned inmates are at various

stages of the direct appeal or habeas corpus

petition process. Condemned male inmates

generally are required to be housed at San

Quentin State Prison (on death row), while

condemned female inmates are housed at

the Central California Women’s Facility in

Chowchilla. The state currently has various

security regulations and procedures that result

in increased security costs for these inmates.

For example, inmates under a death sentence

generally are handcuffed and escorted at all

times by one or two ofﬁcers while outside

their cells. In addition, unlike most offenders,

condemned inmates are currently required to

be placed in separate cells.

Executions Currently Halted by Courts. The state

uses lethal injection to execute condemned

inmates. Because of legal issues surrounding

the state’s lethal injection procedures,

executions have not taken place since 2006.

The state is currently in the process of

developing procedures to allow for executions

to resume.

PROPOSAL

Elimination of Death Penalty for First Degree

Murder. Under this measure, no offender

could be sentenced to death by the state for

ﬁrst degree murder. Instead, the most serious

penalty available would be a prison term of

life without the possibility of being released

by the state parole board. (There is another

measure on this ballot—Proposition 66—that

would maintain the death penalty but seeks to

shorten the time that the legal challenges to

death sentences take.)

Resentencing of Inmates With Death Sentences

to Life Without the Possibility of Parole. The

measure also speciﬁes that offenders currently

sentenced to death would not be executed

and instead would be resentenced to a prison

term of life without the possibility of parole.

This measure also allows the California

Supreme Court to transfer all of its existing

death penalty direct appeals and habeas

corpus petitions to the state’s Courts of Appeal

or trial courts. These courts would resolve

any remaining issues unrelated to the death

sentence—such as claims of innocence.

Inmate Work and Payments to Crime Victim

Requirements. Current state law generally

requires that inmates—including murderers—

work while they are in prison. State prison

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

DEATH PENALTY.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

regulations allow for some exceptions to these

work requirements, such as for inmates who

pose too great a security risk to participate

in work programs. In addition, inmates may

be required by the courts to make payments

to victims of crime. This measure speciﬁes

that every person found guilty of murder must

work while in state prison and have their pay

deducted for any debts they owe to victims of

crime, subject to state regulations. Because

the measure does not change state regulations,

existing prison practices related to inmate

work requirements would not necessarily be

changed. In addition, the measure increases

from 50 percent to 60 percent the maximum

amount that may be deducted from the

wages of inmates sentenced to life without

the possibility of parole for any debts owed

to victims of crime. This provision would also

apply to individuals who are resentenced under

the measure from death to life without the

possibility of parole.

FISCAL EFFECTS

The measure would have a number of ﬁscal

effects on the state and local governments.

The major ﬁscal effects of the measure are

discussed below.

Murder Trials

Court Proceedings. This measure would reduce

state and county costs associated with some

murder cases that would otherwise have been

eligible for the death penalty under current

law. These cases would typically be less

expensive if the death penalty was no longer

an option, for two primary reasons. First, the

duration of some trials would be shortened.

This is because there would no longer be a

separate phase to determine whether the death

penalty is imposed. Other aspects of murder

trials could also be shortened. For example,

jury selection time for some trials could be

reduced as it would no longer be necessary

to remove potential jurors who are unwilling

to impose the death penalty. Second, the

elimination of the death penalty would reduce

the costs incurred by counties for prosecutors

and public defenders for some murder cases.

This is because these agencies generally

use more attorneys in cases where a death

sentence is sought and incur greater expenses

related to investigations and other preparations

for the sentencing phase in such cases.

County Jails. County jail costs could also be

reduced because of the measure’s effect on

murder trials. Persons held for trial on murder

charges, particularly cases that could result

in a death sentence, ordinarily remain in

county jail until the completion of their trial

and sentencing. As some murder cases are

shortened due to the elimination of the death

penalty, persons convicted of murder would be

sent to state prison earlier than they otherwise

would be. Such an outcome would reduce

county jail costs and increase state prison

costs.

Summary of Impacts Related to Murder Trials. In

total, the measure could reduce annual state

and county costs for murder trials by several

tens of millions of dollars on a statewide basis.

The actual reduction would depend on various

factors, including the number of death penalty

trials that would otherwise have occurred in

the absence of the measure. In addition, the

amount of this reduction could be partially

offset to the extent that the elimination of

the death penalty reduced the incentive for

offenders to plead guilty in exchange for a

lesser sentence in some murder cases. If

additional cases went to trial instead of being

resolved through plea agreements, the state

and counties would experience additional costs

for support of courts, prosecution, and defense

attorneys, as well as county jails. The extent

to which this would occur is unknown. In most

cases, the state and counties would likely

redirect available resources resulting from the

For the full text of Proposition 62, see page 156. Title and Summary / Analysis

DEATH PENALTY.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

above cost reductions to other court and law

enforcement activities.

Legal Challenges to Death Sentences

Over time, the measure would reduce state

expenditures by the California Supreme Court

and the state agencies participating in the

legal challenges to death sentences. These

reduced costs would reach about $55 million

annually. However, these reduced costs

likely would be partially offset in the short

run because some state expenditures would

probably continue until the courts resolved

all cases for inmates who previously received

death sentences. In the long run, there would

be relatively minor state and local costs—

possibly totaling a couple million dollars

annually—for hearing appeals from additional

offenders receiving sentences of life without

the possibility of parole.

State Prisons

The elimination of the death penalty would

affect state prison costs in different ways.

On the one hand, its elimination would result

in a somewhat higher prison population and

higher costs as formerly condemned inmates

are sentenced to life without the possibility of

parole. Given the length of time that inmates

currently spend on death row, these costs

would likely not be signiﬁcant. On the other

hand, these added costs likely would be

more than offset by reduced costs from not

housing hundreds of inmates on death row.

As previously discussed, it is generally more

expensive to house an inmate under a death

sentence than an inmate subject to life without

the possibility of parole, due to the higher

security measures used to house and supervise

inmates sentenced to death.

The combined effect of these ﬁscal impacts

would likely result in net state savings for the

operation of the state’s prison system in the

low tens of millions of dollars annually. These

savings, however, could be higher or lower

depending on the rate of executions that would

have otherwise occurred.

Other Fiscal Effects

Prison Construction. The measure could also

affect future prison construction costs by

allowing the state to avoid future facility costs

associated with housing an increasing number

of death row inmates. The extent of any such

savings would depend on the future growth in

the condemned inmate population, how the

state chose to house condemned inmates in

the future, and the future growth in the general

prison population.

Effect on Murder Rate. To the extent that the

prohibition on the use of the death penalty

has an effect on the incidence of murder in

California, the measure could affect state and

local government criminal justice expenditures.

The resulting ﬁscal impact, if any, is unknown

and cannot be estimated.

Summary of Fiscal Impacts

In total, we estimate that this measure would

reduce net state and county costs related

to murder trials, legal challenges to death

sentences, and prisons. These reduced costs

would likely be around $150 million annually

within a few years. This reduction in costs

could be higher or lower by tens of millions of

dollars, depending on various factors.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

DEATH PENALTY.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 62

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 62

★

California’s death penalty HASN’T failed; it was

intentionally sabotaged.

Key supporters of Proposition 62—like the ACLU—have

spent decades undermining the death penalty; now they

argue for repeal.

For the sake of victims, DON’T LET THEM WIN!

We all agree that the death penalty in California isn’t

working. The solution is to MEND, NOT END, the death

penalty. California’s frontline prosecutors and almost all

our 58 elected District Attorneys have a plan to ﬁx it.

STARTING WITH VOTING NO ON PROPOSITION 62!

The system is expensive because BRUTAL KILLERS ﬁle

endless, frivolous appeals, spending decades on death

row. Prop. 62 backers want you to believe that granting

these thugs lifetime healthcare, housing, meals, and

privileges will save money? WHO ARE THEY FOOLING?

They say we don’t need a death penalty. Really?

There’s about 2,000 murders in California annually.

Approximately 15—the worst of the worst—receive a death

sentence. Who are they?

• MASS MURDERERS/SERIAL KILLERS. • Murderers

who RAPED/TORTURED victims. • CHILD KILLERS.

• TERRORISTS.

Ask the proponents of Proposition 62: if a murderer

sentenced to “Life Without Parole” escapes and murders

again, or kills a prison guard, what sentence will they give

him? Another life without parole?

The proponent of Prop. 62—an actor—wants you to

believe the movie script. But let’s be clear, there are no

innocents on California’s death row. They cite one case

from Texas from 1989, still under dispute. California has

never executed an innocent, and never will.

Join victims’ families and law enforcement and VOTE NO

ON PROP. 62!

www.NoProp62YesProp66.com.

MICHELE HANISEE, President

Association of Deputy District Attorneys of Los Angeles County

MARC KLAAS, Father of 12-year-old Murder Victim

Polly Klaas

LAREN LEICHLITER, President

San Bernardino County Deputy Sheriffs Association

California’s death penalty system has failed. Taxpayers

have spent more than $5 billion since 1978 to carry out

13 executions—a cost of $384 million per execution.

The death penalty is an empty promise to victims’

families and carries the unavoidable risk of executing an

innocent person.

YES ON 62 REPLACES THIS COSTLY, FAILED SYSTEM

WITH A STRICT LIFE SENTENCE AND ZERO CHANCE

OF PAROLE

Under Prop. 62, the death penalty will be replaced with a

strict life sentence. Those convicted of the worst crimes

will NEVER be released. Instead of being housed in

expensive private cells on death row, murderers will be

kept with other maximum-security inmates.

WORK AND RESTITUTION

Criminals who would otherwise sit on death row and in

courtrooms during the decades-long appeals guaranteed

by the Constitution, will instead have to work and pay

restitution to their victims’ families.

REAL CLOSURE FOR VICTIMS’ FAMILIES

“California’s death penalty system is a long, agonizing

ordeal for our family. As my sister’s killer sits through

countless hearings, we continually relive this tragedy.

The death penalty is an empty promise of justice. A life

sentence without parole would bring real closure.”—Beth

Webb, whose sister was murdered with seven other people

in a mass-shooting at an Orange County hair salon.

HUGE COST SAVINGS CONFIRMED BY IMPARTIAL

ANALYSIS

The state’s independent Legislative Analyst conﬁrmed

Prop. 62 will save $150 million per year. A death

row sentence costs 18 times more than life in prison.

Resources can be better spent on education, public

safety, and crime prevention that actually works.

DEATH PENALTY SYSTEM FLAWS RUN DEEP

California has not executed anyone in 10 years because

of serious problems. For nearly 40 years, every attempted

ﬁx has failed to make the death penalty system work. It’s

simply unworkable.

“I prosecuted killers using California’s death penalty

law, but the high costs, endless delays and total

ineffectiveness in deterring crime convinced me we need

to replace the death penalty system with life in prison

without parole.”—John Van de Kamp, former Los Angeles

District Attorney and former California Attorney General.

THE RISK OF EXECUTING AN INNOCENT PERSON IS REAL

DNA technology and new evidence have proven the

innocence of more than 150 people on death row after

they were sentenced to death. In California, 66 people

had their murder convictions overturned because new

evidence showed they were innocent.

Carlos DeLuna was executed in 1989, but an independent

investigation later proved his innocence. Executing an

innocent person is a mistake that can never be undone.

FORMER DEATH PENALTY ADVOCATES: YES ON 62

“I led the campaign to bring the death penalty back to

California in 1978. It was a costly mistake. Now I know

we just hurt the victims’ families we were trying to help

and wasted taxpayer dollars. The death penalty cannot be

ﬁxed. We need to replace it, lock up murderers for good,

make them work, and move on.”—Ron Briggs, led the

campaign to create California’s death penalty system.

www.YesOn62.com

JEANNE WOODFORD, Former Death Row Warden

DONALD HELLER, Author of California’s Death Penalty Law

BETH WEBB, Sister of Victim Murdered in 2011

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

DEATH PENALTY.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 62

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 62

★

YES ON 62 REQUIRES A STRICT LIFE SENTENCE—

WHY KEEP PAYING FOR A COSTLY, FAILED DEATH

PENALTY SYSTEM?

Prop. 62 locks up the worst murderers for life and ends

the huge cost of death row. These murderers will never

be paroled or set free. They will have to work and pay

restitution to the families of their victims.

Most of those sentenced to death already end up

spending life in prison because 99% of death sentences

are never carried out. Yet it costs 18 times more to house

them on death row and pay for their attorneys than a

strict life sentence without parole.

YES ON 62 SAVES $150 MILLION A YEAR

The state’s nonpartisan ﬁscal advisor—the Legislative

Analyst—conﬁrms Prop. 62 will save taxpayers

$150 million every year. Read the analysis for yourself in

this Voter Guide.

38 YEARS OF FAILURE

Opponents of Prop. 62 admit the death penalty system

is broken. In fact, the death penalty advocates who

created this system now admit it has failed, despite many

attempts to ﬁx it. Since 1978, taxpayers have spent $5

billion on the death penalty, yet over the last ten years

there hasn’t been a single execution.

The long and costly appeals process is mandated by the

Constitution so an innocent person isn’t wrongly executed.

It can’t be changed. Vote YES on Prop. 62 to save

hundreds of millions of dollars and keep vicious killers

locked up, working and paying restitution to the families

of their victims.

ROBYN BARBOUR, Grandmother was Murdered in 1994

JOHN DONOHUE, Ph.D., Professor of Economics and Law

Stanford Law School

RON BRIGGS, Led Campaign to Bring the Death Penalty

Back in 1978

Join us in VOTING NO on PROPOSITION 62!

Let’s be clear what Proposition 62 does.

Proposition 62 says the worst of the worst murderers get

to stay alive, at the taxpayers’ expense, decades after

committing their horrible crimes, and mocking the pain of

their victims’ families.

The death penalty is reserved for only the worst murderers

like child killers, rape/torture murderers, serial murderers,

and cop killers. Just 1–2% of about 2,000 murders in

California annually end up with a death sentence.

Proposition 62 says these most heinous crimes should

have no higher level of punishment. We disagree. For the

very worst criminals, there needs to be a death penalty.

We all know California’s death penalty system is broken.

Death row inmates are now able to ﬁle one frivolous

appeal after another, denying justice.

The answer is to MEND, NOT END California’s death

penalty laws.

Prosecutors, law enforcement, and the families of

murder victims OPPOSE PROPOSITION 62 because it

jeopardizes public safety, denies justice and closure to

victims’ families, and rewards the most horrible killers.

The backers of Proposition 62 want you to believe they

are protecting wrongly-convicted death row prisoners from

being executed.

But in a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle,

Governor Jerry Brown, “a former Attorney General, said

there are no innocent inmates on California’s death row.”

(3/7/12)

The backers of Proposition 62 say it will save taxpayers

money. WHO ARE THEY FOOLING?

Under Prop. 62, taxpayers are on the hook to feed, clothe,

house, guard, and provide healthcare to brutal killers until

they die of old age. Even give them a heart transplant!

That’s why Mike Genest, former California Finance

Director, says, “Prop. 62 will cost over $100 million.”

If Proposition 62 doesn’t protect victims and doesn’t

protect taxpayers, just who does Proposition 62 protect?

Prop. 62 protects Charles Ng, a brutal serial killer who

kidnapped families, tortured/killed children in front of

their parents, killed the father, and then repeatedly raped

the mother before killing her.

Ng committed his crimes over 30 years ago, delayed his

trial for nearly 15 years with appeals, and was ﬁnally

tried, convicted, and sentenced to death almost 20 years

ago. He’s still on death row, ﬁling appeals to delay his

punishment, long after his victims were silenced forever.

Who else does Proposition 62 protect?

Richard Allen Davis, who kidnapped, raped, and tortured

12-year-old Polly Klaas.

Serial killer Robert Rhoads, who kidnapped, raped, and

tortured 8-year-old Michael Lyons before stabbing him

70 times.

And hundreds more like them.

California’s death row inmates include the killers of:

• Over 1,000 MURDER VICTIMS. • 226 CHILDREN.

• 43 PEACE OFFICERS. • 294 victims who were RAPED

or TORTURED before being killed.

The American Civil Liberties Union supports repealing

the death penalty; the very same people who ﬁle all the

frivolous appeals that have bogged down the system. Now

they are using the problems they created to argue the

death penalty should be repealed.

DON’T BE FOOLED. Join us and VOTE NO on

PROPOSITION 62!

Visit www.NoProp62YesProp66.com for more information.

MIKE RAMOS, District Attorney of San Bernardino County

MARC KLAAS, Father of 12-year-old Murder Victim

Polly Klaas

MIKE DURANT, President

Peace Ofﬁcers Research Association of California

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Restrictions on Firearm and

Ammunition Possession

Under federal and state law, certain individuals

are not allowed to have ﬁrearms. These “prohibited

persons” include individuals (1) convicted of

felonies and some misdemeanors (such as assault

or battery), (2) found by a court to be a danger

to themselves or others due to mental illness,

and (3) with a restraining order against them. In

California, individuals who are not allowed to have

ﬁrearms are also not allowed to have ammunition.

Regulation of Firearm Sales

Both federal and state law include various

regulations related to ﬁrearm sales, including the

licensing of ﬁrearm dealers. Such regulations

include:

• Background Checks. Under federal law, ﬁrearm

dealers must request background checks

of individuals seeking to buy ﬁrearms from

the National Instant Criminal Background

Check System (NICS). The NICS searches

a number of federal databases to ensure

that the buyer is not a prohibited person. As

allowed by federal law, California processes

all background check requests from ﬁrearm

dealers in the state directly by using NICS

and various state databases.

• Removal of Firearms From Prohibited Persons.

The California Department of Justice (DOJ)

maintains a database of individuals who have

legally bought or registered a ﬁrearm with

the state. DOJ agents use this information to

remove ﬁrearms from individuals who are no

longer allowed to have ﬁrearms.

• Other Regulations. Other state regulations

related to ﬁrearms include: limits on the type

of ﬁrearms that can be bought, a ten-day

waiting period before a dealer may give a

ﬁrearm to a buyer, and requirements for

recording and reporting ﬁrearm sales.

Fees charged to ﬁrearm dealers and buyers

generally offset the state’s costs to regulate ﬁrearm

sales.

• Requires individuals to pass a background check

and obtain Department of Justice authorization

to purchase ammunition.

• Prohibits possession of large-capacity

ammunition magazines, and requires their

disposal, as speciﬁed.

• Requires most ammunition sales be made

through licensed ammunition vendors and

reported to Department of Justice.

• Requires lost or stolen ﬁrearms and ammunition

be reported to law enforcement.

• Prohibits persons convicted of stealing a ﬁrearm

from possessing ﬁrearms.

• Establishes new procedures for enforcing laws

prohibiting ﬁrearm possession.

• Requires Department of Justice to provide

information about prohibited persons to federal

National Instant Criminal Background Check

System.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Increased state and local court and law

enforcement costs, potentially in the tens

of millions of dollars annually, related to a

new court process for removing ﬁrearms from

prohibited persons after they are convicted.

• Potential increase in state costs, not likely to

exceed the millions of dollars annually, related to

regulating ammunition sales. These costs would

likely be offset by fee revenues.

• Potential net increase in state and local

correctional costs, not likely to exceed the low

millions of dollars annually, related to changes in

ﬁrearm and ammunition penalties.

For the full text of Proposition 63, see page 163. Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Regulation of Ammunition Sales

Prior to this year, the state did not regulate

ammunition sales in the same manner as ﬁrearms.

In July 2016, the state enacted legislation to

increase the regulation of ammunition sales. Such

regulations include:

• Licenses to Sell Ammunition. Beginning January

2018, individuals and businesses will be

required to obtain a one-year license from DOJ

to sell ammunition. Certain individuals and

businesses would not be required to obtain a

license, such as licensed hunters selling less

than 50 rounds of ammunition per month to

another licensed hunter while on a hunting

trip. In order to obtain a license, ammunition

dealers will need to demonstrate that they are

not prohibited persons. In addition, certain

entities will be able to automatically receive

an ammunition license, such as ﬁrearm

dealers licensed by both the state and federal

government and ﬁrearm wholesalers. A vendor

who fails to comply with ammunition sale

requirements three times would have their

ammunition dealer’s license permanently

revoked. DOJ could charge a fee to individuals

and businesses seeking a license to sell

ammunition to support its administrative and

enforcement costs.

• DOJ Approval to Buy Ammunition. Beginning July

2019, ammunition dealers will be required

to check with DOJ at the time of purchase

that individuals seeking to buy ammunition

are not prohibited persons. This requirement

would not apply to some individuals, such

as persons permitted to carry concealed

weapons. In addition, ammunition dealers

will generally be required to collect and

report information—such as the date of the

sale, the buyers’ identiﬁcation information,

and the type of ammunition purchased—to

DOJ for storage in a database for two years.

Failure to comply with these requirements

is a misdemeanor (punishable by a ﬁne and/

or imprisonment in county jail). DOJ could

generally charge an individual seeking to

purchase ammunition a fee of up to $1 per

transaction to support its administrative and

enforcement costs. DOJ could adjust this fee

cap annually for inﬂation.

• Other Regulations. Beginning January 2018,

state law generally will require that most

ammunition sales (including Internet and out-

of-state sales) take place through a licensed

ammunition dealer. In addition, beginning

July 2019, most California residents will be

prohibited from bringing ammunition into

the state without ﬁrst having the ammunition

delivered to a licensed ammunition dealer.

Failure to comply with these requirements is a

misdemeanor.

Status of Recent Legislation

As discussed above, the state recently enacted

legislation to increase the regulation of ammunition

sales. The state also recently enacted legislation

to further limit the ownership of large-capacity

magazines and to create a penalty for ﬁling a false

lost or stolen ﬁrearm report to law enforcement.

These laws will take effect unless they are placed

before the voters as referenda. If that occurs, voters

will determine whether the laws take effect.

PROPOSAL

Proposition 63 (1) changes state regulation of

ammunition sales, (2) creates a new court process

to ensure the removal of ﬁrearms from prohibited

persons after they are convicted of a felony or

certain misdemeanors, and (3) implements various

other provisions. Additionally, Proposition 63 states

that the Legislature can change its provisions if

such changes are “consistent with and further the

intent” of the measure. Such changes can only

be made if 55 percent of the members of each

house of the Legislature passes them and the bill is

enacted into law.

Changes to State Regulation of Ammunition Sales

Proposition 63 includes various regulations

related to the sale of ammunition. Some of the

regulations would replace existing law with similar

provisions. However, other regulations proposed by

Proposition 63 are different, as discussed below.

FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Requirements to Buy Ammunition. Proposition 63

includes various requirements for individuals

seeking to buy ammunition and for DOJ to regulate

such purchases. Speciﬁcally, the measure:

• Requires individuals to obtain a four-year

permit from DOJ to buy ammunition and for

ammunition dealers to check with DOJ that

individuals buying ammunition have such

permits.

• Requires DOJ to revoke permits from

individuals who become prohibited.

• Allows DOJ to charge each person applying

for a four-year permit a fee of up to $50

to support its various administrative and

enforcement costs related to ammunition

sales.

The state, however, enacted legislation in

July 2016 to replace the above provisions with

alternative ones if Proposition 63 is approved by

the voters. (This legislation was enacted pursuant

to the provision of Proposition 63 allowing for

changes that are “consistent with and further the

intent” of the proposition, as described earlier.)

Speciﬁcally, under the legislation: (1) ammunition

dealers would be required to check with DOJ that

individuals seeking to buy ammunition are not

prohibited persons at the time of purchase and

(2) DOJ could generally charge such individuals up

to $1 per transaction. These provisions are similar

to current law. Fewer individuals, however, would

be exempt from this check than under current

law. For example, individuals permitted to carry

concealed weapons would be subject to this check.

Licenses to Sell Ammunition. Similar to current law,

Proposition 63 requires individuals and businesses

to obtain a one-year license from DOJ to sell

ammunition. However, the measure changes the

types of individuals and businesses that would

be exempt from obtaining a license. For example,

the measure generally exempts individuals and

businesses that sell a small number of rounds of

ammunition from the requirement to get a license.

The measure also makes various changes in the

penalties for failure to follow ammunition sale

requirements. For example, it establishes a new

criminal penalty—speciﬁcally, a misdemeanor—for

failing to follow vendor licensing requirements.

Other Ammunition Requirements. This measure

prohibits most California residents from bringing

ammunition into the state without ﬁrst having the

ammunition delivered to a licensed ammunition

dealer beginning in January 2018—a year and a

half earlier than under current law. Additionally,

failure to comply with this requirement would

change from a misdemeanor to an infraction

(punishable by a ﬁne) for the ﬁrst offense and

either an infraction or a misdemeanor for any

additional offense. The measure also requires DOJ

to store certain ammunition sales information in a

database indeﬁnitely, rather than for two years.

Creates New Court Process for

Removal of Firearms

This measure creates a new court process to ensure

that individuals convicted of offenses that prohibit

them from owning ﬁrearms do not continue to have

them. Beginning in 2018, the measure requires

courts to inform offenders upon conviction that

they must (1) turn over their ﬁrearms to local law

enforcement, (2) sell the ﬁrearms to a licensed

ﬁrearm dealer, or (3) give the ﬁrearms to a licensed

ﬁrearm dealer for storage. The measure also

requires courts to assign probation ofﬁcers to report

on what offenders have done with their ﬁrearms. If

the court ﬁnds that there is probable cause that an

offender still has ﬁrearms, it must order that the

ﬁrearms be removed. Finally, local governments

or state agencies could charge a fee to reimburse

them for certain costs in implementing the

measure (such as those related to the removal or

storage of ﬁrearms).

Implements Other Provisions

Reporting Requirements. The measure includes

a number of reporting requirements related to

ﬁrearms and ammunition. For example, the

measure requires that ammunition dealers report

the loss or theft of ammunition within 48 hours.

It also requires that most individuals report the

loss or theft of ﬁrearms within ﬁve days to local

law enforcement. An individual who does not make

such a report within ﬁve days would be guilty of

an infraction for the ﬁrst two violations. Additional

violations would be a misdemeanor. This measure

For the full text of Proposition 63, see page 163. Title and Summary / Analysis

FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

also reduces the penalty for an individual who

knowingly submits a false report to local law

enforcement from a misdemeanor to an infraction

and eliminates the prohibition from owning

ﬁrearms for ten years for such an individual. This

measure also requires DOJ to submit the name,

date of birth, and physical description of any newly

prohibited person to NICS.

Large-Capacity Magazines. Since 2000, state law

has generally banned individuals from obtaining

large-capacity magazines (deﬁned as those

holding more than ten rounds of ammunition).

The law, however, allowed individuals who had

large-capacity magazines before 2000 to keep

them for their own use. Beginning July 2017,

recently enacted law will prohibit most of these

individuals from possessing these magazines.

Individuals who do not comply are guilty of an

infraction. However, there are various individuals

who will be exempt from this requirement—such as

an individual who owns a ﬁrearm (obtained before

2000) that can only be used with a large-capacity

magazine. Proposition 63 eliminates several

of these exemptions, as well as increases the

maximum penalty for possessing large-capacity

magazines. Speciﬁcally, individuals who possess

such magazines after July 2017 would be guilty of

an infraction or a misdemeanor.

Penalty for Theft of Firearms. Under current state

law, the penalty for theft of ﬁrearms worth $950 or

less is generally a misdemeanor punishable by up

to one year in county jail. Under this measure, such

a crime would be a felony and could be punishable

by up to three years in state prison. Additionally,

individuals previously convicted of a misdemeanor

for the theft of a ﬁrearm would be prohibited from

owning ﬁrearms for ten years. Currently, there is no

such prohibition for a misdemeanor conviction for

theft of ﬁrearms.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Increased Court and Law Enforcement Costs. The

new court process for removing ﬁrearms from

prohibited persons after they are convicted would

result in increased workload for the state and local

governments. For example, state courts and county

probation departments would have some increased

workload to determine whether prohibited persons

have ﬁrearms and whether they have surrendered

them. In addition, state and local law enforcement

would have new workload related to removing

ﬁrearms from offenders who fail to surrender

them as part of the new court process. They could

also have increased costs related to the storage

or return of ﬁrearms. Some of the increased law

enforcement costs related to the removal, storage,

or return of ﬁrearms would be offset to the extent

that local governments and state agencies charge

and collect fees for these activities, as allowed by

this measure. The total magnitude of these state

and local costs could be in the tens of millions of

dollars annually. Actual costs would depend on how

this measure was implemented.

Potential Increased State Regulatory Costs. On

balance, the measure’s changes to the regulation

of ammunition sales could increase state costs.

For example, more individuals or businesses would

likely be subject to state ammunition requirements

under the measure. The actual ﬁscal effect of

the changes would depend on how they are

implemented and how individuals respond to them.

We estimate that the potential increase in state

costs would not likely exceed the millions of dollars

annually. These costs would likely be offset by the

various fees authorized by the measure and existing

state law.

Potential Net Increased Correctional Costs. This

measure makes various changes to penalties

related to ﬁrearms and ammunition. While some

changes reduce penalties for certain offenses, other

changes increase penalties for certain offenses.

On net, these changes could result in increased

correctional costs to state and local governments,

such as to house individuals in prison and jail. The

magnitude of such costs would depend primarily on

the number of violations and how the measure is

enforced. The potential net increase in correctional

costs would likely not exceed the low millions of

dollars annually.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 63

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 63

★

PROPOSITION 63 WILL KEEP US SAFER BY REDUCING

GUN VIOLENCE

Police in Dallas doing their job . . .. A nightclub

in Orlando . . .. An ofﬁce holiday party in San

Bernardino . . .. A church in Charleston . . .. A

movie theater in Aurora . . .. An elementary school in

Newtown . . ..

What’s next? How many more people need to die from gun

violence before we take bold action to save lives?

More than 300 Americans are shot each day, more than

80 of them fatally.

More than 1 million Americans were killed or seriously

injured by guns from 2004–20I4.

ENOUGH!

It’s time to take action to keep guns and ammo out of the

wrong hands.

Proposition 63—the Safety for All Act—will save lives

by closing loopholes to prevent dangerous criminals,

domestic abusers, and the dangerously mentally ill from

obtaining and using deadly weapons.

PROPOSITION 63 WILL:

• Remove illegal guns from our communities by ensuring

that dangerous criminals and domestic abusers sell or

transfer their ﬁrearms after they’re convicted.

• Require any business that sells ammunition to report if

their ammunition is lost or stolen.

• Require people to notify law enforcement if their guns

are lost or stolen, before the weapons end up in the

wrong hands.

• Ensure people convicted of gun theft are ineligible to

own guns.

• Strengthen our background check systems and ensure

that California law enforcement shares data about

dangerous people with the FBI.

Proposition 63 keeps guns and ammo out of the

wrong hands, while protecting the rights of law-abiding

Californians to own guns for self-defense, hunting, and

recreation.

Right now, thousands of dangerous felons remain illegally

armed because we don’t ensure that people convicted

of violent crimes actually relinquish their guns after

conviction. The Department of Justice identiﬁed more

than 17,000 felons and other dangerous people with more

than 34,000 guns, including more than 1,400 assault

weapons.

Passing Proposition 63 will represent a historic and

unprecedented step forward for gun safety.

LEADERS FROM ACROSS CALIFORNIA SUPPORT

PROPOSITION 63, INCLUDING:

• Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom • U.S. Senator

Dianne Feinstein • Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

• California Democratic Party • California Secretary of

State Alex Padilla • Speaker Emeritus of the Assembly

Toni Atkins • Speaker Emeritus of the Assembly John

Pérez • Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, San Francisco • Former

Police Chief Ken James, Emeryville • SEIU • League of

Women Voters of California • California Young Democrats

• California Federation of Teachers • San Francisco Board

of Education • Equality California • Courage Campaign

• California American College of Physicians • California

American College of Emergency Physicians • Southern

California Public Health Association • Clergy and Laity

United for Economic Justice • Coalition Against Gun

Violence • Rabbis Against Gun Violence • States United

to Prevent Gun Violence • Stop Handgun Violence • Stop

Our Shootings • Women Against Gun Violence • Youth

Alive!

To learn more please visit www.SafetyforAll.com.

GAVIN NEWSOM, Lieutenant Governor of California

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, United States Senator

ROBYN THOMAS, Executive Director

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

Terrorists don’t follow the law!

Gavin Newsom refuses to acknowledge that the Orlando

and San Bernardino attacks were ISIS inspired Islamic

radicalism. It is the same ideology that motivated the

9/11 terror attacks that killed 2,996 innocents.

Exploiting terrorist attacks to push sweeping laws

affecting law-abiding peoples’ civil liberties is misleading,

wrong, and dangerous.

None of the proposed laws would prevent terrorist attacks.

The reality is terrorists can always ﬁnd the means to wreak

havoc, a box cutter in a plane on 9/11, a homemade

bomb in Boston, or a truck in Nice, France. Terrorists and

criminals get weapons from the black market, make them,

or steal them from law-abiding citizens.

Everyone agrees that preventing weapons from falling

into the wrong hands is crucial. We all share the concern

about the growing trends of terrorism and radicalization.

But, Prop. 63 is NOT the answer.

Spending tens of millions of taxpayer dollars year after

year on useless lists of everyone who buys and sells

ammunition diverts critical resources and focus away from

effective anti-terrorism efforts, leaving the public more

vulnerable to attack and LESS SAFE.

There’s a reason law enforcement overwhelmingly opposes

Prop. 63.

The public interest would be better served if these

resources were used to educate more Californians

about what they can do to protect their families and

communities from terrorist attacks or to further train law

enforcement to do so.

Stop this dangerous abuse of public resources.

Vote NO on Prop. 63!

ALON STIVI, President

Direct Measures International, Inc.

WILLIAM “BILLY” BIRDZELL, U.S. Special Operations

Command Anti-Terrorism Instructor

RICHARD GRENELL, Longest serving U.S. Spokesman at

the United Nations

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

FIREARMS. AMMUNITION SALES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 63

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 63

★

Prop. 63 is overwhelmingly opposed by the law

enforcement community and civil rights groups because

it will burden law abiding citizens without keeping violent

criminals and terrorists from accessing ﬁrearms and

ammunition.

The California State Sheriffs’ Association, Association

of Deputy District Attorneys for Los Angeles County,

California Correctional Peace Ofﬁcers Association,

California Fish & Game Wardens’ Association, California

Reserve Peace Ofﬁcers Association, and numerous other

law enforcement and civic groups, representing tens

of thousands of public safety professionals throughout

California, are united in their opposition to this ineffective,

burdensome, and costly proposal.

Prop. 63 would divert scarce law enforcement resources

away from local law enforcement and overburden an

already overcrowded court system with the enforcement

of ﬂawed laws that will turn harmless, law-abiding citizens

into criminals. In fact, New York recently abandoned

its enforcement of a similar proposal after it was

passed, ﬁnding that it was impossible to implement and

effectively maintain.

Doing what actually works to keep the public safe is

the highest priority of law enforcement professionals

who dedicate their lives to protecting Californians.

Unfortunately, Prop. 63 will not make anyone safer. To

the contrary, by directing resources away from measures

that are truly effective at preventing the criminal element

from acquiring guns and ammunition, it would make us

all less safe. The immense public resources that Prop. 63

would waste should be used to hire more ofﬁcers and to

target, investigate, and prosecute dangerous individuals

and terrorists.

After closely analyzing the language of Prop. 63, the

law enforcement community found many problems in

the details. Due to strict limitations on the Legislature’s

ability to amend voter-enacted propositions, most of these

problems will be difﬁcult or impossible for the Legislature

to ﬁx if Prop. 63 passes, saddling California with the

burdens and costs of this ﬂawed proposal forever.

By going around the Legislature, this initiative limits

public safety professionals in developing future legislation

that would truly promote public safety. California

taxpayers should not waste hundreds of millions of their

dollars on ineffective laws that have no value to law

enforcement and will harm public safety by diverting

resources away from effective law enforcement activities

that are critical to public safety.

Please visit WWW.WHERESMYAMMO.COM for more

information.

PLEASE VOTE NO ON PROP. 63.

DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, President

California State Sheriffs’ Association

KEVIN BERNZOTT, Chief Executive Ofﬁcer

California Reserve Peace Ofﬁcers Association

TIFFANY CHEUVRONT, Principal Ofﬁcer

Coalition for Civil Liberties

As law enforcement and public safety ofﬁcials, we’re not

surprised that groups such as the NRA and its afﬁliates

oppose Proposition 63. Make no mistake, the so-called

“Coalition for Civil Liberties” is actually an NRA front

group.

The gun lobby often claims we should focus on enforcing

existing gun laws, and that’s exactly what this initiative

does—Prop. 63 closes loopholes and helps enforce existing

laws to keep guns and ammo out of the wrong hands.

For example, Prop. 63 ensures dangerous convicts

prohibited from owning weapons follow the law and get

rid of their ﬁrearms. Law enforcement professionals have

found that felons and dangerous people currently possess

thousands of guns illegally—so closing this loophole will

save lives.

Prop. 63 also requires reporting lost and stolen ﬁrearms,

to help police shut down gun trafﬁcking rings and locate

caches of illegal weapons. Prop. 63 will help police

recover stolen guns before they’re used in crimes and

return them to their lawful owners.

Prop. 63 also improves background check systems so that

law enforcement can prevent people banned from owning

weapons—such as violent felons—from buying guns and

ammo.

And Prop. 63 clariﬁes existing law so that any gun theft

is a felony, ensuring that people who steal guns can’t

own guns. That’s another common-sense reform to save

lives overwhelmingly supported by law enforcement

professionals.

Prop. 63 will close loopholes in our existing laws and

prevent dangerous criminals, domestic abusers, and the

dangerously mentally ill from obtaining and using deadly

weapons.

NANCY O’MALLEY, District Attorney

Alameda County

JEFF ROSEN, District Attorney

Santa Clara County

VICKI HENNESSY, Sheriff

San Francisco

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

State Marijuana Laws

Marijuana Generally Illegal Under State Law.

Under current state law, it is generally illegal

to possess or use marijuana. (Please see the

nearby box for detailed information on how

marijuana is used.) Penalties for marijuana-

related activities vary depending on the

offense. For example, possession of less than

one ounce of marijuana (the equivalent of

roughly 40 marijuana cigarettes, also known

as “joints”) is punishable by a ﬁne, while

selling or growing marijuana may result in a

jail or prison sentence.

Proposition 215 Legalized Medical Marijuana.

In 1996, voters approved Proposition 215,

which made it legal under state law for

individuals of any age to use marijuana in

California for medical purposes. Individuals

must have a recommendation from a doctor

to use medical marijuana. In 2003, the

Legislature legalized medical marijuana

collectives, which are nonproﬁt organizations

that grow and provide marijuana to their

members. Collectives are not now licensed

• Legalizes marijuana under state law, for

use by adults 21 or older.

• Designates state agencies to license and

regulate marijuana industry.

• Imposes state excise tax of 15% on retail

sales of marijuana, and state cultivation

taxes on marijuana of $9.25 per ounce of

ﬂowers and $2.75 per ounce of leaves.

• Exempts medical marijuana from some

taxation.

• Establishes packaging, labeling,

advertising, and marketing standards and

restrictions for marijuana products.

• Prohibits marketing and advertising

marijuana directly to minors.

• Allows local regulation and taxation of

marijuana.

• Authorizes resentencing and destruction of

records for prior marijuana convictions.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE

OF NET STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL

IMPACT:

• The size of the measure’s ﬁscal effects

could vary signiﬁcantly depending on:

(1) how state and local governments

choose to regulate and tax marijuana,

(2) whether the federal government

enforces federal laws prohibiting

marijuana, and

(3) how marijuana prices and

consumption change under the

measure.

• Net additional state and local tax revenues

that could eventually range from the

high hundreds of millions of dollars to

over $1 billion annually. Most of these

funds would be required to be spent for

speciﬁc purposes such as youth programs,

environmental protection, and law

enforcement.

• Net reduced costs potentially in the tens

of millions of dollars annually to state

and local governments primarily related

to a decline in the number of marijuana

offenders held in state prisons and county

jails.

For the full text of Proposition 64, see page 178. Title and Summary / Analysis

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

or regulated by the state, but cities and

counties can regulate where and how

medical marijuana is grown and sold by

individuals or collectives.

State Currently Adopting New Medical

Marijuana Regulations. Recently, new state

laws were adopted to begin regulating

medical marijuana. As shown in Figure 1, a

new Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation

and other state agencies are responsible for

this regulation. The new laws require the

state to set standards for labelling, testing,

and packaging medical marijuana products

and to develop a system to track such

products from production to sale. Currently,

these regulations are being developed by

the different regulatory agencies. Under the

new laws, medical marijuana collectives

must be closed within a few years and

replaced by state-licensed businesses.

Local governments will continue to have the

ability to regulate where and how medical

How do Individuals Use Marijuana?

Smoking. The most common way individuals use marijuana is by smoking it. Typically,

users smoke the dried ﬂowers of the marijuana plant. Dried marijuana leaves can

also be smoked but this is rare because leaves contain only small amounts of

tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the ingredient in marijuana that produces a

“high.” Marijuana leaves, ﬂowers, and stalks can also be processed into concentrated

marijuana and smoked. Examples of concentrated marijuana include hash and hash oil.

Concentrated marijuana is much stronger than dried marijuana, often containing ﬁve to

ten times the THC levels found in dried marijuana ﬂowers.

Vaporizing. Some users consume marijuana with devices called vaporizers. A vaporizer

heats up dried marijuana or concentrated marijuana but does not burn it. This heating

process creates a gas containing THC that is inhaled.

Eating. Marijuana can also be added to food. Edible marijuana products are typically made

by adding THC from the plant into ingredients (like butter or oil) that are used to prepare

foods such as brownies, cookies, or chocolate bars.

Other Methods. Other less common ways of using marijuana include drinking beverages

infused with marijuana and rubbing marijuana infused lotions on the skin.

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

marijuana businesses operate.

Taxes on Medical Marijuana. State and local

governments currently collect sales tax on

medical marijuana. A small number of cities

also impose additional taxes speciﬁcally

on medical marijuana. The total amount of

state and local taxes collected on medical

marijuana likely is several tens of millions of

dollars annually.

Federal Marijuana Laws

Under federal law, it is illegal to possess

or use marijuana, including for medical

use. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in

2005 that federal agencies could continue

under federal law to prosecute individuals

who possess or use marijuana for medical

purposes even if legal under a state’s law.

Currently, however, the U.S. Department of

Justice (DOJ) chooses not to prosecute most

marijuana users and businesses that follow

state and local marijuana laws if those laws

are consistent with federal priorities. These

priorities include preventing minors from

using marijuana and preventing marijuana

from being taken to other states.

PROPOSAL

This measure (1) legalizes adult nonmedical

use of marijuana, (2) creates a system for

regulating nonmedical marijuana businesses,

(3) imposes taxes on marijuana, and

(4) changes penalties for marijuana-related

crimes. These changes are described below.

Legalization of

Adult Nonmedical Use of Marijuana

Personal Use of Nonmedical Marijuana. This

measure changes state law to legalize the

use of marijuana for nonmedical purposes by

adults age 21 and over. Figure 2 summarizes

what activities would be allowable under

the measure. These activities would remain

illegal for individuals under the age of 21.

Purchasing Marijuana. Under the measure,

adults age 21 and over would be able

to purchase marijuana at state-licensed

businesses or through their delivery services.

Businesses could generally not be located

within 600 feet of a school, day care center,

or youth center, unless allowed by a local

government. In addition, businesses selling

For the full text of Proposition 64, see page 178. Title and Summary / Analysis

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

marijuana could not sell tobacco or alcohol.

Under the measure, local governments

could authorize licensed businesses to

allow on-site consumption of marijuana.

However, such businesses could not allow

consumption in areas within the presence

or sight of individuals under the age of

21 or areas visible from a public place.

In addition, businesses allowing on-site

marijuana consumption could not allow

consumption of alcohol or tobacco.

Regulation of Nonmedical Marijuana Businesses

State Regulation of Nonmedical Marijuana

Businesses. This measure changes the

name of the Bureau of Medical Cannabis

Regulation to the Bureau of Marijuana

Control and makes it also responsible

for regulating and licensing nonmedical

marijuana businesses. In addition, the

measure requires other state agencies to

regulate and license different parts of the

nonmedical marijuana industry. These state

agencies would have responsibilities similar

to the ones they currently have for medical

marijuana. The measure requires each

licensing agency to charge fees that cover

its marijuana regulatory costs. Under the

measure, the system for tracking medical

marijuana products that must be developed

under current law would be expanded to

include marijuana for nonmedical use.

The measure also creates the Marijuana

Control Appeals Panel to hear appeals from

individuals affected by a decision of the

state’s regulatory agencies. Decisions of the

panel could be appealed to the courts.

Local Regulation of Nonmedical Marijuana

Businesses. Under the measure, cities

and counties could regulate nonmedical

marijuana businesses. For example, cities

and counties could require nonmedical

marijuana businesses to obtain local licenses

and restrict where they could be located.

Cities and counties could also completely

ban marijuana-related businesses. However,

they could not ban the transportation of

marijuana through their jurisdictions.

Taxation of Marijuana

The measure imposes new state taxes

on growing and selling both medical and

nonmedical marijuana. As shown in Figure 3,

the new tax on growing marijuana would

be based on a dollar amount per ounce of

marijuana, and the new excise tax would

be based on the retail price of marijuana

products sold.

The measure would also affect sales tax

revenue to the state and local governments

in two ways. First, legalizing the sale of

nonmedical marijuana will result in new

sales tax revenue. (This would happen

automatically, as generally products are

subject to this tax under current law.)

Second, the sale of medical marijuana,

which is currently subject to sales tax, is

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

speciﬁcally exempted from that tax. The

measure does not change local governments’

existing ability to place other taxes on

medical marijuana and does not restrict their

ability to tax nonmedical marijuana.

Beginning in 2020, the tax on growing

marijuana would be adjusted annually for

inﬂation. The measure also allows the state

Board of Equalization to annually adjust

the tax rate for marijuana leaves to reﬂect

changes in the price of marijuana ﬂowers

relative to leaves. In addition, the measure

allows the board to establish other categories

of marijuana (such as frozen marijuana)

for tax purposes and speciﬁes that these

categories would be taxed at their value

relative to marijuana ﬂowers.

Allocation of Certain State Tax Revenues.

Revenues collected from the new state

retail excise tax and the state tax on growing

marijuana would be deposited in a new state

account, the California Marijuana Tax Fund.

Certain ﬁnes on businesses or individuals

who violate regulations created by the

measure would also be deposited into this

fund. Monies in the fund would ﬁrst be used

to pay back certain state agencies for any

marijuana regulatory costs not covered by

license fees. A portion of the monies would

then be allocated in speciﬁc dollar amounts

for various purposes, as shown in Figure 4.

All remaining revenues (the vast majority

of monies deposited in the fund) would be

allocated as follows:

• 60 percent for youth programs—

including substance use disorder

education, prevention, and treatment.

• 20 percent to clean up and prevent

environmental damage resulting from

the illegal growing of marijuana.

• 20 percent for (1) programs designed

to reduce driving under the inﬂuence

of alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs

and (2) a grant program designed to

reduce any potential negative impacts

on public health or safety resulting from

the measure.

Penalties for Marijuana-Related Crimes

Change in Penalties for Future Marijuana

Crimes. The measure changes state

marijuana penalties. For example, possession

of one ounce or less of marijuana is

currently punishable by a $100 ﬁne. Under

the measure, such a crime committed by

For the full text of Proposition 64, see page 178. Title and Summary / Analysis

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

someone under the age of 18 would instead

be punishable by a requirement to attend a

drug education or counseling program and

complete community service. In addition,

selling marijuana for nonmedical purposes

is currently punishable by up to four years

in state prison or county jail. Under the

measure, selling marijuana without a license

would be a crime generally punishable by

up to six months in county jail and/or a

ﬁne of up to $500. In addition, individuals

engaging in any marijuana business activity

without a license would be subject to a civil

penalty of up to three times the amount

of the license fee for each violation. While

the measure changes penalties for many

marijuana-related crimes, the penalties for

driving a vehicle while under the impairment

of marijuana would remain the same. The

measure also requires the destruction—

within two years—of criminal records for

individuals arrested or convicted for certain

marijuana-related offenses.

Individuals Previously Convicted of Marijuana

Crimes. Under the measure, individuals

serving sentences for activities that are

made legal or are subject to lesser penalties

under the measure would be eligible for

resentencing. For example, an offender

serving a jail or prison term for growing or

selling marijuana could have their sentence

reduced. (A court would not be required to

resentence someone if it determined that the

person was likely to commit certain severe

crimes.) Qualifying individuals would be

resentenced to whatever punishment they

would have received under the measure.

Resentenced individuals currently in jail

or prison would be subject to community

supervision (such as probation) for up to

one year following their release, unless a

court removes that requirement. In addition,

individuals who have completed sentences

for crimes that are reduced by the measure

could apply to the courts to have their

criminal records changed.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Fiscal Effects Subject to Signiﬁcant Uncertainty

This measure would affect both costs and

revenues for state and local governments.

The size of these effects could vary

signiﬁcantly depending primarily on three

key factors:

• First, it would depend on how state and

local governments chose to regulate and

tax marijuana. For example, if many

cities and counties banned marijuana

businesses, the amount of revenue from

taxes on marijuana would be less than

without such bans.

• Second, it would depend on whether

the U.S. DOJ enforced federal laws

prohibiting marijuana. For example, if

the U.S. DOJ chose to prosecute state-

licensed marijuana businesses, there

could be signiﬁcantly reduced revenue

from marijuana taxes. This analysis

assumes the U.S. DOJ will follow its

current policy regarding enforcement of

marijuana laws.

• Third, the ﬁscal effects would depend

heavily on how marijuana prices

and consumption change under the

measure. This analysis assumes that

the price of marijuana would decline

signiﬁcantly. This is primarily because

(1) businesses would become more

efﬁcient at producing and distributing

marijuana and (2) the price of

marijuana would no longer be inﬂated

to compensate for the risk of selling an

illegal drug. This analysis also assumes

that marijuana consumption would

increase under the measure. This is

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

primarily because of (1) the reduced

price and (2) the reduced legal risk for

marijuana users.

The actual effects on marijuana prices

and consumption are unknown, as are the

regulatory and enforcement actions of the

state, federal, and local governments. As

such, the potential cost and revenue impacts

of this measure described below are subject

to signiﬁcant uncertainty.

Effects on State and Local Costs

Reduction in Various Criminal Justice Costs.

The measure would result in reduced

criminal justice costs for the state and local

governments. This is primarily related to a

decline in the number of offenders held in

state prisons and county jails for growing and

selling marijuana. The measure would also

reduce the number of such offenders placed

under community supervision (such as

county probation). In addition, the measure

would likely reduce other criminal justice

costs, such as state court costs for the

handling of related criminal cases.

The above cost reductions would be partially

offset by increased costs in several areas.

In particular, the courts would incur costs

to process applications from individuals

seeking to be resentenced or have their

criminal records changed. In addition, there

would be costs to supervise resentenced

offenders in the community. These various

costs would be incurred largely within the

ﬁrst couple of years following the passage

of the measure. In addition, there would be

ongoing costs in a few areas. For example,

there would be court costs to destroy records

of arrest and conviction for individuals who

commit certain marijuana-related crimes.

In addition, there would be ongoing costs

to operate drug education and counseling

programs as required by the measure. There

would also be some increased criminal

justice costs (such as county jail and state

court costs) to the extent that increased

marijuana use leads to increased marijuana-

related crime (such as driving while impaired

by marijuana).

In total, the net reduction in state and

local criminal justice costs from the above

changes could be in the tens of millions

of dollars annually. In many cases, these

resources would likely be redirected to other

criminal justice activities.

Effects on State and Local Health Programs.

The measure could also have various ﬁscal

effects on state and local health programs

as a result of increased marijuana use.

For example, the measure could result in

an increase in the number of individuals

seeking publicly funded substance use

treatment. Any additional costs for such

services could be partially or entirely offset

by additional funding that would be available

for substance use treatment under the

measure. Although research on the health

effects of marijuana use is limited, there is

some evidence that smoking marijuana has

harmful effects. For example, marijuana

smoke is among a list of substances

identiﬁed by the state to cause cancer. To

the extent that an increase in marijuana use

negatively affects users’ health, it would

increase somewhat state and local health

program costs.

Increased State Regulatory Costs. The measure

would also result in costs for the state to

regulate nonmedical marijuana businesses.

These costs would vary depending on how

the state chooses to regulate marijuana but

could amount to several tens of millions

of dollars annually. Eventually, these costs

would likely be entirely offset by license fees

and tax revenues.

For the full text of Proposition 64, see page 178. Title and Summary / Analysis

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Effects on State and Local Revenues

Tax Revenues Could Reach $1 Billion

Annually, but Not Right Away. State and

local governments would receive more

revenues—including sales, excise, and

income taxes—from marijuana sales allowed

under this measure. This increase in tax

revenue would result primarily from (1) new

state excise taxes on growing and selling

marijuana, (2) individuals switching from

illegal purchases of marijuana (made from

individuals who do not pay all the taxes they

owe) to legal purchases (at businesses that

collect and pay the taxes they owe), and

(3) an increase in consumption of marijuana.

In addition, lower marijuana prices due to

the measure may provide individuals using

marijuana now with some savings. This could

allow them to purchase other legal products

that generate tax revenue. These revenue

increases, however, would be partially offset

by the loss of sales taxes now collected on

medical marijuana sales, as the measure

exempts such purchases from these taxes.

In total, our best estimate is that the state

and local governments could eventually

collect net additional revenues ranging from

the high hundreds of millions of dollars

to over $1 billion annually. However, the

revenues are likely to be signiﬁcantly lower

in the ﬁrst several years following the

passage of the measure. This is because it

will take a couple of years for the state to

issue licenses to marijuana businesses. In

addition, it will likely take time for newly

licensed businesses to set up efﬁcient

production and distribution systems. Prices

in the legal market will likely fall as more

legal businesses are licensed and as they

become more efﬁcient. As this occurs, more

consumers will begin purchasing marijuana

legally. It is unknown precisely how long this

process will take but it could be several years

after the measure passes before revenues

reach the range described above. As

discussed earlier, the measure requires that

most of these funds be spent on speciﬁed

purposes.

Additional Local Government Revenues.

The measure could result in additional

revenues if local governments impose taxes

on marijuana. The amount of additional

revenues could vary signiﬁcantly, depending

primarily on how many local governments

impose marijuana taxes and at what rates.

These revenues could easily amount to tens

of millions of dollars annually.

Potential Impact on Local Economies in

Marijuana Producing Areas. Exports of

marijuana currently contribute signiﬁcantly

to the economy in parts of Northern

California, such as Humboldt, Mendocino,

and Trinity Counties. Precisely how this

measure would affect these local economies

is unknown. Lower marijuana prices and

more opportunity for legal cultivation

elsewhere could hurt the economy in

these areas, reducing local government tax

revenues. If, however, local growers and

businesses successfully marketed their

marijuana products as premium goods,

consumers might be willing to pay above-

average prices for them. If that occurred,

it could help offset some of the negative

economic effects in those areas.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 64

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 64

★

Proposition 64, in effect, could limit a 45-year ban on

smoking ads on television, allowing marijuana ads airing

to millions of children and teen viewers. These ads can

appear during The Olympics, on “The Voice,” “The Big

Bang Theory” and hundreds of other programs popular

with younger viewers.

These marijuana smoking ads could be allowed on all

broadcast primetime shows, and approximately 95%

of all broadcast television programming. Children could

be exposed to ads promoting marijuana Gummy candy

and brownies—the same products blamed for a spike in

emergency room visits in Colorado.

We ban tobacco television ads because studies show it

encouraged kids to start smoking. Marijuana smoking

ads on TV should have been banned, but the proponents

didn’t want to restrict the enormous proﬁts they plan to

make, estimated in the billions. And like tobacco money,

the corporate monopolies spawned by Proposition 64 can

use that money for contributions to politicians to ensure

we can never undo the damage Proposition 64 will do.

Sharon Levy, M.D., FAAP, chair of the American Academy

of Pediatrics Committee on Substance Abuse warns “It

took several generations, millions of lives and billions of

dollars to establish the harms of tobacco use on health,

even though these harms are overwhelming. We should

not consider marijuana ‘innocent until proven guilty,’ given

what we already know about the harms to adolescents.”

After recent reforms, not one single person remains

in California’s prisons solely for simple marijuana

possession. What Proposition 64 is really about is

exposing our children to harm in order to make billions.

Join us in voting “No” on Proposition 64.

KATIE DEXTER, Past President

San Diego County School Boards Association

JOHN QUINTANILLA, Board Member

Rosemead School District

CYNTHIA RUIZ, Board Member

Walnut Valley Uniﬁed School District

Proposition 64 ﬁnally creates a safe, legal, and

comprehensive system for adult use of marijuana while

protecting our children.

Marijuana is available nearly everywhere in California—

but without any protections for children, without

assurances of product safety, and without generating tax

revenue for the state.

Prop. 64 controls, regulates and taxes adult use of

marijuana, and ends California's criminalization of

responsible adult use.

California Medical Association supports Prop. 64 because

it incorporates best practices from states that already

legalized adult marijuana use, and adheres closely to the

recommendations of California’s Blue Ribbon Commission

on Marijuana Policy, which included law enforcement and

public health experts.

How Prop. 64 Works:

• Under this law, adults 21+ will be allowed to possess

small amounts of nonmedical marijuana, and to

grow small amounts at home for personal use. Sale

of nonmedical marijuana will be legal only at highly

regulated, licensed marijuana businesses, and only

adults 21+ will be permitted to enter. Bars will not sell

marijuana, nor will liquor stores or grocery stores.

Child Protections:

• Drug dealers don’t ask for proof of age and today

can sell marijuana laced with dangerous drugs

and chemicals. 64 includes toughest-in-the-nation

protections for children, requiring purchasers to be 21,

banning advertising directed to children, and requiring

clear labeling and independent product testing to

ensure safety. 64 prohibits marijuana businesses next

to schools.

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce found

that 64 will both raise revenue and decrease costs. By

collecting unpaid taxes from marijuana, it will bring in

over $1 billion of revenue every year to help California.

And it could save tens of millions of dollars annually in

reduced law enforcement costs. Together, that is a beneﬁt

of $11 billion over the next decade.

• 64 corrects mistakes from past measures that didn’t

direct where money goes. Instead, this measure is

speciﬁc about how money can be spent. Prop. 64

speciﬁcally prevents politicians from diverting money to

their separate pet projects.

• 64 pays for itself and raises billions for afterschool

programs that help kids stay in school; for job

placement, job training, and mental health treatment;

for drug prevention education for teens; to treat alcohol

and drug addiction; and to fund training and research

for law enforcement to crack down on impaired driving.

Over the next decade, these programs will receive

billions in revenues.

Every year, there are more than 8,800 felony arrests for

growing or selling marijuana in California, resulting in

some very long prison sentences. This is an enormous

waste of law enforcement resources. Prop. 64 will stop

ruining people’s lives for marijuana.

The tough, common sense regulations put forth in 64

are supported by the largest coalition ever in support of

marijuana reform, including Lieutenant Governor Gavin

Newsom, Democratic and Republican Congressmembers,

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, the California

NAACP, the California Democratic Party and many others.

We all know California’s current approach toward

marijuana doesn’t make sense. It’s time to put an end

to our broken system, and implement proven reforms so

marijuana will be safe, controlled, and taxed.

DR. DONALD O. LYMAN, Former Chief of Chronic Disease

and Injury Control

California Department of Public Health

GRETCHEN BURNS, Executive Director

Parents for Addiction Treatment and Healing

STEVEN DOWNING, Former Deputy Chief

Los Angeles Police Department

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 64

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 64

★

Look at the facts, not scare tactics from groups that

always oppose marijuana reform.

• Some evidence has shown states with legalized

marijuana have less youth marijuana use. Prop. 64

contains the nation’s strictest child protections: warning

labels, child-resistant packaging, and advertising

restrictions, and it requires keeping marijuana out of

public view, away from children.

• Nothing in 64 makes it legal to show marijuana ads on

TV. Federal law prohibits it!

• It has not been deﬁnitively proven that impaired driving

has increased in those states with legalized marijuana,

and crash risk hasn’t increased. Colorado’s Department

of Public Safety and National Highway Trafﬁc Safety

Administration both conﬁrm this.

Vote Yes on 64 because:

• 64 invests hundreds of millions into equipment and law

enforcement training to crack down on unsafe driving.

It allocates new funds to develop comprehensive legal

standards under direction of the California Highway

Patrol for measuring driver impairment.

• 64 makes the protection of public health and safety

the #1 priority of the regulators that determine who

qualiﬁes for a marijuana business license.

• 64 preserves local control.

• 64 builds on consumer protections signed by the Governor.

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce says 64 will

raise revenue and decrease costs. Bipartisan lawmakers

support 64 because it’s based on best practices of states

that have safely legalized.

“I don’t use marijuana and I don’t want my 17-year-old

son to either. I’m voting Yes on 64 because it’s clear it

will protect children much better than what we have now,”

says Maria Alexander, Los Angeles mother.

Learn more at YesOn64.org.

REP. TED LIEU, Former Military Prosecutor

MARSHA ROSENBAUM, Ph.D., Co-Chair

Youth Education and Prevention Working Group,

Blue Ribbon Commission on Marijuana Policy

DR. LARRY BEDARD, Former President

American College of Emergency Physicians

There are ﬁve huge ﬂaws in Proposition 64 that directly

affect you and the people you care about.

Flaw #1: Doubling of highway fatalities.

The AAA Foundation for Highway Safety reports that

deaths in marijuana-related car crashes have doubled

since the State of Washington approved legalization.

Yet, incredibly, Proposition 64’s proponents refused to

include a DUI standard for marijuana, making it extremely

difﬁcult to keep impaired drivers off our highways.

Flaw #2: Allows marijuana growing near schools and parks.

Proposition 64 actually forbids local governments from

banning indoor residential growing of marijuana—even

next door to an elementary school—provided the crop

is limited to six plants, (and that is a lot of marijuana).

The California Police Chiefs Association adds that

“by permitting indoor cultivation of marijuana literally

next door to elementary schools and playgrounds,

Proposition 64 is trampling local control.”

Flaw #3: Will increase, not decrease black market and

drug cartel activity.

“Organized crime ﬁlings have skyrocketed in Colorado

since marijuana legalization,” says Past President of the

Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police John Jackson.

“We had 1 ﬁling in 2007 and by 2015, we had 40. Since

your Proposition 64 repeals the prohibition on heroin

and meth dealers with felony convictions getting into

the legal marijuana business, it could be much worse in

California.”

Flaw #4: Could roll back the total prohibition of smoking

ads on TV.

Tobacco ads have been banned from television for

decades, but Proposition 64 will allow marijuana smoking

ads in prime time, and on programs with millions of

children and teenage viewers.

Flaw #5: Proposition 64 is an all-out assault on

underprivileged neighborhoods already reeling from

alcohol and drug addiction problems.

Bishop Ron Allen of the International Faith Based

Coalition representing 5,000 inner-city churches calls

Proposition 64 an “attack on minorities” and asks “Why

are there no limits on the number of pot shops that can

be opened in poor neighborhoods? We will now have

a string of pot shops to go with the two liquor stores

on every block, but we still can’t get a grocery store.

Proposition 64 will make every parent’s job tougher.”

In short, Proposition 64 is radically different from

legalization measures in other states, and may weaken

countless consumer protections just passed last year and

signed into law by Governor Brown.

If the proponents’ Rebuttal below doesn’t answer these

ﬁve questions, then the only reasonable decision is to

vote “No”.

1. Why is there no DUI standard in your initiative to let

our CHP ofﬁcers get drug-impaired drivers off the road?

It is not sufﬁcient to simply commission a “study”.

2. Why does Proposition 64 permit indoor cultivation of

marijuana right next door to playgrounds and schools?

3. Why does Proposition 64 allow felons convicted

of dealing meth and heroin to be licensed to sell

marijuana?

4. Why does Proposition 64 permit marijuana smoking

commercials on TV?

5. Why is there no limit on the number of pot shops that

can be placed in a single neighborhood?

They’ve gotten it wrong, again. We strongly urge your

“No” vote on Proposition 64.

To get the facts, visit www.NoOn64.net

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, United States Senator

DOUG VILLARS, President

California Association of Highway Patrolmen

C. DUANE DAUNER, President

California Hospital Association

100

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

CARRYOUT BAGS. CHARGES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Carryout Bag Usage. Stores typically provide their

customers with bags to carry out the items they buy.

One type of bag commonly provided is the “single-

use plastic carryout bag,” which refers to a thin

plastic bag used at checkout that is not intended for

continued reuse. In contrast, “reusable plastic bags”

are thicker and sturdier so that they can be reused

many times. Many stores also provide single-use

paper bags. Stores frequently provide single-use paper

and plastic carryout bags to customers for free, and

some stores offer reusable bags for sale. Each year,

roughly 15 billion single-use plastic carryout bags

are provided to customers in California (an average of

about 400 bags per Californian).

Many Local Governments Restrict Single-Use Carryout

Bags. Many cities and counties in California have

adopted local laws in recent years restricting or

banning single-use carryout bags. These local laws

have been implemented due to concerns about how

the use of such bags can impact the environment. For

example, plastic bags can contribute to litter and can

end up in waterways. In addition, plastic bags can

be difﬁcult to recycle because they can get tangled

in recycling machines. Most of these local laws ban

single-use plastic carryout bags at grocery stores,

convenience stores, pharmacies, and liquor stores.

They also usually require the store to charge at least

10 cents for the sale of any carryout bag. Stores are

allowed to keep the resulting revenue. As of June

2016, there were local carryout bag laws in about

150 cities and counties—covering about 40 percent

of California’s population—mostly in areas within

coastal counties.

Statewide Carryout Bag Law. In 2014, the Legislature

passed and the Governor signed a statewide carryout

bag law, Senate Bill (SB) 270. Similar to many

local laws, SB 270 prohibits most grocery stores,

convenience stores, large pharmacies, and liquor

stores in the state from providing single-use plastic

carryout bags. It also requires a store to charge

customers at least 10 cents for any carryout bag that

it provides at checkout. Certain low-income customers

would not have to pay the charge. Under SB 270,

stores would retain the revenue from the sale of

the bags. They could use the proceeds to cover the

costs of providing carryout bags, complying with the

measure, and educational efforts to encourage the

use of reusable bags. These requirements would apply

only to cities and counties that did not already have

their own carryout bag laws as of the fall of 2014.

Referendum on SB 270. Under the State Constitution,

a new state law can be placed before voters as a

referendum to determine whether the law can go into

effect. A referendum on SB 270 qualiﬁed for this

ballot (Proposition 67). If the referendum passes,

SB 270 will go into effect. If it does not pass,

SB 270 will be repealed.

PROPOSAL

Redirects Carryout Bag Revenue to New State

Environmental Fund. This measure speciﬁes how

revenue could be used that resulted from any state

law that (1) prohibits giving certain carryout bags

away for free and (2) requires a minimum charge

for other types of carryout bags. Speciﬁcally, this

measure requires that the resulting revenue be

deposited in a new state fund—the Environmental

Protection and Enhancement Fund—for various

environmental purposes rather than be retained by

stores. The fund would be used to support grants

for programs and projects related to (1) drought

mitigation; (2) recycling; (3) clean drinking

water supplies; (4) state, regional, and local

parks; (5) beach cleanup; (6) litter removal; and

(7) wildlife habitat restoration. The measure allows

a small portion of these funds to be used for grant

administration and biennial audits of the programs

receiving funds.

• Redirects money collected by grocery and certain

other retail stores through sale of carryout bags,

whenever any state law bans free distribution of a

particular kind of carryout bag and mandates the

sale of any other kind of carryout bag.

• Requires stores to deposit bag sale proceeds

into a special fund administered by the Wildlife

Conservation Board to support speciﬁed categories

of environmental projects.

• Provides for Board to develop regulations

implementing law.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Potential state revenue of several tens of millions

of dollars annually under certain circumstances.

Revenue would be used to support certain

environmental programs.

For the full text of Proposition 65, see page 210. Title and Summary / Analysis

101

CARRYOUT BAGS. CHARGES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

Other Provisions. Additionally, the measure allows local

governments to require that money collected from

local carryout bag laws go to the new state fund rather

than allowing that revenue to be kept by stores. It also

includes a provision regarding the implementation of

this measure and any other carryout bag measure on

this ballot. This provision could be interpreted by the

courts as preventing Proposition 67 (the referendum

on SB 270) from going into effect. This provision

would only have an effect if both measures pass and

this measure (Proposition 65) gets more “yes” votes.

However, this analysis assumes that in this situation

the provisions of Proposition 67 not related to the use

of revenues—such as the requirement to ban single-

use plastic carryout bags and charge for other bags—

would still be implemented.

FISCAL EFFECTS

If the requirements of this measure (that there is

a state law prohibiting giving certain carryout bags

away for free and requiring a minimum charge for

other bags) are met, then there would be increased

state revenue for certain environmental programs.

This revenue could reach several tens of millions

of dollars annually. The actual amount of revenue

could be higher or lower

based on several factors,

particularly future sales

and prices of carryout

bags.

At the present time,

there is no state law in

effect that meets this

measure’s requirements.

As such, there would be

no ﬁscal effect as long

as that continued. As

noted earlier, however,

Proposition 67 on this

ballot would enact such

a state law. If both

Proposition 67 and this

measure (Proposition 65)

pass, the impact on the

state would depend on

which one receives the

most votes:

• Proposition 67

(Referendum)

Receives More Votes.

In this situation,

revenue collected

by the stores

would be kept by the stores and there would

not be a ﬁscal impact on the state related to

Proposition 65.

• Proposition 65 (Initiative) Receives More Votes.

In this situation, any revenue collected by

stores from the sale of carryout bags would

be transferred to the new state fund, with the

increased state revenue used to support certain

environmental programs.

In addition, if only this measure passes and

Proposition 67 fails (which means there would not

currently be a statewide law to which this measure

would apply), there could still be a ﬁscal impact

if a state carryout bag law was enacted in the

future. Figure 1 shows how this measure would be

implemented differently depending on different voter

decisions.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Figure 1

Implementation of Proposition 65

Would Be Affected by Outcome of Referendum

Proposition 67

(SB 270 Referendum)

Passes

Proposition 65

(Initiative)

Passes

Statewide carryout bag law in effect.

Use of revenues from sale of

carryout bags depends on which

proposition gets more votes:

• If more “yes” votes for

referendum, revenue is kept by

stores.

• If more “yes” votes for initiative,

revenue goes to state for

environmental programs.

No statewide carryout bag law.

Revenue from any future statewide

law similar to SB 270 would be

used for environmental programs.

No statewide carryout bag law.Statewide carryout bag law in effect

and revenue from the sale of

carryout bags is kept by stores.

Proposition 67

(SB 270 Referendum)

Fails

Proposition 65

(Initiative)

Fails

Alternatively, a provision of Proposition 65 could be interpreted by the courts as preventing Senate Bill (SB) 270 from

going into effect at all.

102

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

CARRYOUT BAGS. CHARGES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 65

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 65

★

The San Jose Mercury News calls Proposition 65

a “tricky strategy” and adds “Prop. 65 deserves

consideration as one of the most disingenuous ballot

measures in state history.”

The out-of-state plastic manufacturers behind

Prop. 65 don’t care about protecting California’s

environment. They want to confuse you. Don’t be

fooled.

Bags aren’t free; they cost your local grocer up to

15 cents each. The out-of-state plastic bag industry

ﬁgures are bogus. The state’s nonpartisan analysis

projects that total revenue from Prop. 65 is in the

range of “zero” to, at best, $80 million.

Remember: there will be “zero” funding for the

environment from Prop. 65 unless voters approve

Prop. 67 to phase out plastic bags.

But the plastic manufacturers behind Prop. 65

are spending millions to persuade voters to oppose

Prop. 67. Confused? That’s the plastic industry’s

plan!

If you care about protecting wildlife and standing up

to the out-of-state plastic bag industry, Vote Yes on

Prop. 67, not this measure.

If you care about reducing plastic pollution, litter and

waste, Vote Yes on Prop. 67, not this measure.

If you care about reducing taxpayer costs for

cleaning up plastic litter, Vote Yes on Prop. 67, not

this measure.

MARK MURRAY, Executive Director

Californians Against Waste

STOP THE SWEETHEART BAG TAX DEAL. HELP

THE ENVIRONMENT

Proposition 65 is needed to STOP grocery stores

from keeping all the money collected from

carryout bag taxes as proﬁt instead of helping the

environment.

Grocery stores stand to gain up to $300 million in

added proﬁts each and every year unless you vote

yes on Prop. 65.

That money should be dedicated to the environment,

not more proﬁts for corporate grocery chains.

Proposition 65 will STOP THE SWEETHEART DEAL

WITH GROCERY STORES and dedicate bag fees to

worthy environmental causes.

A SWEETHEART DEAL IN SACRAMENTO

Who in their right mind would let grocery stores

keep $300 million in bag fees paid by hardworking

California shoppers just trying to make ends meet?

The State Legislature!

In a sweetheart deal put together by special interest

lobbyists, the Legislature voted to let grocery stores

keep bag fees as extra proﬁt.

The grocery stores will get $300 million richer while

shoppers get $300 million poorer.

SHAME ON THE LOBBYISTS AND LEGISLATORS

The big grocery store chains and retailers gave big

campaign contributions to legislators over the past

seven years.

And legislators rewarded them with $300 million in

new proﬁts—all on the backs of shoppers.

Stop the sweetheart special interest deal . . . VOTE

YES ON PROP. 65.

A BETTER WAY TO HELP THE ENVIRONMENT

You can do what the legislators should have done—

dedicate these bag fees to real projects that protect

the environment.

Proposition 65 dedicates the bag fees to

environmental projects like drought relief, beach

clean-up and litter removal.

It puts the California Wildlife Conservation Board in

control of these funds, not grocery store executives,

so Californians will beneﬁt.

PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. STOP THE

SWEETHEART DEAL AND HIDDEN BAG TAX.

VOTE YES ON PROP. 65.

THOMAS HUDSON, Executive Director

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

103

CARRYOUT BAGS. CHARGES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 65

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 65

★

The opponents of Prop. 65 want to dismiss it as “of

no real signiﬁcance”.

YOU DECIDE: IS A $300 MILLION MONEY GRAB

BY GROCERY STORES NOT SIGNIFICANT?

Without Prop. 65, not one penny of the $300 million

customers will be required to pay if California’s

ban on plastic bags goes into effect will help the

environment.

All $300 million will go to grocery store proﬁts.

THAT’S $300 MILLION EVERY YEAR!

VOTE YES ON 65—STOP THE SWEETHEART

GIVEAWAY TO GROCERS.

In a sweetheart deal put together by special interest

lobbyists, the Legislature voted to BAN plastic bags

and REQUIRE grocery stores keep bag fees as proﬁt.

Their “plastic bag ban” REQUIRES grocery stores to

charge every consumer given a bag at check-out no

less than 10 cents per bag.

They could have banned plastic bags without a fee or

dedicated fees to environmental projects.

They didn’t.

Instead, they made grocery stores $300 million

richer and shoppers $300 million poorer every year.

A BETTER WAY TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT.

You can do what the Legislature should have

done—dedicate bag fees to projects that protect the

environment.

Prop. 65 dedicates bag fees to environmental

projects like drought relief, beach clean-up and litter

removal.

It puts the California Wildlife Conservation Board in

control of these funds, not grocery store executives.

PROP. 65 WILL DEDICATE BAG FEES TO THE

ENVIRONMENT.

It’s simple and signiﬁcant.

Join us—vote YES.

THOMAS HUDSON, Executive Director

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PROP. 65 IS TO CONFUSE

VOTERS

Prop. 65 promises a lot but—in reality—will deliver

little for the environment. It was placed on the ballot

by four out-of-state plastic bag companies who keep

interfering with California’s efforts to reduce plastic

pollution.

65 is without real signiﬁcance, designed to distract

from the issue at hand: phasing out plastic shopping

bags. All 65 would do is direct funding from the

sale of paper bags (an option under the plastic bag

ban) to a new state fund. The money for this fund

is a drop in the bucket and will shrink over time as

people adjust to bringing reusable bags.

TO ACTUALLY PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT,

VOTE YES ON 67

The priority for California’s environment this election

is to reduce harmful plastic pollution by voting Yes on

Pro p. 67. This will continue efforts to keep wasteful

plastic shopping bags out of our parks, trees,

neighborhoods and treasured open spaces.

Prop. 65 is not worth your vote. Make your voice

heard on the more important issues and uphold

California’s vital plastic bag ban further down the

ballot.

MARK MURRAY, Executive Director

Californians Against Waste

104

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Death Sentences

First degree murder is generally deﬁned as the

unlawful killing of a human being that (1) is

deliberate and premeditated or (2) takes place

while certain other crimes are committed, such as

kidnapping. It is punishable by a life sentence in

state prison with the possibility of being released by

the state parole board after a minimum of 25 years.

However, current state law makes ﬁrst degree murder

punishable by death or life imprisonment without the

possibility of parole when “special circumstances”

of the crime have been charged and proven in court.

Existing state law identiﬁes a number of special

circumstances that can be charged, such as in cases

when the murder was carried out for ﬁnancial gain

or when more than one murder was committed.

In addition to ﬁrst degree murder, state law also

speciﬁes a few other crimes, such as treason against

the state of California, that can also be punished

by death. Since the current death penalty law was

enacted in California in 1978, 930 individuals have

received a death sentence. In recent years, an average

of about 20 individuals annually have received death

sentences.

Legal Challenges to Death Sentences

Two Ways to Challenge Death Sentences. Following

a death sentence, defendants can challenge the

sentence in two ways:

• Direct Appeals. Under current state law, death

penalty verdicts are automatically appealed to

the California Supreme Court. In these “direct

appeals,” the defendants’ attorneys argue that

violations of state law or federal constitutional

law took place during the trial, such as evidence

improperly being included or excluded from

the trial. These direct appeals focus on the

records of the court proceedings that resulted

in the defendant receiving a death sentence.

If the California Supreme Court conﬁrms the

conviction and death sentence, the defendant

can ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the

decision.

• Habeas Corpus Petitions. In addition to direct

appeals, death penalty cases ordinarily involve

extensive legal challenges—ﬁrst in the California

Supreme Court and then in federal courts. These

challenges, which are commonly referred to as

“habeas corpus” petitions, involve factors of the

case that are different from those considered

in direct appeals. Examples of such factors

include claims that (1) the defendant’s attorney

was ineffective or (2) if the jury had been aware

of additional information (such as biological,

psychological, or social factors faced by the

defendant), it would not have sentenced the

defendant to death.

Attorneys Appointed to Represent Condemned Inmates

in Legal Challenges. The California Supreme Court

appoints attorneys to represent individuals who

have been sentenced to death but cannot afford

• Changes procedures governing state court appeals

and petitions challenging death penalty convictions

and sentences.

• Designates superior court for initial petitions and

limits successive petitions.

• Establishes time frame for state court death

penalty review.

• Requires appointed attorneys who take noncapital

appeals to accept death penalty appeals.

• Exempts prison ofﬁcials from existing regulation

process for developing execution methods.

• Authorizes death row inmate transfers among

California prisons.

• Increases portion of condemned inmates’ wages

that may be applied to victim restitution.

• States other voter approved measures related to

death penalty are void if this measure receives

more afﬁrmative votes.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Unknown ongoing ﬁscal impact on state court costs

for processing legal challenges to death sentences.

• Near-term increases in state court costs—

potentially in the tens of millions of dollars

annually—due to an acceleration of spending to

address new time lines on legal challenges to death

sentences. Savings of similar amounts in future

years.

• Potential state prison savings that could be in the

tens of millions of dollars annually.

For the full text of Proposition 66, see page 212. Title and Summary / Analysis

105

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

legal representation. These attorneys must meet

qualiﬁcations established by the Judicial Council

(the governing and policymaking body of the judicial

branch). Some of these attorneys are employed by

state agencies—speciﬁcally, the Ofﬁce of the State

Public Defender or the Habeas Corpus Resource

Center. The remainder are private attorneys who

are paid by the California Supreme Court. Different

attorneys generally are appointed to represent

individuals in direct appeals and habeas corpus

petitions.

State Incurs Legal Challenge Costs. The state pays

for the California Supreme Court to hear these legal

challenges and for attorneys to represent condemned

inmates. The state also pays for the attorneys

employed by the state Department of Justice who

seek to uphold death sentences while cases are being

challenged in the courts. In total, the state currently

spends about $55 million annually on the legal

challenges to death sentences.

Legal Challenges Can Take a Couple of Decades. Of the

930 individuals who have received a death sentence

since 1978, 15 have been executed, 103 have died

prior to being executed, 64 have had their sentences

reduced by the courts, and 748 are in state prison

with death sentences. The vast majority of the

748 condemned inmates are at various stages of

the direct appeal or habeas corpus petition process.

These legal challenges—measured from when the

individual receives a death sentence to when the

individual has completed all state and federal legal

challenge proceedings—can take a couple of decades

to complete in California due to various factors. For

example, condemned inmates can spend signiﬁcant

amounts of time waiting for the California Supreme

Court to appoint attorneys to represent them. As

of April 2016, 49 individuals were waiting for

attorneys to be appointed for their direct appeals

and 360 individuals were waiting for attorneys to

be appointed for their habeas corpus petitions. In

addition, condemned inmates can spend a signiﬁcant

amount of time waiting for their cases to be heard by

the courts. As of April 2016, an estimated 337 direct

appeals and 263 state habeas corpus petitions were

pending in the California Supreme Court.

Implementation of the Death Penalty

Housing of Condemned Inmates. Condemned male

inmates generally are required to be housed at

San Quentin State Prison (on death row), while

condemned female inmates are housed at the Central

California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla. The

state currently has various security regulations and

procedures that result in increased security costs for

these inmates. For example, inmates under a death

sentence generally are handcuffed and escorted at all

times by one or two ofﬁcers while outside their cells.

In addition, unlike most inmates, condemned inmates

are currently required to be placed in separate cells.

Executions Currently Halted by Courts. The state

uses lethal injection to execute condemned

inmates. However, because of different legal issues

surrounding the state’s lethal injection procedures,

executions have not taken place since 2006. For

example, the courts ruled that the state did not

follow the administrative procedures speciﬁed in

the Administrative Procedures Act when it revised

its execution regulations in 2010. These procedures

require state agencies to engage in certain activities

to provide the public with a meaningful opportunity to

participate in the process of writing state regulations.

Draft lethal injection regulations have been developed

and are currently undergoing public review.

PROPOSAL

This measure seeks to shorten the time that the legal

challenges to death sentences take. Speciﬁcally,

it (1) requires that habeas corpus petitions ﬁrst be

heard in the trial courts, (2) places time limits on

legal challenges to death sentences, (3) changes

the process for appointing attorneys to represent

condemned inmates, and (4) makes various other

changes. (There is another measure on this ballot—

Proposition 62—that also relates to the death penalty.

Proposition 62 would eliminate the death penalty for

ﬁrst degree murder.)

Requires Habeas Corpus Petitions

First Be Heard in Trial Courts

The measure requires that habeas corpus petitions

ﬁrst be heard in trial courts instead of the California

Supreme Court. (Direct appeals would continue to be

heard in the California Supreme Court.) Speciﬁcally,

these habeas corpus petitions would be heard by the

judge who handled the original murder trial unless

good cause is shown for another judge or court to

hear the petition. The measure requires trial courts

to explain in writing their decision on each petition,

which could be appealed to the Courts of Appeal.

The decisions made by the Courts of Appeal could

then be appealed to the California Supreme Court.

The measure allows the California Supreme Court to

transfer any habeas corpus petitions currently pending

before it to the trial courts.

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

106

Title and Summary / Analysis

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

106

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Places Time Limits on

Legal Challenges to Death Sentences

Requires Completion of Direct Appeal and Habeas

Corpus Petition Process Within Five Years. The measure

requires that the direct appeal and the habeas corpus

petition process be completed within ﬁve years of

the death sentence. The measure also requires the

Judicial Council to revise its rules to help ensure

that direct appeals and habeas corpus petitions

are completed within this time frame. The ﬁve-year

requirement would apply to new legal challenges,

as well as those currently pending in court. For

challenges currently pending, the measure requires

that they be completed within ﬁve years from when

Judicial Council adopts revised rules. If the process

takes more than ﬁve years, victims or their attorneys

could request a court order to address the delay.

Requires Filing of Habeas Corpus Petitions Within One

Year of Attorney Appointment. The measure requires

that attorneys appointed to represent condemned

inmates in habeas corpus petitions ﬁle the petition

with the trial courts within one year of their

appointment. The trial court generally would then

have one year to make a decision on the petition. If a

petition is not ﬁled within this time period, the trial

court must dismiss the petition unless it determines

that the defendant is likely either innocent or not

eligible for the death sentence.

Places Other Limitations. In order to help meet the

above time frames, the measure places other limits

on legal challenges to death sentences. For example,

the measure does not allow additional habeas corpus

petitions to be ﬁled after the ﬁrst petition is ﬁled,

except in those cases where the court ﬁnds that the

defendant is likely either innocent or not eligible for

the death sentence.

Changes Process for Appointing Attorneys

The measure requires the Judicial Council and the

California Supreme Court to consider changing the

qualiﬁcations that attorneys representing condemned

inmates must meet. According to the measure,

these qualiﬁcations should (1) ensure competent

representation and (2) expand the number of

attorneys that can represent condemned inmates so

that legal challenges to death sentences are heard

in a timely manner. The measure also requires trial

courts—rather than the California Supreme Court—to

appoint attorneys for habeas corpus petitions.

In addition, the measure changes how attorneys

are appointed for direct appeals under certain

circumstances. Currently, the California Supreme

Court appoints attorneys from a list of qualiﬁed

attorneys it maintains. Under the measure, certain

attorneys could also be appointed from the lists of

attorneys maintained by the Courts of Appeal for

non-death penalty cases. Speciﬁcally, those attorneys

who (1) are qualiﬁed for appointment to the most

serious non-death penalty appeals and (2) meet the

qualiﬁcations adopted by the Judicial Council for

appointment to death penalty cases would be required

to accept appointment to direct appeals if they want

to remain on the Courts of Appeal’s appointment lists.

Makes Other Changes

Habeas Corpus Resources Center Operations. The

measure eliminates the Habeas Corpus Resources

Center’s ﬁve-member board of directors and requires

the California Supreme Court to oversee the center.

The measure also requires that the center’s attorneys

be paid at the same level as attorneys at the Ofﬁce of

the State Public Defender, as well as limits its legal

activities.

Inmate Work and Payments to Victims of Crime

Requirements. Current state law generally requires

that inmates work while they are in prison. State

prison regulations allow for some exceptions to these

requirements, such as for inmates who pose too great

a security risk to participate in work programs. In

addition, inmates may be required by the courts to

make payments to victims of crime. Up to 50 percent

of any money inmates receive is used to pay these

debts. This measure speciﬁes that every person under

a sentence of death must work while in state prison,

subject to state regulations. Because the measure

does not change state regulations, existing prison

practices related to inmate work requirements would

not necessarily be changed. In addition, the measure

requires that 70 percent of any money condemned

inmates receive be used to pay any debts owed to

victims.

Enforcement of Death Sentence. The measure allows

the state to house condemned inmates in any prison.

The measure also exempts the state’s execution

procedures from the Administrative Procedures Act.

In addition, the measure makes various changes

regarding the method of execution used by the

state. For example, legal challenges to the method

could only be heard in the court that imposed the

death sentence. In addition, if such challenges were

successful, the measure requires the trial court to

order a valid method of execution. In cases where

federal court orders prevent the state from using a

given method of execution, the state prisons would be

required to develop a method of execution that meets

For the full text of Proposition 66, see page 212. Title and Summary / Analysis

107

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

federal requirements within 90 days. Finally, the

measure exempts various health care professionals

that assist with executions from certain state laws

and disciplinary actions by licensing agencies, if

those actions are imposed as a result of assisting with

executions.

FISCAL EFFECTS

State Court Costs

Impact on Cost Per Legal Challenge Uncertain. The ﬁscal

impact of the measure on state court-related costs of

each legal challenge to a death sentence is uncertain.

This is because the actual cost could vary signiﬁcantly

depending on four key factors: (1) the complexity

of the legal challenges ﬁled, (2) how state courts

address existing and new legal challenges, (3) the

availability of attorneys to represent condemned

inmates, and (4) whether additional attorneys will be

needed to process each legal challenge.

On the one hand, the measure could reduce the cost

of each legal challenge. For example, the requirement

that each challenge generally be completed in ﬁve

years, as well as the limits on the number of habeas

corpus petitions that can be ﬁled, could result in

the ﬁling of fewer, shorter legal documents. Such a

change could result in each legal challenge taking

less time and state resources to process.

On the other hand, some of the measure’s provisions

could increase state costs for each legal challenge.

For example, the additional layers of review required

for a habeas corpus petition could result in additional

time and resources for the courts to process each

legal challenge. In addition, there could be additional

attorney costs if the state determines that a new

attorney must be appointed when a habeas corpus

petition ruling by the trial courts is appealed to the

Courts of Appeal.

In view of the above, the ongoing annual ﬁscal

impact of the measure on state costs related to legal

challenges to death sentences is unknown.

Near-Term Annual Cost Increases From Accelerated

Spending on Existing Cases. Regardless of how the

measure affects the cost of each legal challenge,

the measure would accelerate the amount the state

spends on legal challenges to death sentences. This is

because the state would incur annual cost increases

in the near term to process hundreds of pending legal

challenges within the time limits speciﬁed in the

measure. The state would save similar amounts in

future years as some or all of these costs would have

otherwise occurred over a much longer term absent

this measure. Given the signiﬁcant number of pending

cases that would need to be addressed, the actual

amount and duration of these accelerated costs in the

near term is unknown. It is possible, however, that

such costs could be in the tens of millions of dollars

annually for many years.

State Prisons

To the extent that the state changes the way it

houses condemned inmates, the measure could

result in state prison savings. For example, if male

inmates were transferred to other prisons instead

of being housed in single cells at San Quentin, it

could reduce the cost of housing and supervising

these inmates. In addition, to the extent the measure

resulted in additional executions that reduced the

number of condemned inmates, the state would also

experience additional savings. In total, such savings

could potentially reach the tens of millions of dollars

annually.

Other Fiscal Effects

To the extent that the changes in this measure have

an effect on the incidence of murder in California

or how often prosecutors seek the death penalty in

murder trials, the measure could affect state and

local government expenditures. The resulting ﬁscal

impact, if any, is unknown and cannot be estimated.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

108

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 66

★

PROPOSITION

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Prop. 66 is a poorly-written and COSTLY EXPERIMENT

that would INCREASE CALIFORNIA’S RISK OF

EXECUTING AN INNOCENT PERSON, add new layers of

government bureaucracy and create even more legal delays

in death penalty cases.

**Read the measure for yourself: According to the state’s

nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce, this measure could

cost taxpayers TENS of MILLIONS of DOLLARS.

Prop. 66 is not real reform. Here’s what EXPERTS SAY

Prop. 66 WOULD ACTUALLY DO:

• INCREASE the chance that California executes an

innocent person

• INCREASE TAXPAYER FUNDED legal defense for death

row inmates

• REQUIRE the state to hire and pay for hundreds of new

lawyers

• LEAD TO CONSTRUCTION of new TAXPAYER FUNDED

DEATH ROW facilities

• CLOG county courts, forcing death penalty cases on

inexperienced judges

• Lead to EXPENSIVE LITIGATION by lawyers who will

challenge a series of confusing provisions

Prop. 66 is a perfect example of SPECIAL INTEREST

GROUPS abusing their power and pushing an agenda while

claiming to seek reform. Look who’s behind Prop. 66: the

prison guards’ union which has an interest in funneling

more money into the prison system and opportunistic

politicians using the initiative to advance their careers.

Experts agree: Prop. 66 is a POORLY WRITTEN,

CONFUSING initiative that will only add MORE DELAY and

MORE COSTS to California’s death penalty.

Remember, MORE THAN 150 INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE

BEEN SENTENCED TO DEATH, and some have been

executed because of poorly written laws like this.

Californians deserve real reform. Prop. 66 is not the answer.

www.NOonCAProp66.org

GIL GARCETTI, District Attorney

Los Angeles County, 1992–2000

JUDGE LADORIS CORDELL, (Retired)

Santa Clara County Superior Court

HELEN HUTCHISON, President

League of Women Voters of California

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 66

★

California’s elected law enforcement leaders, police

ofﬁcers, frontline prosecutors, and the families of murder

victims ask you to REFORM the California death penalty

system by voting YES ON PROPOSITION 66!

We agree California’s current death penalty system is

broken. The most heinous criminals sit on death row for

30 years, with endless appeals delaying justice and costing

taxpayers hundreds of millions.

It does not need to be this way.

The solution is to MEND, NOT END, California’s death penalty.

The solution is YES on PROPOSITION 66.

Proposition 66 was written to speed up the death penalty

appeals system while ensuring that no innocent person is

ever executed.

Proposition 66 means the worst of the worst killers receive

the strongest sentence.

Prop. 66 brings closure to the families of victims.

Proposition 66 protects public safety—these brutal killers

have no chance of ever being in society again.

Prop. 66 saves taxpayers money, because heinous

criminals will no longer be sitting on death row at taxpayer

expense for 30+ years.

Proposition 66 was written by frontline death penalty

prosecutors who know the system inside and out. They know

how the system is broken, and they know how to ﬁx it. It may

sound complicated, but the reforms are actually quite simple.

HERE’S WHAT PROPOSITION 66 DOES:

1. All state appeals should be limited to 5 years.

2. Every murderer sentenced to death will have their special

appeals lawyer assigned immediately. Currently, it can be

ﬁve years or more before they are even assigned a lawyer.

3. The pool of available lawyers to handle these appeals will

be expanded.

4. The trial courts who handled the death penalty trials and

know them best will deal with the initial appeals.

5. The State Supreme Court will be empowered to oversee

the system and ensure appeals are expedited while

protecting the rights of the accused.

6. The State Corrections Department (Prisons) will reform

death row housing; taking away special privileges from

these brutal killers and saving millions.

Together, these reforms will save California taxpayers over

$30,000,000 annually, according to former California

Finance Director Mike Genest, while making our death

penalty system work again.

WE NEED A FUNCTIONING DEATH PENALTY SYSTEM IN

CALIFORNIA

Death sentences are issued rarely and judiciously, and only

against the very worst murderers.

To be eligible for the death penalty in California, you have to

be guilty of ﬁrst-degree murder with “special circumstances.”

These special circumstances include, in part:

• Murderers who raped/tortured their victims.

• Child killers.

• Multiple murderers/serial killers.

• Murders committed by terrorists; as part of a hate-crime;

or killing a police ofﬁcer.

There are nearly 2,000 murders in California annually. Only

about 15 death penalty sentences are imposed.

But when these horrible crimes occur, and a jury

unanimously ﬁnds a criminal guilty and separately,

unanimously recommends death, the appeals should be

heard within ﬁve years, and the killer executed.

Help us protect California, provide closure to victims, and

save taxpayers millions.

Visit www.NoProp62YesProp66.com for more information.

Then join law enforcement and families of victims and vote

YES ON PROPOSITION 66!

JACKIE LACEY, District Attorney of Los Angeles County

KERMIT ALEXANDER, Family Member of Multiple Homicide

Victims

SHAWN WELCH, President

Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs Association

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

109

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 66

★

DEATH PENALTY. PROCEDURES.

INITIATIVE STATUTE.

PROPOSITION

Prop. 66 WASTES TENS OF MILLIONS OF TAXPAYER

DOLLARS.

Evidence shows MORE THAN 150 INNOCENT PEOPLE

HAVE BEEN SENTENCED TO DEATH, and some have been

executed because of poorly written laws like this one.

Prop. 66 is so confusing and poorly written that we don’t

know all of its consequences. We do know this: it will

add more layers of government bureaucracy causing more

delays, cost taxpayers money, and increase California’s risk

of executing an innocent person.

Experts agree: Prop. 66 is DEEPLY FLAWED.

** PROP. 66 COULD INCREASE TAXPAYER COSTS BY

MILLIONS.

According to nonpartisan analysis, Prop. 66 could cost

“tens of millions of dollars annually” with “unknown”

costs beyond that. Read the LAO’s report posted at

www.No0nCAProp66.org/cost.

Experts say Prop. 66 will:

• INCREASE PRISON SPENDING while schools, social

services, and other priorities suffer.

• INCREASE TAXPAYER-FUNDED legal defense for death

row inmates, requiring the state to hire as many as 400

new taxpayer-funded attorneys.

• LEAD TO CONSTRUCTION of new TAXPAYER-FUNDED

DEATH ROW facilities. This initiative authorizes the state

to house death row inmates in new prisons, anywhere in

California.

• Lead to EXPENSIVE LITIGATION by lawyers who will

challenge a series of poorly written provisions.

“Prop. 66 is so ﬂawed that it’s impossible to know for sure

all the hidden costs it will inﬂict on California taxpayers.”—

John Van de Kamp, former Attorney General of California.

** PROP. 66 WOULD INCREASE CALIFORNIA’S RISK OF

EXECUTING AN INNOCENT PERSON.

Instead of making sure everyone gets a fair trial with all the

evidence presented, this measure REMOVES IMPORTANT

LEGAL SAFEGUARDS and could easily lead to fatal mistakes.

This measure is modeled after laws from states like

Texas, where authorities have executed innocent people.

People like Cameron Willingham and Carlos De Luna, both

executed in Texas.

Experts now say they were innocent.

Prop. 66 will:

• LIMIT the ability to present new evidence of innocence

in court.

• LEAVE people who can’t afford a good attorney

vulnerable to mistakes.

• CLOG local courts by moving death penalty cases there,

adding new layers of bureaucracy and placing high

proﬁle cases in the hands of inexperienced judges and

attorneys. This would lead to costly mistakes.

“If someone’s executed and later found innocent, we can’t

go back.”—Judge LaDoris Cordell, Santa Clara (retired).

** A CONFUSING AND POORLY WRITTEN INITIATIVE

THAT WILL ONLY CAUSE MORE DELAY.

Prop. 66 is a misguided experiment that asks taxpayers

to increase the costs of our justice and prison systems by

MILLIONS to enact poorly-written reforms that would put

California at risk.

SF Weekly stated, “Combing through the initiative’s

16 pages is like looking through the ﬁrst draft of an

undergraduate paper. The wording is vague, unfocused and

feels tossed off.”

Instead of adding new layers of government bureaucracy

and increasing costs, we deserve real reform of our justice

system. Prop. 66 is not the answer.

“Instead of reckless, costly changes to our prison system,

we need smart investments that are proven to reduce crime

and serve victims.”—Dionne Wilson, widow of police ofﬁcer

killed in the line of duty.

JEANNE WOODFORD, Warden

California’s Death Row prison, 1999–2004

FRANCISCO CARRILLO JR., Innocent man wrongfully

convicted in Los Angeles County

HON. ANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA, Mayor

City of Los Angeles, 2005–2013

Proposition 66 was carefully written by California’s leading

criminal prosecutors, the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation

and other top legal experts—people who know from

experience what’s needed to MEND, NOT END our state’s

broken death penalty system.

The anti-death penalty extremists opposing Proposition 66

know it ﬁxes the system, and will say anything to defeat it.

Don’t be fooled.

Proposition 66 reforms the death penalty so the system

is fair to both defendants and the families of victims.

Defendants now wait ﬁve years just to be assigned a lawyer,

delaying justice, hurting their appeals, and preventing

closure for the victims’ families. Proposition 66 ﬁxes this by

streamlining the process to ensure justice for all.

Under the current system, California’s most brutal killers—

serial killers, mass murderers, child killers, and murderers

who rape and torture their victims—linger on death row

until they die of old age, with taxpayers paying for their

meals, healthcare, privileges and endless legal appeals.

By reforming the system, Proposition 66 will save taxpayers

over $30 million a year, according to former California

Finance Director Mike Genest. Instead of dragging on for

decades and costing millions, death row killers will have

ﬁve to ten years to have their appeals heard, ample time to

ensure justice is evenly applied while guaranteeing that no

innocent person is wrongly executed.

Ensure justice by voting “YES” on Proposition 66—to

MEND, NOT END the death penalty.

Learn more at www.NoProp62YesProp66.com.

ANNE MARIE SCHUBERT, District Attorney of Sacramento

County

SANDY FRIEND, Mother of Murder Victim

CHUCK ALEXANDER, President

California Correctional Peace Ofﬁcers Association

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 66

★

110

Title and Summary / Analysis

PROPOSITION

BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC BAGS.

REFERENDUM.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY

PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND

Carryout Bag Usage. Stores typically provide their

customers with bags to carry out the items they buy.

One type of bag commonly provided is the “single-

use plastic carryout bag,” which refers to a thin

plastic bag used at checkout that is not intended for

continued reuse. In contrast, “reusable plastic bags”

are thicker and sturdier so that they can be reused

many times. Many stores also provide single-use

paper bags. Stores frequently provide single-use paper

and plastic carryout bags to customers for free, and

some stores offer reusable bags for sale. Each year,

roughly 15 billion single-use plastic carryout bags

are provided to customers in California (an average of

about 400 bags per Californian).

Many Local Governments Restrict Single-Use Carryout

Bags. Many cities and counties in California have

adopted local laws in recent years restricting or

banning single-use carryout bags. These local laws

have been implemented due to concerns about how

the use of such bags can impact the environment.

For example, plastic bags contribute to litter and can

end up in waterways. In addition, plastic bags can

be difﬁcult to recycle because they can get tangled

in recycling machines. Most of these local laws ban

single-use plastic carryout bags at grocery stores,

convenience stores, pharmacies, and liquor stores.

They also usually require the store to charge at least

10 cents for the sale of any carryout bag. Stores are

allowed to keep the resulting revenue. As of June

2016, there were local carryout bag laws in about

150 cities and counties—covering about 40 percent

of California’s population—mostly in areas within

coastal counties.

Passage of Statewide Carryout Bag Law. In 2014,

the Legislature passed and the Governor signed a

statewide carryout bag law, Senate Bill (SB) 270.

As described in more detail below, the law prohibits

certain stores from providing single-use plastic

carryout bags. It also requires these stores to charge

customers for any other carryout bag provided at

checkout.

PROPOSAL

Under the State Constitution, a new state law can be

placed before voters as a referendum to determine

whether the law can go into effect. This proposition

is a referendum on SB 270. Below, we describe what

a “yes” and “no” vote would mean for this measure,

its major provisions, and how this measure could be

affected by another proposition on this ballot.

What a “Yes” and “No” Vote Mean

“Yes” Vote Upholds SB 270. Certain stores would be

prohibited from providing single-use plastic carryout

bags and generally required to charge at least

10 cents for other carryout bags. These requirements

would apply only to cities and counties that did not

already have their own single-use carryout bag laws as

of the fall of 2014.

“No” Vote Rejects SB 270. A store could continue to

provide single-use plastic carryout bags and other

bags free of charge unless it is covered by a local law

that restricts the use of such bags.

Main Provisions of Measure

Prohibits Single-Use Plastic Carryout Bags. This

measure prohibits most grocery stores, convenience

stores, large pharmacies, and liquor stores in the

state from providing single-use plastic carryout bags.

This provision does not apply to plastic bags used

for certain purposes—such as bags for unwrapped

produce.

Creates New Standards for Reusable Plastic Carryout

Bags. This measure also creates new standards

for the material content and durability of reusable

plastic carryout bags. The California Department of

Resources Recovery and Recycling (CalRecycle) would

be responsible for ensuring that bag manufacturers

A “Yes” vote approves, and a “No” vote rejects, a

statute that:

• Prohibits grocery and certain other retail stores

from providing single-use plastic or paper carryout

bags to customers at point of sale.

• Permits sale of recycled paper bags and reusable

bags to customers, at a minimum price of 10 cents

per bag.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:

• Relatively small ﬁscal effects on state and local

governments. Minor increase of less than a

million dollars annually for state administrative

costs, offset by fees. Possible minor savings to

local governments from reduced litter and waste

management costs.

For the full text of Proposition 67, see page 218. Title and Summary / Analysis

111

BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC BAGS.

REFERENDUM.

PROPOSITION

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

CONTINUED

meet these requirements. The measure also deﬁnes

standards for other types of carryout bags.

Requires Charge for Other Carryout Bags. This measure

generally requires a store to charge at least 10 cents

for any carryout bag that it provides to consumers

at checkout. This charge would not apply to bags

used for certain purposes—such as bags used for

prescription medicines. In addition, certain low-

income customers would not have to pay this charge.

Under the measure, stores would retain the revenue

from the sale of the bags. They could use the

proceeds to cover the costs of providing carryout bags,

complying with the measure, and educational efforts

to encourage the use of reusable bags.

Another Proposition on This Ballot Could Affect

Implementation of This Measure

This ballot includes another measure—

Proposition 65—that could direct revenue from

carryout bag sales to the state if approved by voters.

Speciﬁcally, Proposition 65 requires that revenue

collected from a state law to ban certain bags and

charge fees for other bags (like SB 270 does) would

have to be sent to a new state fund to support various

environmental programs.

If both measures pass,

the use of the revenues

from carryout bag sales

would depend on which

measure receives more

votes. Figure 1 shows

how the major provisions

of SB 270 would be

implemented differently

depending on different

voter decisions on the two

measures. Speciﬁcally,

if Proposition 67 (this

referendum on SB 270)

gets more “yes” votes, the

revenue would be kept

by stores for speciﬁed

purposes. However, if

Proposition 65 (initiative)

gets more “yes” votes,

the revenue would be

used for environmental

programs. We note that

Proposition 65 includes

a provision that could

be interpreted by the

courts as preventing

SB 270 from going

into effect at all should

both measures pass and Proposition 65 gets more

“yes” votes. However, this analysis assumes that the

other provisions of SB 270 not related to the use of

revenues—such as the requirement to ban single-use

plastic carryout bags and charge for other bags—

would still be implemented.

FISCAL EFFECTS

Minor State and Local Fiscal Effects. This measure

would have relatively small ﬁscal effects on state

and local governments. Speciﬁcally, the measure

would result in a minor increase of less than a million

dollars annually in state costs for CalRecycle to

ensure that bag manufacturers meet the new reusable

plastic bags requirements. These costs would be

offset by fees charged to makers of these bags. The

measure could also result in other ﬁscal effects—such

as minor savings to local governments from reduced

litter cleanup and waste management costs.

Visit http://www.sos.ca.gov/measure-contributions

for a list of committees primarily formed to support

or oppose this measure. Visit http://www.fppc.ca.gov/

transparency/top-contributors/nov-16-gen-v2.html

to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

Figure 1

Implementation of Referendum Would

Be Affected by Outcome of Proposition 65

Proposition 67

(SB 270 Referendum)

Passes

Proposition 65

(Initiative)

Passes

Statewide carryout bag law in effect.

Use of revenues from sale of

carryout bags depends on which

proposition gets more votes:

• If more “yes” votes for

referendum, revenue is kept by

stores.

• If more “yes” votes for initiative,

revenue goes to state for

environmental programs.

No statewide carryout bag law.

Revenue from any future statewide

law similar to SB 270 would be

used for environmental programs.

No statewide carryout bag law.Statewide carryout bag law in effect

and revenue from the sale of

carryout bags is kept by stores.

Proposition 67

(SB 270 Referendum)

Fails

Proposition 65

(Initiative)

Fails

Alternatively, a provision of Proposition 65 could be interpreted by the courts as preventing Senate Bill (SB) 270 from

going into effect at all.

112

Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency.

PROPOSITION

BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC BAGS.

REFERENDUM.

★

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 67

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 67

★

WE ALL WANT TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT,

BUT PROP. 67 IS A FRAUD.

It is a $300 million per year HIDDEN BAG TAX on

California consumers who will be forced to pay a

minimum 10 cents for every paper and thick plastic

grocery bag they are given at checkout.

AND NOT ONE PENNY WILL GO TO THE

ENVIRONMENT.

Instead, the Legislature gave all $300 million in new

bag tax revenue to grocers as extra proﬁt.

THAT’S $300 MILLION EVERY YEAR!

STOP THE SPECIAL INTEREST SWEETHEART

DEAL.

In a sweetheart deal brokered by special interest

lobbyists, Proposition 67 will grow proﬁts for grocery

stores by up to $300 million a year.

Big grocery store chains get to keep ALL of the new

tax revenue.

Grocers will grow $300 million richer every year on

the backs of consumers.

DON’T BE FOOLED: NOT ONE PENNY OF THE BAG

BAN TAX GOES TO THE ENVIRONMENT.

The Legislature could have dedicated the new

tax revenue to protect the environment, but their

goal wasn’t to protect the environment . . . IT

WAS ABOUT GROWING PROFITS FOR GROCERY

STORES AND LABOR UNIONS.

The measure SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES GROCERS

TO KEEP ALL OF THE NEW TAX AS PROFIT!

STOP THE SWEETHEART DEAL AND HIDDEN BAG

TAX.

VOTE NO ON PROP. 67.

DOROTHY ROTHROCK, President

California Manufacturers & Technology Association

THOMAS HUDSON, Executive Director

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

YES on 67 to REDUCE LITTER, PROTECT OUR

OCEAN and WILDLIFE, and REDUCE CLEAN-UP

COSTS.

Single-use plastic shopping bags create some of the

most visible litter that blows into our parks, trees

and neighborhoods, and washes into our rivers, lakes

and ocean. A YES vote will help keep discarded

plastic bags out of our mountains, valleys, beaches

and communities, and keep them beautiful. The law

also will save our state and local communities tens of

millions of dollars in litter clean-up costs.

PLASTIC BAGS ARE A DEADLY THREAT TO

WILDLIFE.

“Plastic bags harm wildlife every day. Sea turtles,

sea otters, seals, ﬁsh and birds are tangled by

plastic bags; some mistake bags for food, ﬁll

their stomachs with plastics and die of starvation.

YES on 67 is a common-sense solution to reduce

plastic in our ocean, lakes and streams, and

protect wildlife.”—Julie Packard, Executive Director,

Monterey Bay Aquarium

YES on 67 CONTINUES CALIFORNIA’S SUCCESS

IN PHASING OUT PLASTIC BAGS.

A YES vote will keep in place a law passed by the

Legislature and signed by the Governor that will

stop the distribution of wasteful single-use plastic

shopping bags. This law has strong support from

organizations that are committed to protecting the

ocean, wildlife, consumers, and small businesses.

It will be fully implemented statewide once voters

approve Prop. 67.

Many local communities are already phasing out

plastic bags. In fact, nearly 150 local cities and

counties have banned single-use plastic bags. These

laws have already been a success; some communities

have seen a nearly 90 percent reduction in single-use

bags, as well as strong support from consumers.

OUT-OF-STATE PLASTIC BAG COMPANIES ARE

OPPOSING CALIFORNIA’S PROGRESS.

Opposition to this law is funded by four large out-

of-state plastic bag companies. They don’t want

California to take leadership on plastic bag waste,

and are trying to defeat this measure to protect their

proﬁts.

Don’t believe their false claims. We should give

California’s plastic bag law a chance to work,

especially with so much success already at the local

level.

YES on 67 to PROTECT CALIFORNIA’S PLASTIC

BAG LITTER REDUCTION LAW.

JULIE PACKARD, Executive Director

Monterey Bay Aquarium

JOHN LAIRD, Chairperson

California Ocean Protection Council

SCOTT SMITHLINE, Director

California Department of Resources Recycling and

Recovery

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors, and have not been checked for accuracy by any ofﬁcial agency. Arguments

113

BAN ON SINGLE-USE PLASTIC BAGS.

REFERENDUM.

PROPOSITION

★

ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 67

★

DON’T BE FOOLED BY PROP. 67.

It is a $300 million per year HIDDEN TAX INCREASE

on California consumers who will be forced to pay a

minimum 10 cents for every paper and thick plastic

grocery bag they are given at the checkout.

And not one penny goes to the environment.

Instead, the Legislature gave all $300 million in new

tax revenue to grocers as extra proﬁt.

Stop the sweetheart special interest deal . . . VOTE

NO ON PROP. 67.

STOP THE BAG TAX

Prop. 67 bans the use of plastic retail bags and

REQUIRES grocers to charge and keep a minimum

10 cent tax on every paper or thicker plastic reusable

bag provided at checkout.

Consumers will pay $300 million more every year

just to use shopping bags grocery stores used to

provide for free.

TAX REVENUE GOES TO GROCERS, SPECIAL

INTERESTS

Proposition 67 will grow proﬁts for grocery stores by

up to $300 million a year.

Big grocery store chains get to keep all of the tax

revenue.

Grocers will grow $300 million richer on the backs of

consumers.

NOT ONE PENNY OF THE BAG TAX GOES TO HELP

THE ENVIRONMENT

The Legislature could have dedicated the new tax

revenue to protect the environment, but it did not.

Instead, it REQUIRED grocery stores to keep the new

bag tax revenue.

STOP THE SPECIAL INTEREST BAG TAX DEAL

Prop. 67 is a deal cooked up by special interest

lobbyists in Sacramento to grow proﬁts for grocery

stores.

The Legislature passed SB 270 and hidden in the

ﬁne print is a NEW BAG TAX on consumers—a

minimum 10 cents on every paper and thick plastic

reusable bag provided to shoppers—all dedicated to

grocer proﬁts.

STOP THE SWEETHEART DEAL AND HIDDEN BAG

TAX

VOTE NO ON PROP. 67.

DOROTHY ROTHROCK, President

California Manufacturers & Technology Association

THOMAS HUDSON, Executive Director

California Taxpayer Protection Committee

DEBORAH HOWARD, Executive Director

California Senior Advocates League

A YES vote on 67 conﬁrms that California can move

forward with its ban on plastic grocery bags. It’s that

simple.

Don’t be fooled by the deceptive campaign waged

by plastic bag corporations from Texas and South

Carolina, who claim they are looking out for our

environment. Phasing out single-use plastic bags

brings major beneﬁts to California.

These bags kill wildlife, pollute our oceans, ruin

recycling machines, and cause litter that is expensive

to clean up.

Many local communities across California have

already phased out plastic grocery bags, and a YES

vote would continue this progress.

“Don’t buy the industry spin! . . . shoppers can

avoid the 10-cent fee on paper or reusable plastic

bags simply by bringing their own.”—The Los Angeles

Times editorial board

“Across California, small local grocery stores like

ours support a YES vote on Prop. 67. In our local

community, we have a ban on single-use plastic bags

that is working well. Our customers are bringing their

own reusable bags, and are happy to do their part

to reduce unneeded plastic litter. It’s good for small

businesses and consumers.”—Roberta Cruz,

La Fruteria Produce

“Californians are smarter than the plastic bag

makers, especially those from out of state, seem to

think.”—Sacramento Bee Editorial Board

Vote YES on 67 to protect California’s success in

phasing out plastic bag litter and waste.

DOLORES HUERTA, Co-Founder

United Farm Workers

SAM LICCARDO, Mayor

City of San Jose

MARY LUÉVANO, Commissioner

California Coastal Commission

★

REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 67

★

114

Overview of State Bond Debt

OVERVIEW OF STATE BOND DEBT

PREPARED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

This section describes the state’s

bond debt. It also discusses how

Proposition 51—the $9 billion school

bond proposal—would affect state bond

costs.

Background

What Are Bonds? Bonds are a way that

governments and companies borrow

money. The state government uses

bonds primarily to pay for the planning,

construction, and renovation of

infrastructure projects such as bridges,

dams, prisons, parks, schools, and

ofﬁce buildings. The state sells bonds to

investors to receive “up-front” funding

for these projects and then repays the

investors, with interest, over a period of

time.

Why Are Bonds Used? One reason for

issuing bonds is that the large costs of

infrastructure projects can be difﬁcult

to pay for all at once. Additionally,

infrastructure typically provides services

over many years. Thus, it is reasonable

for people, both currently and in the

future, to help pay for these projects.

What Are the Main Types of Bonds? The

two main types of bonds used by the

state are general obligation bonds and

revenue bonds. The state repays general

obligation bonds using the state General

Fund. The General Fund is the state’s

main operating account, which it uses to

pay for education, prisons, health care,

and other services. The General Fund

is supported primarily by income and

sales tax revenues. Under the California

Constitution, state general obligation

bonds must be approved by voters.

In contrast, the state repays revenue

bonds typically using revenue from the

fees or other charges paid by the users

of the project (such as from bridge tolls).

In other cases, certain revenue bonds are

paid using the state General Fund. Under

current law, state revenue bonds do not

require voter approval. (We note that

Proposition 53, described earlier in this

voter guide, would require state revenue

bonds totaling more than $2 billion for a

single state project to receive statewide

voter approval.)

What Are the Costs of Bond Financing?

After selling bonds, the state makes

annual payments until the bonds are paid

off. The annual cost of repaying bonds

depends primarily on the interest rate

and the time period over which the bonds

have to be repaid. The state often makes

bond payments over a 30-year period

(similar to many homeowners making

payments on their mortgages). Assuming

an interest rate of 5 percent, for each

$1 borrowed the state would pay close

to $2 over a typical 30-year repayment

period. Of that $2 amount, $1 would go

toward repaying the amount borrowed

(the principal) and close to $1 for

interest. However, because the repayment

for each bond is spread over the entire

30-year period, the cost after adjusting

for inﬂation is much less—about $1.30

for each $1 borrowed.

Infrastructure Bonds

and the State Budget

Amount of General Fund Debt. The state

has about $85 billion of General

Fund-supported infrastructure bonds

outstanding—that is, bonds on which

it is making principal and interest

payments. In addition, the voters and

the Legislature have approved about

$31 billion of General Fund-supported

bonds that have not yet been sold. Most

of these bonds are expected to be sold in

the coming years as additional projects

need funding. In 2015–16, the General

Overview of State Bond Debt

115

OVERVIEW OF STATE BOND DEBT

CONTINUED

Fund’s infrastructure bond repayments

totaled close to $6 billion.

This Election’s Impact on Debt Payments.

The school bond proposal on this ballot

(Proposition 51) would allow the state to

borrow an additional $9 billion by selling

general obligation bonds to investors.

The amount needed to pay the principal

and interest on these bonds, also known

as the debt service, would depend on

the speciﬁc details of the bond sales.

We assume an interest rate of 5 percent,

that the bonds would be issued over

a ﬁve-year period, and that the bonds

would be repaid over 30 years. Based

on these assumptions, the estimated

average annual General Fund cost would

be about $500 million, about 8 percent

more than the state currently spends

from the General Fund for debt service.

We estimate that the measure would

require total debt-service payments of

about $17.6 billion over the 35-year

period during which the bonds would be

paid off.

This Election’s Impact on the Debt-Service

Ratio (DSR). One indicator of the state’s

debt situation is its DSR. This ratio

indicates the portion of the state’s annual

General Fund revenues that must be

set aside for debt-service payments on

infrastructure bonds and, therefore, are

not available for other state programs.

As shown in Figure 1, the DSR is now

about 5 percent of annual General Fund

revenues. If voters do not approve the

proposed school bond on this ballot,

we project that the state’s debt service

on already authorized bonds will likely

remain at about 5 percent over the next

several years, and decline thereafter.

If voters approve the proposed school

bond on this ballot, we project it would

increase the DSR by about one-third of

a percentage point compared to what it

would otherwise have been. The state’s

future DSR would be higher than those

shown in the ﬁgure if the state and voters

approve additional bonds in the future.

Figure 1

General Fund Debt-Service Ratio

Authorized, but Unsold

Proposed

School Bonds

Percent of General Fund Revenues Spent on Debt Service

1995–96 2000–01 2005–06 2010–11 2015–16 2020–21

Projected

Bonds Already Sold

116

List of Candidates for United States Senate

Information About Candidate Statements

In This Guide

This voter guide includes information about U.S. Senate candidates which begins on page 117 of this guide.

United States Senate candidates can buy space for their candidate statement in this voter guide. Some

candidates, however, choose not to buy space for a statement.

The candidates for U.S. Senate are:

Kamala D. Harris Democratic

Loretta L. Sanchez

Democratic

In Your Sample Ballot Booklet

(Mailed Separately From Your County Registrar)

In addition to the candidates in this guide, your ballot may include State Senate, State Assembly, and

U.S. House of Representatives candidates.

State Senate and State Assembly candidates may buy space for a candidate statement in the county sample

ballot booklets IF they agree to keep their campaign spending under a certain dollar amount described below.

• State Senate candidates may spend no more than $1,269,000 in the general election

• State Assembly candidates may spend no more than $987,000 in the general election

A list of candidates who accepted California’s voluntary campaign spending limits is available at

www.sos.ca.gov/elections/candidate-statements

California’s voluntary campaign spending limits do not apply to candidates for federal ofﬁces including

President, U.S. Senate, and the U.S. House of Representatives.

All U.S. House of Representatives candidates may buy space for a candidate statement in county sample ballot

booklets. Some candidates, however, choose not to buy space for a statement.

For the certiﬁed list of statewide candidates, go to www.sos.ca.gov/elections/candidate-statements

U.S. Presidential Candidates

Information on candidates running for President will be available on the Secretary of State’s

Voter Information Guide website. Visit www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov for more details.

Candidate Statements

117

The order of the statements was determined by randomized drawing. Statements on this page were supplied by the candidates and have not been checked for

accuracy. Each statement was voluntarily submitted and paid for by the candidate. Candidates who did not submit statements could otherwise be qualiﬁed to

appear on the ballot.

CANDIDATE STATEMENTS

UNITED STATES SENATE

Kamala D. Harris | DEMOCRATIC

I am running for the United States Senate because I believe it is time to repair the ladder

of opportunity for more Californians and more Americans. As a lifelong prosecutor, I have

always served just one client: The People of California. As District Attorney of San

Francisco and California Attorney General, I’ve proudly stood up to powerful interests on

behalf of the people and won real victories for our families. I took on violent predators,

including the transnational criminal organizations and human trafﬁckers who proﬁt from

exploiting women and children. I prosecuted polluters and big oil companies, took on the

big Wall Street banks and worked across the aisle to pass the nation’s toughest anti-

foreclosure law to protect our homeowners. As California’s United States Senator, I will

continue to ﬁght hard for the people and cut through the gridlock that pervades

Washington. I will work to create the jobs our people need by bringing home federal

dollars that will repair our crumbling water and transportation systems. I’ll ﬁght for better

schools and to give every child access to pre-kindergarten and affordable childcare. With

student loan debt crippling college graduates, I’ll ﬁght for reﬁnancing and reform that

makes college more affordable for all students. I will stand up for our veterans who

deserve quality health care and job training when they come home. I’ll defend our

environment and coast and lead the ﬁght against climate change. Please join me. Thank

you for your consideration.

4311 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 200

Los Angeles, CA 90010

Tel: (213) 221-1269

Email: [email protected]

www.KamalaHarris.org

• Serves as one of two Senators who represent California’s

interests in the United States Congress.

• Proposes and votes on new national laws.

• Votes on conﬁrming federal judges, U.S. Supreme Court

Justices, and many high-level presidential appointments

to civilian and military positions.

Loretta L. Sanchez | DEMOCRATIC

California needs a proven leader who can deliver results and tackle the full range of

economic, educational and security challenges we face today. Our next U.S. Senator must

have extensive legislative and national security experience and share the life experiences

of working people. I do, and that’s why I am the best candidate for the job. My parents

were hardworking immigrants who struggled to provide for their seven children. I worked

my way through college with the help of government and union grants, and the Anaheim

Rotary Club paid for my MBA. My parents worked hard, valued education and are the only

parents in American history to send two daughters to Congress. That’s why I have fought

passionately in Congress for 20 years for education, affordable college, healthcare reform,

immigration reform, gender equality, LGBT rights, raising the minimum wage, and

environmental protection. I’ve also demonstrated independent judgment and courage

when it mattered most: I voted against the Iraq War, the so-called Patriot Act, and the

Wall Street bailouts. As a senior member of the Armed Services and Homeland Security

Committees, I’ve worked to ensure our troops are trained and equipped to win and cared

for when they come home. I’m the only candidate with the national security experience

necessary to keep America safe from international and domestic terrorism. As your

Senator, I will ﬁght for all Californians, so together we can have a stronger and more

prosperous future. I humbly ask for your vote.

P.O. Box 6037

Santa Ana, CA 92706

Tel: (714) 774-0236

Email: [email protected]

http://loretta.org

118

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS

of 2016 to provide a comprehensive and ﬁscally responsible

approach for addressing the school facility needs for all

Californians.

SEC. 2. Section 17070.41 is added to the Education

Code, to read:

17070.41. Creation of 2016 State School Facilities

Fund.

(a) A fund is hereby established in the State Treasury, to

be known as the 2016 State School Facilities Fund. All

money in the fund, including any money deposited in that

fund from any source whatsoever, and notwithstanding

Section 13340 of the Government Code, is hereby

continuously appropriated without regard to ﬁscal years for

expenditure pursuant to this chapter.

(b) The board may apportion funds to school districts for

the purposes of this chapter, as it read on January 1, 2015,

from funds transferred to the 2016 State School Facilities

Fund from any source.

exceeding those funds on deposit in the 2016 State School

Facilities Fund, and any amount of bonds authorized by

the committee, but not yet sold by the Treasurer.

(d) The board may make disbursements pursuant to any

apportionment made from any funds in the 2016 State

School Facilities Fund, irrespective of whether there exists

at the time of the disbursement an amount in the 2016

State School Facilities Fund sufﬁcient to permit payment

in full of all apportionments previously made. However, no

disbursement shall be made from any funds required by

law to be transferred to the General Fund.

SEC. 3. Part 70 (commencing with Section 101110) is

added to Division 14 of Title 3 of the Education Code, to

read:

PART 70. KINDERGARTEN THROUGH COMMUNITY

COLLEGE PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT

OF 2016

HAPTER 1. GENERAL

101110. This part shall be known, and may be cited, as

the Kindergarten Through Community College Public

Education Facilities Bond Act of 2016.

101112. Bonds in the total amount of nine billion dollars

($9,000,000,000), not including the amount of any

refunding bonds issued in accordance with Sections

101140 and 101149, or so much thereof as is necessary,

may be issued and sold for the purposes set forth in

Sections 101130 and 101144. The bonds, when sold,

shall be and constitute a valid and binding obligation of

the State of California, and the full faith and credit of the

State of California is hereby pledged for the punctual

payment of the principal of, and interest on, the bonds as

the principal and interest become due and payable.

HAPTER 2. KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 12TH GRADE

Article 1. Kindergarten Through 12th Grade School

Facilities Program Provisions

101120. The proceeds of bonds issued and sold pursuant

to this chapter shall be deposited in the 2016 State School

Facilities Fund established in the State Treasury under

Section 17070.41 and shall be allocated by the State

Allocation Board pursuant to this chapter.

101121. All moneys deposited in the 2016 State School

Facilities Fund for the purposes of this chapter shall be

available to provide aid to school districts, county

PROPOSITION 51

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds sections to the Education

Code; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are

printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California ﬁnd and declare all of

the following:

(a) Pursuant to the California Constitution, public

education is a state responsibility and, among other things,

that responsibility requires that public schools be safe,

secure, and peaceful.

(b) The State of California has a fundamental interest in

the ﬁnancing of public education and that interest extends

to ensuring that K–14 facilities are constructed and

maintained in safe, secure, and peaceful conditions.

met its responsibility to provide safe, secure, and peaceful

facilities through the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act

of 1998, contained in Article 1 (commencing with

Section 17070.10) of Chapter 12.5 of Part 10 of Division

1 of Title 1 of the Education Code.

(d) The State Allocation Board has the authority to audit

expenditure reports and school district records in order to

assure bond funds are expended in accordance with

program requirements, which includes verifying that

projects progress in a timely manner and that funds are not

spent on salaries or operating expenses.

(e) The people of the State of California further ﬁnd and

declare the following:

(1) California was among the hardest hit of the states

during the last recession and while employment gains are

occurring, economists caution that the state economy has

not yet fully recovered.

(2) Investments made through the Kindergarten Through

Community College Public Education Facilities Bond Act

of 2016 will provide for career technical education

facilities to provide job training for many Californians and

veterans who face challenges in completing their education

and re-entering the workforce.

(3) Investments will be made in partnership with local

school districts to upgrade aging facilities to meet current

health and safety standards, including retroﬁtting for

earthquake safety and the removal of lead paint, asbestos,

and other hazardous materials.

(4) Studies show that 13,000 jobs are created for each

$1 billion of state infrastructure investment. These jobs

include building and construction trades jobs throughout

the state.

(5) The Kindergarten Through Community College Public

Education Facilities Bond Act of 2016 provides for

disadvantaged school districts and local control.

(6) Academic goals cannot be achieved without 21st

Century school facilities designed to provide improved

school technology and teaching facilities.

(f) Therefore, the people enact the Kindergarten Through

Community College Public Education Facilities Bond Act

Text of Proposed Laws

119

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 51 CONTINUED

65995) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code

may be amended pursuant to law.

Article 2. Kindergarten Through 12th Grade School

Facilities Fiscal Provisions

101130. (a) Of the total amount of bonds authorized to

be issued and sold pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing

with Section 101110), bonds in the amount of seven billion

dollars ($7,000,000,000) not including the amount of

any refunding bonds issued in accordance with

Section 101140, or so much thereof as is necessary, may

be issued and sold to provide a fund to be used for carrying

out the purposes expressed in this chapter and to reimburse

the General Obligation Bond Expense Revolving Fund

pursuant to Section 16724.5 of the Government Code.

(b) Pursuant to this section, the Treasurer shall sell the

bonds authorized by the State School Building Finance

Committee established pursuant to Section 15909 at any

different times necessary to service expenditures required

by the apportionments.

101131. The State School Building Finance Committee,

established by Section 15909 and composed of the

Governor, the Controller, the Treasurer, the Director of

Finance, and the Superintendent, or their designated

representatives, all of whom shall serve thereon without

compensation, and a majority of whom shall constitute a

quorum, is continued in existence for the purpose of this

chapter. The Treasurer shall serve as chairperson of the

committee. Two Members of the Senate appointed by the

Senate Committee on Rules, and two Members of the

Assembly appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, shall

meet with and provide advice to the committee to the

extent that the advisory participation is not incompatible

with their respective positions as Members of the

Legislature. For the purposes of this chapter, the Members

of the Legislature shall constitute an interim investigating

committee on the subject of this chapter and, as that

committee, shall have the powers granted to, and duties

imposed upon, those committees by the Joint Rules of the

Senate and the Assembly. The Director of Finance shall

provide assistance to the committee as it may require. The

Attorney General of the state is the legal adviser of the

committee.

101132. (a) The bonds authorized by this chapter shall

be prepared, executed, issued, sold, paid, and redeemed

as provided in the State General Obligation Bond Law

(Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 16720) of Part 3 of

Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code), and all acts

amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, are hereby

incorporated into this chapter as though set forth in full

within this chapter, except subdivisions (a) and (b) of

Section 16727 of the Government Code shall not apply to

the bonds authorized by this chapter.

(b) For purposes of the State General Obligation Bond

Law, the State Allocation Board is designated the “board”

for purposes of administering the 2016 State School

Facilities Fund.

101133. (a) Upon request of the State Allocation Board,

the State School Building Finance Committee shall

determine whether or not it is necessary or desirable to

issue bonds authorized pursuant to this chapter in order to

fund the related apportionments and, if so, the amount of

bonds to be issued and sold. Successive issues of bonds

may be authorized and sold to fund those apportionments

progressively, and it is not necessary that all of the bonds

authorized to be issued be sold at any one time.

superintendents of schools, and county boards of education

of the state in accordance with the Leroy F. Greene School

Facilities Act of 1998 (Chapter 12.5 (commencing with

Section 17070.10) of Part 10 of Division 1 of Title 1), as

it read on January 1, 2015, as set forth in Section 101122,

to provide funds to repay any money advanced or loaned to

the 2016 State School Facilities Fund under any act of the

Legislature, together with interest provided for in that act,

and to reimburse the General Obligation Bond Expense

Revolving Fund pursuant to Section 16724.5 of the

Government Code.

101122. (a) The proceeds from the sale of bonds,

issued and sold for the purposes of this chapter, shall be

allocated in accordance with the following schedule:

(1) The amount of three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000)

for new construction of school facilities of applicant school

districts pursuant to Chapter 12.5 (commencing with

Section 17070.10) of Part 10 of Division 1 of Title 1.

(2) The amount of ﬁve hundred million dollars

($500,000,000) shall be available for providing school

facilities to charter schools pursuant to Article 12

(commencing with Section 17078.52) of Chapter 12.5 of

Part 10 of Division 1 of Title 1.

(3) The amount of three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000)

for the modernization of school facilities pursuant to

Chapter 12.5 (commencing with Section 17070.10) of

Part 10 of Division 1 of Title 1.

(4) The amount of ﬁve hundred million dollars

($500,000,000) for facilities for career technical

education programs pursuant to Article 13 (commencing

with Section 17078.70) of Chapter 12.5 of Part 10 of

Division 1 of Title 1.

(b) School districts may use funds allocated pursuant to

paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) only for one or more of

the following purposes in accordance with Chapter 12.5

(commencing with Section 17070.10) of Part 10 of

Division 1 of Title 1:

(1) The purchase and installation of air-conditioning

equipment and insulation materials, and related costs.

(2) Construction projects or the purchase of furniture or

equipment designed to increase school security or

playground safety.

(3) The identiﬁcation, assessment, or abatement in school

facilities of hazardous asbestos.

(4) Project funding for high-priority roof replacement

projects.

(5) Any other modernization of facilities pursuant to

Chapter 12.5 (commencing with Section 17070.10) of

Part 10 of Division 1 of Title 1.

subdivision (a) may also be utilized to provide new

construction grants for eligible applicant county boards of

education under Chapter 12.5 (commencing with

Section 17070.10) of Part 10 of Division 1 of Title 1 for

funding classrooms for severely handicapped pupils, or for

funding classrooms for county community school pupils.

(d) Chapter 4.9 (commencing with Section 65995) of

Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, as those

provisions read on January 1, 2015, shall be in effect until

the full amount of bonds authorized for new school facility

construction pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a)

have been expended, or December 31, 2020, whichever is

sooner. Thereafter, Chapter 4.9 (commencing with Section

120

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 51 CONTINUED

received from the sale of bonds for the purpose of carrying

out this chapter.

101139. All money deposited in the 2016 State School

Facilities Fund, that is derived from premium and accrued

interest on bonds sold shall be reserved in the fund and

shall be available for transfer to the General Fund as a

credit to expenditures for bond interest, except that

amounts derived from premium may be reserved and used

to pay the cost of the bond issuance prior to any transfer to

the General Fund.

101140. The bonds issued and sold pursuant to this

chapter may be refunded in accordance with Article 6

(commencing with Section 16780) of Chapter 4 of Part 3

of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code, which is a

part of the State General Obligation Bond Law. Approval by

the voters of the state for the issuance of the bonds

described in this chapter includes the approval of the

issuance of any bonds issued to refund any bonds originally

issued under this chapter or any previously issued refunding

bonds. Any bond refunded with the proceeds of refunding

bonds as authorized by this section may be legally defeased

to the extent permitted by law in the manner and to the

extent set forth in the resolution, as amended from time to

time, authorizing such refunded bond.

101141. The people hereby ﬁnd and declare that,

inasmuch as the proceeds from the sale of bonds authorized

by this chapter are not “proceeds of taxes” as that term is

used in Article XIII B of the California Constitution, the

disbursement of these proceeds is not subject to the

limitations imposed by that article.

HAPTER 3. CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACILITIES

Article 1. General

101142. (a) The 2016 California Community College

Capital Outlay Bond Fund is hereby established in the

State Treasury for deposit of funds from the proceeds of

bonds issued and sold for the purposes of this chapter.

(b) The Higher Education Facilities Finance Committee

established pursuant to Section 67353 is hereby

authorized to create a debt or debts, liability or liabilities,

of the State of California pursuant to this chapter for the

purpose of providing funds to aid the California Community

Colleges.

Article 2. California Community College Program

Provisions

101143. (a) From the proceeds of bonds issued and

sold pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with

Section 101144), the sum of two billion dollars

($2,000,000,000) shall be deposited in the 2016

California Community College Capital Outlay Bond Fund

for the purposes of this article. When appropriated, these

funds shall be available for expenditure for the purposes of

this article.

(b) The purposes of this article include assisting in

meeting the capital outlay ﬁnancing needs of the California

Community Colleges.

the purposes of this article may be used to fund construction

on existing campuses, including the construction of

buildings and the acquisition of related ﬁxtures,

construction of facilities that may be used by more than

one segment of public higher education (intersegmental),

the renovation and reconstruction of facilities, site

acquisition, the equipping of new, renovated, or

reconstructed facilities, which equipment shall have an

(b) A request of the State Allocation Board pursuant to

subdivision (a) shall be supported by a statement of the

apportionments made and to be made for the purposes

described in Sections 101121 and 101122.

101134. There shall be collected each year and in the

same manner and at the same time as other state revenue

is collected, in addition to the ordinary revenues of the

state, a sum in an amount required to pay the principal of,

and interest on, the bonds each year. It is the duty of all

ofﬁcers charged by law with any duty in regard to the

collection of the revenue to do and perform each and every

act that is necessary to collect that additional sum.

101135. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the

Government Code, there is hereby appropriated from the

General Fund in the State Treasury, for the purposes of this

chapter, an amount that will equal the total of the following:

(a) The sum annually necessary to pay the principal of,

and interest on, bonds issued and sold pursuant to this

chapter, as the principal and interest become due and

payable.

(b) The sum necessary to carry out Section 101138,

appropriated without regard to ﬁscal years.

101136. The State Allocation Board may request the

Pooled Money Investment Board to make a loan from the

Pooled Money Investment Account or any other approved

form of interim ﬁnancing, in accordance with Section 16312

of the Government Code, for the purpose of carrying out

this chapter. The amount of the request shall not exceed

the amount of the unsold bonds (exclusive of refunding

bonds) that the committee, by resolution, has authorized

to be sold for the purpose of carrying out this chapter. The

State Allocation Board shall execute any documents

required by the Pooled Money Investment Board to obtain

and repay the loan. Any amounts loaned shall be deposited

in the fund to be allocated by the State Allocation Board in

accordance with this chapter.

101137. Notwithstanding any other provision of this

chapter, or of the State General Obligation Bond Law, if

the Treasurer sells bonds pursuant to this chapter that

include a bond counsel opinion to the effect that the

interest on the bonds is excluded from gross income for

federal tax purposes, subject to designated conditions, the

Treasurer may maintain separate accounts for the

investment of bond proceeds and for the investment

earnings on those proceeds. The Treasurer may use or

direct the use of those proceeds or earnings to pay any

rebate, penalty, or other payment required under federal

law or take any other action with respect to the investment

and use of those bond proceeds required or desirable

under federal law to maintain the tax-exempt status of

those bonds and to obtain any other advantage under

federal law on behalf of the funds of this state.

101138. For the purposes of carrying out this chapter,

the Director of Finance may authorize the withdrawal from

the General Fund of an amount not to exceed the amount

of the unsold bonds (exclusive of refunding bonds) that

have been authorized by the State School Building Finance

Committee to be sold for the purpose of carrying out this

chapter. Any amounts withdrawn shall be deposited in the

2016 State School Facilities Fund consistent with this

chapter. Any money made available under this section

shall be returned to the General Fund, plus an amount

equal to the interest that the money would have earned in

the Pooled Money Investment Account, from proceeds

Text of Proposed Laws

121

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 51 CONTINUED

101146. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the

Government Code, there is hereby appropriated from the

General Fund in the State Treasury, for the purposes of this

chapter, an amount that will equal the total of the following:

(a) The sum annually necessary to pay the principal of,

and interest on, bonds issued and sold pursuant to this

chapter, as the principal and interest become due and

payable.

(b) The sum necessary to carry out Section 101147.5,

appropriated without regard to ﬁscal years.

101146.5. The board, as deﬁned in subdivision (b) of

Section 101144.5, may request the Pooled Money

Investment Board to make a loan from the Pooled Money

Investment Account or any other approved form of interim

ﬁnancing, in accordance with Section 16312 of the

Government Code, for the purpose of carrying out this

chapter. The amount of the request shall not exceed the

amount of the unsold bonds (exclusive of refunding bonds)

that the Higher Education Facilities Finance Committee,

by resolution, has authorized to be sold for the purpose of

carrying out this chapter. The board, as deﬁned in

subdivision (b) of Section 101144.5, shall execute any

documents required by the Pooled Money Investment

Board to obtain and repay the loan. Any amounts loaned

shall be deposited in the fund to be allocated by the board

in accordance with this chapter.

101147. Notwithstanding any other provision of this

chapter, or of the State General Obligation Bond Law, if

the Treasurer sells bonds pursuant to this chapter that

include a bond counsel opinion to the effect that the

interest on the bonds is excluded from gross income for

federal tax purposes, subject to designated conditions, the

Treasurer may maintain separate accounts for the

investment of bond proceeds and for the investment

earnings on those proceeds. The Treasurer may use or

direct the use of those proceeds or earnings to pay any

rebate, penalty, or other payment required under federal

law or take any other action with respect to the investment

and use of those bond proceeds required or desirable

under federal law to maintain the tax-exempt status of

those bonds and to obtain any other advantage under

federal law on behalf of the funds of this state.

101147.5. (a) For the purposes of carrying out this

chapter, the Director of Finance may authorize the

withdrawal from the General Fund of an amount not to

exceed the amount of the unsold bonds (exclusive of

refunding bonds) that have been authorized by the Higher

Education Facilities Finance Committee to be sold for the

purpose of carrying out this chapter. Any amounts

withdrawn shall be deposited in the 2016 California

Community College Capital Outlay Bond Fund consistent

with this chapter. Any money made available under this

section shall be returned to the General Fund, plus an

amount equal to the interest that the money would have

earned in the Pooled Money Investment Account, from

proceeds received from the sale of bonds for the purpose

of carrying out this chapter.

(b) Any request forwarded to the Legislature and the

Department of Finance for funds from this bond issue for

expenditure for the purposes described in this chapter by

the California Community Colleges shall be accompanied

by the ﬁve-year capital outlay plan that reﬂects the needs

and priorities of the community college system and is

prioritized on a statewide basis. Requests shall include a

schedule that prioritizes the seismic retroﬁtting needed to

signiﬁcantly reduce, in the judgment of the particular

average useful life of 10 years, and to provide funds for the

payment of preconstruction costs, including, but not

limited to, preliminary plans and working drawings for

facilities of the California Community Colleges.

Article 3. California Community College Fiscal

Provisions

101144. (a) Of the total amount of bonds authorized to

be issued and sold pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing

with Section 101110), bonds in the total amount of

two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000), not including the

amount of any refunding bonds issued in accordance with

Section 101149, or so much thereof as is necessary, may

be issued and sold to provide a fund to be used for carrying

out the purposes expressed in this chapter and to reimburse

the General Obligation Bond Expense Revolving Fund

pursuant to Section 16724.5 of the Government Code.

(b) Pursuant to this section, the Treasurer shall sell the

bonds authorized by the Higher Education Facilities

Finance Committee established pursuant to Section 67353

at any different times necessary to service expenditures

required by the apportionments.

101144.5. (a) The bonds authorized by this chapter

shall be prepared, executed, issued, sold, paid, and

redeemed as provided in the State General Obligation

Bond Law (Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 16720)

of Part 3 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code),

and all acts amendatory thereof and supplementary

thereto, are hereby incorporated into this chapter as though

set forth in full within this chapter, except subdivisions (a)

and (b) of Section 16727 of the Government Code shall

not apply to the bonds authorized by this chapter.

(b) For the purposes of the State General Obligation Bond

Law, each state agency administering an appropriation of

the 2016 Community College Capital Outlay Bond Fund is

designated as the “board” for projects funded pursuant to

this chapter.

this chapter shall be available for the purpose of funding

aid to the California Community Colleges for the

construction on existing or new campuses, and their

respective off-campus centers and joint use and

intersegmental facilities, as set forth in this chapter.

101145. The Higher Education Facilities Finance

Committee established pursuant to Section 67353 shall

authorize the issuance of bonds under this chapter only to

the extent necessary to fund the related apportionments

for the purposes described in this chapter that are expressly

authorized by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act.

Pursuant to that legislative direction, the committee shall

determine whether or not it is necessary or desirable to

issue bonds authorized pursuant to this chapter in order to

carry out the purposes described in this chapter and, if so,

the amount of bonds to be issued and sold. Successive

issues of bonds may be authorized and sold to carry out

those actions progressively, and it is not necessary that all

of the bonds authorized to be issued be sold at any one

time.

101145.5. There shall be collected each year and in the

same manner and at the same time as other state revenue

is collected, in addition to the ordinary revenues of the

state, a sum in an amount required to pay the principal of,

and interest on, the bonds each year. It is the duty of all

ofﬁcers charged by law with any duty in regard to the

collection of the revenue to do and perform each and every

act which is necessary to collect that additional sum.

122

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 51 CONTINUED

called Medi-Cal. In order for any state to receive federal

Medicaid funds, the state has to contribute a matching

amount of its own money.

B. In 2009, a new program was created whereby California

hospitals began paying a fee to help the state obtain

available federal Medicaid funds, at no cost to California

taxpayers. This program has helped pay for health care for

low-income children and resulted in California hospitals

receiving approximately $2 billion per year in additional

federal money to help hospitals to meet the needs of

Medi-Cal patients.

SEC. 2. Statement of Purpose.

To ensure that the fee paid by hospitals to the state for the

purpose of maximizing the available federal matching

funds is used for the intended purpose, the people hereby

amend the Constitution to require voter approval of changes

to the hospital fee program to ensure that the state uses

these funds for the intended purpose of supporting hospital

care to Medi-Cal patients and to help pay for health care

for low-income children.

SEC. 3. Amendment to the Constitution.

SEC. 3.1. Section 3.5 is added to Article XVI of the

California Constitution, to read:

EC. 3.5. (a) No statute amending or adding to the

provisions of the Medi-Cal Hospital Reimbursement

Improvement Act of 2013 shall become effective unless

approved by the electors in the same manner as statutes

amending initiative statutes pursuant to subdivision (c) of

Section 10 of Article II, except that the Legislature may,

by statute passed in each house by roll call vote entered

into the journal, two-thirds of the membership concurring,

amend or add provisions that further the purposes of the

act.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Act” means the Medi-Cal Hospital Reimbursement

Improvement Act of 2013 (enacted by Senate Bill 239 of

the 2013–14 Regular Session of the Legislature, and any

nonsubstantive amendments to the act enacted by a later

bill in the same session of the Legislature).

(2) “Nonsubstantive amendments” shall only mean minor,

technical, grammatical, or clarifying amendments.

(3) “Provisions that further the purposes of the act” shall

only mean:

(A) Amendments or additions necessary to obtain or

maintain federal approval of the implementation of the

act, including the fee imposed and related quality

assurance payments to hospitals made pursuant to the act;

(B) Amendments or additions to the methodology used for

the development of the fee and quality assurance payments

to hospitals made pursuant to the act.

from repealing the act in its entirety by statute passed in

each house by roll call vote entered into the journal,

two-thirds of the membership concurring, except that the

Legislature shall not be permitted to repeal the act and

replace it with a similar statute imposing a tax, fee, or

assessment unless that similar statute is either:

(1) A provision that furthers the purposes of the act as

deﬁned herein;

(2) Is approved by the electors in the same manner as

statutes amending initiative statutes pursuant to

subdivision (c) of Section 10 of Article II.

college, seismic hazards in buildings identiﬁed as high

priority by the college.

101148. All money deposited in the 2016 California

Community College Capital Outlay Bond Fund that is

derived from premium and accrued interest on bonds sold

shall be reserved in the fund and shall be available for

transfer to the General Fund as a credit to expenditures for

bond interest, except that amounts derived from premium

may be reserved and used to pay the cost of the bond

issuance prior to any transfer to the General Fund.

101149. The bonds issued and sold pursuant to this

chapter may be refunded in accordance with Article 6

(commencing with Section 16780) of Chapter 4 of Part 3

of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code, which is a

part of the State General Obligation Bond Law. Approval by

the voters of the state for the issuance of the bonds

described in this chapter includes the approval of the

issuance of any bonds issued to refund any bonds originally

issued under this chapter or any previously issued refunding

bonds. Any bond refunded with the proceeds of refunding

bonds as authorized by this section may be legally defeased

to the extent permitted by law in the manner and to the

extent set forth in the resolution, as amended from time to

time, authorizing such refunded bond.

101149.5. The people hereby ﬁnd and declare that,

inasmuch as the proceeds from the sale of bonds authorized

by this chapter are not “proceeds of taxes” as that term is

used in Article XIII B of the California Constitution, the

disbursement of these proceeds is not subject to the

limitations imposed by that article.

SEC. 4. General Provisions.

(a) If any provision of this act, or part thereof, is for any

reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining

provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain in full

force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this act

are severable.

(b) This act is intended to be comprehensive. It is the

intent of the people that in the event this act or measures

relating to the same subject shall appear on the same

statewide election ballot, the provisions of the other

measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conﬂict

with this act. In the event that this act receives a greater

number of afﬁrmative votes, the provisions of this act shall

prevail in their entirety, and all provisions of the other

measure or measures shall be null and void.

PROPOSITION 52

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds a section to the California

Constitution and amends sections of the Welfare and

Institutions Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed

to be deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new

provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type

to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Statement of Findings.

A. The federal government established the Medicaid

program to help pay for health care services provided to

low-income patients, including the elderly, persons with

disabilities, and children. In California this program is

Text of Proposed Laws

123

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 52 CONTINUED

of the General Fund expenditures authorized in the most

recent annual Budget Act.

(f) The proceeds of the fee and any interest and dividends

earned on deposits are not deposited into the fund or are

not used as provided in Section 14169.53.

(g) The proceeds of the fee, the matching amount provided

by the federal government, and interest and dividends

earned on deposits in the fund are not used as provided in

Section 14169.68.

SEC. 4.2. Section 14169.75 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code is amended to read:

14169.75. Notwithstanding subdivision (k) of Section

14167.35, subdivisions (a), (i), and (j) of Section

14167.35, creating the fund, are not repealed and shall

remain operative as long as this article remains operative.

Notwithstanding Section 14169.72, this article shall

become inoperative on January 1, 2018. A hospital shall

not be required to pay the fee after that date unless the fee

was owed during the period in which the article was

operative, and payments authorized under Section

14169.53 shall not be made unless the payments were

owed during the period in which the article was operative.

SEC. 5. General Provisions.

(a) If any provision of this measure, or any part thereof, is

for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the

remaining provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain

in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of

this measure are severable.

(b) This measure is intended to be comprehensive. It is

the intent of the people that in the event this measure or

measures relating to the same subject shall appear on the

same statewide election ballot, the provisions of the other

measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conﬂict

with this measure. In the event that this measure receives

a greater number of afﬁrmative votes, the provisions of this

measure shall prevail in their entirety, and all provisions of

the other measure or measures shall be null and void.

PROPOSITION 53

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds a section to the California

Constitution; therefore, new provisions proposed to be

added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are

new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Title.

This act shall be known and may be cited as the No Blank

Checks Initiative.

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California ﬁnd and declare as

follows:

(a) The politicians in Sacramento have mortgaged our

future with long-term bond debt obligations that will take

taxpayers, our children, and future generations decades to

pay off.

(b) Under current rules, the sale of state bonds only needs

to be approved by voters if they will be repaid out of the

state’s general revenues. But state politicians can sell

(d) The proceeds of the fee imposed by the act and all

interest earned on such proceeds shall not be considered

revenues, General Fund revenues, General Fund proceeds

of taxes, or allocated local proceeds of taxes, for purposes

of Sections 8 and 8.5 of this article or for the purposes of

Article XIII B. The appropriation of the proceeds in the

trust fund referred to in the act for hospital services to

Medi-Cal beneﬁciaries or other beneﬁciaries in any other

similar federal program shall not be subject to the

prohibitions or restrictions in Sections 3 or 5 of this article.

SEC. 4. Amendments to Medi-Cal Hospital

Reimbursement Improvement Act of 2013.

SEC. 4.1. Section 14169.72 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code is amended to read:

14169.72. This article shall become inoperative if any of

the following occurs:

(a) The effective date of a ﬁnal judicial determination

made by any court of appellate jurisdiction or a ﬁnal

determination by the United States Department of Health

and Human Services or the federal Centers for Medicare

and Medicaid Services that the quality assurance fee

established pursuant to this article, or Section 14169.54

or 14169.55, cannot be implemented. This subdivision

shall not apply to any ﬁnal judicial determination made by

any court of appellate jurisdiction in a case brought by

hospitals located outside the state.

(b) The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid

Services denies approval for, or does not approve on or

before the last day of a program period, the implementation

of Sections 14169.52, 14169.53, 14169.54, and

14169.55, and the department fails to modify

Section 14169.52, 14169.53, 14169.54, or 14169.55

pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 14169.53 in order

to meet the requirements of federal law or to obtain federal

approval.

in the annual Budget Act, or fails to appropriate such

moneys in a separate bill enacted within thirty (30) days

following enactment of the annual Budget Act. A ﬁnal

judicial determination by the California Supreme Court or

any California Court of Appeal that the revenues collected

pursuant to this article that are deposited in the fund are

either of the following:

(1) “General Fund proceeds of taxes appropriated pursuant

to Article XIII B of the California Constitution,” as used in

subdivision (b) of Section 8 of Article XVI of the California

Constitution.

(2) “Allocated local proceeds of taxes,” as used in

subdivision (b) of Section 8 of Article XVI of the California

Constitution.

(d) The department has sought but has not received

federal ﬁnancial participation for the supplemental

payments and other costs required by this article for which

federal ﬁnancial participation has been sought.

(e) A lawsuit related to this article is ﬁled against the state

and a preliminary injunction or other order has been issued

that results in a ﬁnancial disadvantage to the state. For

purposes of this subdivision, “ﬁnancial disadvantage to

the state” means either of the following:

(1) A loss of federal ﬁnancial participation.

(2) A net cost to the

General Fund cost incurred due to the

act that is equal to or greater than one-quarter of 1 percent

124

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 53 CONTINUED

billions of dollars of additional bond debt without ever

getting the voters’ approval if the bonds will be repaid with

speciﬁc revenue streams or charges imposed directly on

Californians like taxes, fees, rates, tolls, or rents. The

politicians should not be allowed to issue blank checks

Californians have to pay for. Voters must provide prior

approval for all major state bond sale decisions, because

voters are the ones who ultimately pay the bill.

independent, nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce, the

State of California is carrying $340 billion in public debt.

(Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce, “Addressing California’s Key

Liabilities,” Mar. 7, 2014.) Interest and principal payments

on our long-term debt obligations will cripple the state if

we keep spending the way we do now—reducing cash

available for public safety, schools, and other vital state

programs.

(d) Moreover, voters are rarely told the true costs of bond-

funded projects. We were originally told that the bullet

train would cost $9 billion. But now the estimated cost has

ballooned to nearly $70 billion. (Los Angeles Times, “The

Hazy Future of California’s Bullet Train,” Jan. 14, 2014.)

(e) This measure puts the brakes on our state’s public

debt crisis by giving the voters a say in all major state bond

debt proposals that must be repaid through speciﬁc

revenue streams or charges imposed directly on Californians

like taxes, fees, rates, tolls, or rents.

SEC. 3. Statement of Purpose.

The purpose of this measure is to bring the state’s public

debt crisis under control by giving the voters a say in all

major state bond-funded projects that will be paid off

through speciﬁc revenue streams or higher taxes, fees,

rates, tolls, or rents collected from Californians, their

children, and future generations.

SEC. 4. Section 1.6 is added to Article XVI of the

California Constitution, to read:

EC. 1.6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,

all revenue bonds issued or sold by the State in an amount

either singly or in the aggregate over two billion dollars

($2,000,000,000) for any single project ﬁnanced, owned,

operated, or managed by the State must ﬁrst be approved

by the voters at a statewide election. “State” means the

State of California, any agency or department thereof, and

any joint powers agency or similar body created by the

State or in which the State is a member. “State” as used

herein does not include a city, county, city and county,

school district, community college district, or special

district. For purposes of this section, “special district”

refers only to public entities formed for the performance of

local governmental functions within limited boundaries.

(b) A single project for which state revenue bonds are

issued or sold in an amount over two billion dollars

($2,000,000,000) may not be divided into, or deemed to

be, multiple separate projects in order to avoid the voter

approval requirements contained in this section. For

purposes of this section, multiple allegedly separate

projects shall be deemed to constitute a single project

including, but not limited to, in the following circumstances:

(1) Where the allegedly separate projects will be physically

or geographically proximate to each other; or

(2) Where the allegedly separate projects will be physically

joined or connected to each other; or

(3) Where one allegedly separate project cannot accomplish

its stated purpose without the completion of another

allegedly separate project.

contained in this section shall be adjusted annually to

reﬂect any increase or decrease in inﬂation as measured by

the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)

published by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Treasurer’s Ofﬁce shall calculate and publish the

adjustments required by this subdivision.

SEC. 5. Liberal Construction.

This act shall be liberally construed in order to effectuate

its purposes.

SEC. 6. Conﬂicting Measures.

(a) In the event that this measure and another measure or

measures relating to voter approval requirements for state

bonds shall appear on the same statewide election ballot,

the other measure or measures shall be deemed to be in

conﬂict with this measure. In the event that this measure

receives a greater number of afﬁrmative votes, the

provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety,

and the provisions of the other measure or measures shall

be null and void.

(b) If this measure is approved by the voters but superseded

in whole or in part by any other conﬂicting initiative

approved by the voters at the same election, and such

conﬂicting initiative is later held invalid, this measure

shall be self-executing and given full force and effect.

SEC. 7. Severability.

The provisions of this act are severable. If any portion,

section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase,

word, or application of this act is for any reason held to be

invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction,

that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining

portions of this act. The people of the State of California

hereby declare that they would have adopted this act and

each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph,

clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not

declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to

whether any portion of this act or application thereof would

be subsequently declared invalid.

SEC. 8. Legal Defense.

If this act is approved by the voters of the State of California

and thereafter subjected to a legal challenge alleging a

violation of federal law, and both the Governor and Attorney

General refuse to defend this act, then the following

actions shall be taken:

(a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in

Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 12500) of Part 2 of

Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code or any other

law, the Attorney General shall appoint independent

counsel to faithfully and vigorously defend this act on

behalf of the State of California.

(b) Before appointing or thereafter substituting

independent counsel, the Attorney General shall exercise

due diligence in determining the qualiﬁcations of

independent counsel and shall obtain written afﬁrmation

from independent counsel that independent counsel will

faithfully and vigorously defend this act. The written

afﬁrmation shall be made publicly available upon request.

General Fund to the Controller, without regard to ﬁscal

years, in an amount necessary to cover the costs of

Text of Proposed Laws

125

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 53 CONTINUED

retaining independent counsel to faithfully and vigorously

defend this act on behalf of the State of California.

PROPOSITION 54

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure amends sections of the California

Constitution and amends and adds sections to the

Government Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed

to be deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new

provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type

to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Title.

This act shall be known and may be cited as the California

Legislature Transparency Act.

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California hereby ﬁnd and

declare that:

(a) It is essential to the maintenance of a democratic

society that public business be performed in an open and

public manner, and highly desirable that citizens be given

the opportunity to fully review every bill and express their

views regarding the bill’s merits to their elected

representatives, before it is passed.

(b) However, last-minute amendments to bills are

frequently used to push through political favors without

comment or with little advance notice.

Members of the Legislature have any realistic opportunity

to review or debate them, resulting in ill-considered

legislation.

(d) Further, although our State Constitution currently

provides that the proceedings of each house and the

committees thereof shall be open and public, few citizens

have the ability to attend legislative proceedings in person,

and many legislative proceedings go completely unobserved

by the public and press, often leaving no record of what

was said.

(e) Yet, with the availability of modern recording technology

and the Internet, there is no reason why public legislative

proceedings should remain relatively inaccessible to the

citizens that they serve.

(f) Accordingly, to foster disclosure, deliberation, debate,

and decorum in our legislative proceedings, to keep our

citizens fully informed, and to ensure that legislative

proceedings are conducted fairly and openly, our State

Constitution should guarantee the right of all persons,

including members of the press, to freely record legislative

proceedings and to broadcast, post, or otherwise transmit

those recordings.

(g) To supplement this right to record legislative

proceedings, the Legislature itself should also be required

to make and post audiovisual recordings of all public

proceedings to the Internet and to maintain an archive of

these recordings, which will be a valuable resource for the

public, the press, and the academic community for

generations to come.

(h) California should also follow the lead of other states

that require a 72-hour advance notice period between the

time a bill is printed and made available to the public and

the time it is put to a vote, allowing an exception only in

the case of a true emergency, such as a natural disaster.

(i) The opportunity for an orderly and detailed review of

bills by the public, the press, and legislators will result in

better bills while thwarting political favoritism and power

grabs.

(j) These measures will have nominal cost to taxpayers,

while promoting greater transparency in our legislative

proceedings to beneﬁt the people.

SEC. 3. Statement of Purpose.

In enacting this measure, the people of the State of

California intend the following:

(a) To enable we, the people, to observe through the

Internet what is happening and has happened in any and

all of the Legislature’s public proceedings so as to obtain

the information necessary to participate in the political

process and to hold our elected representatives accountable

for their actions.

(b) To enable we, the people, to record and to post or

otherwise transmit our own recordings of those legislative

proceedings in order to encourage fairness in the

proceedings, deliberation in our representatives’ decision-

making, and accountability.

necessary time to carefully evaluate the strengths and

weaknesses of the ﬁnal version of a bill before a vote by

imposing a 72-hour public notice period between the time

that the ﬁnal version is made available to the Legislature

and the public, and the time that a vote is taken, except in

cases of a true emergency declared by the Governor.

SEC. 4. Amendments to Article IV of the California

Constitution.

SEC. 4.1. Section 7 of Article IV of the California

Constitution is amended to read:

EC. 7. (a) Each house shall choose its ofﬁcers and

adopt rules for its proceedings. A majority of the

membership constitutes a quorum, but a smaller number

may recess from day to day and compel the attendance of

absent members.

(b) Each house shall keep and publish a journal of its

proceedings. The rollcall vote of the members on a question

shall be taken and entered in the journal at the request of

3 members present.

the

proceedings of each house and the committees thereof

shall be open and public. The right to attend open and

public proceedings includes the right of any person to

record by audio or video means any and all parts of the

proceedings and to broadcast or otherwise transmit them;

provided that the Legislature may adopt reasonable rules

pursuant to paragraph (5) regulating the placement and

use of the equipment for recording or broadcasting the

proceedings for the sole purpose of minimizing disruption

of the proceedings. Any aggrieved party shall have standing

to challenge said rules in an action for declaratory and

injunctive relief, and the Legislature shall have the burden

of demonstrating that the rule is reasonable.

(2) Commencing on January 1 of the second calendar year

following the adoption of this paragraph, the Legislature

shall also cause audiovisual recordings to be made of all

proceedings subject to paragraph (1) in their entirety, shall

make such recordings public through the Internet within

126

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 54 CONTINUED

24 hours after the proceedings have been recessed or

adjourned for the day, and shall maintain an archive of

said recordings, which shall be accessible to the public

through the Internet and downloadable for a period of no

less than 20 years as speciﬁed by statute.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2)However

closed sessions may be held solely for any of the following

purposes:

(A) To consider the appointment, employment, evaluation

of performance, or dismissal of a public ofﬁcer or employee,

to consider or hear complaints or charges brought against

a Member of the Legislature or other public ofﬁcer or

employee, or to establish the classiﬁcation or compensation

of an employee of the Legislature.

(B) To consider matters affecting the safety and security of

Members of the Legislature or its employees or the safety

and security of any buildings and grounds used by the

Legislature.

regarding pending or reasonably anticipated, or whether to

initiate, litigation when discussion in open session would

not protect the interests of the house or committee

regarding the litigation.

(2)

(4) A caucus of the Members of the Senate, the

Members of the Assembly, or the Members of both houses,

which is composed of the members of the same political

party, may meet in closed session.

(3)

(5) The Legislature shall implement this subdivision by

concurrent resolution adopted by rollcall vote entered in

the journal, two-thirds of the membership of each house

concurring, or by statute, and shall prescribe that, when

the case of a closed session is

held pursuant to paragraph

(1),

(3), shall prescribe that reasonable notice of the

closed session and the purpose of the closed session shall

be provided to the public. If there is a conﬂict between a

concurrent resolution and statute, the last adopted or

enacted shall prevail.

(d) Neither house without the consent of the other may

recess for more than 10 days or to any other place.

SEC. 4.2. Section 8 of Article IV of the California

Constitution is amended to read:

EC. 8. (a) At regular sessions no bill other than the

budget bill may be heard or acted on by committee or

either house until the 31st day after the bill is introduced

unless the house dispenses with this requirement by

rollcall vote entered in the journal, three fourths of the

membership concurring.

(b) (1) The Legislature may make no law except by statute

and may enact no statute except by bill. No bill may be

passed unless it is read by title on 3 days in each house

except that the house may dispense with this requirement

by rollcall vote entered in the journal, two thirds of the

membership concurring.

(2) No bill may be passed or ultimately become a statute

unless until

the bill with any amendments has been

printed, and

distributed to the members, and published on

the Internet, in its ﬁnal form, for at least 72 hours before

the vote, except that this notice period may be waived if

the Governor has submitted to the Legislature a written

statement that dispensing with this notice period for that

bill is necessary to address a state of emergency, as deﬁned

in paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 3 of Article

XIII B, that has been declared by the Governor, and the

house considering the bill thereafter dispenses with the

notice period for that bill by a separate rollcall vote entered

in the journal, two thirds of the membership concurring,

prior to the vote on the bill.

(3) No bill may be passed unless, by rollcall vote entered

in the journal, a majority of the membership of each house

concurs.

this subdivision, a statute enacted at a regular session

shall go into effect on January 1 next following a 90-day

period from the date of enactment of the statute and a

statute enacted at a special session shall go into effect on

the 91st day after adjournment of the special session at

which the bill was passed.

(2) A statute, other than a statute establishing or changing

boundaries of any legislative, congressional, or other

election district, enacted by a bill passed by the Legislature

on or before the date the Legislature adjourns for a joint

recess to reconvene in the second calendar year of the

biennium of the legislative session, and in the possession

of the Governor after that date, shall go into effect on

January 1 next following the enactment date of the statute

unless, before January 1, a copy of a referendum petition

affecting the statute is submitted to the Attorney General

pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 10 of Article II, in

which event the statute shall go into effect on the 91st day

after the enactment date unless the petition has been

presented to the Secretary of State pursuant to subdivision

(b) of Section 9 of Article II.

(3) Statutes calling elections, statutes providing for tax

levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of

the State, and urgency statutes shall go into effect

immediately upon their enactment.

(d) Urgency statutes are those necessary for immediate

preservation of the public peace, health, or safety. A

statement of facts constituting the necessity shall be set

forth in one section of the bill. In each house the section

and the bill shall be passed separately, each by rollcall

vote entered in the journal, two thirds of the membership

concurring. An urgency statute may not create or abolish

any ofﬁce or change the salary, term, or duties of any

ofﬁce, or grant any franchise or special privilege, or create

any vested right or interest.

SEC. 5. Amendments to the Government Code.

SEC. 5.1. Section 9026.5 of the Government Code is

amended to read as follows:

9026.5. Televised or other audiovisual recordings of

public proceedings.

(a) Televised or other audiovisual recordings of the public

proceedings of each house of the Legislature and the

committees thereof may be used for any legitimate purpose

and without the imposition of any fee due to the State or

any public agency or public corporation thereof. No

television signal generated by the Assembly shall be used

for any political or commercial purpose, including, but not

limited to, any campaign for elective public ofﬁce or any

campaign supporting or opposing a ballot proposition

submitted to the electors.

As used in this section, “commercial purpose” does not

include either of the following:

(1) The use of any television signal generated by the

Assembly by an accredited news organization or any

nonproﬁt organization for educational or public affairs

programming.

Text of Proposed Laws

127

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 54 CONTINUED

information system shall be made available in the shortest

feasible time after it is available to the Legislative Counsel.

digital formats of the information identiﬁed in subdivision

(a) and is available to the public shall be made available

by means of access by way of the computer network

speciﬁed in subdivision (b).

(d) Personal information concerning a person who accesses

the information may be maintained only for the purpose of

providing service to the person.

(e) No fee or other charge may be imposed by the

Legislative Counsel as a condition of accessing the

information that is accessible by way of the computer

network speciﬁed in subdivision (b).

(f) The electronic public access provided by way of the

computer network speciﬁed in subdivision (b) shall be in

addition to other electronic or print distribution of the

information.

(g) No action taken pursuant to this section shall be

deemed to alter or relinquish any copyright or other

proprietary interest or entitlement of the State of California

relating to any of the information made available pursuant

to this section.

SEC. 6. Defense of Initiative Measure.

SEC. 6.1. Section 12511.7 is added to the Government

Code, to read:

12511.7. Defense of the California Legislature

Transparency Act.

If an action is brought challenging, in whole or in part, the

validity of the California Legislature Transparency Act, the

following shall apply:

(a) The Legislature shall continue to comply with the act

unless it is declared unconstitutional pursuant to a ﬁnal

judgment of an appellate court.

(b) Except as set forth in subdivision (c), the Attorney

General shall defend against any action challenging, in

whole or in part, the validity of the act, and shall have an

unconditional right to intervene in any action addressing

the validity of the act.

of the act in any action, the Attorney General shall

nonetheless ﬁle an appeal from, or seek review of, any

judgment of any court that determines that the act is

invalid, in whole or in part, if necessary or appropriate to

preserve the state’s standing to defend the law in conformity

with the Attorney General’s constitutional duty to see that

the laws of the state are adequately enforced.

(d) The ofﬁcial proponents of the act have an unconditional

right to participate, either as interveners or real parties in

interest, in any action affecting the validity or interpretation

of the act. Where the Governor and Attorney General have

declined to defend the validity of the act, the ofﬁcial

proponents are also authorized to act on the state’s behalf

in asserting the state’s interest in the validity of the act in

any such action and to appeal from any judgment

invalidating the act.

(e) Nothing in this section precludes other public ofﬁcials

from asserting the state’s interest in the validity of the act.

SEC. 7. Repeal of any Conﬂicting Statute Proposed at

the Primary Election.

If the Legislature places a measure on the ballot for the

June 2016 primary election that is approved by a majority

(2) As authorized by the Assembly, the transmission by a

third party to paid subscribers of an unedited video feed of

the television signal generated by the Assembly.

(b) The Legislature’s costs of complying with paragraph

(2) of subdivision (c) of Section 7 and of paragraph (2) of

subdivision (b) of Section 8 of Article IV of the California

Constitution shall be included as part of the total aggregate

expenditures allowed under Section 7.5 of Article IV of the

California Constitution. Any person or organization who

violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.

SEC. 5.2. Section 10248 of the Government Code is

amended to read as follows:

10248. Public computer network; required legislative

information.

(a) The Legislative Counsel shall, with the advice of the

Assembly Committee on Rules and the Senate Committee

on Rules, make all of the following information available to

the public in electronic form:

(1) The legislative calendar, the schedule of legislative

committee hearings, a list of matters pending on the ﬂoors

of both houses of the Legislature, and a list of the

committees of the Legislature and their members.

(2) The text of each bill introduced in each current

legislative session, including each amended, enrolled, and

chaptered form of each bill.

(3) The bill history of each bill introduced and amended in

each current legislative session.

(4) The bill status of each bill introduced and amended in

each current legislative session.

(5) All bill analyses prepared by legislative committees in

connection with each bill in each current legislative

session.

(6) All audiovisual recordings of legislative proceedings

that have been caused to be made by the Legislature in

accordance with paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section

7 of Article IV of the California Constitution. Each recording

shall remain accessible to the public through the Internet

and downloadable for a minimum period of 20 years

following the date on which the recording was made and

shall then be archived in a secure format.

(6)

(7) All vote information concerning each bill in each

current legislative session.

(7)

(8) Any veto message concerning a bill in each current

legislative session.

(8)

(9) The California Codes.

(9)

(10) The California Constitution.

(10)

(11) All statutes enacted on or after January 1, 1993.

(b) The information identiﬁed in subdivision (a) shall be

made available to the public by means of access by way of

the largest nonproprietary, nonproﬁt cooperative public

computer network. The information shall be made available

in one or more formats and by one or more means in order

to provide the greatest feasible access to the general public

in this state. Any person who accesses the information may

access all or any part of the information. The information

may also be made available by any other means of access

that would facilitate public access to the information. The

information that is maintained in the legislative information

system that is operated and maintained by the Legislative

Counsel shall be made available in the shortest feasible

time after the information is available in the information

system. The information that is not maintained in the

128

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 54 CONTINUED

PROPOSITION 55

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure amends a section of the California

Constitution; therefore, existing provisions proposed to be

deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new provisions

proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate

that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

The California Children’s Education and

Health Care Protection Act of 2016

SECTION 1. Title.

This measure shall be known and may be cited as “The

California Children’s Education and Health Care Protection

Act of 2016.”

SEC. 2. Findings.

(a) During the recent recession, California cut more than

$56 billion from education, health care and other critical

state and local services. These cuts resulted in thousands

of teacher layoffs, increased school class sizes, higher

college tuition fees, and reduced essential services.

Temporary tax increases passed by California voters in

2012 helped to partially offset some of the lost funding,

but those taxes will begin to expire at the end of 2016,

leading to more deﬁcits and more school cuts.

(b) Unless we act now to temporarily extend the current

income tax rates on the wealthiest Californians, our public

schools will soon face another devastating round of cuts

due to lost revenue of billions of dollars a year. Public

school funding was cut to the bone during the recession.

Our schools and colleges are just starting to recover, and

we should be trying to protect education funding instead of

gutting it all over again. We can let the temporary sales tax

increase expire to help working families, but this is not the

time to be giving the wealthiest people in California a tax

cut that they don’t need and that our schools can’t afford.

million children. Every California child deserves a fair

chance to become a successful adult. But for children to

succeed as adults, they must have access to high quality

education and health care.

(d) For children, education and health care are essential

and dependent on one another. Access to a quality

education is fundamental to the success of California’s

children. Even with adequate schools, children cannot

obtain an education if illness prevents them from attending.

And children growing up in communities without adequate

health care are more likely to contract illnesses or have

chronic medical conditions that prevent them from

regularly attending school.

(e) Underfunding of health care programs also harms

California ﬁnancially. Every new state dollar spent on

health care for children and their families is automatically

matched by federal funds. This means every year California

loses out on billions of dollars in federal matching money

that could be used to ensure children and their families

have access to health care.

(f) Research also shows that early access to quality

education and health care improves children’s chances of

succeeding in school and in life. California should do more

to ensure that the state’s children receive the education

of votes thereon, any provision of that measure that is

inconsistent with, or interferes in any way with, the purpose

or provisions adopted by this initiative measure shall be

rendered void and without legal effect.

SEC. 8. Severability.

The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of

this act or its application is held to be invalid, that invalidity

shall not affect the other provisions or applications that

can be given effect in the absence of the invalid provision

or application. Without limiting in any way the generality of

the foregoing, the voters declare (1) that the amendments

to Section 7 of Article IV of the California Constitution are

severable from the amendments to Section 8 of Article IV

of the California Constitution, (2) that the Legislature’s

obligations to cause to be made, to make public, and to

maintain audiovisual recordings of legislative proceedings

are severable from the right of any person to record the

proceedings and broadcast or otherwise transmit such

recordings pursuant to the amendments to Section 7 of

Article IV of the California Constitution, (3) that the right

to record proceedings is severable from the right to

broadcast or otherwise transmit the recordings, and (4)

that the statutory amendments of this initiative measure

are severable from the constitutional amendments.

SEC. 9. Amendments.

The statutory provisions of this act shall not be amended

except upon approval of the voters, except that the

Legislature may amend paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of

Section 10248 of the Government Code to extend the time

that recordings shall remain accessible to the public

through the Internet and downloadable by passing a statute

by a rollcall vote entered in the journal, a majority of the

membership of each house concurring.

SEC. 10. Conﬂicting Ballot Propositions.

(a) In the event that this initiative measure and any other

measure or measures that relate to the transparency of the

legislative process with respect to any of the matters

addressed herein are approved by a majority of voters at

the same election, and this initiative measure receives a

greater number of afﬁrmative votes than any other such

measure or measures, this initiative measure shall control

in its entirety and the other measure or measures shall be

rendered void and without legal effect.

(b) If this initiative measure and a statutory measure

placed on the ballot by the Legislature are approved by a

majority of voters at the same election, the constitutional

amendments in this initiative measure shall control over

any statutory measure placed on the ballot by the

Legislature to the extent that the statutory measure

conﬂicts with, is inconsistent with, or interferes with the

purpose, intent, or provisions of this initiative measure.

superseded in whole or in part by any other conﬂicting

measure approved by the voters and receiving a greater

number of afﬁrmative votes at the same election, and the

conﬂicting measure or superseding provisions thereof are

subsequently held to be invalid, the formerly superseded

provisions of this initiative measure, to the extent

superseded by the subsequently invalidated provisions of

the conﬂicting measure, shall be self-executing and given

the full force of law.

Text of Proposed Laws

129

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 55 CONTINUED

(b) This measure is intended to protect our children by

temporarily extending current income tax rates on wealthy

Californians, instead of awarding a huge tax break to

couples earning more than half a million dollars a year, or

individuals earning more than a quarter million. Instead of

sending money back into the pockets of the wealthy, this

measure sends the money to a special account that must

be spent exclusively to ensure that every California child

has access to a quality public education and the quality

health care necessary for them to stay in school and learn.

current track of balanced budgets and reliable funding for

schools, community colleges, and health care, preventing

a return to the days of chronic budget deﬁcits and funding

cuts.

(d) This measure guarantees in the Constitution that the

revenues it raises for schools will be sent directly to school

districts and community colleges for classroom expenses,

not administrative costs. This school funding cannot be

suspended or withheld no matter what happens with the

state budget.

(e) This measure guarantees in the Constitution that the

revenues it raises for health care will be spent to supplement

existing state funding for health care services that qualify

for matching federal funds.

(f) All revenues from this measure are subject to local

audit every year, and audit by the independent Controller

to ensure that they will be used only for the purposes set

forth in this measure.

SEC. 4. Section 36 of Article XIII of the California

Constitution is amended to read:

EC. 36. (a) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Public Safety Services” includes the following:

(A) Employing and training public safety ofﬁcials,

including law enforcement personnel, attorneys assigned

to criminal proceedings, and court security staff.

(B) Managing local jails and providing housing, treatment,

and services for, and supervision of, juvenile and adult

offenders.

providing services to children and youth who are abused,

neglected, or exploited, or who are at risk of abuse, neglect,

or exploitation, and the families of those children; providing

adoption services; and providing adult protective services.

(D) Providing mental health services to children and adults

to reduce failure in school, harm to self or others,

homelessness, and preventable incarceration or

institutionalization.

(E) Preventing, treating, and providing recovery services

for substance abuse.

(2) “2011 Realignment Legislation” means legislation

enacted on or before September 30, 2012, to implement

the state budget plan, that is entitled 2011 Realignment

and provides for the assignment of Public Safety Services

responsibilities to local agencies, including related

reporting responsibilities. The legislation shall provide

local agencies with maximum ﬂexibility and control over

the design, administration, and delivery of Public Safety

Services consistent with federal law and funding

requirements, as determined by the Legislature. However,

2011 Realignment Legislation shall include no new

programs assigned to local agencies after January 1, 2012,

except for the early periodic screening, diagnosis, and

and health care they need to thrive and achieve their

highest potential.

(g) California public schools, for example, are the most

crowded in the nation. Class sizes are an astonishing 80

percent larger than the national average. The number of

Californians training to be future teachers has dropped by

50 percent in the last ﬁve years as class sizes have soared.

(h) As well, the budgets of California’s community colleges

were slashed during the Great Recession, diminishing the

ability of California children—especially those from low-

income families—to receive career training and an

affordable and necessary college education.

(i) California chronically underfunds health care. California

ranks 48th out of the 50 states in health care spending,

making it difﬁcult for children and their families, seniors,

and the disabled to access health care. Underfunding

health care for children leads to increased rates of serious

illness, and higher long-term medical expenses. Improved

reimbursement for health services helps ensure that

children have access to doctors and hospitals. And once a

hospital or doctor’s ofﬁce closes due to chronic

underfunding, it closes for everyone in that community.

(j) The California Children’s Education and Health Care

Protection Act of 2016 temporarily extends the higher

income tax rates on couples earning more than half a

million dollars a year—those who can most afford it—to

help all California children stay healthy, stay in good public

schools, and have the opportunity for higher education.

(k) This measure does not increase taxes on anyone

earning under $250,000. It does not extend the temporary

sales tax increases that voters previously approved in

2012.

(l) The income tax revenue is guaranteed in the California

Constitution to go directly to local school districts and

community colleges, and to help the state pay for health

care expenses for low-income children and their families.

State funding is freed up to help balance the budget and

prevent even more devastating cuts to services for seniors,

low-income children, working families, and small business

owners. Everyone beneﬁts.

(m) To ensure all these funds go only where the voters

intend, they are put in a special fund that the Legislature

cannot divert to other purposes. None of these revenues

can be spent on state bureaucracy or administrative costs.

(n) These funds will be subject to an independent audit

every year to ensure they are spent only for the purposes

set forth in this measure. Elected ofﬁcials will be subject

to prosecution and criminal penalties if they misuse the

funds.

(o) California has seen massive budget swings over the

past 15 years, with deep deﬁcits and devastating cuts after

the Dot-Com bust and the Great Recession. Maintaining

the state’s rainy day fund will stabilize the budget, avoid

the boom and bust cycles of the past, and protect our

children, seniors, and disabled Californians from cuts in

school and health care funding during future economic

downturns.

SEC. 3. Purpose and Intent.

(a) The chief purpose and intent of the voters in enacting

this measure is to avoid harmful cuts that would reduce

the quality of education and instruction in California’s

local public schools, and to provide adequate funding for

essential health care services for children and family

members who are legal residents of California.

130

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 55 CONTINUED

treatment (EPSDT) program and mental health managed

care.

(b) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (d), commencing

in the 2011–12 ﬁscal year and continuing thereafter, the

following amounts shall be deposited into the Local

Revenue Fund 2011, as established by Section 30025 of

the Government Code, as follows:

(A) All revenues, less refunds, derived from the taxes

described in Sections 6051.15 and 6201.15 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code, as those sections read on July

1, 2011.

(B) All revenues, less refunds, derived from the vehicle

license fees described in Section 11005 of the Revenue

and Taxation Code, as that section read on July 1, 2011.

(2) On and after July 1, 2011, the revenues deposited

pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not be considered General

Fund revenues or proceeds of taxes for purposes of Section

8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution.

are continuously appropriated exclusively to fund the

provision of Public Safety Services by local agencies.

Pending full implementation of the 2011 Realignment

Legislation, funds may also be used to reimburse the State

for program costs incurred in providing Public Safety

Services on behalf of local agencies. The methodology for

allocating funds shall be as speciﬁed in the 2011

Realignment Legislation.

(2) The county treasurer, city and county treasurer, or

other appropriate ofﬁcial shall create a County Local

Revenue Fund 2011 within the treasury of each county or

city and county. The money in each County Local Revenue

Fund 2011 shall be exclusively used to fund the provision

of Public Safety Services by local agencies as speciﬁed by

the 2011 Realignment Legislation.

(3) Notwithstanding Section 6 of Article XIII B, or any

other constitutional provision, a mandate of a new program

or higher level of service on a local agency imposed by the

2011 Realignment Legislation, or by any regulation

adopted or any executive order or administrative directive

issued to implement that legislation, shall not constitute a

mandate requiring the State to provide a subvention of

funds within the meaning of that section. Any requirement

that a local agency comply with Chapter 9 (commencing

with Section 54950) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the

Government Code, with respect to performing its Public

Safety Services responsibilities, or any other matter, shall

not be a reimbursable mandate under Section 6 of Article

XIII B.

(4) (A) Legislation enacted after September 30, 2012,

that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already

borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service

mandated by the 2011 Realignment Legislation shall

apply to local agencies only to the extent that the State

provides annual funding for the cost increase. Local

agencies shall not be obligated to provide programs or

levels of service required by legislation, described in this

subparagraph, above the level for which funding has been

provided.

(B) Regulations, executive orders, or administrative

directives, implemented after October 9, 2011, that are

not necessary to implement the 2011 Realignment

Legislation, and that have an overall effect of increasing

the costs already borne by a local agency for programs or

levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment

Legislation, shall apply to local agencies only to the extent

that the State provides annual funding for the cost increase.

Local agencies shall not be obligated to provide programs

or levels of service pursuant to new regulations, executive

orders, or administrative directives, described in this

subparagraph, above the level for which funding has been

provided.

local agencies, as described in subparagraphs (A) and (B),

above the level for which funding has been provided, shall

not require a subvention of funds by the State nor otherwise

be subject to Section 6 of Article XIII B. This paragraph

shall not apply to legislation currently exempt from

subvention under paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of

Section 6 of Article XIII B as that paragraph read on

January 2, 2011.

(D) The State shall not submit to the federal government

any plans or waivers, or amendments to those plans or

waivers, that have an overall effect of increasing the cost

borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service

mandated by the 2011 Realignment Legislation, except to

the extent that the plans, waivers, or amendments are

required by federal law, or the State provides annual

funding for the cost increase.

(E) The State shall not be required to provide a subvention

of funds pursuant to this paragraph for a mandate that is

imposed by the State at the request of a local agency or to

comply with federal law. State funds required by this

paragraph shall be from a source other than those described

in subdivisions (b) and (d), ad valorem property taxes, or

the Social Services Subaccount of the Sales Tax Account

of the Local Revenue Fund.

(5) (A) For programs described in subparagraphs (C) to

(E), inclusive, of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) and

included in the 2011 Realignment Legislation, if there are

subsequent changes in federal statutes or regulations that

alter the conditions under which federal matching funds as

described in the 2011 Realignment Legislation are

obtained, and have the overall effect of increasing the

costs incurred by a local agency, the State shall annually

provide at least 50 percent of the nonfederal share of those

costs as determined by the State.

(B) When the State is a party to any complaint brought in

a federal judicial or administrative proceeding that involves

one or more of the programs described in subparagraphs

included in the 2011 Realignment Legislation, and there

is a settlement or judicial or administrative order that

imposes a cost in the form of a monetary penalty or has the

overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a

local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by

the 2011 Realignment Legislation, the State shall annually

provide at least 50 percent of the nonfederal share of those

costs as determined by the State. Payment by the State is

not required if the State determines that the settlement or

order relates to one or more local agencies failing to

perform a ministerial duty, failing to perform a legal

obligation in good faith, or acting in a negligent or reckless

manner.

from funding sources other than those described in

subdivisions (b) and (d), ad valorem property taxes, or the

Social Services Subaccount of the Sales Tax Account of

the Local Revenue Fund.

(6) If the State or a local agency fails to perform a duty or

obligation under this section or under the 2011

Text of Proposed Laws

131

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 55 CONTINUED

updated estimate the amounts previously transferred to

the Education Protection Account for that ﬁscal year.

(ii) In June 2015 and in every June from 2016 to 2021

2033, inclusive, the Director of Finance shall make a ﬁnal

determination of the amount of additional revenues, less

refunds, derived from the incremental increases in tax

rates made in subdivision (f) for the ﬁscal year ending two

years prior. The amount of the updated estimate calculated

in clause (i) for the ﬁscal year ending two years prior shall

be subtracted from the amount of this ﬁnal determination.

(D) If the sum determined pursuant to subparagraph (C) is

positive, the Controller shall transfer an amount equal to

that sum into the Education Protection Account within 10

days preceding the end of the ﬁscal year. If that amount is

negative, the Controller shall suspend or reduce subsequent

quarterly transfers, if any, to the Education Protection

Account until the total reduction equals the negative

amount herein described. For purposes of any calculation

made pursuant to clause (i) of subparagraph (C), the

amount of a quarterly transfer shall not be modiﬁed to

reﬂect any suspension or reduction made pursuant to this

subparagraph.

(E) Before June 30, 2018, and before June 30 of each

year from 2019 to 2030, inclusive, the Director of Finance

shall estimate the amount of the additional revenues, less

refunds, to be derived in the following ﬁscal year from the

incremental increases in tax rates made in subdivision (f),

that, when combined with all other available General Fund

revenues, will be required to meet:

(i) The minimum funding guarantee of Section 8 of Article

XVI for that following ﬁscal year; and

(ii) The workload budget for that following ﬁscal year,

excluding any program expenditures already accounted for

through clause (i). For purposes of this section, “workload

budget” has the meaning set forth in Section 13308.05 of

the Government Code, as that section read and was

interpreted by the Department of Finance on January 1,

2016, provided, however, that “currently authorized

services” shall mean only those services that would have

been considered “currently authorized services” under

Section 13308.05 of the Government Code as of January

1, 2016.

(F) In order to enhance the ability of all California school

children and their families to receive regular, quality health

care and thereby minimize school absenteeism due to

health-related problems, whenever the Director of Finance

estimates that the amount available for transfer into the

Education Protection Account during the following ﬁscal

year exceeds the amount of revenues required from that

account pursuant to subparagraph (E) for that following

ﬁscal year, the director shall identify the remaining amount.

Fifty percent of that remainder, up to a maximum of two

billion dollars in any single ﬁscal year, shall be allocated

by the Controller from the Education Protection Account to

the California Department of Health Care Services on a

quarterly basis to increase funding for the existing health

care programs and services described in Chapter 7

(commencing with Section 14000) to Chapter 8.9

(commencing with Section 14700), inclusive, of Part 3 of

Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. The

funding shall be used only for critical, emergency, acute,

and preventive health care services to children and their

families, provided by health care professionals and health

facilities that are licensed pursuant to Section 1250 of the

Health and Safety Code, and to health plans or others that

manage the provision of health care for Medi-Cal

Realignment Legislation, an appropriate party may seek

judicial relief. These proceedings shall have priority over

all other civil matters.

(7) The funds deposited into a County Local Revenue

Fund 2011 shall be spent in a manner designed to

maintain the State’s eligibility for federal matching funds,

and to ensure compliance by the State with applicable

federal standards governing the State’s provision of Public

Safety Services.

(8) The funds deposited into a County Local Revenue

Fund 2011 shall not be used by local agencies to supplant

other funding for Public Safety Services.

(d) If the taxes described in subdivision (b) are reduced or

cease to be operative, the State shall annually provide

moneys to the Local Revenue Fund 2011 in an amount

equal to or greater than the aggregate amount that

otherwise would have been provided by the taxes described

in subdivision (b). The method for determining that amount

shall be described in the 2011 Realignment Legislation,

and the State shall be obligated to provide that amount for

so long as the local agencies are required to perform the

Public Safety Services responsibilities assigned by the

2011 Realignment Legislation. If the State fails to annually

appropriate that amount, the Controller shall transfer that

amount from the General Fund in pro rata monthly shares

to the Local Revenue Fund 2011. Thereafter, the Controller

shall disburse these amounts to local agencies in the

manner directed by the 2011 Realignment Legislation.

The state obligations under this subdivision shall have a

lower priority claim to General Fund money than the ﬁrst

priority for money to be set apart under Section 8 of Article

XVI and the second priority to pay voter-approved debts

and liabilities described in Section 1 of Article XVI.

(e) (1) To ensure that public education is not harmed in

the process of providing critical protection to local Public

Safety Services, the Education Protection Account is

hereby created in the General Fund to receive and disburse

the revenues derived from the incremental increases in

taxes imposed by this section, as speciﬁed in subdivision (f).

(2) (A) Before June 30, 2013, and before June 30 of

each year from 2014 to 2018

2030, inclusive, the Director

of Finance shall estimate the total amount of additional

revenues, less refunds, that will be derived from the

incremental increases in tax rates made in subdivision (f)

that will be available for transfer into the Education

Protection Account during the next ﬁscal year. The Director

of Finance shall make the same estimate by January 10,

2013, for additional revenues, less refunds, that will be

received by the end of the 2012–13 ﬁscal year.

(B) During the last 10 days of the quarter of each of the

ﬁrst three quarters of each ﬁscal year from 2013–14 to

2018–19

2030–31, inclusive, the Controller shall transfer

into the Education Protection Account one-fourth of the

total amount estimated pursuant to subparagraph (A) for

that ﬁscal year, except as this amount may be adjusted

pursuant to subparagraph (D).

2032–33, inclusive, the Director of Finance shall calculate

an adjustment to the Education Protection Account, as

speciﬁed by subparagraph (D), by adding together the

following amounts, as applicable:

(i) In the last quarter of each ﬁscal year from 2012–13 to

2018–19

2030–31, inclusive, the Director of Finance

shall recalculate the estimate made for the ﬁscal year

pursuant to subparagraph (A), and shall subtract from this

132

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 55 CONTINUED

receive less than two hundred dollars ($200) per unit of

average daily attendance.

(4) This subdivision is self-executing and requires no

legislative action to take effect. Distribution of the moneys

in the Education Protection Account by the Board of

Governors of the California Community Colleges and

Superintendent of Public Instruction shall not be delayed

or otherwise affected by failure of the Legislature and

Governor to enact an annual budget bill pursuant to

Section 12 of Article IV, by invocation of paragraph

subdivision (h) of Section 8 of Article XVI, or by any other

action or failure to act by the Legislature or Governor.

(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the moneys

deposited in the Education Protection Account for

education shall not be used to pay any costs incurred by

the Legislature, the Governor, or any agency of state

government.

(6) A community college district, county ofﬁce of

education, school district, or charter school shall have sole

authority to determine how the moneys received from the

Education Protection Account are spent in the school or

schools within its jurisdiction, provided, however, that the

appropriate governing board or body shall make these

spending determinations in open session of a public

meeting of the governing board or body and shall not use

any of the funds from the Education Protection Account

for salaries or beneﬁts of administrators or any other

administrative costs. Each community college district,

county ofﬁce of education, school district, and charter

school shall annually publish on its Internet Web site an

accounting of how much money was received from the

Education Protection Account and how that money was

spent.

(7) The annual independent ﬁnancial and compliance

audit required of community college districts, county

ofﬁces of education, school districts, and charter schools

shall, in addition to all other requirements of law, ascertain

and verify whether the funds provided from the Education

Protection Account have been properly disbursed and

expended as required by this section. Expenses incurred

by those entities to comply with the additional audit

requirement of this section may be paid with funding from

the Education Protection Account and shall not be

considered administrative costs for purposes of this

section.

(8) Revenues, less refunds, derived pursuant to subdivision

(f) for deposit in the Education Protection Account

pursuant to this section shall be deemed “General Fund

revenues,” “General Fund proceeds of taxes,” and “moneys

to be applied by the State for the support of school districts

and community college districts” for purposes of Section 8

of Article XVI.

(f) (1) (A) In addition to the taxes imposed by Part 1

(commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code, for the privilege of selling

tangible personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed

upon all retailers at the rate of 1/4 percent of the gross

receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal

property sold at retail in this State on and after January 1,

2013, and before January 1, 2017.

(B) In addition to the taxes imposed by Part 1 (commencing

with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and

Taxation Code, an excise tax is hereby imposed on the

storage, use, or other consumption in this State of tangible

personal property purchased from any retailer on and after

beneﬁciaries that are contracting with the California

Department of Health Care Services to provide health

beneﬁts pursuant to this section.

(G) The allocation provided for in subparagraph (F) may be

suspended by statute during a ﬁscal year in which a budget

emergency has been declared, provided, however, that the

allocation shall not be reduced beyond the proportional

reduction in overall General Fund expenditures for that

year. For purposes of this section, “budget emergency” has

the same meaning as in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of

Section 22 of Article XVI.

(H) The funding provided pursuant to subparagraph (F)

shall not be used to supplant existing state General Funds

for the nonfederal share of payments for those programs

and, consistent with federal law, shall be used to obtain

federal matching Medicaid funds.

(3) All moneys in the Education Protection Account are

hereby continuously appropriated for the support of school

districts, county ofﬁces of education, charter schools, and

community college districts as set forth in this paragraph,

and for health care as set forth in subparagraph (F) of

paragraph (2).

(A) Eleven percent of the moneys appropriated for

education pursuant to this paragraph shall be allocated

quarterly by the Board of Governors of the California

Community Colleges to community college districts to

provide general purpose funding to community college

districts in proportion to the amounts determined pursuant

to Section 84750.5 of the Education Code, as that code

section read upon voter approval of this section

November 6, 2012. The allocations calculated pursuant to

this subparagraph shall be offset by the amounts speciﬁed

in subdivisions (a), (c), and (d) of Section 84751 of the

Education Code, as that section read upon voter approval

of this section on November 6, 2012, that are in excess of

the amounts calculated pursuant to Section 84750.5 of

the Education Code, as that section read upon voter

approval of this section on November 6, 2012, provided

that no community college district shall receive less than

one hundred dollars ($100) per full time equivalent

student.

(B) Eighty-nine percent of the moneys appropriated for

education pursuant to this paragraph shall be allocated

quarterly by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to

provide general purpose funding to school districts, county

ofﬁces of education, and state general-purpose funding to

charter schools in proportion to the revenue limits

calculated pursuant to Sections 2558 and 42238 of the

Education Code and the amounts calculated pursuant to

Section 47633 of the Education Code for county ofﬁces of

education, school districts, and charter schools,

respectively, as those sections read upon voter approval of

this section on November 6, 2012. The amounts so

calculated shall be offset by the amounts speciﬁed in

subdivision (c) of Section 2558 of, paragraphs (1) through

(7) of subdivision (h) of Section 42238 of, and

Section 47635 of, the Education Code for county ofﬁces

of education, school districts, and charter schools,

respectively, as those sections read upon voter approval of

this section on November 6, 2012, that are in excess of

the amounts calculated pursuant to Sections 2558,

42238, and 47633 of the Education Code for county

ofﬁces of education, school districts, and charter schools,

respectively, as those sections read upon voter approval of

this section on November 6, 2012, provided that no school

district, county ofﬁce of education, or charter school shall

Text of Proposed Laws

133

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 55 CONTINUED

January 1, 2013, and before January 1, 2017, for storage,

use, or other consumption in this state at the rate of 1/4

percent of the sales price of the property.

enacted on or after the effective date of this section, shall

apply to the taxes imposed pursuant to this paragraph.

(D) This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1,

2017.

(2) For any taxable year beginning on or after January 1,

2012, and before January 1, 2019

2031, with respect to

the tax imposed pursuant to Section 17041 of the Revenue

and Taxation Code, the income tax bracket and the rate of

9.3 percent set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of

Section 17041 of the Revenue and Taxation Code shall be

modiﬁed by each of the following:

(A) (i) For that portion of taxable income that is over two

hundred ﬁfty thousand dollars ($250,000) but not over

three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000), the tax rate is

10.3 percent of the excess over two hundred ﬁfty thousand

dollars ($250,000).

(ii) For that portion of taxable income that is over three

hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) but not over ﬁve

hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), the tax rate is 11.3

percent of the excess over three hundred thousand dollars

($300,000).

(iii) For that portion of taxable income that is over ﬁve

hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), the tax rate is 12.3

percent of the excess over ﬁve hundred thousand dollars

($500,000).

(B) The income tax brackets speciﬁed in clauses (i), (ii),

and (iii) of subparagraph (A) shall be recomputed, as

otherwise provided in subdivision (h) of Section 17041 of

the Revenue and Taxation Code, only for taxable years

beginning on and after January 1, 2013.

of the Revenue and Taxation Code, this paragraph shall be

considered to be chaptered on the date it becomes effective

November 6, 2012.

(ii) For purposes of Part 10 (commencing with

Section 17001) of, and Part 10.2 (commencing with

Section 18401) of, Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code, the modiﬁed tax brackets and tax rates established

and imposed by this paragraph shall be deemed to be

established and imposed under Section 17041 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code.

(D) This paragraph shall become inoperative on December

1, 2019

2031.

(3) For any taxable year beginning on or after January 1,

2012, and before January 1, 2019

2031, with respect to

the tax imposed pursuant to Section 17041 of the Revenue

and Taxation Code, the income tax bracket and the rate of

9.3 percent set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of

Section 17041 of the Revenue and Taxation Code shall be

modiﬁed by each of the following:

(A) (i) For that portion of taxable income that is over three

hundred forty thousand dollars ($340,000) but not over

four hundred eight thousand dollars ($408,000), the tax

rate is 10.3 percent of the excess over three hundred forty

thousand dollars ($340,000).

(ii) For that portion of taxable income that is over four

hundred eight thousand dollars ($408,000) but not over

six hundred eighty thousand dollars ($680,000), the tax

rate is 11.3 percent of the excess over four hundred eight

thousand dollars ($408,000).

(iii) For that portion of taxable income that is over six

hundred eighty thousand dollars ($680,000), the tax rate

is 12.3 percent of the excess over six hundred eighty

thousand dollars ($680,000).

(B) The income tax brackets speciﬁed in clauses (i), (ii),

and (iii) of subparagraph (A) shall be recomputed, as

otherwise provided in subdivision (h) of Section 17041 of

the Revenue and Taxation Code, only for taxable years

beginning on and after January 1, 2013.

of the Revenue and Taxation Code, this paragraph shall be

considered to be chaptered on the date it becomes effective

November 6, 2012.

(ii) For purposes of Part 10 (commencing with

Section 17001) of, and Part 10.2 (commencing with

Section 18401) of, Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code, the modiﬁed tax brackets and tax rates established

and imposed by this paragraph shall be deemed to be

established and imposed under Section 17041 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code.

(D) This paragraph shall become inoperative on

December 1, 2019

2031.

(g) (1) The Controller, pursuant to his or her statutory

authority, may perform audits of expenditures from the

Local Revenue Fund 2011 and any County Local Revenue

Fund 2011, and shall audit the Education Protection

Account to ensure that those funds are used and accounted

for in a manner consistent with this section.

(2) The Attorney General or local district attorney shall

expeditiously investigate, and may seek civil or criminal

penalties for, any misuse of moneys from the County Local

Revenue Fund 2011 or the Education Protection Account.

SEC. 5. Conﬂicting Measures.

In the event that this measure and another measure that

affects the tax rates for personal income shall appear on

the same statewide ballot, the provisions of the other

measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conﬂict

with this measure. In the event that this measure receives

a greater number of afﬁrmative votes than a measure

deemed to be in conﬂict with it, the provisions of this

measure shall prevail in their entirety, and the other

measure or measures shall be null and void.

SEC. 6. Severability.

If the provisions of this measure, or part thereof, are for

any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the

remaining provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain

in full force and effect and to this end the provisions of

this measure are severable.

SEC. 7. Proponent Standing.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the state,

government agency, or any of its ofﬁcials fail to defend the

constitutionality of this measure, following its approval by

the voters, any other government employer, the proponent,

or in his or her absence, any citizen of this state shall have

the authority to intervene in any court action challenging

the constitutionality of this measure for the purpose of

defending its constitutionality, whether such action is in

trial court, on appeal, or on discretionary review by the

Supreme Court of California or the Supreme Court of the

United States. The fees and costs of defending the action

134

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 55 CONTINUED

according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention, electronic cigarette use among this group

tripled from 2013 to 2014.

(g) Research into the causes, early detection, and effective

treatment, care, prevention, and potential cures of all

types of cancer, cardiovascular and lung disease, oral

disease, and tobacco-related diseases will ultimately save

lives and save state and local government money in the

future.

(h) There is an urgent need for research in California for

new and effective treatments for all types of cancer,

cardiovascular and lung disease, oral disease, and tobacco-

related diseases. Such research transforms scientiﬁc

discoveries into clinical applications that reduce the

incidence and mortality of such diseases and conditions.

(i) Funding prevention programs designed to discourage

individuals, particularly youth, from taking up smoking

and the use of other tobacco products through health

education and health promotion programs will save lives

and save state and local government money in the future.

(j) A reinvigorated tobacco control program will allow

targeted public health efforts to combat the tobacco

industry’s predatory marketing to ethnic groups, driving

down smoking rates and ultimately reducing cancer,

cardiovascular and lung disease, oral disease, and tobacco-

related diseases in these California communities.

(k) Funding implementation and administrative programs

to support law enforcement efforts to reduce illegal sales

of tobacco products to minors, cigarette smuggling, and

tobacco tax evasion will save lives and save state and local

government money in the future.

(l) California faces a shortage of physicians and dentists to

meet the growing healthcare needs of its residents. As a

result, access to primary and oral healthcare, treatment for

tobacco-related diseases, regular check-ups and other

urgent healthcare needs will suffer. California taxpayers

support the education of thousands of medical and dental

students every year, yet because of limits on the number of

residency programs, many of those physicians and dentists

are forced out of state to continue their training, leaving

patients in California without access to care. Funding

implementation and administrative programs that will help

keep hundreds more doctors in California every year to

improve the health of Californians will save lives and save

state and local government money in the future.

(m) Medical studies have shown that the smoking of

cigarettes and use of other tobacco products affects oral

health by causing dental disease, including gum disease

and bone loss, cancers of the mouth and throat, and severe

tooth wear. Smoking causes half of the cases of gum

disease, which results in increased tooth loss. Oral cancer

risk for smokers is at least six times higher than for

nonsmokers and 75% of all oral cancer in the United

States is related to tobacco use. Oral cancer risk for

smokeless tobacco increases 50-fold over nonsmokers.

There is an association between maternal smoking during

pregnancy and cleft lip development in fetuses. Tobacco

cessation reduces the risk of mouth and throat cancer by

50%. Funding programs that educate, prevent and treat

dental diseases, including those caused by use of tobacco,

will improve the lives of Californians and save state and

local government money in the future.

(n) Increasing the cost of cigarettes and tobacco products

is widely recognized as the most effective way to reduce

smoking across California, especially by young people. The

shall be a charge on funds appropriated to the Attorney

General, which shall be satisﬁed promptly.

SEC. 8. Effective Date.

This measure shall take effect immediately upon passage.

PROPOSITION 56

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds a section to the California

Constitution and amends and adds sections to the Revenue

and Taxation Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed

to be deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new

provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type

to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

The California Healthcare, Research and Prevention

Tobacco Tax Act of 2016

SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations.

(a) Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of

death and disease in California, claiming the lives of more

than 40,000 people every year. Each year thousands of

Californians require medical and dental treatment as a

result of tobacco use.

(b) Healthcare treatment of all types of cancer,

cardiovascular and lung disease, oral disease, and tobacco-

related diseases continues to impose a signiﬁcant ﬁnancial

burden upon California’s overstressed healthcare system.

Tobacco use costs Californians more than $13.29 billion

in healthcare expenses every year, of which $3.5 billion is

paid for by taxpayers through existing healthcare programs

and services that provide healthcare, treatment, and

services for Californians. The cost of lost productivity due

to tobacco use adds an additional estimated $10.35 billion

to the annual economic consequences of smoking and

tobacco use in California.

decrease tobacco use and mitigate the costs of healthcare

treatment and improve existing programs providing for

quality healthcare and access to healthcare services for

families and children. It will save lives and save state and

local government money in the future.

(d) An increase in funding for existing healthcare programs

and services that treat all types of cancer, cardiovascular

and lung disease, oral disease, and tobacco-related

diseases and conditions will expand the number of

healthcare providers that treat patients with such diseases

and conditions. Funds spent for this purpose can be used

to match federal funds, with the federal government

putting up as much as nine dollars for every dollar spent

from this fund.

(e) Most electronic cigarettes contain nicotine, which is

derived from tobacco and is a highly addictive drug.

Electronic cigarettes are currently not subject to any

tobacco taxation, making them cheaper and potentially

more attractive, especially to young people.

(f) There are more than 470 electronic cigarette brands

for sale today offered in over 7,700 ﬂavors including

candy-ﬂavors that appeal to youth, such as Captain Crunch,

gummy bear, cotton candy, Atomic Fireball, and fruit

loops. The fastest growing age range for electronic

cigarettes is middle school and high school students and

Text of Proposed Laws

135

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

(a) “Cigarettes” has the same meaning as in Section 30003,

as it read on January 1, 1988.

(b) “Tobacco products” includes, but is not limited to, all

forms of cigars, smoking tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff,

and any other articles or products made of, or containing

at least 50 percent, tobacco a product containing, made,

or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for

human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed,

absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested

by any other means, including, but not limited to, cigars,

little cigars, chewing tobacco, pipe tobacco, or snuff, but

does not include cigarettes. Tobacco products shall also

include electronic cigarettes. Tobacco products shall not

include any product that has been approved by the United

States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco

cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes where

that product is marketed and sold solely for such approved

use. Tobacco products does not include any food products

as that term is deﬁned pursuant to Section 6359.

system sold in combination with nicotine which can be

used to deliver to a person nicotine in aerosolized or

vaporized form, including, but not limited to, an e-cigarette,

e-cigar, e-pipe, vape pen, or e-hookah. Electronic cigarettes

include any component, part, or accessory of such a device

that is used during the operation of the device when sold

in combination with any liquid or substance containing

nicotine. Electronic cigarettes also include any liquid or

substance containing nicotine, whether sold separately or

sold in combination with any device that could be used to

deliver to a person nicotine in aerosolized or vaporized

form. Electronic cigarettes do not include any device not

sold in combination with any liquid or substance containing

nicotine, or any battery, battery charger, carrying case, or

other accessory not used in the operation of the device if

sold separately. Electronic cigarettes shall not include any

product that has been approved by the United States Food

and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation

product or for other therapeutic purposes where that

product is marketed and sold solely for such approved use.

As used in this subdivision, nicotine does not include any

food products as that term is deﬁned pursuant to Section

6359.

(c)

(d) “Fund” means the Cigarette and Tobacco Products

Surtax Fund created by Section 30122.

SEC. 3.2. Section 30131.1 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

30131.1. The following deﬁnitions apply for purposes of

this article:

(a) “Cigarette” has the same meaning as in Section 30003,

as it read on January 1, 1997.

(b) “Tobacco products” includes, but is not limited to, all

forms of cigars, smoking tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff,

and any other articles or products made of, or containing

at least 50 percent, tobacco, but does not include

cigarettes shall have the same meaning as in subdivision

(b) of Section 30121, as amended by the California

Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of

2016.

SEC. 4. The California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016.

SEC. 4.1. Article 2.5 (commencing with

Section 30130.50) is added to Chapter 2 of Part 13 of

Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, to read:

2000 U.S. Surgeon General’s Report, Reducing Tobacco

Use, found that raising tobacco-product prices decreases

the prevalence of tobacco use, particularly among kids and

young adults, and that tobacco tax increases produce

“substantial long-term improvements in health.” From its

review of existing research, the report concluded that

raising tobacco taxes is one of the most effective tobacco

prevention and control strategies. Reducing smoking saves

lives and saves state and local government money in the

future.

(o) Because increasing the tobacco tax will reduce smoking

and the use of other tobacco products, it is important to

protect existing tobacco tax funded programs from a

decline in tax revenues.

(p) California currently taxes cigarettes at only $0.87 per

pack, and ranks 35th in tobacco tax rates, reﬂecting one of

the lowest tobacco taxes in the United States. As of

January, 2016, the national average will be $1.60 per

pack. Thirty-two states have cigarette tax rates of $1 per

pack or higher, and California is well below other western

states (Washington: $3.025; Oregon: $1.31; Nevada:

$1.80; and Arizona: $2). California last raised its tobacco

tax in 1998.

SEC. 2. Statement of Purpose.

The purpose of this act is to increase the tax on tobacco

and other tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes,

in order to:

(a) Save the lives of Californians and save state and local

government money in the future by reducing smoking and

tobacco use among all Californians, but particularly youth.

(b) Provide funds to increase funding for existing

healthcare programs and services that treat all types of

cancer, cardiovascular and lung disease, oral disease, and

tobacco-related diseases, expand the number of healthcare

providers, and maximize federal funding for these programs

and services.

and cures for all types of cancer, cardiovascular and lung

disease, oral disease, and tobacco-related diseases, and to

transform such scientiﬁc discoveries into clinical

applications to reduce the incidence and mortality of such

diseases and conditions.

(d) Provide funds to support prevention programs aimed at

discouraging individuals from using cigarettes and other

tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes.

(e) Provide funds for implementation and administrative

purposes to reduce cigarette smuggling, tobacco tax

evasion, and illegal sales of tobacco products to minors,

fund medical training for new doctors to treat diseases,

including those caused by tobacco use, and fund programs

to prevent and treat dental diseases, including those

caused by tobacco use.

(f) Protect existing tobacco tax funded programs, which

currently save Californians millions of dollars in healthcare

costs.

(g) Provide a full accounting of how funds raised are spent

to further the purposes of this act without creating new

bureaucracies.

SEC. 3. Deﬁnition of Tobacco Products.

SEC. 3.1. Section 30121 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

30121. For purposes of this article:

136

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

(b) (1) Every licensed cigarette distributor, for the

privilege of distributing cigarettes and for holding or storing

cigarettes for sale, use, or consumption, shall pay a

cigarette indicia adjustment tax for each California

cigarette tax stamp that is afﬁxed to any package of

cigarettes and for each unafﬁxed California cigarette tax

stamp in its possession or under its control at 12:01 a.m.

on the ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst calendar quarter commencing

more than 90 days after the effective date of this act at the

following rates:

(A) Two dollars and ﬁfty cents ($2.50) for each stamp

bearing the designation “25.”

(B) Two dollars ($2) for each stamp bearing the designation

“20.”

“10.”

(2) Every licensed cigarette distributor shall ﬁle a return

with the board on or before the ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst calendar

quarter commencing 180 days after the effective date of

this act on a form prescribed by the board, showing the

number of stamps described in subparagraphs (A), (B),

and (C) of paragraph (1). The amount of tax shall be

computed and shown on the return.

and payable on or before the ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst calendar

quarter commencing 180 days after the effective date of

this act. Payments shall be made by remittances payable

to the board and the payments shall accompany the return

and forms required to be ﬁled by this section.

(d) Any amount required to be paid by this section that is

not timely paid shall bear interest at the rate and by the

method established pursuant to Section 30202 from the

ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst calendar quarter commencing 180

days after the effective date of this act, until paid, and

shall be subject to determination, and redetermination,

and any penalties provided with respect to determinations

and redeterminations.

30130.53. California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund.

(a) The California Healthcare, Research and Prevention

Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund is hereby established in the

State Treasury.

(b) All revenues raised pursuant to the taxes imposed by

this article, less refunds made pursuant to Article 1

(commencing with Section 30361) of Chapter 6, shall be

deposited into the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund.

Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of

2016 Fund is a trust fund established solely to carry out

the purposes of this act and all revenues deposited into the

California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco

Tax Act of 2016 Fund, together with interest earned by the

fund, are hereby continuously appropriated for the

purposes of this act without regard to ﬁscal year and shall

be expended only in accordance with the provisions of this

act and its purposes.

(d) Notwithstanding any other law, revenues deposited

into the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention

Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund, including any interest

earned by the fund, shall only be used for the speciﬁc

purposes set forth in this act, and shall be appropriated

and expended only for the purposes expressed in this act

and shall not be subject to appropriation, reversion, or

Article 2.5. California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016

30130.50. Deﬁnitions.

For the purposes of this article:

(a) “Cigarette” has the same meaning as that in

Section 30003 as it read on January 1, 2015.

(b) “Tobacco products” has the same meaning as that in

subdivision (b) of Section 30121, as amended by this act.

30130.51. California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Cigarette Distribution

Tax.

(a) In addition to any other taxes imposed upon the

distribution of cigarettes under this part, there shall be

imposed an additional tax upon every distributor of

cigarettes at the rate of one hundred mills ($0.100) for

each cigarette distributed on or after the ﬁrst day of the

ﬁrst calendar quarter commencing more than 90 days after

the effective date of this act.

(b) The board shall adopt regulations providing for the

implementation of an equivalent tax on electronic

cigarettes as that term is deﬁned in subdivision (c) of

Section 30121, and the methods for collection of the tax.

Such regulations shall include imposition of an equivalent

tax on any device intended to be used to deliver aerosolized

or vaporized nicotine to the person inhaling from the device

when sold separately or as a package; any component,

part, or accessory of such a device that is used during the

operation of the device, whether sold separately or as a

package with such device; and any liquid or substance

containing nicotine, whether sold separately or as a

package with any device that would allow it to be inhaled.

Such regulations may include, but are not limited to,

deﬁning who is a distributor of electronic cigarettes

pursuant to Section 30011 and the licensing requirements

of any such person.

revenues resulting from the tax imposed by subdivision (a)

and all revenues resulting from the equivalent increase in

the tax on tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes,

imposed by subdivision (b) of Section 30123, shall be

deposited into the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund created by

Section 30130.53.

30130.52. California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Cigarette Floor Taxes.

(a) (1) In addition to any other tax, every dealer and

wholesaler, for the privilege of holding or storing cigarettes

for sale, use, or consumption, shall pay a ﬂoor stock tax for

each cigarette in its possession or under its control in this

state at 12:01 a.m. on the ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst calendar

quarter commencing more than 90 days after the effective

date of this act at the rate of one hundred mills ($0.100)

for each cigarette.

(2) Every dealer and wholesaler shall ﬁle a return with the

board on or before the ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst calendar quarter

commencing more than 180 days after the effective date

of this act on a form prescribed by the board, showing the

number of cigarettes in its possession or under its control

in this state at 12:01 a.m. on the ﬁrst day of the ﬁrst

calendar quarter commencing more than 90 days after the

effective date of this act. The amount of tax shall be

computed and shown on the return.

Text of Proposed Laws

137

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

30130.55. California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Distribution of

Revenue.

After deducting and transferring the necessary funds

pursuant to Section 30130.54 and subdivisions (a), (b),

(c), (d), and (e) of Section 30130.57, the Controller shall

annually allocate and transfer the remaining funds in the

California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco

Tax Act of 2016 Fund as follows:

(a) Eighty-two percent shall be transferred to the

Healthcare Treatment Fund, which is hereby created, and

shall be used by the State Department of Health Care

Services to increase funding for the existing healthcare

programs and services described in Chapter 7 (commencing

with Section 14000) to Chapter 8.9 (commencing with

Section 14700), inclusive, of Part 3 of Division 9 of the

Welfare and Institutions Code, including those that provide

healthcare, treatment, and services for Californians with

tobacco-related diseases and conditions, by providing

improved payments, for all healthcare, treatment, and

services described in Chapter 7 (commencing with

Section 14000) to Chapter 8.9 (commencing with

Section 14700), inclusive, of Part 3 of Division 9 of the

Welfare and Institutions Code. To the extent possible given

the limits of funding under this article, payments and

support for the nonfederal share of payments for healthcare,

services, and treatment shall be increased based on criteria

developed and periodically updated as part of the annual

state budget process, provided that these funds shall not

be used to supplant existing state general funds for these

same purposes. These criteria shall include, but not be

limited to, ensuring timely access, limiting speciﬁc

geographic shortages of services, or ensuring quality care.

Consistent with federal law, the funding shall be used to

draw down federal funds. The funding shall be used only

for care provided by health care professionals, clinics,

health facilities that are licensed pursuant to Section

1250 of the Health and Safety Code, and to health plans

contracting with the State Department of Health Care

Services to provide health beneﬁts pursuant to this section.

The funding can be used for the nonfederal share of

payments from governmental entities where applicable.

The department shall, if required, seek any necessary

federal approval for the implementation of this section.

(b) Thirteen percent shall be used for the purpose of

funding comprehensive tobacco prevention and control

programs, provided that these funds are not to be used to

supplant existing state or local funds for these same

purposes. These funds shall be apportioned in the following

manner:

(1) Eighty-ﬁve percent to the State Department of Public

Health Tobacco Control Program to be used for the tobacco

control programs described beginning at Section 104375

of the Health and Safety Code. The State Department of

Public Health shall award funds to state and local

governmental agencies, tribes, universities and colleges,

community-based organizations, and other qualiﬁed

agencies for the implementation, evaluation, and

dissemination of evidence-based health promotion and

health communication activities in order to monitor,

evaluate, and reduce tobacco and nicotine use, tobacco-

related disease rates, and tobacco-related health

disparities, and develop a stronger evidence base of

effective prevention programming with not less than 15

percent of health promotion, health communication

activities, and evaluation and tobacco use surveillance

transfer by the Legislature, the Governor, the Director of

Finance, or the Controller for any purpose other than those

speciﬁed in this act, nor shall such revenues be loaned to

the General Fund or any other fund of the state or any local

government fund.

30130.54. California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Effect on Tobacco

Consumption and Tax Revenue.

(a) The board shall determine within one year of the

effective date of this act, and annually thereafter, the

effect that the additional taxes imposed on cigarettes by

this article, and the resulting increase in the tax on tobacco

products required by subdivision (b) of Section 30123,

have on the consumption of cigarettes and tobacco

products in this state. To the extent that a decrease in

consumption is determined by the board to be a direct

result of the additional tax imposed on cigarettes by this

article, and the resulting increase in the tax on tobacco

products required by subdivision (b) of Section 30123,

the board shall determine the ﬁscal effect the decrease in

consumption has on the Cigarette and Tobacco Products

Surtax Fund created by Section 30122 (Proposition 99 as

approved by the voters at the November 8, 1988, statewide

general election), the Breast Cancer Fund created by

Section 30461.6, and the California Children and Families

Trust Fund created by Section 30131 (Proposition 10 as

approved by the voters at the November 3, 1998, statewide

general election), and the revenues derived from

Section 30101.

(b) The Controller shall transfer from the California

Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of

2016 Fund to those affected funds described in subdivision

(a) the amount necessary to offset the revenue decrease

directly resulting from the imposition of additional taxes by

this article.

effective date of this act, and annually thereafter, the

effect, if any, that the additional taxes imposed on

cigarettes by this article, and the resulting increase in the

tax on tobacco products required by subdivision (b) of

Section 30123, have on the consumption of cigarettes

and tobacco products in this state, including from the

illegal sale of cigarettes and tobacco products. To the

extent that there is a loss of state or local government sales

and use tax revenues and such loss is determined by the

board to be a direct result of the additional tax imposed on

cigarettes by this article, and the resulting increase in the

tax on tobacco products required by subdivision (b) of

Section 30123, including from the illegal sale of cigarettes

and tobacco products, the board shall determine the ﬁscal

effect on state and local government sales and use tax

revenues.

(d) The Controller shall transfer from the California

Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of

2016 Fund to the general fund of the state and those

affected local governments described in subdivision (c)

the amount necessary to offset the state and local sales

and use tax revenue decrease directly resulting from the

imposition of additional taxes by this article, including

from the illegal sale of cigarettes and tobacco products.

(e) Transfers under this section shall be made by the

Controller at such times as the Controller determines

necessary to further the intent of this section.

138

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund

and how that money was spent. The annual accounting

shall also be posted on any social media outlets the state

agency or department deems appropriate.

(d) The use of the funds received by the State Department

of Health Care Services pursuant to subdivision (a) of

Section 30130.55 shall be subject to the same restrictions,

including, but not limited to, audits and prevention of

fraud, imposed by existing law.

(e) The use of the funds received by the State Department

of Public Health, the State Department of Education, and

the University of California pursuant to subdivisions (b)

and (c) of Section 30130.55 shall be subject to oversight

by the Tobacco Education and Research Oversight

Committee pursuant to Sections 104365 and 104370 of

the Health and Safety Code.

30130.57. Implementation and Administrative Costs.

(a) Moneys from the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund shall be used to

reimburse the board for expenses incurred in the

administration, calculation, and collection of the tax

imposed by this article and for expenses incurred in the

calculation and distribution of funds and in the

promulgation of regulations as required by this act,

provided, however, that after deducting the necessary

funds pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 30130.54,

not more than 5 percent annually of the funds remaining

in the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention

Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund shall be used for such

administrative costs.

(b) Moneys from the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund shall be used to

reimburse the independent nonpartisan California State

Auditor up to four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000)

annually for actual costs incurred to conduct each of the

audits required by Section 30130.56 for the purpose of

providing public transparency and ensuring that the

revenues generated by this article are used for healthcare,

tobacco use prevention and research.

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund in the amount of

forty million dollars ($40,000,000) annually shall be used

to provide funding to the University of California for the

purpose and goal of increasing the number of primary care

and emergency physicians trained in California. This goal

shall be achieved by providing this funding to the University

of California to sustain, retain, and expand graduate

medical education programs to achieve the goal of

increasing the number of primary care and emergency

physicians in the State of California based on demonstrated

workforce needs and priorities.

(1) For the purposes of this subdivision, “primary care”

means internal medicine, family medicine, obstetrics/

gynecology, and pediatrics.

(2) Funding shall be prioritized for direct graduate medical

education costs for programs serving medically underserved

areas and populations.

(3) For the purposes of this subdivision, all allopathic and

osteopathic residency programs accredited by federally

recognized accrediting organizations and located in

California shall be eligible to apply to receive funding to

support resident education in California.

(4) The University of California shall annually review

physician shortages by specialty across the state and by

funds being awarded to accelerate and monitor the rate of

decline in tobacco-related disparities with the goal of

eliminating tobacco-related disparities.

(2) Fifteen percent to the State Department of Education

to be used for school programs to prevent and reduce the

use of tobacco and nicotine products by young people as

described in Section 104420 of the Health and Safety

Code with not less than 15 percent of these funds being

awarded to accelerate and monitor the rate of decline in

tobacco-related disparities for the purpose of eliminating

tobacco-related disparities.

research of cancer, heart and lung tobacco-related diseases

pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 104500)

of Chapter 1 of Part 3 of Division 103 of the Health and

Safety Code to supplement the Cigarette and Tobacco

Products Surtax Medical Research Program, provided that

these funds be used under the following conditions:

(1) The funds shall be used for grants and contracts for

basic, applied, and translational medical research in

California into the prevention of, early detection of,

treatments for, complementary treatments for, and

potential cures for all types of cancer, cardiovascular and

lung disease, oral disease, and tobacco-related diseases.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the University

of California, through the Tobacco Related Disease

Research Program, shall have authority to expend funds

received under this act for the purposes set forth in this

subdivision.

(2) Any grants and contracts awarded shall be awarded

using existing medical research program infrastructure and

on the basis of scientiﬁc merit as determined by an open,

competitive peer review process that assures objectivity,

consistency, and high quality.

(3) Individuals or entities that receive the grants and

contracts pursuant to this subdivision must reside or be

located entirely within California.

(4) The research must be performed entirely within

California.

(5) The funds shall not be used to supplant existing state

or local funds for these same purposes.

30130.56. Independent Audit and Disclosure.

To provide full public accountability concerning the uses

to which funds from the California Healthcare, Research

and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 are put, and to

ensure full compliance with the California Healthcare,

Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016:

(a) The nonpartisan California State Auditor shall conduct

at least biennially an independent ﬁnancial audit of the

state and local agencies receiving funds pursuant to the

California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco

Tax Act of 2016. An audit conducted pursuant to this

section shall include, but not be limited to, a review of the

administrative costs expended by the state agencies that

administer the fund.

(b) Based on the independent audit, the nonpartisan

California State Auditor shall prepare a report detailing its

review and include any recommendations for improvements.

The report shall be made available to the public.

pursuant to this act shall, on an annual basis, publish on

its respective Internet Web site an accounting of how much

money was received from the California Healthcare,

Text of Proposed Laws

139

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

sales of tobacco products to minors, including, but not

limited to, the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement

(STAKE) Act, pursuant to Section 22952 of the Business

and Professions Code.

(4) Six million dollars ($6,000,000) annually to the

California Attorney General to be used for activities,

including, but not limited to, enforcing laws that regulate

the distribution and sale of cigarettes and other tobacco

products, such as laws that prohibit cigarette smuggling,

counterfeiting, selling untaxed tobacco, selling tobacco

without a proper license and selling tobacco to minors, and

enforcing tobacco-related laws, court judgments, and

settlements.

(f) Not more than 5 percent of the funds received pursuant

to this article shall be used by any state or local agency or

department receiving such funds for administrative costs.

(g) The California State Auditor shall promulgate

regulations pursuant to the rulemaking provisions of the

Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing

with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the

Government Code) to deﬁne administrative costs for

purposes of this article. Such regulations shall take into

account the differing nature of the agencies or departments

receiving funds.

(h) The board shall determine beginning two years

following the effective date of this act, and annually

thereafter, any reduction in revenues, following the ﬁrst

year after the effective date of this act, resulting from a

reduction in the consumption of cigarettes and tobacco

products due to the additional taxes imposed on cigarettes

by this article, and the increase in the tax on tobacco

products required by subdivision (b) of Section 30123. If

the board determines there has been a reduction in

revenues, the amount of funds allocated pursuant to

subdivisions (c), (d) and (e) shall be reduced proportionately.

30130.58. Statutory References.

Unless otherwise stated, all references in this act refer to

statutes as they existed on January 1, 2016.

SEC. 5. Conforming Amendments to the Revenue and

Taxation Code.

SEC. 5.1. Section 30014 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

30014. (a) “Transporter” means any person transporting

into or within this state any of the following:

(1) Cigarettes not contained in packages to which are

afﬁxed California cigarette tax stamps or meter impressions.

(2) Tobacco products upon which the tobacco products

surtax imposed by Article 2 (commencing with

Section 30121), Article 2.5 (commencing with Section

30130.50), and Article 3 (commencing with

Section 30131) of Chapter 2 has not been paid.

(b) “Transporter” shall not include any of the following:

(1) A licensed distributor.

(2) A common carrier.

(3) A person transporting cigarettes and tobacco products

under federal internal revenue bond or customs control

that are non-tax paid under Chapter 52 of the Internal

Revenue Act of 1954 as amended.

SEC. 5.2. Section 30104 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

region. Based on this review, to the extent that there are

demonstrated state or regional shortages of nonprimary

care physicians, funds may be used to expand graduate

medical education programs that are intended to address

such shortages.

(d) Moneys from the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund in the amount of

thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) annually shall be

used to provide funding to the State Department of Public

Health state dental program for the purpose and goal of

educating about, preventing and treating dental disease,

including dental disease caused by use of cigarettes and

other tobacco products. This goal shall be achieved by the

program providing this funding to activities that support

the state dental plan based on demonstrated oral health

needs, prioritizing serving underserved areas and

populations. Funded program activities shall include, but

not be limited to, the following: education, disease

prevention, disease treatment, surveillance, and case

management.

The department shall have broad authority to fully

implement and effectuate the purposes of this subdivision,

including the determination of underserved communities,

the development of program protocols, the authority to

reimburse state-sponsored services related to the program,

and the authority to contract with one or more individuals

or public or private entities to provide program activities.

(e) Moneys from the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund in the amount of

forty-eight million dollars ($48,000,000) annually shall

be used for the purpose of funding law enforcement efforts

to reduce illegal sales of tobacco products, particularly

illegal sales to minors; to reduce cigarette smuggling,

tobacco tax evasion, the sale of tobacco products without

a license and the sale of counterfeit tobacco products; to

enforce tobacco-related laws, court judgments, and legal

settlements; and to conduct law enforcement training and

technical assistance activities for tobacco-related statutes;

provided that these funds are not to be used to supplant

existing state or local funds for these same purposes.

These funds shall be apportioned in the following manner:

(1) Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) annually to the

California Department of Justice/Ofﬁce of the Attorney

General to be distributed to local law enforcement agencies

to support and hire front-line law enforcement peace

ofﬁcers for programs, including, but not limited to,

enforcement of state and local laws related to the illegal

sales and marketing of tobacco to minors, and increasing

investigative activities and compliance checks to reduce

illegal sales of cigarettes and tobacco products to minors

and youth.

(2) Six million dollars ($6,000,000) annually to the board

to be used to enforce laws that regulate the distribution

and retail sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products,

such as laws that prohibit cigarette and tobacco product

smuggling, counterfeiting, selling untaxed cigarettes and

other tobacco products, and selling cigarettes and other

tobacco products without a proper license.

(3) Six million dollars ($6,000,000) annually to the

California Department of Public Health to be used to

support programs, including, but not limited to, providing

grants and contracts to local law enforcement agencies to

provide training and funding for the enforcement of state

and local laws related to the illegal sales of tobacco to

minors, increasing investigative activities, and compliance

checks, and other appropriate activities to reduce illegal

140

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

SEC. 5.4. Section 30166 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

30166. Stamps and meter register settings shall be sold

to licensed distributors at their denominated values less a

discount of 0.85 percent, which shall be capped at the

ﬁrst one dollar ($1.00) in denominated value to licensed

distributors. Payment for stamps or meter register settings

shall be made at the time of purchase, provided that a

licensed distributor, subject to the conditions and

provisions of this article, may be permitted to defer

payments therefor.

SEC. 5.5. Section 30181 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

30181. (a) When

If any tax imposed upon cigarettes

under Article 1 (commencing with Section 30101), Article

2 (commencing with Section 30121), and Article 3

(commencing with Section 30131) of Chapter 2 this part

is not paid through the use of stamps or meter impressions,

the tax shall be due and payable monthly on or before the

25th day of the month following the calendar month in

which a distribution of cigarettes occurs, or in the case of

a sale of cigarettes on the facilities of a common carrier for

which the tax is imposed pursuant to Section 30104, the

tax shall be due and payable monthly on or before the 25th

day of the month following the calendar month in which a

sale of cigarettes on the facilities of the carrier occurs.

(b) Each distributor of tobacco products shall ﬁle a return

in the form, as prescribed by the board, which

that may

include, but not be limited to, electronic media respecting

the distributions of tobacco products and their wholesale

cost during the preceding month, and any other information

as the board may require to carry out this part. The return

shall be ﬁled with the board on or before the 25th day of

the calendar month following the close of the monthly

period for which it relates, together with a remittance

payable to the board, of the amount of tax, if any, due

under Article 2 (commencing with Section 30121) or

Article 3 (commencing with Section 30131) of Chapter 2

for that period.

may require the ﬁling of the returns for longer than monthly

periods.

(d) Returns shall be authenticated in a form or pursuant to

methods as may be prescribed by the board.

(e) This section shall become operative on January 1,

2007.

SEC. 6. Conformity with State Constitution.

SEC. 6.1. Section 23 is added to Article XVI of the

California Constitution, to read:

EC. 23. The tax imposed by the California Healthcare,

Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 and the

revenue derived therefrom, including investment interest,

shall not be considered General Fund revenues for purposes

of Section 8 and its implementing statutes, and shall not

be considered “General Fund revenues,” “state revenues,”

or “General Fund proceeds of taxes” for purposes of

subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 8 and its implementing

statutes.

SEC. 6.2. Section 14 is added to Article XIII B of the

California Constitution, to read:

EC. 14. “Appropriations subject to limitation” of each

entity of government shall not include appropriations of

revenue from the California Healthcare, Research and

30104. The taxes imposed by this part shall not apply to

the sale of cigarettes or tobacco products by a distributor

to a common carrier engaged in interstate or foreign

passenger service or to a person authorized to sell cigarettes

or tobacco products on the facilities of the carrier.

Whenever cigarettes or tobacco products are sold by

distributors to common carriers engaged in interstate or

foreign passenger service for use or sale on facilities of the

carriers, or to persons authorized to sell cigarettes or

tobacco products on those facilities, the tax imposed by

Sections 30101, 30123, and 30131.2 under this part

shall not be levied with respect to the sales of the cigarettes

or tobacco products by the distributors, but a tax is hereby

levied upon the carriers or upon the persons authorized to

sell cigarettes or tobacco products on the facilities of the

carriers, as the case may be, for the privilege of making

sales in California at the same rate as set forth in Sections

30101, 30123, and 30131.2. under this part. Those

common carriers and authorized persons shall pay the tax

imposed by this section and ﬁle reports with the board, as

provided in Section 30186.

SEC. 5.3. Section 30108 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code is amended to read:

30108. (a) Every distributor engaged in business in this

state and selling or accepting orders for cigarettes or

tobacco products with respect to the sale of which the tax

imposed by Sections 30101, 30123, and 30131.2

under

this part is inapplicable shall, at the time of making the

sale or accepting the order or, if the purchaser is not then

obligated to pay the tax with respect to his or her distribution

of the cigarettes or tobacco products, at the time the

purchaser becomes so obligated, collect the tax from the

purchaser, if the purchaser is other than a licensed

distributor, and shall give to the purchaser a receipt

therefor in the manner and form prescribed by the board.

(b) Every person engaged in business in this state and

making gifts of untaxed cigarettes or tobacco products as

samples with respect to which the tax imposed by Sections

30101, 30123, and 30131.2 under this part is

inapplicable shall, at the time of making the gift or, if the

donee is not then obligated to pay the tax with respect to

his or her distribution of the cigarettes or tobacco products,

at the time the donee becomes so obligated, collect the tax

from the donee, if the donee is other than a licensed

distributor, and shall give the donee a receipt therefor in

the manner and form prescribed by the board. This section

shall not apply to those distributions of cigarettes or

tobacco products which

that are exempt from tax under

Section 30105.5.

any of the following:

(1) Maintaining, occupying, or using, permanently or

temporarily, directly or indirectly, or through a subsidiary,

or agent, by whatever name called, an ofﬁce, place of

distribution, sales or sample room or place, warehouse or

storage place, or other place of business.

(2) Having any representative, agent, salesperson,

canvasser or solicitor operating in this state under the

authority of the distributor or its subsidiary for the purpose

of selling, delivering, or the taking of orders for cigarettes

or tobacco products.

(d) The taxes required to be collected by this section

constitute debts owed by the distributor, or other person

required to collect the taxes, to the state.

Text of Proposed Laws

141

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 56 CONTINUED

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund created by the

California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco

Tax Act of 2016. No adjustment in the appropriations limit

of any entity of government shall be required pursuant to

Section 3 as a result of revenue being deposited in or

appropriated from the California Healthcare, Research and

Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund.

SEC. 7. Severability.

If the provisions of this act, or part thereof, are for any

reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining

provisions shall not be affected, but shall remain in full

force and effect and to this end the provisions of this act

are severable.

SEC. 8. Conﬂicting Measures.

(a) It is the intent of the people that in the event that this

measure and another measure relating to the taxation of

tobacco shall appear on the same statewide election ballot,

the provisions of the other measure or measures shall not

be deemed to be in conﬂict with this measure, and if

approved by the voters, this measure shall take effect

notwithstanding approval by the voters of another measure

relating to the taxation of tobacco by a greater number of

afﬁrmative votes.

(b) If this measure is approved by the voters but superseded

by law by any other conﬂicting ballot measure approved by

the voters at the same election, and the conﬂicting measure

is later held invalid, this measure shall be self-executing

and given the full force of law.

SEC. 9. Amendments.

(a) Except as hereafter provided, this act may only be

amended by the electors as provided in subdivision (c) of

Section 10 of Article II of the California Constitution.

(b) The Legislature may amend subdivisions (a) and (c) of

Section 30130.55 and Section 30130.57 of the Revenue

and Taxation Code to further the purposes of the California

Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of

2016 by a statute passed in each house by roll-call vote

entered in the journal, two-thirds of the membership

concurring.

Section 30130.55 of the Revenue and Taxation Code to

further the purposes of the California Healthcare, Research

and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 by a statute

passed in each house by roll-call vote entered in the

journal, four-ﬁfths of the membership concurring.

SEC. 10. Effective Date.

This act shall become effective as provided in subdivision

(a) of Section 10 of Article II of the California Constitution;

provided, however, the amendment to Section 30121 of

the Revenue and Taxation Code shall become effective

April 1, 2017.

PROPOSITION 57

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds a section to the California

Constitution and amends sections of the Welfare and

Institutions Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed

to be deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new

provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type

to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

The Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016

SECTION 1. Title.

This measure shall be known and may be cited as “The

Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016.”

SEC. 2. Purpose and Intent.

In enacting this act, it is the purpose and intent of the

people of the State of California to:

1. Protect and enhance public safety.

2. Save money by reducing wasteful spending on prisons.

3. Prevent federal courts from indiscriminately releasing

prisoners.

4. Stop the revolving door of crime by emphasizing

rehabilitation, especially for juveniles.

5. Require a judge, not a prosecutor, to decide whether

juveniles should be tried in adult court.

SEC. 3. Section 32 is added to Article I of the California

Constitution, to read:

EC. 32. (a) The following provisions are hereby enacted

to enhance public safety, improve rehabilitation, and avoid

the release of prisoners by federal court order,

notwithstanding anything in this article or any other

provision of law:

(1) Parole Consideration: Any person convicted of a

nonviolent felony offense and sentenced to state prison

shall be eligible for parole consideration after completing

the full term for his or her primary offense.

(A) For purposes of this section only, the full term for the

primary offense means the longest term of imprisonment

imposed by the court for any offense, excluding the

imposition of an enhancement, consecutive sentence, or

alternative sentence.

(2) Credit Earning: The Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation shall have authority to award credits earned

for good behavior and approved rehabilitative or educational

achievements.

(b) The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

shall adopt regulations in furtherance of these provisions,

and the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation shall certify that these regulations protect

and enhance public safety.

SEC. 4. Judicial Transfer Process.

SEC. 4.1. Section 602 of the Welfare and Institutions

Code is amended to read:

602. (a)

Except as provided in subdivision (b)

Section 707, any person who is under 18 years of age

when he or she violates any law of this state or of the

United States or any ordinance of any city or county of this

state deﬁning crime other than an ordinance establishing

a curfew based solely on age, is within the jurisdiction of

the juvenile court, which may adjudge such person to be a

ward of the court.

(b) Any person who is alleged, when he or she was 14

years of age or older, to have committed one of the following

offenses shall be prosecuted under the general law in a

court of criminal jurisdiction:

(1) Murder, as described in Section 187 of the Penal

Code, if one of the circumstances enumerated in

subdivision (a) of Section 190.2 of the Penal Code is

142

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 57 CONTINUED

alleged by the prosecutor, and the prosecutor alleges that

the minor personally killed the victim.

(2) The following sex offenses, if the prosecutor alleges

that the minor personally committed the offense, and if

the prosecutor alleges one of the circumstances enumerated

in the One Strike law, subdivision (d) or (e) of Section

667.61 of the Penal Code, applies:

(A) Rape, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a)

of Section 261 of the Penal Code.

(B) Spousal rape, as described in paragraph (1) of

subdivision (a) of Section 262 of the Penal Code.

described in Section 264.1 of the Penal Code.

(D) Forcible lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 14

years of age, as described in subdivision (b) of Section

288 of the Penal Code.

(E) Forcible sexual penetration, as described in subdivision

(a) of Section 289 of the Penal Code.

(F) Sodomy or oral copulation in violation of Section 286

or 288a of the Penal Code, by force, violence, duress,

menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on

the victim or another person.

(G) Lewd and lascivious acts on a child under 14 years of

age, as deﬁned in subdivision (a) of Section 288, unless

the defendant qualiﬁes for probation under subdivision (d)

of Section 1203.066 of the Penal Code.

SEC. 4.2. Section 707 of the Welfare and Institutions

Code is amended to read:

707. (a) (1) In any case in which a minor is alleged to

be a person described in subdivision (a) of

Section 602 by

reason of the violation, when he or she was 16 years of age

or older, of any felony criminal statute, or ordinance except

those listed in subdivision (b), or of an offense listed in

subdivision (b) when he or she was 14 or 15 years of age,

the district attorney or other appropriate prosecuting ofﬁcer

may make a motion to transfer the minor from juvenile

court to a court of criminal jurisdiction. upon

The motion

of the petitioner

must be made prior to the attachment of

jeopardy. Upon such motion, the juvenile court shall cause

order the probation ofﬁcer to investigate and

submit a

report on the behavioral patterns and social history of the

minor. being considered for a determination of unﬁtness.

The report shall include any written or oral statement

offered by the victim pursuant to Section 656.2.

(2) Following submission and consideration of the report,

and of any other relevant evidence that the petitioner or

the minor may wish to submit, the juvenile court shall

decide whether the minor should be transferred to a court

of criminal jurisdiction. In making its decision, the court

shall consider the criteria speciﬁed in subparagraphs

(A) to (E). If the court orders a transfer of jurisdiction, the

court shall recite the basis for its decision in an order

entered upon the minutes. In any case in which a hearing

has been noticed pursuant to this section, the court shall

postpone the taking of a plea to the petition until the

conclusion of the transfer hearing, and no plea that may

have been entered already shall constitute evidence at the

hearing. may ﬁnd that the minor is not a ﬁt and proper

subject to be dealt with under the juvenile court law if it

concludes that the minor would not be amenable to the

care, treatment, and training program available through

the facilities of the juvenile court, based upon an evaluation

of the criteria speciﬁed in clause (i) of subparagraphs (A)

to (E), inclusive:

(A) (i) The degree of criminal sophistication exhibited by

the minor.

(ii) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in clause (i),

the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant factor,

including, but not limited to, the minor’s age, maturity,

intellectual capacity, and physical, mental, and emotional

health at the time of the alleged offense, the minor’s

impetuosity or failure to appreciate risks and consequences

of criminal behavior, the effect of familial, adult, or peer

pressure on the minor’s actions, and the effect of the

minor’s family and community environment and childhood

trauma on the minor’s criminal sophistication.

(B) (i) Whether the minor can be rehabilitated prior to the

expiration of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction.

(ii) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in clause (i),

the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant factor,

including, but not limited to, the minor’s potential to grow

and mature.

(ii) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in clause (i),

the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant factor,

including, but not limited to, the seriousness of the minor’s

previous delinquent history and the effect of the minor’s

family and community environment and childhood trauma

on the minor’s previous delinquent behavior.

(D) (i) Success of previous attempts by the juvenile court

to rehabilitate the minor.

(ii) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in clause (i),

the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant factor,

including, but not limited to, the adequacy of the services

previously provided to address the minor’s needs.

(E) (i) The circumstances and gravity of the offense

alleged in the petition to have been committed by the

minor.

(ii) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in clause (i),

the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant factor,

including but not limited to, the actual behavior of the

person, the mental state of the person, the person’s degree

of involvement in the crime, the level of harm actually

caused by the person, and the person’s mental and

emotional development.

A determination that the minor is not a ﬁt and proper

subject to be dealt with under the juvenile court law may

be based on any one or a combination of the factors set

forth in clause (i) of subparagraphs (A) to (E), inclusive,

which shall be recited in the order of unﬁtness. In any case

in which a hearing has been noticed pursuant to this

section, the court shall postpone the taking of a plea to the

petition until the conclusion of the ﬁtness hearing, and no

plea that may have been entered already shall constitute

evidence at the hearing.

(2) (A) This paragraph shall apply to a minor alleged to be

a person described in Section 602 by reason of the

violation, when he or she has attained 16 years of age, of

any felony offense when the minor has been declared to be

a ward of the court pursuant to Section 602 on one or

more prior occasions if both of the following apply:

(i) The minor has previously been found to have committed

two or more felony offenses.

(ii) The offenses upon which the prior petition or petitions

were based were committed when the minor had attained

14 years of age.

Text of Proposed Laws

143

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 57 CONTINUED

each and every one of those criteria. In making a ﬁnding of

ﬁtness, the court may consider extenuating and mitigating

circumstances in evaluating each of those criteria. In any

case in which the hearing has been noticed pursuant to

this section, the court shall postpone the taking of a plea

to the petition until the conclusion of the ﬁtness hearing

and no plea that may have been entered already shall

constitute evidence at the hearing. If the minor is found to

be a ﬁt and proper subject to be dealt with under the

juvenile court law pursuant to this subdivision, the minor

shall be committed to placement in a juvenile hall, ranch

camp, forestry camp, boot camp, or secure juvenile home

pursuant to Section 730, or in any institution operated by

the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division

of Juvenile Facilities.

(3) If, pursuant to this subdivision, the minor is found to

be not a ﬁt and proper subject for juvenile court treatment

and is tried in a court of criminal jurisdiction and found

guilty by the trier of fact, the judge may commit the minor

to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,

Division of Juvenile Facilities, in lieu of sentencing the

minor to the state prison, unless the limitations speciﬁed

in Section 1732.6 apply.

(b) Subdivision (c) (a) shall be applicable in any case in

which a minor is alleged to be a person described in

Section 602 by reason of the violation of one of the

following offenses when he or she was 14 or 15 years of

age:

(1) Murder.

(2) Arson, as provided in subdivision (a) or (b) of

Section 451 of the Penal Code.

(3) Robbery.

(4) Rape with force, violence, or threat of great bodily

harm.

(5) Sodomy by force, violence, duress, menace, or threat

of great bodily harm.

(6) A lewd or lascivious act as provided in subdivision (b)

of Section 288 of the Penal Code.

(7) Oral copulation by force, violence, duress, menace, or

threat of great bodily harm.

(8) An offense speciﬁed in subdivision (a) of Section 289

of the Penal Code.

(9) Kidnapping for ransom.

(10) Kidnapping for purposes of robbery.

(11) Kidnapping with bodily harm.

(12) Attempted murder.

(13) Assault with a ﬁrearm or destructive device.

(14) Assault by any means of force likely to produce great

bodily injury.

(15) Discharge of a ﬁrearm into an inhabited or occupied

building.

(16) An offense described in Section 1203.09 of the

Penal Code.

(17) An offense described in Section 12022.5 or

12022.53 of the Penal Code.

(18) A felony offense in which the minor personally used

a weapon described in any provision listed in Section 16590

of the Penal Code.

(19) A felony offense described in Section 136.1 or 137

of the Penal Code.

(B) Upon motion of the petitioner made prior to the

attachment of jeopardy the court shall cause the probation

ofﬁcer to investigate and submit a report on the behavioral

patterns and social history of the minor being considered

for a determination of unﬁtness. Following submission and

consideration of the report, and of any other relevant

evidence that the petitioner or the minor may wish to

submit, the minor shall be presumed to be not a ﬁt and

proper subject to be dealt with under the juvenile court law

unless the juvenile court concludes, based upon evidence,

which evidence may be of extenuating or mitigating

circumstances, that the minor would be amenable to the

care, treatment, and training program available through

the facilities of the juvenile court based upon an evaluation

of the criteria speciﬁed in subclause (I) of clauses (i) to (v),

inclusive:

(i) (I) The degree of criminal sophistication exhibited by

the minor.

(II) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subclause

(I), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the minor’s age,

maturity, intellectual capacity, and physical, mental, and

emotional health at the time of the alleged offense, the

minor’s impetuosity or failure to appreciate risks and

consequences of criminal behavior, the effect of familial,

adult, or peer pressure on the minor’s actions, and the

effect of the minor’s family and community environment

and childhood trauma on the minor’s criminal

sophistication.

(ii) (I) Whether the minor can be rehabilitated prior to the

expiration of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction.

(II) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subclause

(I), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the minor’s potential

to grow and mature.

(iii) (I) The minor’s previous delinquent history.

(II) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subclause

(I), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the seriousness of the

minor’s previous delinquent history and the effect of the

minor’s family and community environment and childhood

trauma on the minor’s previous delinquent behavior.

(iv) (I) Success of previous attempts by the juvenile court

to rehabilitate the minor.

(II) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subclause

(I), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the adequacy of the

services previously provided to address the minor’s needs.

(v) (I) The circumstances and gravity of the offense

alleged in the petition to have been committed by the

minor.

(II) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subclause

(I), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the actual behavior of

the person, the mental state of the person, the person’s

degree of involvement in the crime, the level of harm

actually caused by the person, and the person’s mental

and emotional development.

A determination that the minor is a ﬁt and proper subject

to be dealt with under the juvenile court law shall be based

on a ﬁnding of amenability after consideration of the

criteria set forth in subclause (I) of clauses (i) to (v),

inclusive, and ﬁndings therefore recited in the order as to

each of those criteria that the minor is ﬁt and proper under

144

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 57 CONTINUED

(20) Manufacturing, compounding, or selling one-half

ounce or more of a salt or solution of a controlled substance

speciﬁed in subdivision (e) of Section 11055 of the Health

and Safety Code.

(21) A violent felony, as deﬁned in subdivision (c) of

Section 667.5 of the Penal Code, which also would

constitute a felony violation of subdivision (b) of

Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.

(22) Escape, by the use of force or violence, from a county

juvenile hall, home, ranch, camp, or forestry camp in

violation of subdivision (b) of Section 871 if great bodily

injury is intentionally inﬂicted upon an employee of the

juvenile facility during the commission of the escape.

(23) Torture as described in Sections 206 and 206.1 of

the Penal Code.

(24) Aggravated mayhem, as described in Section 205 of

the Penal Code.

(25) Carjacking, as described in Section 215 of the Penal

Code, while armed with a dangerous or deadly weapon.

(26) Kidnapping for purposes of sexual assault, as

punishable in subdivision (b) of Section 209 of the Penal

Code.

(27) Kidnapping as punishable in Section 209.5 of the

Penal Code.

(28) The offense described in subdivision (c) of

Section 26100 of the Penal Code.

(29) The offense described in Section 18745 of the Penal

Code.

(30) Voluntary manslaughter, as described in subdivision

(a) of Section 192 of the Penal Code.

in Section 602 by reason of the violation, when he or she

was 14 years of age or older, of any of the offenses listed

in subdivision (b), upon motion of the petitioner made

prior to the attachment of jeopardy the court shall cause

the probation ofﬁcer to investigate and submit a report on

the behavioral patterns and social history of the minor

being considered for a determination of unﬁtness.

Following submission and consideration of the report, and

of any other relevant evidence that the petitioner or the

minor may wish to submit, the minor shall be presumed to

be not a ﬁt and proper subject to be dealt with under the

juvenile court law unless the juvenile court concludes,

based upon evidence, which evidence may be of extenuating

or mitigating circumstances, that the minor would be

amenable to the care, treatment, and training program

available through the facilities of the juvenile court based

upon an evaluation of each of the criteria speciﬁed in

subparagraph (A) of paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive:

(1) (A) The degree of criminal sophistication exhibited by

the minor.

(B) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subparagraph

(A), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the minor’s age,

maturity, intellectual capacity, and physical, mental, and

emotional health at the time of the alleged offense, the

minor’s impetuosity or failure to appreciate risks and

consequences of criminal behavior, the effect of familial,

adult, or peer pressure on the minor’s actions, and the

effect of the minor’s family and community environment

and childhood trauma on the minor’s criminal

sophistication.

(2) (A) Whether the minor can be rehabilitated prior to

the expiration of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction.

(B) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subparagraph

(A), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the minor’s potential

to grow and mature.

(3) (A) The minor’s previous delinquent history.

(B) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subparagraph

(A), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the seriousness of the

minor’s previous delinquent history and the effect of the

minor’s family and community environment and childhood

trauma on the minor’s previous delinquent behavior.

(4) (A) Success of previous attempts by the juvenile court

to rehabilitate the minor.

(B) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subparagraph

(A), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the adequacy of the

services previously provided to address the minor’s needs.

(5) (A) The circumstances and gravity of the offenses

alleged in the petition to have been committed by the

minor.

(B) When evaluating the criterion speciﬁed in subparagraph

(A), the juvenile court may give weight to any relevant

factor, including, but not limited to, the actual behavior of

the person, the mental state of the person, the person’s

degree of involvement in the crime, the level of harm

actually caused by the person, and the person’s mental

and emotional development.

A determination that the minor is a ﬁt and proper subject

to be dealt with under the juvenile court law shall be based

on a ﬁnding of amenability after consideration of the

criteria set forth in subparagraph (A) of paragraphs (1) to

(5), inclusive, and ﬁndings therefore recited in the order as

to each of those criteria that the minor is ﬁt and proper

under each and every one of those criteria. In making a

ﬁnding of ﬁtness, the court may consider extenuating or

mitigating circumstances in evaluating each of those

criteria. In any case in which a hearing has been noticed

pursuant to this section, the court shall postpone the

taking of a plea to the petition until the conclusion of the

ﬁtness hearing and no plea which may have been entered

already shall constitute evidence at the hearing. If,

pursuant to this subdivision, the minor is found to be not

a ﬁt and proper subject for juvenile court treatment and is

tried in a court of criminal jurisdiction and found guilty by

the trier of fact, the judge may commit the minor to the

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of

Juvenile Facilities, in lieu of sentencing the minor to the

state prison, unless the limitations speciﬁed in Section

1732.6 apply.

(d) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (b) of Section

602, the district attorney or other appropriate prosecuting

ofﬁcer may ﬁle an accusatory pleading in a court of criminal

jurisdiction against any minor 16 years of age or older who

is accused of committing an offense enumerated in

subdivision (b).

(2) Except as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 602,

the district attorney or other appropriate prosecuting ofﬁcer

may ﬁle an accusatory pleading against a minor 14 years

of age or older in a court of criminal jurisdiction in any

case in which any one or more of the following circumstances

apply:

Text of Proposed Laws

145

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 57 CONTINUED

(4) In any case in which the district attorney or other

appropriate prosecuting ofﬁcer has ﬁled an accusatory

pleading against a minor in a court of criminal jurisdiction

pursuant to this subdivision, the case shall then proceed

according to the laws applicable to a criminal case. In

conjunction with the preliminary hearing as provided in

Section 738 of the Penal Code, the magistrate shall make

a ﬁnding that reasonable cause exists to believe that the

minor comes within this subdivision. If reasonable cause is

not established, the criminal court shall transfer the case

to the juvenile court having jurisdiction over the matter.

(5) For an offense for which the prosecutor may ﬁle the

accusatory pleading in a court of criminal jurisdiction

pursuant to this subdivision, but elects instead to ﬁle a

petition in the juvenile court, if the minor is subsequently

found to be a person described in subdivision (a) of

Section 602, the minor shall be committed to placement

in a juvenile hall, ranch camp, forestry camp, boot camp,

or secure juvenile home pursuant to Section 730, or in any

institution operated by the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Facilities.

(6) If, pursuant to this subdivision, the minor is found to

be not a ﬁt and proper subject for juvenile court treatment

and is tried in a court of criminal jurisdiction and found

guilty by the trier of fact, the judge may commit the minor

to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation,

Division of Juvenile Facilities, in lieu of sentencing the

minor to the state prison, unless the limitations speciﬁed

in Section 1732.6 apply.

(e) A report submitted by a probation ofﬁcer pursuant to

this section regarding the behavioral patterns and social

history of the minor being considered for a determination

of unﬁtness shall include any written or oral statement

offered by the victim, the victim’s parent or guardian if the

victim is a minor, or if the victim has died, the victim’s

next of kin, as authorized by subdivision (b) of

Section 656.2. Victims’ statements shall be considered by

the court to the extent they are relevant to the court’s

determination of unﬁtness.

SEC. 5. Amendment.

This act shall be broadly construed to accomplish its

purposes. The provisions of Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of this

act may be amended so long as such amendments are

consistent with and further the intent of this act by a

statute that is passed by a majority vote of the members of

each house of the Legislature and signed by the Governor.

SEC. 6. Severability.

If any provision of this act, or part of this act, or the

application of any provision or part to any person or

circumstances, is for any reason held to be invalid, the

remaining provisions, or applications of provisions, shall

not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect,

and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.

SEC. 7. Conﬂicting Initiatives.

(a) In the event that this act and another act addressing

credits and parole eligibility for state prisoners or adult

court prosecution for juvenile defendants shall appear on

the same statewide ballot, the provisions of the other act

or acts shall be deemed to be in conﬂict with this act. In

the event that this act receives a greater number of

afﬁrmative votes than an act deemed to be in conﬂict with

it, the provisions of this act shall prevail in their entirety,

and the other act or acts shall be null and void.

(A) The minor is alleged to have committed an offense

that if committed by an adult would be punishable by

death or imprisonment in the state prison for life.

(B) The minor is alleged to have personally used a ﬁrearm

during the commission or attempted commission of a

felony, as described in Section 12022.5 or 12022.53 of

the Penal Code.

listed in subdivision (b) in which any one or more of the

following circumstances apply:

(i) The minor has previously been found to be a person

described in Section 602 by reason of the commission of

an offense listed in subdivision (b).

(ii) The offense was committed for the beneﬁt of, at the

direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang,

as deﬁned in subdivision (f) of Section 186.22 of the

Penal Code, with the speciﬁc intent to promote, further, or

assist in criminal conduct by gang members.

(iii) The offense was committed for the purpose of

intimidating or interfering with any other person’s free

exercise or enjoyment of a right secured to him or her by

the Constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution

or laws of the United States and because of the other

person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin,

disability, gender, or sexual orientation, or because the

minor perceives that the other person has one or more of

those characteristics, as described in Title 11.6

(commencing with Section 422.55) of Part 1 of the Penal

Code.

(iv) The victim of the offense was 65 years of age or older,

or blind, deaf, quadriplegic, paraplegic, developmentally

disabled, or conﬁned to a wheelchair, and that disability

was known or reasonably should have been known to the

minor at the time of the commission of the offense.

(3) Except as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 602,

the district attorney or other appropriate prosecuting ofﬁcer

may ﬁle an accusatory pleading in a court of criminal

jurisdiction against any minor 16 years of age or older who

is accused of committing one or more of the following

offenses, if the minor has previously been found to be a

person described in Section 602 by reason of the violation

of a felony offense, when he or she was 14 years of age or

older:

(A) A felony offense in which it is alleged that the victim

of the offense was 65 years of age or older, or blind, deaf,

quadriplegic, paraplegic, developmentally disabled, or

conﬁned to a wheelchair, and that disability was known or

reasonably should have been known to the minor at the

time of the commission of the offense.

(B) A felony offense committed for the purposes of

intimidating or interfering with any other person’s free

exercise or enjoyment of a right secured to him or her by

the Constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution

or laws of the United States and because of the other

person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin,

disability, gender, or sexual orientation, or because the

minor perceived that the other person had one or more of

those characteristics, as described in Title 11.6

(commencing with

Section 422.55) of Part 1 of the Penal

Code.

direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang

as prohibited by Section 186.22 of the Penal Code.

146

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 57 CONTINUED

(b) If this act is approved by voters but superseded by law

by any other conﬂicting act approved by voters at the same

election, and the conﬂicting ballot act is later held invalid,

this act shall be self-executing and given full force and

effect.

SEC. 8. Proponent Standing.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the State,

government agency, or any of its ofﬁcials fail to defend the

constitutionality of this act, following its approval by the

voters, any other government employer, the proponent, or

in their absence, any citizen of this State shall have the

authority to intervene in any court action challenging the

constitutionality of this act for the purpose of defending its

constitutionality, whether such action is in any trial court,

on appeal, or on discretionary review by the Supreme Court

of California or the Supreme Court of the United States.

The reasonable fees and costs of defending the action

shall be a charge on funds appropriated to the Department

of Justice, which shall be satisﬁed promptly.

SEC. 9. Liberal Construction.

This act shall be liberally construed to effectuate its

purposes.

PROPOSITION 58

This law proposed by Senate Bill 1174 of the 2013–2014

Regular Session (Chapter 753, Statutes of 2014) is

submitted to the people in accordance with Section 10 of

Article II of the California Constitution.

This proposed law amends and repeals sections of the

Education Code; therefore, provisions proposed to be

deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new provisions

proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate

that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. This measure shall be known, and may be

cited, as the “California Ed.G.E. Initiative” or “California

Education for a Global Economy Initiative.”

SEC. 2. Section 300 of the Education Code is amended

to read:

300. The People

people of California ﬁnd and declare as

follows:

(a) Whereas, The English language is the national public

language of the United States of America and of the State

of California, is spoken by the vast majority of California

residents, and is also the leading world language for

science, technology, and international business,

science

and technology, thereby being the

an important language

of economic opportunity; and

(b) Whereas, Immigrant

All parents are eager to have their

children acquire a good knowledge of English, thereby

allowing master the English language and obtain a high-

quality education, thereby preparing them to fully

participate in the American Dream of economic and social

advancement; and

multinational businesses that must communicate daily

with associates around the world; and

(d) Whereas, California employers across all sectors, both

public and private, are actively recruiting multilingual

employees because of their ability to forge stronger bonds

with customers, clients, and business partners; and

(e) Whereas, Multilingual skills are necessary for our

country’s national security and essential to conducting

diplomacy and international programs; and

(f) Whereas, California has a natural reserve of the world’s

largest languages, including English, Mandarin, and

Spanish, which are critical to the state’s economic trade

and diplomatic efforts; and

(g) Whereas, California has the unique opportunity to

provide all parents with the choice to have their children

educated to high standards in English and one or more

additional languages, including Native American

languages, thereby increasing pupils’ access to higher

education and careers of their choice; and

(c)

(h) Whereas, The government and the public schools

of California have a moral obligation and a constitutional

duty to provide all of California’s children, regardless of

their ethnicity or national origins,

origin, with the skills

necessary to become productive members of our society,

and of these skills, literacy in the English language is

among the most important; and

(d)

(i) Whereas, The public schools of California currently

do a poor job of educating immigrant children, wasting

ﬁnancial resources on costly experimental language

programs whose failure over the past two decades is

demonstrated by the current high drop-out rates and low

English literacy levels of many immigrant children;

California Legislature approved, and the Governor signed,

a historic school funding reform that restructured public

education funding in a more equitable manner, directs

increased resources to improve English language

acquisition, and provides local control to school districts,

county ofﬁces of education, and schools on how to spend

funding through the local control funding formula and

local control and accountability plans; and

(j) Whereas, Parents now have the opportunity to

participate in building innovative new programs that will

offer pupils greater opportunities to acquire 21st century

skills, such as multilingualism; and

(k) Whereas, All parents will have a choice and voice to

demand the best education for their children, including

access to language programs that will improve their

children’s preparation for college and careers, and allow

them to be more competitive in a global economy; and

(l) Whereas, Existing law places constraints on teachers

and schools, which have deprived many pupils of

opportunities to develop multilingual skills; and

(e)

(m) Whereas, Young immigrant children can easily

acquire full ﬂuency in a new language, such as English, if

they are heavily exposed to that language in the classroom

at an early age. A large body of research has demonstrated

the cognitive, economic, and long-term academic beneﬁts

of multilingualism and multiliteracy.

(f)

(n) Therefore, It is resolved that: amendments to, and

the repeal of, certain provisions of this chapter at the

November 2016 statewide general election will advance

the goal of voters to ensure that all children in California

public schools shall be taught English as rapidly and

effectively as possible. receive the highest quality

education, master the English language, and access high-

quality, innovative, and research-based language programs

that provide the California Ed.G.E. (California Education

for a Global Economy).

SEC. 3. Section 305 of the Education Code is amended

to read:

Text of Proposed Laws

147

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 58 CONTINUED

(a) “English learner” means a child who does not speak

English or whose native language is not English and who is

not currently able to perform ordinary classroom work in

English, also known as a Limited English Proﬁciency or

LEP child. pupil who is “limited English proﬁcient” as that

term is deﬁned in the federal No Child Left Behind Act of

2001 (20 U.S.C. 7801(25)).

(b) “English language classroom” means a classroom in

which the language of instruction used by the teaching

personnel is overwhelmingly the English language, and in

which such teaching personnel possess a good knowledge

of the English language. “Native speaker of English”

means a pupil who has learned and used English in his or

her home from early childhood and English has been his or

her primary means of concept formation and

communication.

classroom in which the pupils either are native English

language speakers or already have acquired reasonable

ﬂuency in English. “Language acquisition programs” refers

to educational programs designed to ensure English

acquisition as rapidly and as effectively as possible, and

that provide instruction to pupils on the state-adopted

academic content standards, including the English

language development standards. The language acquisition

programs provided to pupils shall be informed by research

and shall lead to grade level proﬁciency and academic

achievement in both English and another language.

Language acquisition programs may include, but are not

limited to, all of the following:

(1) Dual-language immersion programs that provide

integrated language learning and academic instruction for

native speakers of English and native speakers of another

language, with the goals of high academic achievement,

ﬁrst and second language proﬁciency, and cross-cultural

understanding.

(2) Transitional or developmental programs for English

learners that provide instruction to pupils that utilizes

English and a pupil’s native language for literacy and

academic instruction and enables an English learner to

achieve English proﬁciency and academic mastery of

subject matter content and higher order skills, including

critical thinking, in order to meet state-adopted academic

content standards.

(d)

(3) “Sheltered English immersion” or “structured

English immersion” means an English language acquisition

process for young children Structured English immersion

programs for English learners in which nearly all classroom

instruction is provided in English

English, but with the

curriculum and a presentation designed for children

pupils

who are learning the language.

English.

(e) “Bilingual education/native language instruction”

means a language acquisition process for pupils in which

much or all instruction, textbooks, and teaching materials

are in the child’s native language.

SEC. 5. Section 310 of the Education Code is amended

to read:

310. The

(a) requirements of Section 305 may be waived

with the prior written informed consent, to be provided

annually, of the child’s Parents or legal guardians of pupils

enrolled in the school may choose a language acquisition

program that best suits their child pursuant to this section.

Schools in which the parents or legal guardian under the

circumstances speciﬁed below and in Section 311. Such

informed consent shall require that said guardians of 30

305. Subject

(a) (1) to the exceptions provided in Article

3 As part of the parent and community engagement process

required for the development of a local control and

accountability plan pursuant to Article 4.5 (commencing

with Section 310

), all children in California public schools

shall be taught English by being taught in English. In

particular, this shall require that all children be placed in

English language classrooms. Children who are English

learners shall be educated through sheltered English

immersion during a temporary transition period not

normally intended to exceed one year. Local schools shall

be permitted to place in the same classroom English

learners of different ages but whose degree of English

proﬁciency is similar. Local schools shall be encouraged to

mix together in the same classroom English learners from

different native-language groups but with the same degree

of English ﬂuency. Once English learners have acquired a

good working knowledge of English, they shall be

transferred to English language mainstream classrooms.

As much as possible, current supplemental funding for

English learners shall be maintained, subject to possible

modiﬁcation under Article 8 (commencing with

Section 335) below. 52060) of Chapter 6.1 of Part 28 of

Division 4 of Title 2, school districts and county ofﬁces of

education shall solicit input on, and shall provide to pupils,

effective and appropriate instructional methods, including,

but not limited to, establishing language acquisition

programs, as deﬁned in Section 306. This requirement is

intended to ensure that all pupils, including English

learners and native speakers of English, have access to the

core academic content standards, including the English

language development standards, as applicable, and

become proﬁcient in English pursuant to the state priorities

identiﬁed in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of

Section 52060 and of Section 52066.

(2) School districts and county ofﬁces of education shall,

at a minimum, provide English learners with a structured

English immersion program, as speciﬁed in Section 306,

for purposes of ensuring that English learners have access

to the core academic content standards, including the

English language development standards, and become

proﬁcient in English pursuant to the state priorities

identiﬁed in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of

Section 52060 and of Section 52066.

(b) When a school district or a county ofﬁce of education

establishes a language acquisition program pursuant to

this section, the school district or county ofﬁce of education

shall consult with the proper school personnel, including,

but not limited to, administrators and certiﬁcated teachers

with the appropriate authorizations and experience.

also encouraged to provide opportunities to pupils who are

native speakers of English to be instructed in another

language to a degree sufﬁcient to produce proﬁciency in

that language. The non-English language should be at the

discretion of the parents, community, and school,

depending upon the linguistic and ﬁnancial resources of

the school community and other local considerations.

(d) A language acquisition program established pursuant

to this section shall comply with the requirements of

Section 310.

SEC. 4. Section 306 of the Education Code is amended

to read:

306. The deﬁnitions of the terms used in this article and

in Article 3

1 (commencing with Section 310) 300) are as

follows:

148

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 58 CONTINUED

Section 305) and Article 3 (commencing with Section 310),

respectively, all California school children have the right to

be provided with an English language public education. If

a California school child has been denied the option of an

English language instructional curriculum in public school,

the child’s parent or legal guardian shall have legal

standing to sue for enforcement of the provisions of this

statute, and if successful shall be awarded normal and

customary attorney’s fees and actual damages, but not

punitive or consequential damages. Any school board

member or other elected ofﬁcial or public school teacher

or administrator who willfully and repeatedly refuses to

implement the terms of this statute by providing such

free public education and an English language educational

option at an available public school to a California school

child may be held personally liable for fees and actual

damages by the child’s parents or legal guardian. public

education.

SEC. 8. Section 335 of the Education Code is amended

to read:

335. The provisions of this act may be amended by a

statute that becomes effective upon approval by the

electorate or by a statute to further the act’s purpose

passed by a two-thirds

majority vote of each house of the

Legislature and signed by the Governor.

SEC. 9. Sections 2 to 8, inclusive, of this act shall

become operative on July 1, 2017.

PROPOSITION 59

The following advisory question is submitted to the people

in accordance with Section 4 of Senate Bill 254 of the

2015–16 Regular Session (Chapter 20, Statutes of 2016).

Advisory Question: “Shall California’s elected ofﬁcials use

all of their constitutional authority, including, but not

limited to, proposing and ratifying one or more amendments

to the United States Constitution, to overturn

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)

558 U.S. 310, and other applicable judicial precedents,

to allow the full regulation or limitation of campaign

contributions and spending, to ensure that all citizens,

regardless of wealth, may express their views to one

another, and to make clear that corporations should not

have the same constitutional rights as human beings?”

PROPOSITION 60

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds sections to the Labor Code;

therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are printed

in italic type to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

The California Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act

The people of the State of California do hereby ordain as

follows:

SECTION 1. Title.

This Act shall be known and may be cited as “The California

Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act” (the “Act”).

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California hereby ﬁnd and

declare all of the following:

pupils or more per school or the parents or legal guardian

personally visit the school to apply for the waiver and that

they there be provided a full description of the educational

materials to be used in the different educational program

choices and all the educational opportunities available to

the child. Under such parental waiver conditions, children

may be transferred to classes where they are taught English

and other subjects through bilingual education techniques

or other generally recognized educational methodologies

permitted by law. Individual schools in which guardians of

20 pupils or more of a given grade level receive a waiver

any grade request a language acquisition program that is

designed to provide language instruction shall be required

to offer such a class; otherwise, they must allow the pupils

to transfer to a public school in which such a class is

offered. program to the extent possible, based upon the

requirements of Section 305.

(b) If a school district implements a language acquisition

program pursuant to this section, it shall do both of the

following:

(1) Comply with the kindergarten and grades 1 to 3,

inclusive, class size requirements speciﬁed in

Section 42238.02.

(2) Provide, as part of the annual parent notice required

pursuant to Section 48980 or upon enrollment, the parent

or legal guardian of a minor pupil with information on the

types of language programs available to pupils enrolled in

the school district, including, but not limited to, a

description of each program.

SEC. 6. Section 311 of the Education Code is repealed.

311. The circumstances in which a parental exception

waiver may be granted under Section 310 are as follows:

(a) Children who already know English: the child already

possesses good English language skills, as measured by

standardized tests of English vocabulary comprehension,

reading, and writing, in which the child scores at or above

the state average for his or her grade level or at or above

the 5th grade average, whichever is lower; or

(b) Older children: the child is age 10 years or older, and

it is the informed belief of the school principal and

educational staff that an alternate course of educational

study would be better suited to the child’s rapid acquisition

of basic English language skills; or

placed for a period of not less than thirty days during that

school year in an English language classroom and it is

subsequently the informed belief of the school principal

and educational staff that the child has such special

physical, emotional, psychological, or educational needs

that an alternate course of educational study would be

better suited to the child’s overall educational development.

A written description of these special needs must be

provided and any such decision is to be made subject to

the examination and approval of the local school

superintendent, under guidelines established by and

subject to the review of the local Board of Education and

ultimately the State Board of Education. The existence of

such special needs shall not compel issuance of a waiver,

and the parents shall be fully informed of their right to

refuse to agree to a waiver.

SEC. 7. Section 320 of the Education Code is amended

to read:

320. As detailed in Article

Section 5 of Article IX of the

California Constitution, and Article 2 (commencing with

Text of Proposed Laws

149

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 60 CONTINUED

(a) Widespread transmission of sexually transmitted

infections associated with making adult ﬁlms in California

has been documented by one or more county departments

of public health. All workers in the adult ﬁlm industry

deserve to go to work and not become ill. It is important

that safer sex practices in the making of adult ﬁlms, and in

particular the use of condoms by performers, be required

so as to limit the spread of HIV/AIDS and other sexually

transmitted infections in the adult ﬁlm industry. Not only

is the risk of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted

infections among adult ﬁlm performers of immediate

public concern, but so is the risk of transmitting HIV/AIDS

and other sexually transmitted infections between adult

ﬁlm performers and the broader population.

(b) The adult ﬁlm industry places proﬁts above worker

safety and actively prevents and discourages the use of

certain essential safer sex methods. Costs of vaccinations,

testing, and medical monitoring relative to HIV/AIDS and

other sexually transmitted infections are currently unfairly

borne by adult ﬁlm performers, while adult ﬁlm producers

avoid bearing these costs and responsibilities. This Act is

necessary and appropriate to address these public

concerns.

SEC. 3. Purposes and Intent.

The people of the State of California hereby declare the

following purposes and intent in enacting this Act:

(a) To protect performers in the adult ﬁlm industry and

minimize the spread of sexually transmitted infections

resulting from the making of adult ﬁlms in California, thus

reducing the negative impact on people’s health and

improving Californians’ quality of life.

(b) To require producers of adult ﬁlms to comply with the

law by requiring, among other things, that performers are

protected by condoms from sexually transmitted infections.

Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) and the

California Occupational Safety and Health Standards

Board to take appropriate measures to enforce the Act.

(d) To require the costs of certain vaccinations, testing,

and medical monitoring relative to HIV/AIDS and other

sexually transmitted infections to be paid by adult ﬁlm

producers and to give adult ﬁlm performers a private right

of action to recover civil damages for economic or personal

injury caused by adult ﬁlm producers’ failure to comply

with the health and safety requirements of this Act.

(e) To hold liable all individuals and entities with a

ﬁnancial interest in the making or distribution of adult

ﬁlms who violate this Act.

(f) To require adult ﬁlm producers to provide notice of

ﬁlming, to maintain certain records regarding ﬁlming, to

post a notice regarding the required use of condoms for

speciﬁed scenes, and to fulﬁll additional health

requirements.

(g) To discourage noncompliance and encourage

compliance with the requirements of this Act by requiring

adult ﬁlm producers to be licensed.

(h) To extend the time in which the State of California may

pursue violators of the Act.

(i) To enable whistleblowers and private citizens to pursue

violators of the Act where the state fails to do so.

(j) To prohibit talent agents from knowingly referring adult

ﬁlm performers to locations where condoms will not be

used in the making of adult ﬁlms.

(k) To provide for the Act’s proper legal defense should it

be adopted and thereafter challenged in court.

SEC. 4. The California Safer Sex in the Adult Film

Industry Act shall be codiﬁed by adding Sections 6720 to

6720.8, inclusive, to the Labor Code.

SEC. 4.1. Section 6720 is added to the Labor Code, to

read:

6720. Health and Employment Requirements: Adult

Film Industry.

(a) An adult ﬁlm producer shall maintain engineering

controls and work practice controls sufﬁcient to protect

adult ﬁlm performers from exposure to blood and any other

potentially infectious material-sexually transmitted

infections (“OPIM-STI”). Engineering controls and work

practice controls shall include:

(1) Provision of and required use of condoms during the

ﬁlming of adult ﬁlms.

(2) Provision of condom-safe water-based or silicone-based

lubricants to facilitate the use of condoms.

(3) Any other reasonable STI prevention engineering

controls and work practice controls as required by

regulations adopted by the board through the administrative

rulemaking process, so long as such engineering controls

and work practice controls are reasonably germane to the

purposes and intent of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive.

(b) The costs of all STI prevention vaccinations, all STI

tests, and all medical follow-up required in order for an

individual to be an adult ﬁlm performer, shall be borne by

the adult ﬁlm producer and not by the adult ﬁlm performer.

conﬁdential, as required by law, any adult ﬁlm performer’s

health information acquired by any means.

(d) An adult ﬁlm producer’s failure to offer, provide, and

pay for a STI prevention vaccine, STI test, or medical

examination, as required in order to be an adult ﬁlm

performer, if such vaccine, test, or examination is

consented to by the adult ﬁlm performer, shall result in a

penalty against the adult ﬁlm producer, payable to the

State of California, equal to the cost of each STI prevention

vaccine, each STI test, and each medical examination that

the adult ﬁlm producer failed to offer, provide, or pay for

on behalf of the adult ﬁlm performer.

(e) Any adult ﬁlm performer may seek and be awarded, in

addition to any other remedies or damages allowed by law,

a civil damages award of up to ﬁfty thousand dollars

($50,000), subject to yearly consumer price index

increases, if the trier of fact: (1) ﬁnds that the adult ﬁlm

performer has suffered economic or personal injury as a

result of the adult ﬁlm producer’s failure to comply with

subdivisions (a), (b), or (c); (2) makes an afﬁrmative

ﬁnding that the adult ﬁlm producer’s failure to comply was

negligent, reckless, or intentional; and (3) ﬁnds that an

award is appropriate. The court shall award costs and

attorney’s fees to a prevailing plaintiff in litigation ﬁled

pursuant to this subdivision or subdivision (f). Reasonable

attorney’s fees may be awarded to a prevailing defendant

upon a ﬁnding by the court that the plaintiff’s prosecution

of the action was not in good faith. In the event that an

adult ﬁlm performer’s damages for economic or personal

injury are covered by the adult ﬁlm producer’s workers’

compensation insurance, this subdivision shall not apply.

(f) Any adult ﬁlm performer entitled to bring an action

under subdivision (e) shall be entitled to bring such an

150

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 60 CONTINUED

(5) The name and contact information of any talent agency

that referred any adult ﬁlm performer to the adult ﬁlm

producer.

(6) A certiﬁcation signed by the adult ﬁlm producer, under

penalty of perjury, that:

(A) Condoms will be used or have been used at all times

during the ﬁlming of acts of vaginal or anal intercourse;

(B) All STI testing, STI prevention vaccinations, and

medical examinations, as required in order for an individual

to be an adult ﬁlm performer, have been offered to the

individual prior to the beginning of ﬁlming at no charge to

the individual; and

prevention vaccination, and medical examinations have

been paid by the adult ﬁlm producer.

(7) Any other documentation or information that the

division or board may require to assure compliance with

the provisions of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive.

(b) Upon submitting the information required by this

section, the adult ﬁlm producer must pay a fee set by the

division or board in an amount sufﬁcient for data security,

data storage, and other administrative expenses associated

with receiving, processing, and maintaining all information

submitted under this section. Until the division or board

sets the fee, the fee shall be one hundred dollars ($100).

The fees collected pursuant to this subdivision shall not be

used to cover the costs of enforcing Sections 6720 to

6720.8, inclusive.

producers, one of the adult ﬁlm producers may transmit

the information required to be disclosed by subdivision (a)

on behalf of all of the adult ﬁlm’s adult ﬁlm producers.

(d) An adult ﬁlm producer’s failure to timely disclose to

the division the information required by this section, or to

comply with the subdivision (f) training program

requirement, the subdivision (g) signage requirement, or

the subdivision (h) recordkeeping requirement, shall be

punishable by a penalty of no less than one thousand

dollars ($1,000) and no more than seven thousand dollars

($7,000) per violation, as determined via the administrative

enforcement process or a civil action. Each repeat violation

shall be punishable by a penalty of no less than seven

thousand dollars ($7,000) and no more than ﬁfteen

thousand dollars ($15,000), as determined via the

administrative enforcement process or a civil action. The

failure to provide any individual piece of information

required by subdivision (a) constitutes a separate violation.

(e) An adult ﬁlm producer who knowingly makes any false

statement, representation, or certiﬁcation in complying

with subdivision (a) shall be assessed a penalty of not

more than seventy thousand dollars ($70,000) as

determined via the administrative enforcement process or

a civil action.

(f) An adult ﬁlm producer shall provide a training program

to each adult ﬁlm performer and employee as required by

regulations adopted by the board in accordance with the

administrative rulemaking process.

(g) A legible sign shall be displayed at all times at the

location where an adult ﬁlm is ﬁlmed in a conventional

typeface not smaller than 48-point font, that provides the

following notice so as to be clearly visible to all adult ﬁlm

performers in said adult ﬁlms:

action on behalf of all similarly situated adult ﬁlm

performers, subject to class certiﬁcation by a court.

(g) By January 1, 2018, the board shall adopt regulations

to implement and effectuate the provisions and purposes

of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, in accordance with

the rulemaking provisions of the Administrative Procedure

Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of

Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

(h) This section shall not be construed to require condoms,

barriers, or other personal protective equipment to be

visible in the ﬁnal product of an adult ﬁlm. However, there

shall be a rebuttable presumption that any adult ﬁlm

without visible condoms that is distributed for commercial

purposes in the State of California by any means was

produced in violation of this section.

(i) Liability under Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive,

shall not apply to adult ﬁlm performers, bona ﬁde

employees, individuals providing independent contracting

services, or production volunteers of an adult ﬁlm producer

who are acting within the scope of the general services

being provided and in accordance with the instruction of

the adult ﬁlm producer, provided that such individuals

have no ﬁnancial interest in the adult ﬁlm and are not

adult ﬁlm producers. Such individuals shall not be

considered agents of the adult ﬁlm producer for purposes

of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive.

(j) Nothing in Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, shall

prevent a state agency, such as the division or board, from

promulgating regulations governing the making, producing,

ﬁnancing, and distributing of adult ﬁlms, so long as such

regulations enhance workplace safety protections and

rights for adult ﬁlm performers and do not weaken the

requirements of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive.

(k) In the event the amount of any monetary penalty set

forth in Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, is found

invalid by a court of law, the division is empowered to and

shall develop, and the board is empowered to and shall

adopt, monetary penalties via the administrative rulemaking

process in a reasonable amount sufﬁcient to deter

noncompliance and encourage compliance with the

requirements of the provisions in which the penalties are

found to be invalid.

SEC. 4.2. Section 6720.1 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.1. Notice & Disclosure.

(a) Within 10 days after the beginning of ﬁlming, an adult

ﬁlm producer must disclose to the division, in writing,

signed under penalty of perjury by the adult ﬁlm producer,

the following information:

(1) The address or addresses at which the ﬁlming took, is

taking, or will take place, with any changes in location to

be disclosed to the division within 72 hours after such

changes occur.

(2) The date or dates on which the ﬁlming took, is taking,

or will take place, with any changes to the ﬁlming date or

dates to be disclosed to the division within 72 hours after

such changes occur.

(3) The name and contact information of the adult ﬁlm

producer.

(4) The name and contact information of the designated

custodian of records as required by subdivision (h).

Text of Proposed Laws

151

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 60 CONTINUED

administrative enforcement process or a civil action, to

have violated subdivision (a) of Section 6720.

(d) For any adult ﬁlm producer who is not an individual,

no license shall be effective unless all owners and

managing agents of such adult ﬁlm producer obtain a

license.

(e) A license shall be effective for two years, unless

suspended by the division. Following the last day of the

suspension period, the division shall inform the suspended

licensee of license reinstatement.

(f) Licensing requirements:

(1) Each applicant and licensee must not have been

found, through the administrative enforcement process or

by a court, to have violated any of the requirements of

subdivision (a) of Section 6720 for the 12 months

preceding the ﬁling of an application with the division or

the duration of the adult ﬁlm producer’s suspension,

whichever is less. All persons shall be considered in

compliance with Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, as

of the effective date of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive.

(g) Whenever the division determines that a licensee has

failed to comply with the requirements of subdivision (a) of

Section 6720, the division shall issue a written notice to

the licensee. The notice shall include a statement of

deﬁciencies found, shall set forth corrective measures, if

any, necessary for the licensee to be in compliance with

subdivision (a) of Section 6720, and shall inform the

licensee that penalties or license suspension may result.

(h) A written request for administrative review, or for a

continuance if good cause is shown, must be made by the

noticed licensee within 15 calendar days of the issuance

of the notice to comply, or else such review or continuance

are waived.

(i) Within 10 days after the administrative review or waiver,

excluding weekends and holidays, the division shall issue

a written notice of decision to the licensee, specifying any

penalties imposed on the licensee. For licenses that have

been suspended, the notice of decision shall specify the

acts or omissions found to be in violation of Sections 6720

to 6720.8, inclusive, and, in the case of a suspended

license, shall state the length and extent of the suspension.

The notice of decision shall also state the terms, if any,

upon which the license may be reinstated or reissued.

(j) A license issued pursuant to Sections 6720 to 6720.8,

inclusive, may be reinstated if the division determines that

the conditions which prompted the suspension no longer

exist and any penalties imposed pursuant to Sections

6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, have been satisﬁed. In no

event shall this section be construed as limiting a licensee’s

right to seek mandamus or to appeal an adverse license

decision.

(k) Performing the functions of an adult ﬁlm producer

without a license shall result in a ﬁne of up to ﬁfty dollars

($50) per day for any adult ﬁlm producer who has previously

been found to have violated subdivision (a) of Section

6720. Any adult ﬁlm producer who fails to register as an

adult ﬁlm producer within 10 days after qualifying as an

adult ﬁlm producer shall be liable for a ﬁne of up to twenty-

ﬁve dollars ($25) per day for performing the functions of

an adult ﬁlm producer without a license.

SEC. 4.4. Section 6720.3 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.3. Statute of Limitations.

The State of California requires the use of condoms

for all acts of vaginal or anal intercourse during

the production of adult ﬁlms to protect performers

from sexually transmitted infections and diseases.

Any public health concerns regarding any activities

occurring during the production of any adult ﬁlms

should be directed to:

The division or the board shall determine, and shall make

available to the public and to all adult ﬁlm producers, the

language to be inserted directly above the blank line on the

sign required by this subdivision, and all adult ﬁlm

producers shall comply with such determination by

inserting such language directly above the blank line on

the sign.

(h) An adult ﬁlm producer shall designate a custodian of

records for purposes of Sections 6720 to 6720.8,

inclusive. For a period of not less than four years, the

custodian of records shall maintain:

(1) A copy of each original and unedited adult ﬁlm made,

produced, ﬁnanced, or directed by the adult ﬁlm producer.

(2) A copy of the information required to be disclosed by

subdivision (a).

(3) Proof that the adult ﬁlm producer provided a training

program to each adult ﬁlm performer and employee

pursuant to subdivision (f).

(4) Proof that a legible sign was displayed at the locations

where the adult ﬁlm was ﬁlmed pursuant to subdivision (f).

(i) By January 1, 2018, the division or board shall adopt

regulations to implement and effectuate this section and

Section 6720.2 in accordance with the rulemaking

provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3

of Title 2 of the Government Code).

SEC. 4.3. Section 6720.2 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.2. Adult Film Producers: License.

(a) Within 10 days after the beginning of ﬁlming of an

adult ﬁlm, the adult ﬁlm’s adult ﬁlm producer shall pay the

required application fee, submit a required application to

the division, and obtain a license. An adult ﬁlm producer

with a license that is in effect at the beginning of ﬁlming

an adult ﬁlm shall not be required to submit a new license

application and fee. The application fee shall be set by the

division via administrative rulemaking, in an amount

sufﬁcient to provide for the cost of the administration of

this section. Until the division sets the fee, the fee shall be

one hundred dollars ($100). The fees collected pursuant

to this subdivision shall not be used to cover the costs of

enforcing Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive.

(b) A license shall be effective immediately upon the

division’s receipt of the application and fee so long as the

application and fee are transmitted to the division within

10 days after the beginning of ﬁlming. In addition, the

license shall be effective retroactively by 10 days or shall

be effective on the day of beginning of ﬁlming, whichever

is earlier.

performed by the division. Suspension of a license shall

only be permitted upon a stipulation by an adult ﬁlm

producer or upon a proper showing before a presiding

ofﬁcer, to be selected by the division to conduct the

hearing, that the licensee has been found, via the

152

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 60 CONTINUED

(a) Notwithstanding Section 6317, in an action to

prosecute any alleged violators of Sections 6720 to

6720.8, inclusive, or any adult ﬁlm regulations now or

hereafter adopted, the time for commencement of action

shall be the later of the following:

(1) One year after the date of the violation.

(2) One year after the violation is discovered, or through

the use of reasonable diligence, should have been

discovered.

SEC. 4.5. Section 6720.4 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.4. Liability and Penalties.

(a) Notwithstanding any contrary provisions in Sections

6423 to 6436, inclusive, every adult ﬁlm producer, or any

person in an agency relationship with an adult ﬁlm

producer, who does any of the following shall, in an

administrative or civil action, be assessed a penalty as

deﬁned in subdivision (b):

(1) Negligently violates any provision of subdivision (a),

(b), or (c) of Section 6720;

(2) Knowingly or repeatedly violates any provision of

subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 6720;

(3) Fails or refuses to comply with, after notiﬁcation and

expiration of any abatement period, any provision of

subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 6720; or

(4) Aids and abets another to commit any of the acts in

paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a).

(b) Any violation of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) is

punishable by a penalty of not less than one thousand

dollars ($1,000) nor more than ﬁve thousand dollars

($5,000); any violation of paragraph (2) or (3) of

subdivision (a) is punishable by a penalty of not less than

ﬁve thousand dollars ($5,000) nor more than seventy

thousand dollars ($70,000); and any violation of paragraph

(4) of subdivision (a) is punishable by a penalty of not less

than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than thirty-

ﬁve thousand dollars ($35,000).

6423 to 6436, inclusive, any adult ﬁlm producer who

willfully violates subdivision (a) of Section 6720, the

violation of which causes death, or permanent or prolonged

bodily impairment, to the adult ﬁlm performer, is

punishable by a ﬁne of not more than one hundred

thousand dollars ($100,000) via the administrative

enforcement process or a civil action. If the adult ﬁlm

producer is a limited liability company or a corporation,

the ﬁne may not exceed one million ﬁve hundred thousand

dollars ($1,500,000).

SEC. 4.6. Section 6720.5 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.5. Agents of Control; Aiding and Abetting; Multiple

Violations.

(a) Every person who possesses, through purchase for

commercial consideration, any rights in one or more adult

ﬁlms ﬁlmed in California in violation of subdivision (a) of

Section 6720 and who knowingly or recklessly sends or

causes to be sent, or brings or causes to be brought, into

or within California, for sale or distribution, one or more

adult ﬁlms ﬁlmed in California in violation of subdivision

(a) of Section 6720, with intent to distribute, or who offers

to distribute, or does distribute, such ﬁlms for commercial

purposes, shall be assessed a penalty of the greater of:

(1) Not less than one-half times, but not more than

one-and-one-half times, the total amount of commercial

consideration exchanged for any rights in the adult ﬁlms.

(2) Not less than one-half times, but not more than

one-and-one-half times, the total cost of producing the

adult ﬁlms.

(b) Any person found to have aided and abetted any other

person or persons in violating subdivision (a) shall be

found liable for violating subdivision (a).

who has previously been found liable for violating

subdivision (a) shall be assessed a penalty of the greater

of:

(1) Not less than two times, but not more than three times,

the amount of commercial consideration exchanged for

any rights in the adult ﬁlm.

(2) Not less than two times, but not more than three times,

the total cost of producing the adult ﬁlm.

(d) Any person found liable for violating subdivision (a)

who has been found liable two or more times for violating

subdivision (a) shall be assessed a penalty of the greater

of:

(1) Not less than three times, but not more than four

times, the amount of commercial consideration exchanged

for any rights in the adult ﬁlm.

(2) Not less than three times, but not more than four

times, the total cost of producing the adult ﬁlm.

(e) Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, shall not apply to

legitimate medical, educational, and scientiﬁc activities,

to telecommunication companies that transmit or carry

adult ﬁlms, to criminal law enforcement and prosecuting

agencies in the investigation and prosecution of criminal

offenses, and to any ﬁlm rated by the Motion Picture

Association of America unless such ﬁlm is an adult ﬁlm.

SEC. 4.7. Section 6720.6 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.6. Enforcement; Whistleblowers; Private Rights of

Action.

(a) Any person who violates any provision of Sections

6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, shall be liable via the

administrative enforcement process, or via a civil action

brought by the division or its designee, a civil prosecutor,

an adult ﬁlm performer aggrieved by a violation of Section

6720, or an individual residing in the State of California.

Any adult ﬁlm performer or individual, before ﬁling a civil

action pursuant to this subdivision, must ﬁle with the

division a written request for the division to pursue the

alleged violator or violators via the administrative

enforcement process or via commencement of a civil

action. The request shall include a statement of the

grounds for believing that Sections 6720 to 6720.8,

inclusive, have been violated. The division shall respond to

the individual in writing, indicating whether it intends to

pursue an administrative or civil action, or take no action.

If the division, within 21 days of receiving the request,

responds that it is going to pursue the alleged violator or

violators via the administrative enforcement process or a

civil action, and initiates enforcement proceedings or ﬁles

a civil action within 45 days of receiving the request, no

other action may be brought unless the division’s action is

abandoned or dismissed without prejudice. If the division,

within 21 days of receiving the request, responds in the

Text of Proposed Laws

153

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 60 CONTINUED

negative, or fails to respond, the person requesting the

action may ﬁle a civil action.

(b) The time period within which a civil action shall be

commenced shall be tolled from the date of the division’s

receipt of the request to either the date the civil action is

dismissed without prejudice or the administrative

enforcement action is abandoned, whichever is later, but

only for a civil action brought by the individual who ﬁled

the request.

regard to any person for any violations of Sections 6720 to

6720.8, inclusive, after the division has issued an order

consistent with Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, or

collected a penalty against that person for the same

violation. Although Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive,

impose no criminal liability, no civil action alleging a

violation of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, may be

ﬁled against a person pursuant to this section if a criminal

prosecutor is maintaining a criminal action against that

person regarding the same transaction or occurrence. Not

more than one judgment on the merits with respect to any

particular violation of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive,

may be obtained under this section against any person.

The court may dismiss a pending action, without prejudice

to any other action, for failure of the plaintiff to proceed

diligently or in good faith.

(d) If judgment is entered against one or more defendants

in an action brought under this section, penalties recovered

by the plaintiff shall be distributed as follows: 75 percent

to the State of California and 25 percent to the plaintiff.

The court shall award to a plaintiff or defendant other than

a governmental agency who prevails in any action

authorized by Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, and

brought pursuant to this section the costs of litigation,

including reasonable attorney’s fees. However, in order for

a defendant to recover attorney’s fees from a plaintiff, the

court must ﬁrst ﬁnd that the plaintiff’s pursuit of the

litigation was frivolous or in bad faith.

SEC. 4.8. Section 6720.7 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.7. Talent Agency Liability.

(a) It shall be unlawful for any talent agency, as that term

is deﬁned in subdivision (a) of Section 1700.4, to

knowingly refer, for monetary consideration, any adult ﬁlm

performer to any producer, or agent of the producer,

including, but not limited to, casting directors, of adult

ﬁlms who are not in compliance with subdivision (a) of

Section 6720. Any talent agency found liable for violating

this subdivision shall be liable to the adult ﬁlm performer

for the amount of the monetary consideration received by

the talent agency as a result of the referral made in violation

of this section and for reasonable attorney’s fees associated

with successfully pursuing the talent agency for liability for

violating this subdivision.

(b) Any talent agency that obtains written conﬁrmation

prior to the beginning of ﬁlming, signed under penalty of

perjury by the adult ﬁlm producer, that the adult ﬁlm

producer is in compliance with, and will continue to

comply with, all requirements of subdivision (a) of Section

6720 shall not be liable for violating this section.

or revocation of the violator’s talent agency license. The

Division of Occupational Safety and Health and the

Division of Labor Standards Enforcement shall maintain

concurrent jurisdiction over the enforcement of this

section.

(d) Upon the ﬁnding of liability for violations of subdivision

(a) of Section 6720, the division shall transmit the

information in paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section

6720.1 to the Department of lndustrial Relations, Division

of Labor Standards Enforcement, or any successor agency.

SEC. 4.9. Section 6720.8 is added to the Labor Code,

to read:

6720.8. Deﬁnitions.

For purposes of Sections 6720 to 6720.8, inclusive, the

following deﬁnitions shall apply:

(a) “Adult ﬁlm” means any recorded, streamed, or

real-time broadcast of any ﬁlm, video, multimedia, or other

representation of sexual intercourse in which performers

actually engage in vaginal or anal penetration by a penis.

(b) “Adult ﬁlm performer” means any individual whose

penis penetrates a vagina or anus while being ﬁlmed, or

whose vagina or anus is penetrated by a penis while being

ﬁlmed.

produces, ﬁnances, or directs one or more adult ﬁlms

ﬁlmed in California and that sells, offers to sell, or causes

to be sold such adult ﬁlm in exchange for commercial

consideration.

(d) “Adult ﬁlm regulations” means all regulations adopted

by the board in accordance with the rulemaking provisions

of the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3

of Title 2 of the Government Code) that are reasonably

germane to the purposes and intent of Sections 6720 to

6720.8, inclusive.

(e) “Aided and abetted” or “aids and abets” means

knowingly or recklessly giving substantial assistance to a

person.

(f) “Beginning of ﬁlming” means the point at which an

adult ﬁlm begins to be recorded, streamed, or real-time

broadcast.

(g) “Board” means the Occupational Safety and Health

Standards Board.

(h) “Commercial consideration” means anything of value,

including but not limited to, real or digital currency, or

contingent or vested rights in any current or future revenue.

(i) “Commercial purposes” means to sell, offer to sell, or

cause to be sold, in exchange for commercial consideration.

(j) “Distribute” or “distributed” means to transfer

possession of in exchange for commercial consideration.

(k) “Division” means the Division of Occupational Safety

and Health.

(l) “Filmed” and “ﬁlming” means the recording, streaming,

or real-time broadcast of any adult ﬁlm.

(m) “License” means Adult Film Producer Health License.

(n) “Licensee” means any person holding a valid Adult

Film Producer Health License.

(o) “Other potentially infectious material-sexually

transmitted infections” or “OPIM-STI” means bodily ﬂuids

and other substances that may contain and transmit

sexually transmitted pathogens.

154

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 60 CONTINUED

stake in defending this Act from constitutional or statutory

challenges to the Act’s validity. In the event the Attorney

General fails to defend this Act; or the Attorney General

fails to appeal an adverse judgment against the

constitutionality or statutory permissibility of this Act, in

whole or in part, in any court, the Act’s proponent shall be

entitled to assert his direct and personal stake by defending

the Act’s validity in any court and shall be empowered by

the citizens through this Act to act as an agent of the

citizens of the State of California subject to the following

conditions: (1) the proponent shall not be considered an

“at-will” employee of the State of California, but the

Legislature shall have the authority to remove the proponent

from his agency role by a majority vote of each house of the

Legislature when “good cause” exists to do so, as that term

is deﬁned by California case law; (2) the proponent shall

take the Oath of Ofﬁce under Section 3 of Article XX of the

California Constitution, as an employee of the State of

California; (3) the proponent shall be subject to all

ﬁduciary, ethical, and legal duties prescribed by law; and

(4) the proponent shall be indemniﬁed by the State of

California for only reasonable expenses and other losses

incurred by the proponent, as agent, in defending the

validity of the challenged Act. The rate of indemniﬁcation

shall be no more than the amount it would cost the State

to perform the defense itself.

SEC. 11. Effective Date.

Except as otherwise provided herein, this Act shall become

effective the day after its approval by the voters.

PROPOSITION 61

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds a section to the Welfare and

Institutions Code; therefore, new provisions proposed to be

added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are

new.

PROPOSED LAW

The California Drug Price Relief Act

The people of the State of California do hereby ordain as

follows:

SECTION 1. Title.

This Act shall be known, and may be cited, as “The

California Drug Price Relief Act” (the “Act”).

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California hereby ﬁnd and

declare all of the following:

(a) Prescription drug costs have been, and continue to be,

one of the greatest drivers of rising health care costs in

California.

(b) Nationally, prescription drug spending increased more

than 800 percent between 1990 and 2013, making it one

of the fastest growing segments of health care.

used to treat HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis C, and cancer, are rising

faster than other types of medications. In 2014 alone,

total spending on specialty medications increased by more

than 23 percent.

(d) The pharmaceutical industry’s practice of charging

inﬂated drug prices has resulted in pharmaceutical

(p) “Person” means any individual, partnership, ﬁrm,

association, corporation, limited liability company, or other

legal entity.

(q) “Sexually Transmitted Infection” or “STI” means any

infection or disease spread by sexual intercourse,

including, but not limited to, HIV/AIDS, gonorrhea,

syphilis, chlamydia, hepatitis, trichomoniasis, genital

human papillomavirus infection (HPV), and genital herpes.

SEC. 5. Liberal Construction.

This Act is an exercise of the public power of the people of

the State of California for the protection of their health,

safety, and welfare, and shall be liberally construed to

effectuate its purposes.

SEC. 6. Conﬂicting Measures.

This Act is intended to be comprehensive. It is the intent

of the people of the State of California that in the event

this Act and one or more measures relating to the same

subject shall appear on the same statewide ballot, the

provisions of the other measure or measures shall be

deemed to be in conﬂict with this Act. In the event that

this Act receives a greater number of afﬁrmative votes, the

provisions of this Act shall prevail in their entirety, and all

provisions of the other measure or measures shall be null

and void.

SEC. 7. Proponent Accountability.

The people of the State of California hereby declare that

the proponent of this Act should be held civilly liable in

the event this Act is struck down, after passage, in whole

or in part, by a court for being constitutionally or statutorily

impermissible. Such a constitutionally or statutorily

impermissible initiative is a misuse of taxpayer funds and

electoral resources and the Act’s proponent, as the drafter

of the Act, must be held accountable for such an

occurrence.

In the event this Act, after passage, is struck down in

court, in whole or in part, as unconstitutional or statutorily

invalid, and all avenues for appealing and overturning the

court decision have been exhausted, the proponent shall

pay a civil penalty of $10,000 to the General Fund of the

State of California for failure to draft a wholly constitutionally

or statutorily permissible initiative law. No party or entity

may waive this civil penalty.

SEC. 8. Amendment and Repeal.

This Act may be amended to further its purposes by statute

passed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Legislature and

signed by the Governor.

SEC. 9. Severablility.

If any provision of this Act, or part thereof, or the

applicability of any provision or part to any person or

circumstances, is for any reason held to be invalid or

unconstitutional, the remaining provisions and parts shall

not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect,

and to this end the provisions and parts of this Act are

severable. The voters hereby declare that this Act, and

each portion and part, would have been adopted

irrespective of whether any one or more provisions or parts

are found to be invalid or unconstitutional.

SEC. 10. Legal Defense.

The people of the State of California desire that the Act, if

approved by the voters, and thereafter challenged in court,

be defended by the State of California. The people of the

State of California, by enacting this Act, hereby declare

that the proponent of this Act has a direct and personal

Text of Proposed Laws

155

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 61 CONTINUED

drug by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.

The requirements of this section shall not be applicable to

drugs purchased or procured, or rates developed, pursuant

to or under any Medi-Cal managed care program.

that the State of California, and all state agencies and

other state entities that enter into one or more agreements

with the manufacturer of any drug for the purchase of

prescribed drugs, shall implement this section in a timely

manner, and to that end the State of California and all

such state agencies and other state entities are required to

implement and comply with this law no later than July 1,

2017.

(d) The State of California, and each and every state

administrative agency or other state entity, may adopt rules

and regulations to implement the provisions of this section,

and may seek any waivers of federal law, rule, and

regulation necessary to implement the provisions of this

section.

SEC. 5. Liberal Construction.

This Act is an exercise of the public power of the people of

the State of California for the protection of their health,

safety, and welfare, and shall be liberally construed to

effectuate its purposes.

SEC. 6. Conﬂicting Measures.

This Act is intended to be comprehensive. It is the intent

of the people of the State of California that in the event

this Act and one or more measures relating to the same

subject shall appear on the same statewide ballot, the

provisions of the other measure or measures shall be

deemed to be in conﬂict with this Act. In the event that

this Act receives a greater number of afﬁrmative votes, the

provisions of this Act shall prevail in their entirety, and all

provisions of the other measure or measures shall be null

and void.

SEC. 7. Proponent Accountability.

The people of the State of California hereby declare that

the proponent of this Act should be held civilly liable in the

event this Act is struck down, after passage, in whole or in

part, by a court of law for being constitutionally or statutorily

impermissible. Such a constitutionally or statutorily

impermissible initiative is a misuse of taxpayer funds and

electoral resources and the Act’s proponent, as drafter of

the Act, must be held accountable for such an occurrence.

In the event this Act, after passage, is struck down in a

court of law, in whole or in part, as unconstitutional or

statutorily invalid, and all avenues for appeal have been

exhausted, the proponent shall pay a civil penalty of

$10,000 to the General Fund of the State of California for

failure to draft and sponsor a wholly constitutionally or

statutorily permissible initiative law but shall have no other

liability to any person or entity with respect to, related to,

or arising from the Act. No party or entity may waive this

civil penalty.

SEC. 8. Amendment and Repeal.

This Act may be amended to further its purposes by statute

passed by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature and signed

by the Governor.

SEC. 9. Severability.

If any provision of this Act, or part thereof, or the

applicability of any provision or part to any person or

circumstances, is for any reason held to be invalid or

unconstitutional, the remaining provisions and parts shall

company proﬁts exceeding those of even the oil and

investment banking industries.

(e) Inﬂated drug pricing has led to drug companies

lavishing excessive pay on their executives.

(f) Excessively priced drugs continue to be an unnecessary

burden on California taxpayers that ultimately results in

cuts to health care services and providers for people in

need.

(g) Although California has engaged in efforts to reduce

prescription drug costs through rebates, drug manufacturers

are still able to charge the state more than other government

payers for the same medications, resulting in a dramatic

imbalance that must be rectiﬁed.

(h) If California is able to pay the same prices for

prescription drugs as the amounts paid by the United

States Department of Veterans Affairs, it would result in

signiﬁcant savings to California and its taxpayers. This Act

is necessary and appropriate to address these public

concerns.

SEC. 3. Purposes and Intent.

The people of the State of California hereby declare the

following purposes and intent in enacting this Act:

(a) To enable the State of California to pay the same prices

for prescription drugs as the prices paid by the United

States Department of Veterans Affairs, thus rectifying the

imbalance among government payers.

(b) To enable signiﬁcant cost savings to California and its

taxpayers for prescription drugs, thus helping to stem the

tide of rising health care costs in California.

be adopted and thereafter challenged in court.

SEC. 4. The California Drug Price Relief Act shall be

codiﬁed by adding Section 14105.32 to the Welfare and

Institutions Code, to read:

14105.32. Drug Pricing.

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and insofar

as may be permissible under federal law, neither the State

of California, nor any state administrative agency or other

state entity, including, but not limited to, the State

Department of Health Care Services, shall enter into any

agreement with the manufacturer of any drug for the

purchase of a prescribed drug unless the net cost of the

drug, inclusive of cash discounts, free goods, volume

discounts, rebates, or any other discounts or credits, as

determined by the State Department of Health Care

Services, is the same as or less than the lowest price paid

for the same drug by the United States Department of

Veterans Affairs.

(b) The price ceiling described in subdivision (a) also shall

apply to all programs where the State of California or any

state administrative agency or other state entity is the

ultimate payer for the drug, even if it did not purchase the

drug directly. This includes, but is not limited to,

California’s Medi-Cal fee-for-service outpatient drug

program and California’s AIDS Drug Assistance Program.

In addition to agreements for any cash discounts, free

goods, volume discounts, rebates, or any other discounts

or credits already in place for these programs, the

responsible state agency shall enter into additional

agreements with drug manufacturers for further price

reductions so that the net cost of the drug, as determined

by the State Department of Health Care Services, is the

same as or less than the lowest price paid for the same

156

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 61 CONTINUED

2. Under current law, California sentences many criminals

to death who commit ﬁrst degree murder, but the state

rarely carries out executions. Instead, the state spends

millions of taxpayer dollars providing lawyers for death row

inmates, only to see the murderers it has sentenced to

death by execution die of old age in prison.

3. Since 1978, California has spent more than $4 billion

on a death penalty system that has sentenced nearly one

thousand criminals to death by execution but has executed

only 13 people. Even though there are over 700 inmates

now on death row, California has not executed anyone in

almost eleven years.

4. Violent murderers who are sentenced to serve life in

prison without the possibility of parole in California are

never eligible for parole. They spend the rest of their lives

in prison and they die in prison.

5. Fewer than 1% of death row inmates work and pay their

wages to compensate their victims. Murderers sentenced

to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole are

required to work in prison and use their wages to pay

restitution to the victims of their crimes.

6. All convicted murderers sentenced to life imprisonment

without the possibility of parole should be legally required

to work while in prison and pay 60% of their wages to

compensate their victims for the damage they caused.

7. While many think it is cheaper to execute murderers

than to imprison them for life, in fact it is far more

expensive. The death penalty system costs over $100

million more per year to maintain than a system that has

life imprisonment without the possibility of parole as its

harshest punishment, according to a study by former death

penalty prosecutor and judge, Arthur Alarcon, and law

professor Paula Mitchell. By replacing the death penalty

with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole,

California taxpayers would save well over $100 million

every year.

8. The death penalty is a failed government program that

wastes taxpayer dollars and makes fatal mistakes. More

than 150 innocent people have been sentenced to death

in this country, and some innocent people have actually

been executed. Wrongful convictions rob innocent people

of decades of their lives, waste tax dollars, and re-

traumatize the victims’ families, while the real killers

remain free to kill again.

9. Retroactive application of this act will end a costly and

ineffective practice immediately and ensure that California

never executes an innocent person.

10. California’s death penalty is an empty promise. Death

penalty cases drag on for decades. A sentence of life in

prison without the possibility of parole provides swift and

certain justice for grieving families.

11. Life in prison without the possibility of parole ensures

that the worst criminals stay in prison forever and saves

money. By replacing the death penalty with life in prison

without the possibility of parole, we would save the state

$1 billion in ﬁve years without releasing a single

prisoner—$1 billion that could be invested in crime

prevention strategies, services for victims, education, and

keeping our communities and families safe.

SEC. 3. Purpose and Intent.

The people of the State of California declare their purpose

and intent in enacting the act to be as follows:

not be affected, but shall remain in full force and effect,

and to this end the provisions and parts of this Act are

severable. The voters hereby declare that this Act, and

each portion and part, would have been adopted irrespective

of whether any one or more provisions or parts are found to

be invalid or unconstitutional.

SEC. 10. Legal Defense.

The people of the State of California desire that the Act, if

approved by the voters, and thereafter challenged in court,

be defended by the State of California. The people of the

State of California, by enacting this Act, hereby declare

that the proponent of this Act has a direct and personal

stake in defending this Act from constitutional or statutory

challenges to the Act’s validity. In the event the Attorney

General fails to defend this Act, or the Attorney General

fails to appeal an adverse judgment against the

constitutionality or statutory permissibility of this Act, in

whole or in part, in any court of law, the Act’s proponent

shall be entitled to assert its direct and personal stake by

defending the Act’s validity in any court of law and shall be

empowered by the citizens through this Act to act as agent

of the citizens of the State of California subject to the

following conditions: (1) the proponent shall not be

considered an “at-will” employee of the State of California,

but the Legislature shall have the authority to remove the

proponent from their agency role by a majority vote of each

house of the Legislature when “good cause” exists to do

so, as that term is deﬁned by California case law; (2) the

proponent shall take the Oath of Ofﬁce under Section 3 of

Article XX of the California Constitution as an employee of

the State of California; (3) the proponent shall be subject

to all ﬁduciary, ethical, and legal duties prescribed by law;

and (4) the proponent shall be indemniﬁed by the State of

California for only reasonable expenses and other losses

incurred by the proponent, as agent, in defending the

validity of the challenged Act. The rate of indemniﬁcation

shall be no more than the amount it would cost the state

to perform the defense itself.

SEC. 11. Effective Date.

Except as otherwise provided herein, this Act shall become

effective the day after its approval by the voters.

PROPOSITION 62

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure amends and repeals sections of the

Penal Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed to be

deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new provisions

proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate

that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

The Justice That Works Act of 2016

SECTION 1. Title.

This initiative shall be known and may be cited as “The

Justice That Works Act of 2016.”

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California do hereby ﬁnd and

declare all of the following:

1. Violent killers convicted of ﬁrst degree murder must be

separated from society and severely punished.

Text of Proposed Laws

157

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

(4) The defendant personally used a ﬁrearm in the

commission of the offense, in violation of Section 12022.5.

(d) Every person guilty of murder in the second degree

shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for

a term of 20 years to life if the killing was perpetrated by

means of shooting a ﬁrearm from a motor vehicle,

intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with

the intent to inﬂict great bodily injury.

(e) Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 2930) of

Chapter 7 of Title 1 of Part 3 shall not apply to reduce any

minimum term of a sentence imposed pursuant to this

section. A person sentenced pursuant to this section shall

not be released on parole prior to serving the minimum

term of conﬁnement prescribed by this section.

(f) Every person found guilty of murder and sentenced or

resentenced to a term of life imprisonment without the

possibility of parole pursuant to this section shall be

required to work within a high-security prison as many

hours of faithful labor in each day and every day during his

or her term of imprisonment as shall be prescribed by the

rules and regulations of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, pursuant to Section 2700. In any case

where the prisoner owes a restitution ﬁne or restitution

order, the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation shall deduct money from the wages and

trust account deposits of the prisoner and shall transfer

those funds to the California Victim Compensation and

Government Claims Board according to the rules and

regulations of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, pursuant to Sections 2085.5 and 2717.8.

SEC. 5. Section 190.1 of the Penal Code is repealed.

190.1. A case in which the death penalty may be

imposed pursuant to this chapter shall be tried in separate

phases as follows:

(a) The question of the defendant’s guilt shall be ﬁrst

determined. If the trier of fact ﬁnds the defendant guilty of

ﬁrst degree murder, it shall at the same time determine the

truth of all special circumstances charged as enumerated

in Section 190.2 except for a special circumstance

charged pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of

Section 190.2 where it is alleged that the defendant had

been convicted in a prior proceeding of the offense of

murder in the ﬁrst or second degree.

(b) If the defendant is found guilty of ﬁrst degree murder

and one of the special circumstances is charged pursuant

to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 190.2 which

charges that the defendant had been convicted in a prior

proceeding of the offense of murder of the ﬁrst or second

degree, there shall thereupon be further proceedings on

the question of the truth of such special circumstance.

and one or more special circumstances as enumerated in

Section 190.2 has been charged and found to be true, his

sanity on any plea of not guilty by reason of insanity under

Section 1026 shall be determined as provided in Section

190.4. If he is found to be sane, there shall thereupon be

further proceedings on the question of the penalty to be

imposed. Such proceedings shall be conducted in

accordance with the provisions of Section 190.3 and

190.4.

SEC. 6. Section 190.2 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

190.2. (a) The penalty for a defendant who is found

guilty of murder in the ﬁrst degree is death or

imprisonment

1. To end California’s costly and ineffective death penalty

system and replace it with a common sense approach that

sentences persons convicted of ﬁrst degree murder with

special circumstances to life imprisonment without the

possibility of parole so they are permanently separated

from society and required to pay restitution to their victims.

2. To require everyone convicted of ﬁrst degree murder

and sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility

of parole to work while in prison, and to increase to 60%

the portion of wages they must pay as restitution to their

victims.

3. To eliminate the risk of executing an innocent person.

4. To end the decades-long appeals process in which

grieving family members attending multiple hearings are

forced to continually relive the trauma of their loss.

5. To achieve fairness and uniformity in sentencing,

through retroactive application of this act to replace the

death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of

parole.

SEC. 4. Section 190 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

190. (a) Every person guilty of murder in the ﬁrst degree

shall be punished by death,

imprisonment in the state

prison for life without the possibility of parole, or

imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to

life. The penalty to be applied shall be determined as

provided in Sections 190.1,

190.2, 190.3, 190.4, and

190.5.

Except as provided in subdivision (b), (c), or (d), every

person guilty of murder in the second degree shall be

punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of

15 years to life.

(b) Except as provided in subdivision (c), every person

guilty of murder in the second degree shall be punished by

imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to

life if the victim was a peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in

subdivision (a) of Section 830.1, subdivision (a), (b), or

Section 830.5, who was killed while engaged in the

performance of his or her duties, and the defendant knew,

or reasonably should have known, that the victim was a

peace ofﬁcer engaged in the performance of his or her

duties.

shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for

a term of life without the possibility of parole if the victim

was a peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in subdivision (a) of

Section 830.1, subdivision (a), (b), or (c) of Section 830.2,

subdivision (a) of Section 830.33, or Section 830.5, who

was killed while engaged in the performance of his or her

duties, and the defendant knew, or reasonably should have

known, that the victim was a peace ofﬁcer engaged in the

performance of his or her duties, and any of the following

facts has been charged and found true:

(1) The defendant speciﬁcally intended to kill the peace

ofﬁcer.

(2) The defendant speciﬁcally intended to inﬂict great

bodily injury, as deﬁned in Section 12022.7, on a peace

ofﬁcer.

(3) The defendant personally used a dangerous or deadly

weapon in the commission of the offense, in violation of

subdivision (b) of Section 12022.

158

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

paragraph, “juvenile proceeding” means a proceeding

brought pursuant to Section 602 or 707 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code.

(11) The victim was a prosecutor or assistant prosecutor

or a former prosecutor or assistant prosecutor of any local

or state prosecutor’s ofﬁce in this or any other state, or of

a federal prosecutor’s ofﬁce, and the murder was

intentionally carried out in retaliation for, or to prevent the

performance of, the victim’s ofﬁcial duties.

(12) The victim was a judge or former judge of any court

of record in the local, state, or federal system in this or any

other state, and the murder was intentionally carried out in

retaliation for, or to prevent the performance of, the victim’s

ofﬁcial duties.

(13) The victim was an elected or appointed ofﬁcial or

former ofﬁcial of the federal government, or of any local or

state government of this or any other state, and the killing

was intentionally carried out in retaliation for, or to prevent

the performance of, the victim’s ofﬁcial duties.

(14) The murder was especially heinous, atrocious, or

cruel, manifesting exceptional depravity. As used in this

section, the phrase “especially heinous, atrocious, or

cruel, manifesting exceptional depravity” means a

conscienceless or pitiless crime that is unnecessarily

torturous to the victim.

(15) The defendant intentionally killed the victim by

means of lying in wait.

(16) The victim was intentionally killed because of his or

her race, color, religion, nationality, or country of origin.

(17) The murder was committed while the defendant was

engaged in, or was an accomplice in, the commission of,

attempted commission of, or the immediate ﬂight after

committing, or attempting to commit, the following

felonies:

(A) Robbery in violation of Section 211 or 212.5.

(B) Kidnapping in violation of Section 207, 209, or

209.5.

(D) Sodomy in violation of Section 286.

(E) The performance of a lewd or lascivious act upon the

person of a child under the age of 14 years in violation of

Section 288.

(F) Oral copulation in violation of Section 288a.

(G) Burglary in the ﬁrst or second degree in violation of

Section 460.

(H) Arson in violation of subdivision (b) of Section 451.

(I) Train wrecking in violation of Section 219.

(J) Mayhem in violation of Section 203.

(K) Rape by instrument in violation of Section 289.

(L) Carjacking, as deﬁned in Section 215.

(M) To prove the special circumstances of kidnapping in

subparagraph (B), or arson in subparagraph (H), if there is

speciﬁc intent to kill, it is only required that there be proof

of the elements of those felonies. If so established, those

two special circumstances are proven even if the felony of

kidnapping or arson is committed primarily or solely for the

purpose of facilitating the murder.

(18) The murder was intentional and involved the inﬂiction

of torture.

in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole

if one or more of the following special circumstances has

been found under Section 190.4 to be true:

(1) The murder was intentional and carried out for ﬁnancial

gain.

(2) The defendant was convicted previously of murder in

the ﬁrst or second degree. For the purpose of this paragraph,

an offense committed in another jurisdiction, which if

committed in California would be punishable as ﬁrst or

second degree murder, shall be deemed murder in the ﬁrst

or second degree.

(3) The defendant, in this proceeding, has been convicted

of more than one offense of murder in the ﬁrst or second

degree.

(4) The murder was committed by means of a destructive

device, bomb, or explosive planted, hidden, or concealed

in any place, area, dwelling, building, or structure, and the

defendant knew, or reasonably should have known, that his

or her act or acts would create a great risk of death to one

or more human beings.

(5) The murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding

or preventing a lawful arrest, or perfecting or attempting to

perfect, an escape from lawful custody.

(6) The murder was committed by means of a destructive

device, bomb, or explosive that the defendant mailed or

delivered, attempted to mail or deliver, or caused to be

mailed or delivered, and the defendant knew, or reasonably

should have known, that his or her act or acts would create

a great risk of death to one or more human beings.

(7) The victim was a peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in

Section 830.1, 830.2, 830.3, 830.31, 830.32, 830.33,

830.34, 830.35, 830.36, 830.37, 830.4, 830.5, 830.6,

830.10, 830.11, or 830.12, who, while engaged in the

course of the performance of his or her duties, was

intentionally killed, and the defendant knew, or reasonably

should have known, that the victim was a peace ofﬁcer

engaged in the performance of his or her duties; or the

victim was a peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in the above-

enumerated sections, or a former peace ofﬁcer under any

of those sections, and was intentionally killed in retaliation

for the performance of his or her ofﬁcial duties.

(8) The victim was a federal law enforcement ofﬁcer or

agent who, while engaged in the course of the performance

of his or her duties, was intentionally killed, and the

defendant knew, or reasonably should have known, that

the victim was a federal law enforcement ofﬁcer or agent

engaged in the performance of his or her duties; or the

victim was a federal law enforcement ofﬁcer or agent, and

was intentionally killed in retaliation for the performance

of his or her ofﬁcial duties.

(9) The victim was a ﬁreﬁghter, as deﬁned in Section 245.1,

who, while engaged in the course of the performance of his

or her duties, was intentionally killed, and the defendant

knew, or reasonably should have known, that the victim

was a ﬁreﬁghter engaged in the performance of his or her

duties.

(10) The victim was a witness to a crime who was

intentionally killed for the purpose of preventing his or her

testimony in any criminal or juvenile proceeding, and the

killing was not committed during the commission or

attempted commission, of the crime to which he or she

was a witness; or the victim was a witness to a crime and

was intentionally killed in retaliation for his or her testimony

in any criminal or juvenile proceeding. As used in this

Text of Proposed Laws

159

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

involved a crime of violence, the presence or absence of

other criminal activity by the defendant which involved the

use or attempted use of force or violence or which involved

the express or implied threat to use force or violence, and

the defendant’s character, background, history, mental

condition and physical condition.

However, no evidence shall be admitted regarding other

criminal activity by the defendant which did not involve

the use or attempted use of force or violence or which did

not involve the express or implied threat to use force or

violence. As used in this section, criminal activity does not

require a conviction.

However, in no event shall evidence of prior criminal

activity be admitted for an offense for which the defendant

was prosecuted and acquitted. The restriction on the use

of this evidence is intended to apply only to proceedings

pursuant to this section and is not intended to affect

statutory or decisional law allowing such evidence to be

used in any other proceedings.

Except for evidence in proof of the offense or special

circumstances which subject a defendant to the death

penalty, no evidence may be presented by the prosecution

in aggravation unless notice of the evidence to be

introduced has been given to the defendant within a

reasonable period of time as determined by the court, prior

to trial. Evidence may be introduced without such notice in

rebuttal to evidence introduced by the defendant in

mitigation.

The trier of fact shall be instructed that a sentence of

conﬁnement to state prison for a term of life without the

possibility of parole may in future after sentence is

imposed, be commuted or modiﬁed to a sentence that

includes the possibility of parole by the Governor of the

State of California.

In determining the penalty, the trier of fact shall take into

account any of the following factors if relevant:

(a) The circumstances of the crime of which the defendant

was convicted in the present proceeding and the existence

of any special circumstances found to be true pursuant to

Section 190.1.

(b) The presence or absence of criminal activity by the

defendant which involved the use of attempted use of

force or violence or the express or implied threat to use

force or violence.

(d) Whether or not the offense was committed while the

defendant was under the inﬂuence of extreme mental or

emotional disturbance.

(e) Whether or not the victim was a participant in the

defendant’s homicidal conduct or consented to the

homicidal act.

(f) Whether or not the offense was committed under

circumstances which the defendant reasonably believed to

be a moral justiﬁcation or extenuation for his conduct.

(g) Whether or not defendant acted under extreme duress

or under the substantial domination of another person.

(h) Whether or not at the time of the offense the capacity

of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his

conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of

law was impaired as a result of mental disease or defect,

or the affects of intoxication.

(i) The age of the defendant at the time of the crime.

(19) The defendant intentionally killed the victim by the

administration of poison.

(20) The victim was a juror in any court of record in the

local, state, or federal system in this or any other state,

and the murder was intentionally carried out in retaliation

for, or to prevent the performance of, the victim’s ofﬁcial

duties.

(21) The murder was intentional and perpetrated by

means of discharging a ﬁrearm from a motor vehicle,

intentionally at another person or persons outside the

vehicle with the intent to inﬂict death. For purposes of this

paragraph, “motor vehicle” means any vehicle as deﬁned

in Section 415 of the Vehicle Code.

(22) The defendant intentionally killed the victim while

the defendant was an active participant in a criminal street

gang, as deﬁned in subdivision (f) of Section 186.22, and

the murder was carried out to further the activities of the

criminal street gang.

(b) Unless an intent to kill is speciﬁcally required under

subdivision (a) for a special circumstance enumerated

therein, an actual killer, as to whom the special

circumstance has been found to be true under

Section 190.4, need not have had any intent to kill at the

time of the commission of the offense which is the basis of

the special circumstance in order to suffer death or

conﬁnement in the state prison for life without the

possibility of parole.

to kill, aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, solicits,

requests, or assists any actor in the commission of murder

in the ﬁrst degree shall be punished by death or

imprisonment in the state prison for life without the

possibility of parole if one or more of the special

circumstances enumerated in subdivision (a) has been

found to be true under Section 190.4.

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (c), every person, not the

actual killer, who, with reckless indifference to human life

and as a major participant, aids, abets, counsels,

commands, induces, solicits, requests, or assists in the

commission of a felony enumerated in paragraph (17) of

subdivision (a) which results in the death of some person

or persons, and who is found guilty of murder in the ﬁrst

degree therefor, shall be punished by death or

imprisonment

in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole

if a special circumstance enumerated in paragraph (17) of

subdivision (a) has been found to be true under

Section 190.4.

The penalty shall be determined as provided in this section

and Sections 190.1, 190.3,

190.4, and 190.5.

SEC. 7. Section 190.3 of the Penal Code is repealed.

190.3. If the defendant has been found guilty of murder

in the ﬁrst degree, and a special circumstance has been

charged and found to be true, or if the defendant may be

subject to the death penalty after having been found guilty

of violating subdivision (a) of Section 1672 of the Military

and Veterans Code or Sections 37, 128, 219, or 4500 of

this code, the trier of fact shall determine whether the

penalty shall be death or conﬁnement in state prison for a

term of life without the possibility of parole. In the

proceedings on the question of penalty, evidence may be

presented by both the people and the defendant as to any

matter relevant to aggravation, mitigation, and sentence

including, but not limited to, the nature and circumstances

of the present offense, any prior felony conviction or

convictions whether or not such conviction or convictions

160

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

of the previous jury to be untrue. If such new jury is unable

to reach the unanimous verdict that one or more of the

special circumstances it is trying are true, the court shall

dismiss the jury and in the court’s discretion shall either

order a new jury impaneled to try the issues the previous

jury was unable to reach the unanimous verdict on, or

impose a punishment of conﬁnement in state prison for a

term of 25 years.

(b) If defendant was convicted by the court sitting without

a jury the trier of fact at the penalty hearing shall be a jury

unless a jury is waived by the defendant and the people, in

which case the trier of fact shall be the court. If the

defendant was convicted by a plea of guilty, the trier of

fact shall be a jury unless a jury is waived by the defendant

and the people.

If the trier of fact is a jury and has been unable to reach a

unanimous verdict as to what the penalty shall be, the

court shall dismiss the jury and shall order a new jury

impaneled to try the issue as to what the penalty shall be.

If such new jury is unable to reach a unanimous verdict as

to what the penalty shall be, the court in its discretion

shall either order a new jury or impose a punishment of

conﬁnement in state prison for a term of life without the

possibility of parole.

a crime for which he may be subject to imprisonment in

state prison for life without the possibility of parole the

death penalty was a jury, the same jury shall consider any

plea of not guilty by reason of insanity pursuant to

Section 1026, and the truth of any special circumstances

which may be alleged, and the penalty to be applied

unless for good cause shown the court discharges that jury

in which case a new jury shall be drawn. The court shall

state facts in support of the ﬁnding of good cause upon the

record and cause them to be entered into the minutes.

(d) In any case in which the defendant may be subject to

the death penalty, evidence presented at any prior phase of

the trial, including any proceeding under a plea of not

guilty by reason of insanity pursuant to Section 1026 shall

be considered an any subsequent phase of the trial, if the

trier of fact of the prior phase is the same trier of fact at

the subsequent phase.

(e) In every case in which the trier of fact has returned a

verdict or ﬁnding imposing the death penalty, the defendant

shall be deemed to have made an application for

modiﬁcation of such verdict or ﬁnding pursuant to

Subdivision 7 of Section 11. In ruling on the application,

the judge shall review the evidence, consider, take into

account, and be guided by the aggravating and mitigating

circumstances referred to in Section 190.3, and shall

make a determination as to whether the jury’s ﬁndings and

verdicts that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the

mitigating circumstances are contrary to law or the

evidence presented. The judge shall state on the record

the reasons for his ﬁndings.

The judge shall set forth the reasons for his ruling on the

application and direct that they be entered on the Clerk’s

minutes. The denial of the modiﬁcation of the death

penalty verdict pursuant to subdivision (7) of Section

1181 shall be reviewed on the defendant’s automatic

appeal pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1239. The

granting of the application shall be reviewed on the

People’s appeal pursuant to paragraph (6).

SEC. 9. Section 2085.5 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

(j) Whether or not the defendant was an accomplice to the

offense and his participation in the commission of the

offense was relatively minor.

(k) Any other circumstance which extenuates the gravity

of the crime even though it is not a legal excuse for the

crime.

After having heard and received all of the evidence, and

after having heard and considered the arguments of

counsel, the trier of fact shall consider, take into account

and be guided by the aggravating and mitigating

circumstances referred to in this section, and shall impose

a sentence of death if the trier of fact concludes that the

aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating

circumstances. If the trier of fact determines that the

mitigating circumstances outweigh the aggravating

circumstances the trier of fact shall impose a sentence of

conﬁnement in state prison for a term of life without the

possibility of parole.

SEC. 8. Section 190.4 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

190.4. (a) Whenever special circumstances as

enumerated in Section 190.2 are alleged and the trier of

fact ﬁnds the defendant guilty of ﬁrst degree murder, the

trier of fact shall also make a special ﬁnding on the truth

of each alleged special circumstance. The determination

of the truth of any or all of the special circumstances shall

be made by the trier of fact on the evidence presented at

the trial or at the hearing held pursuant to Subdivision (b)

of Section 190.1.

In case of a reasonable doubt as to whether a special

circumstance is true, the defendant is entitled to a ﬁnding

that is not true. The trier of fact shall make a special

ﬁnding that each special circumstance charged is either

true or not true. Whenever a special circumstance requires

proof of the commission or attempted commission of a

crime, such crime shall be charged and proved pursuant to

the general law applying to the trial and conviction of the

crime.

If the defendant was convicted by the court sitting without

a jury, the trier of fact shall be a jury unless a jury is waived

by the defendant and by the people, in which case the trier

of fact shall be the court. If the defendant was convicted

by a plea of guilty, the trier of fact shall be a jury unless a

jury is waived by the defendant and by the people.

If the trier of fact ﬁnds that any one or more of the special

circumstances enumerated in Section 190.2 as charged is

true, there shall be a separate penalty hearing,

the

defendant shall be punished by imprisonment in state

prison for life without the possibility of parole. and neither

the ﬁnding that any of the remaining special circumstances

charged is not true, nor if the trier of fact is a jury, the

inability of the jury to agree on the issue of the truth or

untruth of any of the remaining special circumstances

charged, shall prevent the holding of a separate penalty

hearing.

In any case in which the defendant has been found guilty

by a jury, and the jury has been unable to reach an

unanimous verdict that one or more of the special

circumstances charged are true, and does not reach a

unanimous verdict that all the special circumstances

charged are not true, the court shall dismiss the jury and

shall order a new jury impaneled to try the issues, but the

issue of guilt shall not be tried by such jury, nor shall such

jury retry the issue of the truth of any of the special

circumstances which were found by an unanimous verdict

Text of Proposed Laws

161

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

California Victim Compensation Board for direct payment

to the victim, or payment shall be made to the Restitution

Fund to the extent that the victim has received assistance

pursuant to that program. The sentencing court shall be

provided a record of the payments made to victims and of

the payments deposited to the Restitution Fund pursuant

to this subdivision.

(2) In any case in which a prisoner sentenced or

resentenced on or after the effective date of this act to a

term of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole

owes a restitution order imposed pursuant to subdivision

prior to September 29, 1994, subdivision (h) of Section

730.6 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or subdivision

(f) of Section 1202.4, the Secretary of the Department of

Corrections and Rehabilitation shall deduct a minimum of

20 percent or the balance owing on the order amount,

whichever is less, up to a maximum of 60 percent from the

wages and up to a maximum of 50 percent from the trust

account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited by federal

law. The secretary shall transfer that amount to the

California Victim Compensation Board for direct payment

to the victim, or payment shall be made to the Restitution

Fund to the extent that the victim has received assistance

pursuant to that program. The sentencing court shall be

provided a record of the payments made to victims and of

the payments deposited to the Restitution Fund pursuant

to this subdivision.

(d) When a prisoner is punished by imprisonment in a

county jail pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, in

any case in which a prisoner owes a restitution order

imposed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 13967 of

the Government Code, as operative prior to September 29,

1994, subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code, or subdivision (b) of Section 1202.4,

the agency designated by the board of supervisors in the

county where the prisoner is incarcerated is authorized to

deduct a minimum of 20 percent or the balance owing on

the order amount, whichever is less, up to a maximum of

50 percent from the county jail equivalent of wages and

trust account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited by

federal law. The agency shall transfer that amount to the

California Victim Compensation Board for direct payment

to the victim, or payment shall be made to the Restitution

Fund to the extent that the victim has received assistance

pursuant to that program, or may pay the victim directly.

The sentencing court shall be provided a record of the

payments made to the victims and of the payments

deposited to the Restitution Fund pursuant to this

subdivision.

(e) The secretary shall deduct and retain from the wages

and trust account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited

by federal law, an administrative fee that totals 10 percent

of any amount transferred to the California Victim

Compensation Board pursuant to subdivision (a) or (c).

The secretary shall deduct and retain from any prisoner

settlement or trial award, an administrative fee that totals

5 percent of any amount paid from the settlement or award

to satisfy an outstanding restitution order or ﬁne pursuant

to subdivision (n), unless prohibited by federal law. The

secretary shall deposit the administrative fee moneys in a

special deposit account for reimbursing administrative and

support costs of the restitution program of the Department

of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The secretary, at his or

her discretion, may retain any excess funds in the special

deposit account for future reimbursement of the

department’s administrative and support costs for the

2085.5. (a) (1) In any case in which a prisoner owes a

restitution ﬁne imposed pursuant to subdivision (a) of

Section 13967 of the Government Code, as operative prior

to September 29, 1994, subdivision (b) of Section 730.6

of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or subdivision (b) of

Section 1202.4, the Secretary of the Department of

Corrections and Rehabilitation shall deduct a minimum of

20 percent or the balance owing on the ﬁne amount,

whichever is less, up to a maximum of 50 percent from the

wages and trust account deposits of a prisoner, unless

prohibited by federal law, and shall transfer that amount to

the California Victim Compensation Board for deposit in

the Restitution Fund in the State Treasury. The amount

deducted shall be credited against the amount owing on

the ﬁne. The sentencing court shall be provided a record of

the payments.

(2) In any case in which a prisoner sentenced or

resentenced on or after the effective date of this act to a

term of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole

owes a restitution ﬁne imposed pursuant to subdivision (a)

of Section 13967 of the Government Code, as operative

prior to September 29, 1994, subdivision (b) of Section

730.6 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or subdivision

(b) of Section 1202.4, the Secretary of the Department of

Corrections and Rehabilitation shall deduct a minimum of

20 percent or the balance owing on the ﬁne amount,

whichever is less, up to a maximum of 60 percent from the

wages and up to a maximum of 50 percent from the trust

account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited by federal

law, and shall transfer that amount to the California Victim

Compensation Board for deposit in the Restitution Fund in

the State Treasury. The amount deducted shall be credited

against the amount owing on the ﬁne. The sentencing

court shall be provided a record of the payments.

(b) (1) When a prisoner is punished by imprisonment in a

county jail pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, in

any case in which a prisoner owes a restitution ﬁne imposed

pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 13967 of the

Government Code, as operative prior to September 29,

1994, subdivision (b) of Section 730.6 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code, or subdivision (b) of Section 1202.4,

the agency designated by the board of supervisors in the

county where the prisoner is incarcerated is authorized to

deduct a minimum of 20 percent or the balance owing on

the ﬁne amount, whichever is less, up to a maximum of 50

percent from the county jail equivalent of wages and trust

account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited by federal

law, and shall transfer that amount to the California Victim

Compensation Board for deposit in the Restitution Fund in

the State Treasury. The amount deducted shall be credited

against the amount owing on the ﬁne. The sentencing

court shall be provided a record of the payments.

(2) If the board of supervisors designates the county

sheriff as the collecting agency, the board of supervisors

shall ﬁrst obtain the concurrence of the county sheriff.

order imposed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 13967

of the Government Code, as operative prior to September

29, 1994, subdivision (h) of Section 730.6 of the Welfare

and Institutions Code, or subdivision (f) of Section 1202.4,

the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation shall deduct a minimum of 20 percent or

the balance owing on the order amount, whichever is less,

up to a maximum of 50 percent from the wages and trust

account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited by federal

law. The secretary shall transfer that amount to the

162

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

(i) The secretary, or, when a prisoner is punished by

imprisonment in a county jail pursuant to subdivision (h)

of Section 1170, the agency designated by the board of

supervisors in the county where the prisoner is incarcerated,

may deduct and retain from moneys collected from

parolees or persons previously imprisoned in county jail an

administrative fee that totals 10 percent of any amount

transferred to the California Victim Compensation Board

pursuant to subdivision (g) or (h), unless prohibited by

federal law. The secretary shall deduct and retain from any

settlement or trial award of a parolee an administrative fee

that totals 5 percent of an amount paid from the settlement

or award to satisfy an outstanding restitution order or ﬁne

pursuant to subdivision (n), unless prohibited by federal

law. The agency is authorized to deduct and retain from

any settlement or trial award of a person previously

imprisoned in county jail an administrative fee that totals

5 percent of any amount paid from the settlement or award

to satisfy an outstanding restitution order or ﬁne pursuant

to subdivision (n). The secretary or the agency shall deposit

the administrative fee moneys in a special deposit account

for reimbursing administrative and support costs of the

restitution program of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation or the agency, as applicable. The secretary,

at his or her discretion, or the agency may retain any excess

funds in the special deposit account for future

reimbursement of the department’s or agency’s

administrative and support costs for the restitution program

or may transfer all or part of the excess funds for deposit

in the Restitution Fund.

(j) When a prisoner has both a restitution ﬁne and a

restitution order from the sentencing court, the Department

of Corrections and Rehabilitation shall collect the

restitution order ﬁrst pursuant to subdivision (c).

(k) When a prisoner is punished by imprisonment in a

county jail pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170

and that prisoner has both a restitution ﬁne and a restitution

order from the sentencing court, if the agency designated

by the board of supervisors in the county where the prisoner

is incarcerated collects the ﬁne and order, the agency shall

collect the restitution order ﬁrst pursuant to subdivision

(d).

(l) When a parolee has both a restitution ﬁne and a

restitution order from the sentencing court, the Department

of Corrections and Rehabilitation, or, when the prisoner is

punished by imprisonment in a county jail pursuant to

subdivision (h) of Section 1170, the agency designated by

the board of supervisors in the county where the prisoner

is incarcerated, may collect the restitution order ﬁrst,

pursuant to subdivision (h).

(m) If an inmate is housed at an institution that requires

food to be purchased from the institution canteen for

unsupervised overnight visits, and if the money for the

purchase of this food is received from funds other than the

inmate’s wages, that money shall be exempt from restitution

deductions. This exemption shall apply to the actual

amount spent on food for the visit up to a maximum of ﬁfty

dollars ($50) for visits that include the inmate and one

visitor, seventy dollars ($70) for visits that include the

inmate and two or three visitors, and eighty dollars ($80)

for visits that include the inmate and four or more visitors.

(n) Compensatory or punitive damages awarded by trial or

settlement to any inmate, parolee, person placed on

postrelease community supervision pursuant to

Section 3451, or defendant on mandatory supervision

imposed pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of

restitution program or may transfer all or part of the excess

funds for deposit in the Restitution Fund.

(f) When a prisoner is punished by imprisonment in a

county jail pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170,

the agency designated by the board of supervisors in the

county where the prisoner is incarcerated is authorized to

deduct and retain from the county jail equivalent of wages

and trust account deposits of a prisoner, unless prohibited

by federal law, an administrative fee that totals 10 percent

of any amount transferred to the California Victim

Compensation Board pursuant to subdivision (b) or (d).

The agency is authorized to deduct and retain from a

prisoner settlement or trial award an administrative fee

that totals 5 percent of any amount paid from the

settlement or award to satisfy an outstanding restitution

order or ﬁne pursuant to subdivision (n), unless prohibited

by federal law. Upon release from custody pursuant to

subdivision (h) of Section 1170, the agency is authorized

to charge a fee to cover the actual administrative cost of

collection, not to exceed 10 percent of the total amount

collected. The agency shall deposit the administrative fee

moneys in a special deposit account for reimbursing

administrative and support costs of the restitution program

of the agency. The agency is authorized to retain any excess

funds in the special deposit account for future

reimbursement of the agency’s administrative and support

costs for the restitution program or may transfer all or part

of the excess funds for deposit in the Restitution Fund.

(g) In any case in which a parolee owes a restitution ﬁne

imposed pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 13967 of

the Government Code, as operative prior to September 29,

1994, subdivision (b) of Section 730.6 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code, or subdivision (b) of Section 1202.4,

the secretary, or, when a prisoner is punished by

imprisonment in a county jail pursuant to subdivision (h)

of Section 1170, the agency designated by the board of

supervisors in the county where the prisoner is incarcerated,

may collect from the parolee or, pursuant to Section 2085.6,

from a person previously imprisoned in county jail any

moneys owing on the restitution ﬁne amount, unless

prohibited by federal law. The secretary or the agency shall

transfer that amount to the California Victim Compensation

Board for deposit in the Restitution Fund in the State

Treasury. The amount deducted shall be credited against

the amount owing on the ﬁne. The sentencing court shall

be provided a record of the payments.

(h) In any case in which a parolee owes a direct order of

restitution, imposed pursuant to subdivision (c) of

Section 13967 of the Government Code, as operative prior

to September 29, 1994, subdivision (h) of Section 730.6

of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or paragraph (3) of

subdivision (a) of Section 1202.4, the secretary, or, when

a prisoner is punished by imprisonment in a county jail

pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, the agency

designated by the board of supervisors in the county where

the prisoner is incarcerated or a local collection program,

may collect from the parolee or, pursuant to Section 2085.6,

from a person previously imprisoned in county jail any

moneys owing, unless prohibited by federal law. The

secretary or the agency shall transfer that amount to the

California Victim Compensation Board for direct payment

to the victim, or payment shall be made to the Restitution

Fund to the extent that the victim has received assistance

pursuant to that program, or the agency may pay the victim

directly. The sentencing court shall be provided a record of

the payments made by the offender pursuant to this

subdivision.

Text of Proposed Laws

163

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 62 CONTINUED

shall automatically be converted to imprisonment in the

state prison for life without the possibility of parole under

the terms and conditions of this act. The State of California

shall not carry out any execution following the effective

date of this act.

Court may transfer all death penalty appeals and habeas

petitions pending before the Supreme Court to any district

of the Court of Appeal or superior court, in the Supreme

Court’s discretion.

SEC. 11. Effective Date.

This act shall become effective on the day following the

election at which it was approved, pursuant to subdivision

(a) of Section 10 of Article II of the California Constitution.

SEC. 12. Severability.

The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of

this act or its application is held invalid, including but not

limited to Section 10, that invalidity shall not affect other

provisions or applications that can be given effect without

the invalid provision or application.

PROPOSITION 63

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure amends, repeals, and adds sections

to the Penal Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed

to be deleted are printed in strikeout type

and new

provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type

to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

The Safety for All Act of 2016

SECTION 1. Title.

This measure shall be known and may be cited as “The

Safety for All Act of 2016.”

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California ﬁnd and declare:

1. Gun violence destroys lives, families and communities.

From 2002 to 2013, California lost 38,576 individuals to

gun violence. That is more than seven times the number of

U.S. soldiers killed in combat during the wars in Iraq and

Afghanistan combined. Over this same period, 2,258

children were killed by gunshot injuries in California. The

same number of children murdered in the Sandy Hook

elementary school massacre are killed by gunﬁre in this

state every 39 days.

2. In 2013, guns were used to kill 2,900 Californians,

including 251 children and teens. That year, at least

6,035 others were hospitalized or treated in emergency

rooms for non-fatal gunshot wounds, including 1,275

children and teens.

3. Guns are commonly used by criminals. According to the

California Department of Justice, in 2014 there were

1,169 ﬁrearm murders in California, 13,546 armed

robberies involving a ﬁrearm, and 15,801 aggravated

assaults involving a ﬁrearm.

4. This tragic violence imposes signiﬁcant economic

burdens on our society. Researchers conservatively

estimate that gun violence costs the economy at least

$229 billion every year, or more than $700 per American

subdivision (h) of Section 1170, in connection with a civil

action brought against a federal, state, or local jail, prison,

or correctional facility, or any ofﬁcial or agent thereof, shall

be paid directly, after payment of reasonable attorney’s

fees and litigation costs approved by the court, to satisfy

any outstanding restitution orders or restitution ﬁnes

against that person. The balance of the award shall be

forwarded to the payee after full payment of all outstanding

restitution orders and restitution ﬁnes, subject to

subdivisions (e) and (i). The Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation shall make all reasonable efforts to

notify the victims of the crime for which that person was

convicted concerning the pending payment of any

compensatory or punitive damages. For any prisoner

punished by imprisonment in a county jail pursuant to

subdivision (h) of Section 1170, the agency is authorized

to make all reasonable efforts to notify the victims of the

crime for which that person was convicted concerning the

pending payment of any compensatory or punitive

damages.

(o) (1) Amounts transferred to the California Victim

Compensation Board for payment of direct orders of

restitution shall be paid to the victim within 60 days from

the date the restitution revenues are received by the

California Victim Compensation Board. If the restitution

payment to a victim is less than twenty-ﬁve dollars ($25),

then payment need not be forwarded to that victim until

the payment reaches twenty-ﬁve dollars ($25) or when the

victim requests payment of the lesser amount.

(2) If a victim cannot be located, the restitution revenues

received by the California Victim Compensation Board on

behalf of the victim shall be held in trust in the Restitution

Fund until the end of the state ﬁscal year subsequent to

the state ﬁscal year in which the funds were deposited or

until the time that the victim has provided current address

information, whichever occurs sooner. Amounts remaining

in trust at the end of the speciﬁed period of time shall

revert to the Restitution Fund.

(3) (A) A victim failing to provide a current address within

the period of time speciﬁed in paragraph (2) may provide

documentation to the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, which shall verify that moneys were

collected on behalf of the victim. Upon receipt of that

veriﬁed information from the Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation, the California Victim Compensation

Board shall transmit the restitution revenues to the victim

in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (c) or (h).

(B) A victim failing to provide a current address within the

period of time speciﬁed in paragraph (2) may provide

documentation to the agency designated by the board of

supervisors in the county where the prisoner punished by

imprisonment in a county jail pursuant to subdivision (h)

of Section 1170 is incarcerated, which may verify that

moneys were collected on behalf of the victim. Upon

receipt of that veriﬁed information from the agency, the

California Victim Compensation Board shall transmit the

restitution revenues to the victim in accordance with the

provisions of subdivision (d) or (h).

SEC. 10. Retroactive Application of Act.

(a) In order to best achieve the purpose of this act as

stated in Section 3 and to achieve fairness, equality, and

uniformity in sentencing, this act shall be applied

retroactively.

(b) In any case where a defendant or inmate was sentenced

to death prior to the effective date of this act, the sentence

164

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

ammunition magazines, but does not prohibit the general

public from possessing them. We should close that

loophole. No one except trained law enforcement should

be able to possess these dangerous ammunition magazines.

13. Although the State of California conducts background

checks on gun buyers who live in California, we have to rely

on other states and the FBI to conduct background checks

on gun buyers who live elsewhere. We should make

background checks outside of California more effective by

consistently requiring the state to report who is prohibited

from possessing ﬁrearms to the federal background check

system.

14. The theft of a gun is a serious and potentially violent

crime. We should clarify that such crimes can be charged

as felonies, and prevent people who are convicted of such

crimes from possessing ﬁrearms.

SEC. 3. Purpose and Intent.

The people of the State of California declare their purpose

and intent in enacting “The Safety for All Act of 2016”

(the “Act”) to be as follows:

1. To implement reasonable and common-sense reforms

to make California’s gun safety laws the toughest in the

nation while still safeguarding the Second Amendment

rights of all law-abiding, responsible Californians.

2. To keep guns and ammunition out of the hands of

convicted felons, the dangerously mentally ill, and other

persons who are prohibited by law from possessing ﬁrearms

and ammunition.

3. To ensure that those who buy ammunition in California—

just like those who buy ﬁrearms—are subject to background

checks.

4. To require all stores that sell ammunition to report any

lost or stolen ammunition within 48 hours of discovering

that it is missing.

5. To ensure that California shares crucial information

with federal law enforcement by consistently requiring the

state to report individuals who are prohibited by law from

possessing ﬁrearms to the federal background check

system.

6. To require the reporting of lost or stolen ﬁrearms to law

enforcement.

7. To better enforce the laws that require people to

relinquish their ﬁrearms once they are convicted of a crime

that makes them ineligible to possess ﬁrearms.

8. To make it illegal in California to possess the kinds of

military-style ammunition magazines that enable mass

killings like those at Sandy Hook Elementary School; a

movie theater in Aurora, Colorado; Columbine High School;

and an ofﬁce building at 101 California Street in San

Francisco, California.

9. To prevent people who are convicted of the theft of a

ﬁrearm from possessing ﬁrearms, and to effectuate the

intent of Proposition 47 that the theft of a ﬁrearm is felony

grand theft, regardless of the value of the ﬁrearm, in

alignment with Sections 25400 and 1192.7 of the Penal

Code.

SEC. 4. Lost or Stolen Firearms.

SEC. 4.1. Division 4.5 (commencing with

Section 25250) is added to Title 4 of Part 6 of the Penal

Code, to read:

per year. In 2013 alone, California gun deaths and injuries

imposed $83 million in medical costs and $4.24 billion in

lost productivity.

5. California can do better. Reasonable, common-sense

gun laws reduce gun deaths and injuries, keep guns away

from criminals and ﬁght illegal gun trafﬁcking. Although

California has led the nation in gun safety laws, those laws

still have loopholes that leave communities throughout the

state vulnerable to gun violence and mass shootings. We

can close these loopholes while still safeguarding the

ability of law-abiding, responsible Californians to own guns

for self-defense, hunting and recreation.

6. We know background checks work. Federal background

checks have already prevented more than 2.4 million gun

sales to convicted criminals and other illegal purchasers in

America. In 2012 alone, background checks blocked

192,043 sales of ﬁrearms to illegal purchasers including

82,000 attempted purchases by felons. That means

background checks stopped roughly 225 felons from

buying ﬁrearms every day. Yet California law only requires

background checks for people who purchase ﬁrearms, not

for people who purchase ammunition. We should close

that loophole.

7. Right now, any violent felon or dangerously mentally ill

person can walk into a sporting goods store or gun shop in

California and buy ammunition, no questions asked. That

should change. We should require background checks for

ammunition sales just like gun sales, and stop both from

getting into the hands of dangerous individuals.

8. Under current law, stores that sell ammunition are not

required to report to law enforcement when ammunition is

lost or stolen. Stores should have to report lost or stolen

ammunition within 48 hours of discovering that it is

missing so law enforcement can work to prevent that

ammunition from being illegally trafﬁcked into the hands

of dangerous individuals.

9. Californians today are not required to report lost or

stolen guns to law enforcement. This makes it difﬁcult for

law enforcement to investigate crimes committed with

stolen guns, break up gun trafﬁcking rings, and return

guns to their lawful owners. We should require gun owners

to report their lost or stolen guns to law enforcement.

10. Under current law, people who commit felonies and

other serious crimes are prohibited from possessing

ﬁrearms. Yet existing law provides no clear process for

those people to relinquish their guns when they become

prohibited at the time of conviction. As a result, in 2014,

the Department of Justice identiﬁed more than 17,000

people who possess more than 34,000 guns illegally,

including more than 1,400 assault weapons. We need to

close this dangerous loophole by not only requiring

prohibited people to tum in their guns, but also ensuring

that it happens.

11. Military-style large-capacity ammunition magazines—

some capable of holding more than 100 rounds of

ammunition—signiﬁcantly increase a shooter’s ability to

kill a lot of people in a short amount of time. That is why

these large capacity ammunition magazines are common

in many of America’s most horriﬁc mass shootings, from

the killings at 101 California Street in San Francisco in

1993 to Columbine High School in 1999 to the massacre

at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut

in 2012.

12. Today, California law prohibits the manufacture,

importation and sale of military-style, large capacity

Text of Proposed Laws

165

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

SEC. 4.2. Section 26835 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

26835. A licensee shall post conspicuously within the

licensed premises the following warnings in block letters

not less than one inch in height:

(a) “IF YOU KEEP A LOADED FIREARM WITHIN ANY

PREMISES UNDER YOUR CUSTODY OR CONTROL, AND

A PERSON UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE OBTAINS IT AND

USES IT, RESULTING IN INJURY OR DEATH, OR CARRIES

IT TO A PUBLIC PLACE, YOU MAY BE GUILTY OF A

MISDEMEANOR OR A FELONY UNLESS YOU STORED

THE FIREARM IN A LOCKED CONTAINER OR LOCKED

THE FIREARM WITH A LOCKING DEVICE, TO KEEP IT

FROM TEMPORARILY FUNCTIONING.”

(b) “IF YOU KEEP A PISTOL, REVOLVER, OR OTHER

FIREARM CAPABLE OF BEING CONCEALED UPON THE

PERSON, WITHIN ANY PREMISES UNDER YOUR

CUSTODY OR CONTROL, AND A PERSON UNDER 18

YEARS OF AGE GAINS ACCESS TO THE FIREARM, AND

CARRIES IT OFF-PREMISES, YOU MAY BE GUILTY OF A

MISDEMEANOR, UNLESS YOU STORED THE FIREARM

IN A LOCKED CONTAINER, OR LOCKED THE FIREARM

WITH A LOCKING DEVICE, TO KEEP IT FROM

TEMPORARILY FUNCTIONING.”

UNDER YOUR CUSTODY OR CONTROL, AND A PERSON

UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE GAINS ACCESS TO THE

FIREARM, AND CARRIES IT OFF-PREMISES TO A

SCHOOL OR SCHOOL-SPONSORED EVENT, YOU MAY BE

GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, INCLUDING A FINE OF UP

TO FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000), UNLESS YOU

STORED THE FIREARM IN A LOCKED CONTAINER, OR

LOCKED THE FIREARM WITH A LOCKING DEVICE.”

(d) “IF YOU NEGLIGENTLY STORE OR LEAVE A LOADED

FIREARM WITHIN ANY PREMISES UNDER YOUR

CUSTODY OR CONTROL, WHERE A PERSON UNDER 18

YEARS OF AGE IS LIKELY TO ACCESS IT, YOU MAY BE

GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR, INCLUDING A FINE OF UP

TO ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,000), UNLESS YOU

STORED THE FIREARM IN A LOCKED CONTAINER, OR

LOCKED THE FIREARM WITH A LOCKING DEVICE.”

(e) “DISCHARGING FIREARMS IN POORLY VENTILATED

AREAS, CLEANING FIREARMS, OR HANDLING

AMMUNITION MAY RESULT IN EXPOSURE TO LEAD, A

SUBSTANCE KNOWN TO CAUSE BIRTH DEFECTS,

REPRODUCTIVE HARM, AND OTHER SERIOUS PHYSICAL

INJURY. HAVE ADEQUATE VENTILATION AT ALL TIMES.

WASH HANDS THOROUGHLY AFTER EXPOSURE.”

(f) “FEDERAL REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT IF YOU DO

NOT TAKE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE FIREARM

THAT YOU ARE ACQUIRING OWNERSHIP OF WITHIN 30

DAYS AFTER YOU COMPLETE THE INITIAL BACKGROUND

CHECK PAPERWORK, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH

THE BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS A SECOND TIME

IN ORDER TO TAKE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THAT

FIREARM.”

(g) “NO PERSON SHALL MAKE AN APPLICATION TO

PURCHASE MORE THAN ONE PISTOL, REVOLVER, OR

OTHER FIREARM CAPABLE OF BEING CONCEALED

UPON THE PERSON WITHIN ANY 30-DAY PERIOD AND

NO DELIVERY SHALL BE MADE TO ANY PERSON WHO

HAS MADE AN APPLICATION TO PURCHASE MORE

THAN ONE PISTOL, REVOLVER, OR OTHER FIREARM

CAPABLE OF BEING CONCEALED UPON THE PERSON

WITHIN ANY 30-DAY PERIOD.”

DIVISION 4.5. LOST OR STOLEN FIREARMS

25250. (a) Commencing July 1, 2017, every person

shall report the loss or theft of a ﬁrearm he or she owns or

possesses to a local law enforcement agency in the

jurisdiction in which the theft or loss occurred within ﬁve

days of the time he or she knew or reasonably should have

known that the ﬁrearm had been stolen or lost.

(b) Every person who has reported a ﬁrearm lost or stolen

under subdivision (a) shall notify the local law enforcement

agency in the jurisdiction in which the theft or loss occurred

within ﬁve days if the ﬁrearm is subsequently recovered by

the person.

required to report the loss or theft of a ﬁrearm that is an

antique ﬁrearm within the meaning of subdivision (c) of

Section 16170.

25255. Section 25250 shall not apply to the following:

(a) Any law enforcement agency or peace ofﬁcer acting

within the course and scope of his or her employment or

ofﬁcial duties if he or she reports the loss or theft to his or

her employing agency.

(b) Any United States marshal or member of the Armed

Forces of the United States or the National Guard, while

engaged in his or her ofﬁcial duties.

(commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United

States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto,

and who reports the theft or loss in accordance with

Section 923(g)(6) of Title 18 of the United States Code, or

the successor provision thereto, and applicable regulations

issued thereto.

(d) Any person whose ﬁrearm was lost or stolen prior to

July 1, 2017.

25260. Pursuant to Section 11108, every sheriff or

police chief shall submit a description of each ﬁrearm that

has been reported lost or stolen directly into the Department

of Justice Automated Firearms System.

25265. (a) Every person who violates Section 25250 is,

for a ﬁrst violation, guilty of an infraction, punishable by a

ﬁne not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100).

(b) Every person who violates Section 25250 is, for a

second violation, guilty of an infraction, punishable by a

ﬁne not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000).

or subsequent violation, guilty of a misdemeanor,

punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding

six months, or by a ﬁne not to exceed one thousand dollars

($1,000), or by both that ﬁne and imprisonment.

25270. Every person reporting a lost or stolen ﬁrearm

pursuant to Section 25250 shall report the make, model,

and serial number of the ﬁrearm, if known by the person,

and any additional relevant information required by the

local law enforcement agency taking the report.

25275. (a) No person shall report to a local law

enforcement agency that a ﬁrearm has been lost or stolen,

knowing the report to be false. A violation of this section is

an infraction, punishable by a ﬁne not exceeding two

hundred ﬁfty dollars ($250) for a ﬁrst offense, and by a

ﬁne not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) for a

second or subsequent offense.

(b) This section shall not preclude prosecution under any

other law.

166

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

that fact. Upon notiﬁcation by the department, the dealer

shall transmit corrections to the record of electronic or

telephonic transfer to the department, or shall transmit

any fee required pursuant to Section 28225, or both, as

appropriate, and if notiﬁcation by the department is

received by the dealer at any time prior to delivery of the

ﬁrearm to be purchased, the dealer shall withhold delivery

until the conclusion of the waiting period described in

Sections 26815 and 27540.

(f) (1) (A) The department shall immediately notify the

dealer to delay the transfer of the ﬁrearm to the purchaser

if the records of the department, or the records available to

the department in the National Instant Criminal Background

Check System, indicate one of the following:

(i) The purchaser has been taken into custody and placed

in a facility for mental health treatment or evaluation and

may be a person described in Section 8100 or 8103 of the

Welfare and Institutions Code and the department is

unable to ascertain whether the purchaser is a person who

is prohibited from possessing, receiving, owning, or

purchasing a ﬁrearm, pursuant to Section 8100 or 8103

of the Welfare and Institutions Code, prior to the conclusion

of the waiting period described in Sections 26815 and

27540.

(ii) The purchaser has been arrested for, or charged with,

a crime that would make him or her, if convicted, a person

who is prohibited by state or federal law from possessing,

receiving, owning, or purchasing a ﬁrearm, and the

department is unable to ascertain whether the purchaser

was convicted of that offense prior to the conclusion of the

waiting period described in Sections 26815 and 27540.

(iii) The purchaser may be a person described in

subdivision (a) of Section 27535, and the department is

unable to ascertain whether the purchaser, in fact, is a

person described in subdivision (a) of Section 27535,

prior to the conclusion of the waiting period described in

Sections 26815 and 27540.

(B) The dealer shall provide the purchaser with information

about the manner in which he or she may contact the

department regarding the delay described in subparagraph

(A).

(2) The department shall notify the purchaser by mail

regarding the delay and explain the process by which the

purchaser may obtain a copy of the criminal or mental

health record the department has on ﬁle for the purchaser.

Upon receipt of that criminal or mental health record, the

purchaser shall report any inaccuracies or incompleteness

to the department on an approved form.

(3) If the department ascertains the ﬁnal disposition of

the arrest or criminal charge, or the outcome of the mental

health treatment or evaluation, or the purchaser’s eligibility

to purchase a ﬁrearm, as described in paragraph (1), after

the waiting period described in Sections 26815 and

27540, but within 30 days of the dealer’s original

submission of the purchaser information to the department

pursuant to this section, the department shall do the

following:

(A) If the purchaser is not a person described in subdivision

(a) of Section 27535, and is not prohibited by state or

federal law, including, but not limited to, Section 8100 or

8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, from possessing,

receiving, owning, or purchasing a ﬁrearm, the department

shall immediately notify the dealer of that fact and the

dealer may then immediately transfer the ﬁrearm to the

purchaser, upon the dealer’s recording on the register or

(h) “IF A FIREARM YOU OWN OR POSSESS IS LOST OR

STOLEN, YOU MUST REPORT THE LOSS OR THEFT TO A

LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY WHERE THE LOSS

OR THEFT OCCURRED WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF THE TIME

YOU KNEW OR REASONABLY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN

THAT THE FIREARM HAD BEEN LOST OR STOLEN.”

SEC. 5. Strengthening the National Instant Criminal

Background Check System.

SEC. 5.1. Section 28220 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

28220. (a) Upon submission of ﬁrearm purchaser

information, the Department of Justice shall examine its

records, as well as those records that it is authorized to

request from the State Department of State Hospitals

pursuant to Section 8104 of the Welfare and Institutions

Code, in order to determine if the purchaser is a person

described in subdivision (a) of Section 27535, or is

prohibited by state or federal law from possessing,

receiving, owning, or purchasing a ﬁrearm.

(b) To the extent that funding is available, the

The

Department of Justice may

shall participate in the National

Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), as

described in subsection (t) of Section 922 of Title 18 of

the United States Code, and, if that participation is

implemented, shall notify the dealer and the chief of the

police department of the city or city and county in which

the sale was made, or if the sale was made in a district in

which there is no municipal police department, the sheriff

of the county in which the sale was made, that the

purchaser is a person prohibited from acquiring a ﬁrearm

under federal law.

prohibited by state or federal law from possessing,

receiving, owning, or purchasing a ﬁrearm or is a person

described in subdivision (a) of Section 27535, it shall

immediately notify the dealer and the chief of the police

department of the city or city and county in which the sale

was made, or if the sale was made in a district in which

there is no municipal police department, the sheriff of the

county in which the sale was made, of that fact.

(d) If the department determines that the copies of the

Section 28210 contain any blank spaces or inaccurate,

illegible, or incomplete information, preventing

identiﬁcation of the purchaser or the handgun or other

ﬁrearm to be purchased, or if any fee required pursuant to

Section 28225 is not submitted by the dealer in

conjunction with submission of copies of the register, the

department may notify the dealer of that fact. Upon

notiﬁcation by the department, the dealer shall submit

corrected copies of the register to the department, or shall

submit any fee required pursuant to Section 28225, or

both, as appropriate and, if notiﬁcation by the department

is received by the dealer at any time prior to delivery of the

ﬁrearm to be purchased, the dealer shall withhold delivery

until the conclusion of the waiting period described in

Sections 26815 and 27540.

(e) If the department determines that the information

transmitted to it pursuant to Section 28215 contains

inaccurate or incomplete information preventing

identiﬁcation of the purchaser or the handgun or other

ﬁrearm to be purchased, or if the fee required pursuant to

Section 28225 is not transmitted by the dealer in

conjunction with transmission of the electronic or

telephonic record, the department may notify the dealer of

Text of Proposed Laws

167

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

possesses any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the

date the magazine was acquired, is guilty of an infraction

punishable by a ﬁne not to exceed one hundred dollars

($100) per large-capacity magazine, or is guilty of a

misdemeanor punishable by a ﬁne not to exceed one

hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, by

imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by

both that ﬁne and imprisonment.

(d) Any person who may not lawfully possess a large-

capacity magazine commencing July 1, 2017 shall, prior

to July 1, 2017:

(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state;

(2) Sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed ﬁrearms

dealer; or

(3) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law

enforcement agency for destruction.

SEC. 6.2. Section 32400 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

32400. Section 32310 does not apply to the sale of,

giving of, lending of, possession of, importation into this

state of, or purchase of, any large-capacity magazine to or

by any federal, state, county, city and county, or city agency

that is charged with the enforcement of any law, for use by

agency employees in the discharge of their ofﬁcial duties,

whether on or off duty, and where the use is authorized by

the agency and is within the course and scope of their

duties.

SEC. 6.3. Section 32405 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

32405. Section 32310 does not apply to the sale to,

lending to, transfer to, purchase by, receipt of, possession

of, or importation into this state of, a large-capacity

magazine by a sworn peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in Chapter 4.5

(commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, or

sworn federal law enforcement ofﬁcer, who is authorized to

carry a ﬁrearm in the course and scope of that ofﬁcer’s

duties.

SEC. 6.4. Section 32406 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

32406. Subdivision (c) of Section 32310 does not apply

to an honorably retired sworn peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in

Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of

Part 2, or honorably retired sworn federal law enforcement

ofﬁcer, who was authorized to carry a ﬁrearm in the course

and scope of that ofﬁcer’s duties. “Honorably retired” shall

have the same meaning as provided in Section 16690.

SEC. 6.5. Section 32410 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

32410. Section 32310 does not apply to the sale, or

purchase, or possession of any large-capacity magazine to

or by a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to

26915, inclusive.

SEC. 6.6. Section 32420 of the Penal Code is repealed.

32420. Section 32310 does not apply to the importation

of a large-capacity magazine by a person who lawfully

possessed the large-capacity magazine in the state prior to

January 1, 2000, lawfully took it out of the state, and is

returning to the state with the same large-capacity

magazine.

SEC. 6.7. Section 32425 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

record of electronic transfer the date that the ﬁrearm is

transferred, the dealer signing the register or record of

electronic transfer indicating delivery of the ﬁrearm to that

purchaser, and the purchaser signing the register or record

of electronic transfer acknowledging the receipt of the

ﬁrearm on the date that the ﬁrearm is delivered to him or

her.

(B) If the purchaser is a person described in subdivision

(a) of Section 27535, or is prohibited by state or federal

law, including, but not limited to, Section 8100 or 8103

of the Welfare and Institutions Code, from possessing,

receiving, owning, or purchasing a ﬁrearm, the department

shall immediately notify the dealer and the chief of the

police department in the city or city and county in which

the sale was made, or if the sale was made in a district in

which there is no municipal police department, the sheriff

of the county in which the sale was made, of that fact in

compliance with subdivision (c) of Section 28220.

(4) If the department is unable to ascertain the ﬁnal

disposition of the arrest or criminal charge, or the outcome

of the mental health treatment or evaluation, or the

purchaser’s eligibility to purchase a ﬁrearm, as described

in paragraph (1), within 30 days of the dealer’s original

submission of purchaser information to the department

pursuant to this section, the department shall immediately

notify the dealer and the dealer may then immediately

transfer the ﬁrearm to the purchaser, upon the dealer’s

recording on the register or record of electronic transfer

the date that the ﬁrearm is transferred, the dealer signing

the register or record of electronic transfer indicating

delivery of the ﬁrearm to that purchaser, and the purchaser

signing the register or record of electronic transfer

acknowledging the receipt of the ﬁrearm on the date that

the ﬁrearm is delivered to him or her.

(g) Commencing July 1, 2017, upon receipt of information

demonstrating that a person is prohibited from possessing

a ﬁrearm pursuant to federal or state law, the department

shall submit the name, date of birth, and physical

description of the person to the National Instant Criminal

Background Check System Index, Denied Persons Files.

The information provided shall remain privileged and

conﬁdential, and shall not be disclosed, except for the

purpose of enforcing federal or state ﬁrearms laws.

SEC. 6. Possession of Large-Capacity Magazines.

SEC. 6.1. Section 32310 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

32310. (a) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing

with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1

(commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2,

commencing January 1, 2000,

any person in this state

who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports

into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale,

or who gives, lends, buys, or receives any large-capacity

magazine is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail

not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to

subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

(b) For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes

both fabricating a magazine and assembling a magazine

from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to,

the body, spring, follower, and ﬂoor plate or end plate, to

be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.

Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1

(commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2,

commencing July 1, 2017, any person in this state who

168

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

(2) Any ﬁrearm or ammunition that the licensee takes

possession of pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with

Section 28050), or pursuant to Section 30312.

(3) Any ﬁrearm or ammunition kept at the licensee’s place

of business.

SEC. 7.2. Section 26915 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

26915. (a) Commencing January 1, 2018, a A

ﬁrearms

dealer may

shall require any agent or employee who

handles, sells, or delivers ﬁrearms to obtain and provide to

the dealer a certiﬁcate of eligibility from the Department of

Justice pursuant to Section 26710. On the application for

the certiﬁcate, the agent or employee shall provide the

name and California ﬁrearms dealer number of the ﬁrearms

dealer with whom the person is employed.

(b) The department shall notify the ﬁrearms dealer in the

event that the agent or employee who has a certiﬁcate of

eligibility is or becomes prohibited from possessing

ﬁrearms.

the agents or employees of a ﬁrearms dealer, the agent or

employee shall obtain a certiﬁcate of eligibility pursuant to

subdivision (a).

(d) (1) Nothing in this section shall be construed to

preclude a local jurisdiction from conducting an additional

background check pursuant to Section 11105. The local

jurisdiction may not charge a fee for the additional criminal

history check.

(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude

a local jurisdiction from prohibiting employment based on

criminal history that does not appear as part of obtaining a

certiﬁcate of eligibility.

(e) The licensee shall prohibit any agent who the licensee

knows or reasonably should know is within a class of

persons prohibited from possessing ﬁrearms pursuant to

Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 29800) or Chapter 3

(commencing with Section 29900) of Division 9 of this

title, or Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code, from coming into contact with any

ﬁrearm that is not secured and from accessing any key,

combination, code, or other means to open any of the

locking devices described in subdivision (g).

(f) Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing

a local government from enacting an ordinance imposing

additional conditions on licensees with regard to agents or

employees.

(g) For purposes of this article, “secured” means a ﬁrearm

that is made inoperable in one or more of the following

ways:

(1) The ﬁrearm is inoperable because it is secured by a

ﬁrearm safety device listed on the department’s roster of

approved ﬁrearm safety devices pursuant to subdivision (d)

of Section 23655.

(2) The ﬁrearm is stored in a locked gun safe or long-gun

safe that meets the standards for department-approved

gun safes set forth in Section 23650.

(3) The ﬁrearm is stored in a distinct locked room or area

in the building that is used to store ﬁrearms, which can

only be unlocked by a key, a combination, or similar means.

(4) The ﬁrearm is secured with a hardened steel rod or

cable that is at least one-eighth of an inch in diameter

through the trigger guard of the ﬁrearm. The steel rod or

cable shall be secured with a hardened steel lock that has

32425. Section 32310 does not apply to either

any of

the following:

(a) The lending or giving of any large-capacity magazine to

a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915,

inclusive, or to a gunsmith, for the purposes of maintenance,

repair, or modiﬁcation of that large-capacity magazine.

(b) The possession of any large-capacity magazine by a

person speciﬁed in subdivision (a) for the purposes

speciﬁed in subdivision (a).

(b)

magazine by a person speciﬁed in subdivision (a).

SEC. 6.8. Section 32435 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

32435. Section 32310 does not apply to any of the

following:

(a) The sale of, giving of, lending of, possession of,

importation into this state of, or purchase of, any large-

capacity magazine, to or by any entity that operates an

armored vehicle business pursuant to the laws of this

state.

(b) The lending of large-capacity magazines by an entity

speciﬁed in subdivision (a) to its authorized employees,

while in the course and scope of employment for purposes

that pertain to the entity’s armored vehicle business.

employees of an entity speciﬁed in subdivision (a) for

purposes that pertain to the entity’s armored vehicle

business.

(c)

(d) The return of those large-capacity magazines to

the entity speciﬁed in subdivision (a) by those employees

speciﬁed in subdivision (b).

SEC. 6.9. Section 32450 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

32450. Section 32310 does not apply to the purchase

or possession of a large-capacity magazine by the holder of

a special weapons permit issued pursuant to Section 31000,

32650, or 33300, or pursuant to Article 3 (commencing

with Section 18900) of Chapter 1 of Division 5 of Title 2,

or pursuant to Article 4 (commencing with Section 32700)

of Chapter 6 of this division, for any of the following

purposes:

(a) For use solely as a prop for a motion picture, television,

or video production.

(b) For export pursuant to federal regulations.

agencies, or the military, pursuant to applicable federal

regulations.

SEC. 7. Firearms Dealers.

SEC. 7.1. Section 26885 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

26885. (a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) and

of a licensee shall be kept within the licensed location.

(b) Within 48 hours of discovery, a licensee shall report

the loss or theft of any of the following items to the

appropriate law enforcement agency in the city, county, or

city and county where the licensee’s business premises are

located:

(1) Any ﬁrearm or ammunition that is merchandise of the

licensee.

Text of Proposed Laws

169

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

knows or has cause to believe is not the actual purchaser

or transferee of the ammunition, with knowledge or cause

to believe that the ammunition is to be subsequently sold

or transferred to a person who is prohibited from owning,

possessing, or having under custody or control any

ammunition or reloaded ammunition pursuant to

subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 30305, is guilty of a

misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail

not exceeding one year, or a ﬁne not exceeding one

thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that ﬁne and

imprisonment.

(b)

shall not be construed as restricting the application of any

other law. However, an act or omission punishable in

different ways by this section and another provision of law

shall not be punished under more than one provision.

SEC. 8.6. Section 30312 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

30312. (a) Commencing February 1, 2011, the

(1)

Commencing January 1, 2018, the sale of ammunition by

any party shall be conducted by or processed through a

licensed ammunition vendor.

(2) When neither party to an ammunition sale is a licensed

ammunition vendor, the seller shall deliver the ammunition

to a vendor to process the transaction. The ammunition

vendor shall then promptly and properly deliver the

ammunition to the purchaser, if the sale is not prohibited,

as if the ammunition were the vendor’s own merchandise.

If the ammunition vendor cannot legally deliver the

ammunition to the purchaser, the vendor shall forthwith

return the ammunition to the seller. The ammunition

vendor may charge the purchaser an administrative fee to

process the transaction, in an amount to be set by the

Department of Justice, in addition to any applicable fees

that may be charged pursuant to the provisions of this title.

(b) Commencing January 1, 2018, the sale, delivery or

transfer of ownership of handgun

ammunition by any party

may only occur in a face-to-face transaction with the seller,

deliverer, or transferor being provided bona ﬁde evidence

of identity from the purchaser or other transferee, provided,

however, that ammunition may be purchased or acquired

over the Internet or through other means of remote ordering

if a licensed ammunition vendor initially receives the

ammunition and processes the transaction in compliance

with this section and Article 3 (commencing with Section

30342) of Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4 of this part.

(b)

apply to or affect

the sale, delivery, or transfer of handgun

ammunition to any of the following:

(1) An authorized law enforcement representative of a

city, county, city and county, or state or federal government,

if the sale, delivery, or transfer is for exclusive use by that

government agency and, prior to the sale, delivery, or

transfer of the handgun

ammunition, written authorization

from the head of the agency employing the purchaser or

transferee is obtained, identifying the employee as an

individual authorized to conduct the transaction, and

authorizing the transaction for the exclusive use of the

agency employing the individual.

(2) A sworn peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in Chapter 4.5

(commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, or

sworn federal law enforcement ofﬁcer, who is authorized to

carry a ﬁrearm in the course and scope of the ofﬁcer’s

duties.

a shackle. The lock and shackle shall be protected or

shielded from the use of a boltcutter and the rod or cable

shall be anchored in a manner that prevents the removal of

the ﬁrearm from the premises.

SEC. 8. Sales of Ammunition.

SEC. 8.1. Section 16150 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

16150. (a) As used in Section 30300, “ammunition”

means handgun ammunition as deﬁned in Section 16650.

As used in this part, except in subdivision (a) of Section

30305 and in Section 30306, “ammunition” means one

or more loaded cartridges consisting of a primed case,

propellant, and with one or more projectiles. “Ammunition”

does not include blanks.

(b) As used in subdivision (a) of Section 30305 and in

Section 30306, “ammunition” includes, but is not limited

to, any bullet, cartridge, magazine, clip, speed loader,

autoloader, or projectile capable of being ﬁred from a

ﬁrearm with a deadly consequence. “Ammunition” does

not include blanks.

SEC. 8.2. Section 16151 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

16151. (a) As used in this part, commencing January 1,

2018, “ammunition vendor” means any person, ﬁrm,

corporation, or other business enterprise that holds a

current ammunition vendor license issued pursuant to

Section 30385.

(b) Commencing January 1, 2018, a ﬁrearms dealer

licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive,

shall automatically be deemed a licensed ammunition

vendor, provided the dealer complies with the requirements

of Articles 2 (commencing with Section 30300) and 3

(commencing with Section 30342) of Chapter 1 of Division

10 of Title 4.

SEC. 8.3. Section 16662 of the Penal Code is repealed.

16662. As used in this part, “handgun ammunition

vendor” means any person, ﬁrm, corporation, dealer, or

any other business enterprise that is engaged in the retail

sale of any handgun ammunition, or that holds itself out as

engaged in the business of selling any handgun ammunition.

SEC. 8.4. Section 17315 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

17315. As used in Article 3 (commencing with Section

30345) Articles 2 through 5 of Chapter 1 of Division 10 of

Title 4, “vendor” means a

an handgun ammunition vendor.

SEC. 8.5. Section 30306 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

30306. (a) Any person, corporation, or

ﬁrm, or other

business enterprise who supplies, delivers, sells, or gives

possession or control of, any ammunition to any person

who he or she knows or using reasonable care should know

is prohibited from owning, possessing, or having under

custody or control, any ammunition or reloaded ammunition

pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 30305, is

guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a

county jail not exceeding one year, or a ﬁne not exceeding

one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that ﬁne and

imprisonment.

(b) Any person, corporation, ﬁrm, or other business

enterprise who supplies, delivers, sells, or gives possession

or control of, any ammunition to any person whom the

person, corporation, ﬁrm, or other business enterprise

170

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

(3) An importer or manufacturer of handgun ammunition

or ﬁrearms who is licensed to engage in business pursuant

to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18

of the United States Code and the regulations issued

pursuant thereto.

(4) A person who is on the centralized list of exempted

federal ﬁrearms licensees maintained by the Department

of Justice pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with

Section 28450) of Chapter 6 of Division 6 of this title.

(5) A person whose licensed premises are outside this

state and who is licensed as a dealer or collector of ﬁrearms

pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of

Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations

issued pursuant thereto.

(6) A person who is licensed as a collector of ﬁrearms

pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of

Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations

issued pursuant thereto, whose licensed premises are

within this state, and who has a current certiﬁcate of

eligibility issued by the Department of Justice pursuant to

Section 26710.

(7) A handgun

An ammunition vendor.

(8) A consultant-evaluator.

(9) A person who purchases or receives ammunition at a

target facility holding a business or other regulatory license,

provided that the ammunition is at all times kept within

the facility’s premises.

(10) A person who purchases or receives ammunition from

a spouse, registered domestic partner, or immediate family

member as deﬁned in Section 16720.

(c)

(d) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

SEC. 8.7. Section 30314 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

30314. (a) Commencing January 1, 2018, a resident of

this state shall not bring or transport into this state any

ammunition that he or she purchased or otherwise obtained

from outside of this state unless he or she ﬁrst has that

ammunition delivered to a licensed ammunition vendor for

delivery to that resident pursuant to the procedures set

forth in Section 30312.

(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to any of the following:

(1) An ammunition vendor.

(2) A sworn peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in Chapter 4.5

(commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, or

sworn federal law enforcement ofﬁcer, who is authorized to

carry a ﬁrearm in the course and scope of the ofﬁcer’s

duties.

(3) An importer or manufacturer of ammunition or ﬁrearms

who is licensed to engage in business pursuant to Chapter

44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the

United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant

thereto.

(4) A person who is on the centralized list of exempted

federal ﬁrearms licensees maintained by the Department

of Justice pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with

Section 28450) of Chapter 6 of Division 6.

(5) A person who is licensed as a collector of ﬁrearms

pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of

Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations

issued pursuant thereto, whose licensed premises are

within this state, and who has a current certiﬁcate of

eligibility issued by the Department of Justice pursuant to

Section 26710.

(6) A person who acquired the ammunition from a spouse,

registered domestic partner, or immediate family member

as deﬁned in Section 16720.

time offense, and either an infraction or a misdemeanor for

any subsequent offense.

SEC. 8.8. The heading of Article 3 (commencing with

Section 30342) of Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4 of

Part 6 of the Penal Code is amended to read:

Article 3. Handgun

Ammunition Vendors

SEC. 8.9. Section 30342 is added to the Penal Code,

immediately preceding Section 30345, to read:

30342. (a) Commencing January 1, 2018, a valid

ammunition vendor license shall be required for any

person, ﬁrm, corporation, or other business enterprise to

sell more than 500 rounds of ammunition in any 30-day

period.

(b) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

SEC. 8.10. Section 30347 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

30347. (a) An ammunition vendor shall require any

agent or employee who handles, sells, delivers, or has

under his or her custody or control any ammunition, to

obtain and provide to the vendor a certiﬁcate of eligibility

from the Department of Justice issued pursuant to Section

26710. On the application for the certiﬁcate, the agent or

employee shall provide the name and address of the

ammunition vendor with whom the person is employed, or

the name and California ﬁrearms dealer number of the

ammunition vendor if applicable.

(b) The department shall notify the ammunition vendor in

the event that the agent or employee who has a certiﬁcate

of eligibility is or becomes prohibited from possessing

ammunition under subdivision (a) of Section 30305 or

federal law.

An ammunition vendor shall not permit any agent or

employee who the vendor knows or reasonably should know

is a person described in Chapter 2 (commencing with

Section 29800) or Chapter 3 (commencing with

Section 29900) of Division 9 of this title or Section 8100

or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code to handle,

sell, or

deliver, or have under his or her custody or control,

any handgun

ammunition in the course and scope of

employment.

SEC. 8.11. Section 30348 is added to the Penal Code,

to read:

30348. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), the

sale of ammunition by a licensed vendor shall be conducted

at the location speciﬁed in the license.

(b) A vendor may sell ammunition at a gun show or event

if the gun show or event is not conducted from any

motorized or towed vehicle.

means a function sponsored by any national, state, or local

organization, devoted to the collection, competitive use, or

other sporting use of ﬁrearms, or an organization or

association that sponsors functions devoted to the

collection, competitive use, or other sporting use of

ﬁrearms in the community.

Text of Proposed Laws

171

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

and the ammunition is delivered to the person in the same

transaction as the ﬁrearm.

(d) Commencing July 1, 2019, the ammunition vendor

shall verify with the department, in a manner prescribed by

the department, that the person is authorized to purchase

ammunition by comparing the person’s ammunition

purchase authorization number to the centralized list of

authorized ammunition purchasers. If the person is not

listed as an authorized ammunition purchaser, the vendor

shall deny the sale or transfer.

(b)

(e) Subdivision Subdivisions (a) and (d) shall not

apply to or affect

sales or other transfers of ownership of

handgun

ammunition by handgun ammunition vendors to

any of the following, if properly identiﬁed:

(1) A person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to

26915, inclusive.

(2) (1) A handgun An ammunition vendor.

(3)

(2) A person who is on the centralized list of exempted

federal ﬁrearms licensees maintained by the department

pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 28450) of

Chapter 6 of Division 6 of this title.

(4)

(3) A target facility that holds a business or regulatory

license person who purchases or receives ammunition at a

target facility holding a business or other regulatory license,

provided that the ammunition is at all times kept within

the facility’s premises.

(5)

(4) A gunsmith.

(6)

(5) A wholesaler.

(7)

(6) A manufacturer or importer of ﬁrearms or

ammunition licensed pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing

with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States Code,

and the regulations issued pursuant thereto.

(8)

(7) An authorized law enforcement representative of a

city, county, city and county, or state or federal government,

if the sale or other transfer of ownership is for exclusive

use by that government agency, and, prior to the sale,

delivery, or transfer of the handgun

ammunition, written

authorization from the head of the agency authorizing the

transaction is presented to the person from whom the

purchase, delivery, or transfer is being made. Proper

written authorization is deﬁned as veriﬁable written

certiﬁcation from the head of the agency by which the

purchaser, transferee, or person otherwise acquiring

ownership is employed, identifying the employee as an

individual authorized to conduct the transaction, and

authorizing the transaction for the exclusive use of the

agency by which that individual is employed.

(8) A properly identiﬁed sworn peace ofﬁcer, as deﬁned in

Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of

Part 2, or properly identiﬁed sworn federal law enforcement

ofﬁcer, who is authorized to carry a ﬁrearm in the course

and scope of the ofﬁcer’s duties.

(f) (1) Proper identiﬁcation is deﬁned as veriﬁable written

certiﬁcation from the head of the agency by which the

purchaser or transferee is employed, identifying the

purchaser or transferee as a full-time paid peace ofﬁcer

who is authorized to carry a ﬁrearm in the course and scope

of the ofﬁcer’s duties.

(2) The certiﬁcation shall be delivered to the vendor at the

time of purchase or transfer and the purchaser or transferee

shall provide bona ﬁde evidence of identity to verify that he

or she is the person authorized in the certiﬁcation.

(d) Sales of ammunition at a gun show or event shall

comply with all applicable laws including Sections 30347,

30350, 30352, and 30360.

SEC. 8.12. Section 30350 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

30350. A

An ammunition vendor shall not sell or

otherwise transfer ownership of, offer for sale or otherwise

offer to transfer ownership of, or display for sale or display

for transfer of ownership of any handgun

ammunition in a

manner that allows that ammunition to be accessible to a

purchaser or transferee without the assistance of the

vendor or an employee of the vendor.

SEC. 8.13. Section 30352 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

30352. (a) Commencing February 1, 2011, a

July 1,

2019, an ammunition vendor shall not sell or otherwise

transfer ownership of any handgun

ammunition without, at

the time of delivery, legibly recording the following

information on a form to be prescribed by the Department

of Justice:

(1) The date of the sale or other transaction

transfer.

(2) The purchaser’s or transferee’s driver’s license or other

identiﬁcation number and the state in which it was issued.

(3) The brand, type, and amount of ammunition sold or

otherwise transferred.

(4) The purchaser’s or transferee’s full name and signature.

(5) The name of the salesperson who processed the sale or

other transaction.

(6) The right thumbprint of the purchaser or transferee on

the above form.

(7) (6) The purchaser’s or transferee’s full residential

address and telephone number.

(8)

(7) The purchaser’s or transferee’s date of birth.

(b) Commencing July 1, 2019, an ammunition vendor

shall electronically submit to the department the

information required by subdivision (a) for all sales and

transfers of ownership of ammunition. The department

shall retain this information in a database to be known as

the Ammunition Purchase Records File. This information

shall remain conﬁdential and may be used by the

department and those entities speciﬁed in, and pursuant

to, subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 11105, through the

California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System,

only for law enforcement purposes. The ammunition vendor

shall not use, sell, disclose, or share such information for

any other purpose other than the submission required by

this subdivision without the express written consent of the

purchaser or transferee.

listed in this subdivision, or those persons or entities listed

in subdivision (e), shall be authorized to purchase

ammunition. Prior to delivering any ammunition, an

ammunition vendor shall require bona ﬁde evidence of

identity to verify that the person who is receiving delivery

of the ammunition is a person or entity listed in subdivision

(e) or one of the following:

(1) A person authorized to purchase ammunition pursuant

to Section 30370.

(2) A person who was approved by the department to

receive a ﬁrearm from the ammunition vendor, pursuant to

Section 28220, if that vendor is a licensed ﬁrearms dealer,

172

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

and Institutions Code, and if authorized, the National

Instant Criminal Background Check System, as described

in Section 922(t) of Title 18 of the United States Code, in

order to determine if the applicant is prohibited from

possessing or acquiring ammunition under subdivision (a)

of Section 30305 or federal law.

(2) The applicant shall be approved or denied within 30

days of the date of the submission of the application to the

department. If the application is denied, the department

shall state the reasons for doing so and provide the

applicant an appeal process to challenge that denial.

(3) If the department is unable to ascertain the ﬁnal

disposition of the application within 30 days of the

applicant’s submission, the department shall grant

authorization to the applicant.

(4) The ammunition purchase authorization number shall

be the same as the number on the document presented by

the person as bona ﬁde evidence of identity.

(f) The department shall renew a person’s ammunition

purchase authorization before its expiration, provided that

the department determines that the person is not prohibited

from acquiring or possessing ammunition under subdivision

(a) of Section 30305 or federal law, and provided the

applicant timely pays the renewal fee set forth in

subdivision (g).

(g) The department may charge a reasonable fee not to

exceed ﬁfty dollars ($50) per person for the issuance of an

ammunition purchase authorization or the issuance of a

renewal authorization, however, the department shall not

set these fees any higher than necessary to recover the

reasonable, estimated costs to fund the ammunition

authorization program provided for in this section and

Section 30352, including the enforcement of this program

and maintenance of any data systems associated with this

program.

(h) The Ammunition Safety and Enforcement Special

Fund is hereby created within the State Treasury. All fees

received pursuant to this section shall be deposited into

the Ammunition Safety and Enforcement Special Fund of

the General Fund, and, notwithstanding Section 13340 of

the Government Code, are continuously appropriated for

purposes of implementing, operating and enforcing the

ammunition authorization program provided for in this

section and Section 30352, and for repaying the start-up

loan provided for in Section 30371.

(i) The department shall annually review and may adjust

all fees speciﬁed in subdivision (g) for inﬂation.

(j) The department is authorized to adopt regulations to

implement the provisions of this section.

30371. (a) There is hereby appropriated twenty-ﬁve

million dollars ($25,000,000) from the General Fund as a

loan for the start-up costs of implementing, operating and

enforcing the provisions of the ammunition authorization

program provided for in Sections 30352 and 30370.

(b) For purposes of repaying the loan, the Controller shall,

after disbursing moneys necessary to implement, operate

and enforce the ammunition authorization program

provided for in Sections 30352 and 30370, transfer all

proceeds from fees received by the Ammunition Safety and

Enforcement Special Fund up to the amount of the loan

provided by this section, including interest at the pooled

money investment account rate, to the General Fund.

(3) The vendor shall keep the certiﬁcation with the record

of sale and submit the certiﬁcation to the department.

(g) The department is authorized to adopt regulations to

implement the provisions of this section.

SEC. 8.14. Section 30363 is added to the Penal Code,

to read:

30363. Within 48 hours of discovery, an ammunition

vendor shall report the loss or theft of any of the following

items to the appropriate law enforcement agency in the

city, county, or city and county where the vendor’s business

premises are located:

(1) Any ammunition that is merchandise of the vendor.

(2) Any ammunition that the vendor takes possession of

pursuant to Section 30312.

(3) Any ammunition kept at the vendor’s place of business.

SEC. 8.15. Article 4 (commencing with Section 30370)

is added to Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4 of Part 6 of

the Penal Code, to read:

Article 4. Ammunition Purchase Authorizations

30370. (a) (1) Commencing on January 1, 2019, any

person who is 18 years of age or older may apply to the

Department of Justice for an ammunition purchase

authorization.

(2) The ammunition purchase authorization may be used

by the authorized person to purchase or otherwise seek the

transfer of ownership of ammunition from an ammunition

vendor, as that term is deﬁned in Section 16151, and

shall have no other force or effect.

(3) The ammunition purchase authorization shall be valid

for four years from July 1, 2019, or the date of issuance,

whichever is later, unless it is revoked by the department

pursuant to subdivision (b).

(b) The ammunition purchase authorization shall be

promptly revoked by the department upon the occurrence

of any event which would have disqualiﬁed the holder from

being issued the ammunition purchase authorization

pursuant to this section. If an authorization is revoked, the

department shall upon the written request of the holder

state the reasons for doing so and provide the holder an

appeal process to challenge that revocation.

centralized list of all persons who are authorized to

purchase ammunition and shall promptly remove from the

list any persons whose authorization was revoked by the

department pursuant to this section. The department shall

provide access to the list by ammunition vendors for

purposes of conducting ammunition sales or other

transfers, and shall provide access to the list by law

enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes.

(d) The department shall issue an ammunition purchase

authorization to the applicant if all of the following

conditions are met:

(1) The applicant is 18 years of age or older.

(2) The applicant is not prohibited from acquiring or

possessing ammunition under subdivision (a) of

Section 30305 or federal law.

(3) The applicant pays the fees set forth in subdivision (g).

(e) (1) Upon receipt of an initial or renewal application,

the department shall examine its records, and the records

it is authorized to request from the State Department of

State Hospitals, pursuant to Section 8104 of the Welfare

Text of Proposed Laws

173

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

provided access to the registry for law enforcement

purposes.

for a breach of any of the prohibitions and requirements of

Article 2 (commencing with Section 30300) or Article 3

(commencing with Section 30342).

SEC. 9. Nothing in this Act shall preclude or preempt a

local ordinance that imposes additional penalties or

requirements in regard to the sale or transfer of ammunition.

SEC. 10. Securing Firearms From Prohibited Persons.

SEC. 10.1. Section 1524 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

1524. (a) A search warrant may be issued upon any of

the following grounds:

(1) When the property was stolen or embezzled.

(2) When the property or things were used as the means of

committing a felony.

(3) When the property or things are in the possession of

any person with the intent to use them as a means of

committing a public offense, or in the possession of

another to whom he or she may have delivered them for the

purpose of concealing them or preventing them from being

discovered.

(4) When the property or things to be seized consist of an

item or constitute evidence that tends to show a felony has

been committed, or tends to show that a particular person

has committed a felony.

(5) When the property or things to be seized consist of

evidence that tends to show that sexual exploitation of a

child, in violation of Section 311.3, or possession of

matter depicting sexual conduct of a person under 18

years of age, in violation of Section 311.11, has occurred

or is occurring.

(6) When there is a warrant to arrest a person.

(7) When a provider of electronic communication service

or remote computing service has records or evidence, as

speciﬁed in Section 1524.3, showing that property was

stolen or embezzled constituting a misdemeanor, or that

property or things are in the possession of any person with

the intent to use them as a means of committing a

misdemeanor public offense, or in the possession of

another to whom he or she may have delivered them for the

purpose of concealing them or preventing their discovery.

(8) When the property or things to be seized include an

item or evidence that tends to show a violation of

Section 3700.5 of the Labor Code, or tends to show that a

particular person has violated Section 3700.5 of the Labor

Code.

(9) When the property or things to be seized include a

ﬁrearm or other deadly weapon at the scene of, or at the

premises occupied or under the control of the person

arrested in connection with, a domestic violence incident

involving a threat to human life or a physical assault as

provided in Section 18250. This section does not affect

warrantless seizures otherwise authorized by

Section 18250.

(10) When the property or things to be seized include a

ﬁrearm or other deadly weapon that is owned by, or in the

possession of, or in the custody or control of, a person

described in subdivision (a) of Section 8102 of the Welfare

and Institutions Code.

SEC. 8.16. Article 5 (commencing with Section 30385)

is added to Chapter 1 of Division 10 of Title 4 of Part 6 of

the Penal Code, to read:

Article 5. Ammunition Vendor Licenses

30385. (a) The Department of Justice is authorized to

issue ammunition vendor licenses pursuant to this article.

The department shall, commencing July 1, 2017,

commence accepting applications for ammunition vendor

licenses. If an application is denied, the department shall

inform the applicant of the reason for denial in writing.

(b) The ammunition vendor license shall be issued in a

form prescribed by the department and shall be valid for a

period of one year. The department may adopt regulations

to administer the application and enforcement provisions

of this article. The license shall allow the licensee to sell

ammunition at the location speciﬁed in the license or at a

gun show or event as set forth in Section 30348.

the department shall issue the license to the entity, but

shall require a responsible person to pass the background

check pursuant to Section 30395.

(2) For purposes of this article, “responsible person”

means a person having the power to direct the management,

policies, and practices of the entity as it pertains to

ammunition.

(d) Commencing January 1, 2018, a ﬁrearms dealer

licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive,

shall automatically be deemed a licensed ammunition

vendor, provided the dealer complies with the requirements

of Article 2 (commencing with Section 30300) and Article

3 (commencing with Section 30342).

30390. (a) The Department of Justice may charge

ammunition vendor license applicants a reasonable fee

sufﬁcient to reimburse the department for the reasonable,

estimated costs of administering the license program,

including the enforcement of this program and maintenance

of the registry of ammunition vendors.

(b) The fees received by the department pursuant to this

article shall be deposited in the Ammunition Vendors

Special Account, which is hereby created. Notwithstanding

Section 13340 of the Government Code, the revenue in

the fund is continuously appropriated for use by the

department for the purpose of implementing, administering

and enforcing the provisions of this article, and for

collecting and maintaining information submitted pursuant

to Section 30352.

Special Fund shall also be available upon appropriation to

the department for the purpose of implementing and

enforcing the provisions of this article.

30395. (a) The Department of Justice is authorized to

issue ammunition vendor licenses to applicants who the

department has determined, either as an individual or a

responsible person, are not prohibited from possessing,

receiving, owning, or purchasing ammunition under

subdivision (a) of Section 30305 or federal law, and who

provide a copy of any regulatory or business license

required by local government, a valid seller’s permit issued

by the State Board of Equalization, a federal ﬁrearms

license if the person is federally licensed, and a certiﬁcate

of eligibility issued by the department.

(b) The department shall keep a registry of all licensed

ammunition vendors. Law enforcement agencies shall be

174

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

(e), or (f) of Section 655 of the Harbors and Navigation

Code.

(ii) The person from whom the sample is being sought has

refused an ofﬁcer’s request to submit to, or has failed to

complete, a blood test as required by Section 655.1 of the

Harbors and Navigation Code.

(iii) The sample will be drawn from the person in a

reasonable, medically approved manner.

(B) This paragraph is not intended to abrogate a court’s

mandate to determine the propriety of the issuance of a

search warrant on a case-by-case basis.

(b) The property, things, person, or persons described in

subdivision (a) may be taken on the warrant from any

place, or from any person in whose possession the property

or things may be.

warrant shall issue for any documentary evidence in the

possession or under the control of any person who is a

lawyer as deﬁned in Section 950 of the Evidence Code, a

physician as deﬁned in Section 990 of the Evidence Code,

a psychotherapist as deﬁned in Section 1010 of the

Evidence Code, or a member of the clergy as deﬁned in

Section 1030 of the Evidence Code, and who is not

reasonably suspected of engaging or having engaged in

criminal activity related to the documentary evidence for

which a warrant is requested unless the following procedure

has been complied with:

(1) At the time of the issuance of the warrant, the court

shall appoint a special master in accordance with

subdivision (d) to accompany the person who will serve the

warrant. Upon service of the warrant, the special master

shall inform the party served of the speciﬁc items being

sought and that the party shall have the opportunity to

provide the items requested. If the party, in the judgment

of the special master, fails to provide the items requested,

the special master shall conduct a search for the items in

the areas indicated in the search warrant.

(2) (A) If the party who has been served states that an

item or items should not be disclosed, they shall be sealed

by the special master and taken to court for a hearing.

(B) At the hearing, the party searched shall be entitled to

raise any issues that may be raised pursuant to

Section 1538.5 as well as a claim that the item or items

are privileged, as provided by law. The hearing shall be

held in the superior court. The court shall provide sufﬁcient

time for the parties to obtain counsel and make motions or

present evidence. The hearing shall be held within three

days of the service of the warrant unless the court makes a

ﬁnding that the expedited hearing is impracticable. In that

case, the matter shall be heard at the earliest possible

time.

limitations of time prescribed in Chapter 2 (commencing

with Section 799) of Title 3 of Part 2 shall be tolled from

the time of the seizure until the ﬁnal conclusion of the

hearing, including any associated writ or appellate

proceedings.

(3) The warrant shall, whenever practicable, be served

during normal business hours. In addition, the warrant

shall be served upon a party who appears to have possession

or control of the items sought. If, after reasonable efforts,

the party serving the warrant is unable to locate the person,

the special master shall seal and return to the court, for

(11) When the property or things to be seized include a

ﬁrearm that is owned by, or in the possession of, or in the

custody or control of, a person who is subject to the

prohibitions regarding ﬁrearms pursuant to Section 6389

of the Family Code, if a prohibited ﬁrearm is possessed,

owned, in the custody of, or controlled by a person against

whom a protective order has been issued pursuant to

Section 6218 of the Family Code, the person has been

lawfully served with that order, and the person has failed to

relinquish the ﬁrearm as required by law.

(12) When the information to be received from the use of

a tracking device constitutes evidence that tends to show

that either a felony, a misdemeanor violation of the Fish

and Game Code, or a misdemeanor violation of the Public

Resources Code has been committed or is being committed,

tends to show that a particular person has committed a

felony, a misdemeanor violation of the Fish and Game

Code, or a misdemeanor violation of the Public Resources

Code, or is committing a felony, a misdemeanor violation

of the Fish and Game Code, or a misdemeanor violation of

the Public Resources Code, or will assist in locating an

individual who has committed or is committing a felony, a

misdemeanor violation of the Fish and Game Code, or a

misdemeanor violation of the Public Resources Code. A

tracking device search warrant issued pursuant to this

paragraph shall be executed in a manner meeting the

requirements speciﬁed in subdivision (b) of Section 1534.

(13) When a sample of the blood of a person constitutes

evidence that tends to show a violation of Section 23140,

23152, or 23153 of the Vehicle Code and the person from

whom the sample is being sought has refused an ofﬁcer’s

request to submit to, or has failed to complete, a blood test

as required by Section 23612 of the Vehicle Code, and the

sample will be drawn from the person in a reasonable,

medically approved manner. This paragraph is not intended

to abrogate a court’s mandate to determine the propriety of

the issuance of a search warrant on a case-by-case basis.

(14) Beginning January 1, 2016, the property or things to

be seized are ﬁrearms or ammunition or both that are

owned by, in the possession of, or in the custody or control

of a person who is the subject of a gun violence restraining

order that has been issued pursuant to Division 3.2

(commencing with Section 18100) of Title 2 of Part 6, if a

prohibited ﬁrearm or ammunition or both is possessed,

owned, in the custody of, or controlled by a person against

whom a gun violence restraining order has been issued,

the person has been lawfully served with that order, and

the person has failed to relinquish the ﬁrearm as required

by law.

(15) Beginning January 1, 2018, the property or things to

be seized include a ﬁrearm that is owned by, or in the

possession of, or in the custody or control of, a person who

is subject to the prohibitions regarding ﬁrearms pursuant

to Section 29800 or 29805, and the court has made a

ﬁnding pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of

Section 29810 that the person has failed to relinquish the

ﬁrearm as required by law.

(15)

(16) When the property or things to be seized are

controlled substances or a device, contrivance, instrument,

or paraphernalia used for unlawfully using or administering

a controlled substance pursuant to the authority described

in Section 11472 of the Health and Safety Code.

(16)

(17) (A) When all of the following apply:

(i) A sample of the blood of a person constitutes evidence

that tends to show a violation of subdivision (b), (c), (d),

Text of Proposed Laws

175

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

issue a warrant to search a person or property located in

another county if the person whose identifying information

was taken or used resides in the same county as the issuing

court.

(k) This section shall not be construed to create a cause of

action against any foreign or California corporation, its

ofﬁcers, employees, agents, or other speciﬁed persons for

providing location information.

SEC. 10.2. Section 27930 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

27930. Section 27545 does not apply to deliveries,

transfers, or returns of ﬁrearms made pursuant to any of

the following:

(a) Sections 18000 and 18005.

(b) Division 4 (commencing with Section 18250) of Title

Division 11.

(d) Sections 34005 and 34010.

(e) Section 29810.

SEC. 10.3. Section 29810 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

29810. (a) For any person who is subject to

Section 29800 or 29805, the court shall, at the time

judgment is imposed, provide on a form supplied by the

Department of Justice, a notice to the defendant prohibited

by this chapter from owning, purchasing, receiving,

possessing, or having under custody or control, any ﬁrearm.

The notice shall inform the defendant of the prohibition

regarding ﬁrearms and include a form to facilitate the

transfer of ﬁrearms. If the prohibition on owning or

possessing a ﬁrearm will expire on a date speciﬁed in the

court order, the form shall inform the defendant that he or

she may elect to have his or her ﬁrearm transferred to a

ﬁrearms dealer licensed pursuant to Section 29830.

(b) Failure to provide the notice described in subdivision

(a) is not a defense to a violation of this chapter.

2018.

SEC. 10.4. Section 29810 is added to the Penal Code,

to read:

29810. (a) (1) Upon conviction of any offense that

renders a person subject to Section 29800 or

Section 29805, the person shall relinquish all ﬁrearms he

or she owns, possesses, or has under his or her custody or

control in the manner provided in this section.

(2) The court shall, upon conviction of a defendant for an

offense described in subdivision (a), instruct the defendant

that he or she is prohibited from owning, purchasing,

receiving, possessing, or having under his or her custody or

control, any ﬁrearms, ammunition, and ammunition

feeding devices, including but not limited to magazines,

and shall order the defendant to relinquish all ﬁrearms in

the manner provided in this section. The court shall also

provide the defendant with a Prohibited Persons

Relinquishment Form developed by the Department of

Justice.

(3) Using the Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form,

the defendant shall name a designee and grant the

designee power of attorney for the purpose of transferring

or disposing of any ﬁrearms. The designee shall be either a

local law enforcement agency or a consenting third party

determination by the court, any item that appears to be

privileged as provided by law.

(d) (1) As used in this section, a “special master” is an

attorney who is a member in good standing of the California

State Bar and who has been selected from a list of qualiﬁed

attorneys that is maintained by the State Bar particularly

for the purposes of conducting the searches described in

this section. These attorneys shall serve without

compensation. A special master shall be considered a

public employee, and the governmental entity that caused

the search warrant to be issued shall be considered the

employer of the special master and the applicable public

entity, for purposes of Division 3.6 (commencing with

Section 810) of Title 1 of the Government Code, relating to

claims and actions against public entities and public

employees. In selecting the special master, the court shall

make every reasonable effort to ensure that the person

selected has no relationship with any of the parties involved

in the pending matter. Information obtained by the special

master shall be conﬁdential and may not be divulged

except in direct response to inquiry by the court.

(2) In any case in which the magistrate determines that,

after reasonable efforts have been made to obtain a special

master, a special master is not available and would not be

available within a reasonable period of time, the magistrate

may direct the party seeking the order to conduct the

search in the manner described in this section in lieu of

the special master.

(e) Any search conducted pursuant to this section by a

special master may be conducted in a manner that permits

the party serving the warrant or his or her designee to

accompany the special master as he or she conducts his or

her search. However, that party or his or her designee may

not participate in the search nor shall he or she examine

any of the items being searched by the special master

except upon agreement of the party upon whom the warrant

has been served.

(f) As used in this section, “documentary evidence”

includes, but is not limited to, writings, documents,

blueprints, drawings, photographs, computer printouts,

microﬁlms, X-rays, ﬁles, diagrams, ledgers, books, tapes,

audio and video recordings, ﬁlms, and papers of any type

or description.

(g) No warrant shall issue for any item or items described

in Section 1070 of the Evidence Code.

(h) Notwithstanding any other law, no claim of attorney

work product as described in Chapter 4 (commencing with

Section 2018.010) of Title 4 of Part 4 of the Code of Civil

Procedure shall be sustained where there is probable cause

to believe that the lawyer is engaging or has engaged in

criminal activity related to the documentary evidence for

which a warrant is requested unless it is established at the

hearing with respect to the documentary evidence seized

under the warrant that the services of the lawyer were not

sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or

plan to commit a crime or a fraud.

(i) Nothing in this section is intended to limit an attorney’s

ability to request an in-camera hearing pursuant to the

holding of the Supreme Court of California in People v.

Superior Court (Laff) (2001) 25 Cal.4th 703.

(j) In addition to any other circumstance permitting a

magistrate to issue a warrant for a person or property in

another county, when the property or things to be seized

consist of any item or constitute evidence that tends to

show a violation of Section 530.5, the magistrate may

176

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

the defendant has properly complied with the requirements

of this section by relinquishing all ﬁrearms identiﬁed by

the probation ofﬁcer’s investigation or declared by the

defendant on the Prohibited Persons Relinquishment

Form, and by timely submitting a completed Prohibited

Persons Relinquishment Form. The probation ofﬁcer shall

also report to the Department of Justice on a form to be

developed by the department whether the Automated

Firearms System has been updated to indicate which

ﬁrearms have been relinquished by the defendant.

(3) Prior to ﬁnal disposition or sentencing in the case, the

court shall make ﬁndings concerning whether the probation

ofﬁcer’s report indicates that the defendant has

relinquished all ﬁrearms as required, and whether the

court has received a completed Prohibited Persons

Relinquishment Form, along with the receipts described in

paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) or paragraph (1) of

subdivision (e). The court shall ensure that these ﬁndings

are included in the abstract of judgment. If necessary to

avoid a delay in sentencing, the court may make and enter

these ﬁndings within 14 days of sentencing.

(4) If the court ﬁnds probable cause that the defendant

has failed to relinquish any ﬁrearms as required, the court

shall order the search for and removal of any ﬁrearms at

any location where the judge has probable cause to believe

the defendant’s ﬁrearms are located. The court shall state

with speciﬁcity the reasons for and scope of the search and

seizure authorized by the order.

(5) Failure by a defendant to timely ﬁle the completed

Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form with the assigned

probation ofﬁcer shall constitute an infraction punishable

by a ﬁne not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100).

(d) The following procedures shall apply to any defendant

who is a prohibited person within the meaning of paragraph

(1) of subdivision (a) who does not remain in custody at

any time within the ﬁve-day period following conviction:

(1) The designee shall dispose of any ﬁrearms the

defendant owns, possesses, or has under his or her custody

or control within ﬁve days of the conviction by surrendering

the ﬁrearms to the control of a local law enforcement

agency, selling the ﬁrearms to a licensed ﬁrearms dealer,

or transferring the ﬁrearms for storage to a ﬁrearms dealer

pursuant to Section 29830, in accordance with the wishes

of the defendant. Any proceeds from the sale of the

ﬁrearms shall become the property of the defendant. The

law enforcement ofﬁcer or licensed dealer taking possession

of any ﬁrearms pursuant to this subdivision shall issue a

receipt to the designee describing the ﬁrearms and listing

any serial number or other identiﬁcation on the ﬁrearms at

the time of surrender.

(2) If the defendant owns, possesses, or has under his or

her custody or control any ﬁrearms to relinquish, the

defendant’s designee shall submit the completed

Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form to the assigned

probation ofﬁcer within ﬁve days following the conviction,

along with the receipts described in paragraph (1) of

subdivision (d) showing the defendant’s ﬁrearms were

surrendered to a local law enforcement agency or sold or

transferred to a licensed ﬁrearms dealer.

(3) If the defendant does not own, possess, or have under

his or her custody or control any ﬁrearms to relinquish, he

or she shall, within ﬁve days following conviction, submit

the completed Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form to

the assigned probation ofﬁcer, with a statement afﬁrming

that he or she has no ﬁrearms to be relinquished.

who is not prohibited from possessing ﬁrearms under state

or federal law. The designee shall, within the time periods

speciﬁed in subdivisions (d) and (e), surrender the ﬁrearms

to the control of a local law enforcement agency, sell the

ﬁrearms to a licensed ﬁrearms dealer, or transfer the

ﬁrearms for storage to a ﬁrearms dealer pursuant to

Section 29830.

(b) The Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form shall do

all of the following:

(1) Inform the defendant that he or she is prohibited from

owning, purchasing, receiving, possessing, or having under

his or her custody or control, any ﬁrearms, ammunition,

and ammunition feeding devices, including but not limited

to magazines, and that he or she shall relinquish all

ﬁrearms through a designee within the time periods set

forth in subdivision (d) or (e) by surrendering the ﬁrearms

to the control of a local law enforcement agency, selling

the ﬁrearms to a licensed ﬁrearms dealer, or transferring

the ﬁrearms for storage to a ﬁrearms dealer pursuant to

Section 29830.

(2) Inform the defendant that any cohabitant of the

defendant who owns ﬁrearms must store those ﬁrearms in

accordance with Section 25135.

(3) Require the defendant to declare any ﬁrearms that he

or she owned, possessed, or had under his or her custody

or control at the time of his or her conviction, and require

the defendant to describe the ﬁrearms and provide all

reasonably available information about the location of the

ﬁrearms to enable a designee or law enforcement ofﬁcials

to locate the ﬁrearms.

(4) Require the defendant to name a designee, if the

defendant declares that he or she owned, possessed, or

had under his or her custody or control any ﬁrearms at the

time of his or her conviction, and grant the designee power

of attorney for the purpose of transferring or disposing of

all ﬁrearms.

(5) Require the designee to indicate his or her consent to

the designation and, except a designee that is a law

enforcement agency, to declare under penalty of perjury

that he or she is not prohibited from possessing any

ﬁrearms under state or federal law.

(6) Require the designee to state the date each ﬁrearm

was relinquished and the name of the party to whom it was

relinquished, and to attach receipts from the law

enforcement ofﬁcer or licensed ﬁrearms dealer who took

possession of the relinquished ﬁrearms.

(7) Inform the defendant and the designee of the obligation

to submit the completed Prohibited Persons Relinquishment

Form to the assigned probation ofﬁcer within the time

periods speciﬁed in subdivisions (d) and (e).

described in subdivision (a), the court shall immediately

assign the matter to a probation ofﬁcer to investigate

whether the Automated Firearms System or other credible

information, such as a police report, reveals that the

defendant owns, possesses, or has under his or her custody

or control any ﬁrearms. The assigned probation ofﬁcer

shall receive the Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form

from the defendant or the defendant’s designee, as

applicable, and ensure that the Automated Firearms

System has been properly updated to indicate that the

defendant has relinquished those ﬁrearms.

(2) Prior to ﬁnal disposition or sentencing in the case, the

assigned probation ofﬁcer shall report to the court whether

Text of Proposed Laws

177

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

or if the defendant provides written notice of an intent to

appeal a conviction for an offense described in subdivision

(a), or if the Automated Firearms System indicates that the

ﬁrearm was reported lost or stolen by the lawful owner. If

the ﬁrearm was reported lost or stolen, the ﬁrearm shall be

restored to the lawful owner, as soon as its use as evidence

has been served, upon the lawful owner’s identiﬁcation of

the weapon and proof of ownership, and after the law

enforcement agency has complied with Chapter 2

(commencing with Section 33850) of Division 11 of Title

4. The agency shall notify the Department of Justice of the

disposition of relinquished ﬁrearms pursuant to

Section 34010.

(j) A city, county, or city and county, or a state agency may

adopt a regulation, ordinance, or resolution imposing a

charge equal to its administrative costs relating to the

seizure, impounding, storage, or release of a ﬁrearm

pursuant to Section 33880.

(k) This section shall become operative on January 1,

2018.

SEC. 11. Theft of Firearms.

SEC. 11.1. Section 490.2 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

(a) Notwithstanding Section 487 or any other provision of

law deﬁning grand theft, obtaining any property by theft

where the value of the money, labor, real or personal

property taken does not exceed nine hundred ﬁfty dollars

($950) shall be considered petty theft and shall be

punished as a misdemeanor, except that such person may

instead be punished pursuant to subdivision (h) of

Section 1170 if that person has one or more prior

convictions for an offense speciﬁed in clause (iv) of

subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of

Section 667 or for an offense requiring registration

pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290.

(b) This section shall not be applicable to any theft that

may be charged as an infraction pursuant to any other

provision of law.

SEC. 11.2. Section 29805 of the Penal Code is amended

to read:

29805. Except as provided in Section 29855 or

subdivision (a) of Section 29800, any person who has

been convicted of a misdemeanor violation of Section 71,

76, 136.1, 136.5, or 140, subdivision (d) of Section 148,

Section 171b, paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of

Section 171c, 171d, 186.28, 240, 241, 242, 243,

243.4, 244.5, 245, 245.5, 246.3, 247, 273.5, 273.6,

417, 417.6, 422, 626.9, 646.9, or 830.95, subdivision

(a) of former Section 12100, as that section read at any

time from when it was enacted by Section 3 of Chapter 1386

of the Statutes of 1988 to when it was repealed by Section

18 of Chapter 23 of the Statutes of 1994, Section 17500,

17510, 25300, 25800, 30315, or 32625, subdivision

(b) or (d) of Section 26100, or Section 27510, or

Section 8100, 8101, or 8103 of the Welfare and

Institutions Code, any ﬁrearm-related offense pursuant to

Sections 871.5 and 1001.5 of the Welfare and Institutions

Code, Section 490.2 if the property taken was a ﬁrearm, or

of the conduct punished in subdivision (c) of Section 27590,

and who, within 10 years of the conviction, owns,

purchases, receives, or has in possession or under custody

or control, any ﬁrearm is guilty of a public offense, which

shall be punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not

exceeding one year or in the state prison, by a ﬁne not

(e) The following procedures shall apply to any defendant

who is a prohibited person within the meaning of paragraph

(1) of subdivision (a) who is in custody at any point within

the ﬁve-day period following conviction:

(1) The designee shall dispose of any ﬁrearms the

defendant owns, possesses, or has under his or her custody

or control within 14 days of the conviction by surrendering

the ﬁrearms to the control of a local law enforcement

agency, selling the ﬁrearms to a licensed ﬁrearms dealer,

or transferring the ﬁrearms for storage to a ﬁrearms dealer

pursuant to Section 29830, in accordance with the wishes

of the defendant. Any proceeds from the sale of the

ﬁrearms shall become the property of the defendant. The

law enforcement ofﬁcer or licensed dealer taking possession

of any ﬁrearms pursuant to this subdivision shall issue a

receipt to the designee describing the ﬁrearms and listing

any serial number or other identiﬁcation on the ﬁrearms at

the time of surrender.

(2) If the defendant owns, possesses, or has under his or

her custody or control any ﬁrearms to relinquish, the

defendant’s designee shall submit the completed

Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form to the assigned

probation ofﬁcer, within 14 days following conviction,

along with the receipts described in paragraph (1) of

subdivision (e) showing the defendant’s ﬁrearms were

surrendered to a local law enforcement agency or sold or

transferred to a licensed ﬁrearms dealer.

(3) If the defendant does not own, possess, or have under

his or her custody or control any ﬁrearms to relinquish, he

or she shall, within 14 days following conviction, submit

the completed Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form to

the assigned probation ofﬁcer, with a statement afﬁrming

that he or she has no ﬁrearms to be relinquished.

(4) If the defendant is released from custody during the

14 days following conviction and a designee has not yet

taken temporary possession of each ﬁrearm to be

relinquished as described above, the defendant shall,

within ﬁve days following his or her release, relinquish

each ﬁrearm required to be relinquished pursuant to

paragraph (1) of subdivision (d).

(f) For good cause, the court may shorten or enlarge the

time periods speciﬁed in subdivisions (d) and (e), enlarge

the time period speciﬁed in paragraph (3) of subdivision

(c), or allow an alternative method of relinquishment.

(g) The defendant shall not be subject to prosecution for

unlawful possession of any ﬁrearms declared on the

Prohibited Persons Relinquishment Form if the ﬁrearms

are relinquished as required.

(h) Any ﬁrearms that would otherwise be subject to

relinquishment by a defendant under this section, but

which are lawfully owned by a cohabitant of the defendant,

shall be exempt from relinquishment, provided the

defendant is notiﬁed that the cohabitant must store the

ﬁrearm in accordance with Section 25135.

(i) A law enforcement agency shall update the Automated

Firearms System to reﬂect any ﬁrearms that were

relinquished to the agency pursuant to this section. A law

enforcement agency shall retain a ﬁrearm that was

relinquished to the agency pursuant to this section for 30

days after the date the ﬁrearm was relinquished. After the

30-day period has expired, the ﬁrearm is subject to

destruction, retention, sale or other transfer by the agency,

except upon the certiﬁcate of a judge of a court of record,

or of the district attorney of the county, that the retention

of the ﬁrearm is necessary or proper to the ends of justice,

178

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 63 CONTINUED

of California or the Supreme Court of the United States.

The reasonable fees and costs of defending the action

shall be a charge on funds appropriated to the Department

of Justice, which shall be satisﬁed promptly.

PROPOSITION 64

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure amends, repeals, and adds sections

to the Business and Professions Code, the Food and

Agricultural Code, the Health and Safety Code, the Labor

Code, the Revenue and Taxation Code, and the Water Code;

therefore, existing provisions proposed to be deleted are

printed in strikeout type

and new provisions proposed to be

added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are

new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Title.

This measure shall be known and may be cited as the

Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (“the

Adult Use of Marijuana Act”).

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

A. Currently in California, nonmedical marijuana use is

unregulated, untaxed, and occurs without any consumer or

environmental protections. The Control, Regulate and Tax

Adult Use of Marijuana Act will legalize marijuana for

those over 21 years old, protect children, and establish

laws to regulate marijuana cultivation, distribution, sale

and use, and will protect Californians and the environment

from potential dangers. It establishes the Bureau of

Marijuana Control within the Department of Consumer

Affairs to regulate and license the marijuana industry.

B. Marijuana is currently legal in our state for medical use

and illegal for nonmedical use. Abuse of the medical

marijuana system in California has long been widespread,

but recent bipartisan legislation signed by Governor Jerry

Brown is establishing a comprehensive regulatory scheme

for medical marijuana. The Control, Regulate and Tax

Adult Use of Marijuana Act (hereafter called the Adult Use

of Marijuana Act) will consolidate and streamline regulation

and taxation for both nonmedical and medical marijuana.

C. Currently, marijuana growth and sale is not being taxed

by the State of California, which means our state is missing

out on hundreds of millions of dollars in potential tax

revenue every year. The Adult Use of Marijuana Act will tax

both the growth and sale of marijuana to generate hundreds

of millions of dollars annually. The revenues will cover the

cost of administering the new law and will provide funds

to: invest in public health programs that educate youth to

prevent and treat serious substance abuse; train local law

enforcement to enforce the new law with a focus on DUI

enforcement; invest in communities to reduce the illicit

market and create job opportunities; and provide for

environmental cleanup and restoration of public lands

damaged by illegal marijuana cultivation.

D. Currently, children under the age of 18 can just as

easily purchase marijuana on the black market as adults

can. By legalizing marijuana, the Adult Use of Marijuana

Act will incapacitate the black market, and move marijuana

purchases into a legal structure with strict safeguards

against children accessing it. The Adult Use of Marijuana

Act prohibits the sale of nonmedical marijuana to those

exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that

imprisonment and ﬁne. The court, on forms prescribed by

the Department of Justice, shall notify the department of

persons subject to this section. However, the prohibition in

this section may be reduced, eliminated, or conditioned as

provided in Section 29855 or 29860.

SEC. 12. Interim Standards.

Notwithstanding the Administrative Procedure Act (APA),

and in order to facilitate the prompt implementation of the

Safety for All Act of 2016, the California Department of

Justice may adopt interim standards without compliance

with the procedures set forth in the APA. The interim

standards shall remain in effect for no more than two

years, and may be earlier superseded by regulations

adopted pursuant to the APA. “Interim standards” means

temporary standards that perform the same function as

“emergency regulations” under the Administrative

Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the

Government Code), except that in order to provide greater

opportunity for public comment on permanent regulations,

the interim standards may remain in force for two years

rather than 180 days.

SEC. 13. Amending the Measure.

This Act shall be broadly construed to accomplish its

purposes. The provisions of this measure may be amended

by a vote of 55 percent of the members of each house of

the Legislature and signed by the Governor so long as such

amendments are consistent with and further the intent of

this Act.

SEC. 14. Conﬂicting Measures.

(a) In the event that this measure and another measure on

the same subject matter, including but not limited to the

regulation of the sale or possession of ﬁrearms or

ammunition, shall appear on the same statewide ballot,

the provisions of the other measure or measures shall be

deemed to be in conﬂict with this measure. In the event

that this measure receives a greater number of afﬁrmative

votes than a measure deemed to be in conﬂict with it, the

provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety,

and the other measure or measures shall be null and void.

(b) If this measure is approved by voters but superseded

by law by any other conﬂicting measure approved by voters

at the same election, and the conﬂicting ballot measure is

later held invalid, this measure shall be self-executing and

given full force and effect.

SEC. 15. Severability.

If any provision of this measure, or part of this measure, or

the application of any provision or part to any person or

circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or

unconstitutional, the remaining provisions, or applications

of provisions, shall not be affected, but shall remain in full

force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this

measure are severable.

SEC. 16. Proponent Standing.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the State,

government agency, or any of its ofﬁcials fail to defend the

constitutionality of this Act, following its approval by the

voters, any other government employer, the proponent, or

in their absence, any citizen of this State shall have the

authority to intervene in any court action challenging the

constitutionality of this Act for the purpose of defending

its constitutionality, whether such action is in trial court,

on appeal, or on discretionary review by the Supreme Court

Text of Proposed Laws

179

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

cultivation licenses for the ﬁrst ﬁve years. The Adult Use of

Marijuana Act also protects consumers and small

businesses by imposing strict anti-monopoly restrictions

for businesses that participate in the nonmedical marijuana

industry.

SEC. 3. Purpose and Intent.

The purpose of the Adult Use of Marijuana Act is to

establish a comprehensive system to legalize, control and

regulate the cultivation, processing, manufacture,

distribution, testing, and sale of nonmedical marijuana,

including marijuana products, for use by adults 21 years

and older, and to tax the commercial growth and retail sale

of marijuana. It is the intent of the people in enacting this

act to accomplish the following:

(a) Take nonmedical marijuana production and sales out

of the hands of the illegal market and bring them under a

regulatory structure that prevents access by minors and

protects public safety, public health, and the environment.

(b) Strictly control the cultivation, processing,

manufacture, distribution, testing and sale of nonmedical

marijuana through a system of state licensing, regulation,

and enforcement.

regulations for nonmedical marijuana businesses and

enact additional local requirements for nonmedical

marijuana businesses, but not require that they do so for a

nonmedical marijuana business to be issued a state license

and be legal under state law.

(d) Allow local governments to ban nonmedical marijuana

businesses as set forth in this act.

(e) Require track and trace management procedures to

track nonmedical marijuana from cultivation to sale.

(f) Require nonmedical marijuana to be comprehensively

tested by independent testing services for the presence of

contaminants, including mold and pesticides, before it

can be sold by licensed businesses.

(g) Require nonmedical marijuana sold by licensed

businesses to be packaged in child-resistant containers

and be labeled so that consumers are fully informed about

potency and the effects of ingesting nonmedical marijuana.

(h) Require licensed nonmedical marijuana businesses to

follow strict environmental and product safety standards

as a condition of maintaining their license.

(i) Prohibit the sale of nonmedical marijuana by businesses

that also sell alcohol or tobacco.

(j) Prohibit the marketing and advertising of nonmedical

marijuana to persons younger than 21 years old or near

schools or other places where children are present.

(k) Strengthen the state’s existing medical marijuana

system by requiring patients to obtain by January 1, 2018,

a new recommendation from their physician that meets the

strict standards signed into law by the Governor in 2015,

and by providing new privacy protections for patients who

obtain medical marijuana identiﬁcation cards as set forth

in this act.

(l) Permit adults 21 years and older to use, possess,

purchase and grow nonmedical marijuana within deﬁned

limits for use by adults 21 years and older as set forth in

this act.

(m) Allow local governments to reasonably regulate the

cultivation of nonmedical marijuana for personal use by

adults 21 years and older through zoning and other local

under 21 years old, and provides new resources to educate

youth against drug abuse and train local law enforcement

to enforce the new law. It bars marijuana businesses from

being located within 600 feet of schools and other areas

where children congregate. It establishes mandatory and

strict packaging and labeling requirements for marijuana

and marijuana products. And it mandates that marijuana

and marijuana products cannot be advertised or marketed

towards children.

E. There are currently no laws governing adult use

marijuana businesses to ensure that they operate in

accordance with existing California laws. Adult use of

marijuana may only be accessed from the unregulated

illicit market. The Adult Use of Marijuana Act sets up a

comprehensive system governing marijuana businesses at

the state level and safeguards local control, allowing local

governments to regulate marijuana-related activities, to

subject marijuana businesses to zoning and permitting

requirements, and to ban marijuana businesses by a vote

of the people within a locality.

F. Currently, illegal marijuana growers steal or divert

millions of gallons of water without any accountability. The

Adult Use of Marijuana Act will create strict environmental

regulations to ensure that the marijuana is grown efﬁciently

and legally, to regulate the use of pesticides, to prevent

wasting water, and to minimize water usage. The Adult Use

of Marijuana Act will crack down on the illegal use of water

and punish bad actors, while providing funds to restore

lands that have been damaged by illegal marijuana grows.

If a business does not demonstrate they are in full

compliance with the applicable water usage and

environmental laws, they will have their license revoked.

G. Currently, the courts are clogged with cases of non-

violent drug offenses. By legalizing marijuana, the Adult

Use of Marijuana Act will alleviate pressure on the courts,

but continue to allow prosecutors to charge the most

serious marijuana-related offenses as felonies, while

reducing the penalties for minor marijuana-related offenses

as set forth in the act.

H. By bringing marijuana into a regulated and legitimate

market, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act creates a

transparent and accountable system. This will help police

crackdown on the underground black market that currently

beneﬁts violent drug cartels and transnational gangs,

which are making billions from marijuana trafﬁcking and

jeopardizing public safety.

I. The Adult Use of Marijuana Act creates a comprehensive

regulatory structure in which every marijuana business is

overseen by a specialized agency with relevant expertise.

The Bureau of Marijuana Control, housed in the Department

of Consumer Affairs, will oversee the whole system and

ensure a smooth transition to the legal market, with

licenses issued beginning in 2018. The Department of

Consumer Affairs will also license and oversee marijuana

retailers, distributors, and microbusinesses. The

Department of Food and Agriculture will license and

oversee marijuana cultivation, ensuring it is environmentally

safe. The State Department of Public Health will license

and oversee manufacturing and testing, ensuring

consumers receive a safe product. The State Board of

Equalization will collect the special marijuana taxes, and

the Controller will allocate the revenue to administer the

new law and provide the funds to critical investments.

J. The Adult Use of Marijuana Act ensures the nonmedical

marijuana industry in California will be built around small

and medium sized businesses by prohibiting large-scale

180

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(b) The weight of any other ingredient combined with

marijuana to prepare topical or oral administrations, food,

drink, or other product.

SEC. 4.2. Section 11018.1 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11018.1. Marijuana Products.

“Marijuana products” means marijuana that has undergone

a process whereby the plant material has been transformed

into a concentrate, including, but not limited to,

concentrated cannabis, or an edible or topical product

containing marijuana or concentrated cannabis and other

ingredients.

SEC. 4.3. Section 11018.2 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11018.2. Marijuana Accessories.

“Marijuana accessories” means any equipment, products

or materials of any kind which are used, intended for use,

or designed for use in planting, propagating, cultivating,

growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding,

converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing,

analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, smoking,

vaporizing, or containing marijuana, or for ingesting,

inhaling, or otherwise introducing marijuana or marijuana

products into the human body.

SEC. 4.4. Section 11362.1 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11362.1. (a) Subject to Sections 11362.2, 11362.3,

11362.4, and 11362.45, but notwithstanding any other

provision of law, it shall be lawful under state and local

law, and shall not be a violation of state or local law, for

persons 21 years of age or older to:

(1) Possess, process, transport, purchase, obtain, or give

away to persons 21 years of age or older without any

compensation whatsoever, not more than 28.5 grams of

marijuana not in the form of concentrated cannabis;

(2) Possess, process, transport, purchase, obtain, or give

away to persons 21 years of age or older without any

compensation whatsoever, not more than eight grams of

marijuana in the form of concentrated cannabis, including

as contained in marijuana products;

(3) Possess, plant, cultivate, harvest, dry, or process not

more than six living marijuana plants and possess the

marijuana produced by the plants;

(4) Smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products; and

(5) Possess, transport, purchase, obtain, use, manufacture,

or give away marijuana accessories to persons 21 years of

age or older without any compensation whatsoever.

(b) Paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) is intended to meet

the requirements of subsection (f) of Section 863 of

Title 21 of the United States Code (21 U.S.C. Sec. 863(f))

by authorizing, under state law, any person in compliance

with this section to manufacture, possess, or distribute

marijuana accessories.

with conduct deemed lawful by this section are not

contraband nor subject to seizure, and no conduct deemed

lawful by this section shall constitute the basis for

detention, search, or arrest.

SEC. 4.5. Section 11362.2 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

laws, and only to ban outdoor cultivation as set forth in this

act.

(n) Deny access to marijuana by persons younger than 21

years old who are not medical marijuana patients.

(o) Prohibit the consumption of marijuana in a public

place unlicensed for such use, including near K–12

schools and other areas where children are present.

(p) Maintain existing laws making it unlawful to operate a

car or other vehicle used for transportation while impaired

by marijuana.

(q) Prohibit the cultivation of marijuana on public lands or

while trespassing on private lands.

(r) Allow public and private employers to enact and enforce

workplace policies pertaining to marijuana.

(s) Tax the growth and sale of marijuana in a way that

drives out the illicit market for marijuana and discourages

use by minors, and abuse by adults.

(t) Generate hundreds of millions of dollars in new state

revenue annually for restoring and repairing the

environment, youth treatment and prevention, community

investment, and law enforcement.

(u) Prevent illegal production or distribution of marijuana.

(v) Prevent the illegal diversion of marijuana from

California to other states or countries or to the illegal

market.

(w) Preserve scarce law enforcement resources to prevent

and prosecute violent crime.

(x) Reduce barriers to entry into the legal, regulated

market.

(y) Require minors who commit marijuana-related offenses

to complete drug prevention education or counseling and

community service.

(z) Authorize courts to resentence persons who are

currently serving a sentence for offenses for which the

penalty is reduced by the act, so long as the person does

not pose a risk to public safety, and to redesignate or

dismiss such offenses from the criminal records of persons

who have completed their sentences as set forth in this

act.

(aa) Allow industrial hemp to be grown as an agricultural

product, and for agricultural or academic research, and

regulated separately from the strains of cannabis with

higher delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentrations.

SEC. 4. Personal Use.

SEC. 4.1. Section 11018 of the Health and Safety Code

is amended to read:

11018. Marijuana.

“Marijuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa

L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin

extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound,

manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of

the plant, its seeds or resin. It does not include the mature

stalks of the plant, ﬁber produced from the stalks, oil or

cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other

compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or

preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted

therefrom), ﬁber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the

plant which is incapable of germination:

(a) Industrial hemp, as deﬁned in Section 11018.5; or

Text of Proposed Laws

181

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(4) Possess an open container or open package of

marijuana or marijuana products while driving, operating,

or riding in the passenger seat or compartment of a motor

vehicle, boat, vessel, aircraft, or other vehicle used for

transportation.

(5) Possess, smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana

products in or upon the grounds of a school, day care

center, or youth center while children are present.

(6) Manufacture concentrated cannabis using a volatile

solvent, unless done in accordance with a license under

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of

Division 8 of, or Division 10 of, the Business and

Professions Code.

(7) Smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products

while driving, operating a motor vehicle, boat, vessel,

aircraft, or other vehicle used for transportation.

(8) Smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products

while riding in the passenger seat or compartment of a

motor vehicle, boat, vessel, aircraft, or other vehicle used

for transportation except as permitted on a motor vehicle,

boat, vessel, aircraft, or other vehicle used for transportation

that is operated in accordance with Section 26200 of the

Business and Professions Code and while no persons under

the age of 21 years are present.

(b) For purposes of this section, “day care center” has the

same meaning as in Section 1596.76.

exhale, burn, or carry any lighted or heated device or pipe,

or any other lighted or heated marijuana or marijuana

product intended for inhalation, whether natural or

synthetic, in any manner or in any form. “Smoke” includes

the use of an electronic smoking device that creates an

aerosol or vapor, in any manner or in any form, or the use

of any oral smoking device for the purpose of circumventing

the prohibition of smoking in a place.

(d) For purposes of this section, “volatile solvent” means

volatile organic compounds, including: (1) explosive gases,

such as Butane, Propane, Xylene, Styrene, Gasoline,

Kerosene, 0

or H

; and (2) dangerous poisons, toxins, or

carcinogens, such as Methanol, Iso-propyl Alcohol,

Methylene Chloride, Acetone, Benzene, Toluene, and Tri-

chloro-ethylene.

(e) For purposes of this section, “youth center” has the

same meaning as in Section 11353.1.

(f) Nothing in this section shall be construed or interpreted

to amend, repeal, affect, restrict, or preempt laws

pertaining to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.

SEC. 4.7. Section 11362.4 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11362.4. (a) A person who engages in the conduct

described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.3 is guilty of an infraction punishable by

no more than a one hundred dollar ($100) ﬁne; provided,

however, that persons under the age of 18 shall instead be

required to complete four hours of a drug education

program or counseling, and up to 10 hours of community

service, over a period not to exceed 60 days once the drug

education program or counseling and community service

opportunity are made available to the person.

(b) A person who engages in the conduct described in

paragraphs (2) through (4) of subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.3 shall be guilty of an infraction punishable

by no more than a two-hundred-fifty-dollar ($250) ﬁne,

11362.2. (a) Personal cultivation of marijuana under

paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.1 is

subject to the following restrictions:

(1) A person shall plant, cultivate, harvest, dry, or process

plants in accordance with local ordinances, if any, adopted

in accordance with subdivision (b).

(2) The living plants and any marijuana produced by the

plants in excess of 28.5 grams are kept within the person’s

private residence, or upon the grounds of that private

residence (e.g., in an outdoor garden area), are in a locked

space, and are not visible by normal unaided vision from a

public place.

(3) Not more than six living plants may be planted,

cultivated, harvested, dried, or processed within a single

private residence, or upon the grounds of that private

residence, at one time.

(b) (1) A city, county, or city and county may enact and

enforce reasonable regulations to reasonably regulate the

actions and conduct in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.1.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), no city, county, or city

and county may completely prohibit persons engaging in

the actions and conduct under paragraph (3) of

subdivision (a) of Section 11362.1 inside a private

residence, or inside an accessory structure to a private

residence located upon the grounds of a private residence

that is fully enclosed and secure.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.1, a city, county, or city and county may

completely prohibit persons from engaging in actions and

conduct under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.1 outdoors upon the grounds of a private

residence.

(4) Paragraph (3) shall become inoperative upon a

determination by the California Attorney General that

nonmedical use of marijuana is lawful in the State of

California under federal law, and an act taken by a city,

county, or city and county under paragraph (3) shall be

deemed repealed upon the date of such determination by

the Attorney General.

(5) For purposes of this section, “private residence”

means a house, an apartment unit, a mobile home, or

other similar dwelling.

SEC. 4.6. Section 11362.3 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11362.3. (a) Nothing in Section 11362.1 shall be

construed to permit any person to:

(1) Smoke or ingest marijuana or marijuana products in

any public place, except in accordance with Section 26200

of the Business and Professions Code.

(2) Smoke marijuana or marijuana products in a location

where smoking tobacco is prohibited.

(3) Smoke marijuana or marijuana products within 1,000

feet of a school, day care center, or youth center while

children are present at such a school, day care center, or

youth center, except in or upon the grounds of a private

residence or in accordance with Section 26200 of, or

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of

Division 8 of, the Business and Professions Code and only

if such smoking is not detectable by others on the grounds

of such a school, day care center, or youth center while

children are present.

182

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(e) Laws providing that it would constitute negligence or

professional malpractice to undertake any task while

impaired from smoking or ingesting marijuana or marijuana

products.

(f) The rights and obligations of public and private

employers to maintain a drug and alcohol free workplace or

require an employer to permit or accommodate the use,

consumption, possession, transfer, display, transportation,

sale, or growth of marijuana in the workplace, or affect the

ability of employers to have policies prohibiting the use of

marijuana by employees and prospective employees, or

prevent employers from complying with state or federal

law.

(g) The ability of a state or local government agency to

prohibit or restrict any of the actions or conduct otherwise

permitted under Section 11362.1 within a building owned,

leased, or occupied by the state or local government

agency.

(h) The ability of an individual or private entity to prohibit

or restrict any of the actions or conduct otherwise permitted

under Section 11362.1 on the individual’s or entity’s

privately owned property.

(i) Laws pertaining to the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.

SEC. 5. Use of Marijuana for Medical Purposes.

SEC. 5.1. Section 11362.712 is added to the Health

and Safety Code, to read:

11362.712. (a) Commencing on January 1, 2018, a

qualiﬁed patient must possess a physician’s

recommendation that complies with Article 25 (commencing

with Section 2525) of Chapter 5 of Division 2 of the

Business and Professions Code. Failure to comply with this

requirement shall not, however, affect any of the protections

provided to patients or their primary caregivers by

Section 11362.5.

(b) A county health department or the county’s designee

shall develop protocols to ensure that, commencing upon

January 1, 2018, all identiﬁcation cards issued pursuant

to Section 11362.71 are supported by a physician’s

recommendation that complies with Article 25

(commencing with Section 2525) of Chapter 5 of Division 2

of the Business and Professions Code.

SEC. 5.2. Section 11362.713 is added to the Health

and Safety Code, to read:

11362.713. (a) Information identifying the names,

addresses, or social security numbers of patients, their

medical conditions, or the names of their primary

caregivers, received and contained in the records of the

State Department of Public Health and by any county

public health department are hereby deemed “medical

information” within the meaning of the Conﬁdentiality of

Medical Information Act (Part 2.6 (commencing with

Section 56) of Division 1 of the Civil Code) and shall not

be disclosed by the department or by any county public

health department except in accordance with the

restrictions on disclosure of individually identiﬁable

information under the Conﬁdentiality of Medical

Information Act.

(b) Within 24 hours of receiving any request to disclose

the name, address, or social security number of a patient,

their medical condition, or the name of their primary

caregiver, the State Department of Public Health or any

county public health agency shall contact the patient and

inform the patient of the request and if the request was

made in writing, a copy of the request.

unless such activity is otherwise permitted by state and

local law; provided, however, that persons under the age of

18 shall instead be required to complete four hours of drug

education or counseling, and up to 20 hours of community

service, over a period not to exceed 90 days once the drug

education program or counseling and community service

opportunity are made available to the person.

paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.3 shall

be subject to the same punishment as provided under

subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 11357.

(d) A person who engages in the conduct described in

paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 11362.3 shall

be subject to punishment under Section 11379.6.

(e) A person who violates the restrictions in subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.2 is guilty of an infraction punishable by

no more than a two-hundred-fifty-dollar ($250) ﬁne.

(f) Notwithstanding subdivision (e), a person under the

age of 18 who violates the restrictions in subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.2 shall be punished under subdivision (a) of

Section 11358.

(g) (1) The drug education program or counseling hours

required by this section shall be mandatory unless the

court makes a ﬁnding that such a program or counseling is

unnecessary for the person or that a drug education

program or counseling is unavailable.

(2) The drug education program required by this section

for persons under the age of 18 must be free to participants

and provide at least four hours of group discussion or

instruction based on science and evidence-based principles

and practices speciﬁc to the use and abuse of marijuana

and other controlled substances.

(h) Upon a ﬁnding of good cause, the court may extend

the time for a person to complete the drug education or

counseling, and community service required under this

section.

SEC. 4.8. Section 11362.45 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11362.45. Nothing in Section 11362.1 shall be

construed or interpreted to amend, repeal, affect, restrict,

or preempt:

(a) Laws making it unlawful to drive or operate a vehicle,

boat, vessel, or aircraft, while smoking, ingesting, or

impaired by, marijuana or marijuana products, including,

but not limited to, subdivision (e) of Section 23152 of the

Vehicle Code, or the penalties prescribed for violating

those laws.

(b) Laws prohibiting the sale, administering, furnishing, or

giving away of marijuana, marijuana products, or marijuana

accessories, or the offering to sell, administer, furnish, or

give away marijuana, marijuana products, or marijuana

accessories to a person younger than 21 years of age.

from engaging in any of the actions or conduct otherwise

permitted under Section 11362.1.

(d) Laws pertaining to smoking or ingesting marijuana or

marijuana products on the grounds of, or within, any

facility or institution under the jurisdiction of the

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or the

Division of Juvenile Justice, or on the grounds of, or within,

any other facility or institution referenced in Section 4573

of the Penal Code.

Text of Proposed Laws

183

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

SEC. 5.5. Section 11362.85 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11362.85. Upon a determination by the California

Attorney General that the federal schedule of controlled

substances has been amended to reclassify or declassify

marijuana, the Legislature may amend or repeal the

provisions of the Health and Safety Code, as necessary, to

conform state law to such changes in federal law.

SEC. 6. Marijuana Regulation and Safety.

SEC. 6.1. Division 10 (commencing with Section

26000) is added to the Business and Professions Code, to

read:

DIVISION 10. MARIJUANA

HAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS

26000. (a) The purpose and intent of this division is to

establish a comprehensive system to control and regulate

the cultivation, distribution, transport, storage,

manufacturing, processing, and sale of nonmedical

marijuana and marijuana products for adults 21 years of

age and over.

(b) In the furtherance of subdivision (a), this division

expands the power and duties of the existing state agencies

responsible for controlling and regulating the medical

cannabis industry under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8 to include the power and

duty to control and regulate the commercial nonmedical

marijuana industry.

implement this division, provided such laws are consistent

with the purposes and intent of the Control, Regulate and

Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.

26001. For purposes of this division, the following

deﬁnitions shall apply:

(a) “Applicant” means the following:

(1) The owner or owners of a proposed licensee. “Owner”

means all persons having (A) an aggregate ownership

interest (other than a security interest, lien, or encumbrance)

of 20 percent or more in the licensee and (B) the power to

direct or cause to be directed, the management or control

of the licensee.

(2) If the applicant is a publicly traded company, “owner”

includes the chief executive ofﬁcer and any member of the

board of directors and any person or entity with an

aggregate ownership interest in the company of 20 percent

or more. If the applicant is a nonproﬁt entity, “owner”

means both the chief executive ofﬁcer and any member of

the board of directors.

(b) “Bureau” means the Bureau of Marijuana Control

within the Department of Consumer Affairs.

signiﬁcantly difﬁcult for children under ﬁve years of age to

open, and not difﬁcult for normal adults to use properly.

(d) “Commercial marijuana activity” includes the

cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution,

processing, storing, laboratory testing, labeling,

transportation, distribution, delivery or sale of marijuana

and marijuana products as provided for in this division.

(e) “Cultivation” means any activity involving the planting,

growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of

marijuana.

neither the State Department of Public Health, nor any

county public health agency, shall disclose, nor shall they

be ordered by agency or court to disclose, the names,

addresses, or social security numbers of patients, their

medical conditions, or the names of their primary

caregivers, sooner than the 10th day after which the

patient whose records are sought to be disclosed has been

contacted.

(d) No identiﬁcation card application system or database

used or maintained by the State Department of Public

Health or by any county department of public health or the

county’s designee as provided in Section 11362.71 shall

contain any personal information of any qualiﬁed patient,

including, but not limited to, the patient’s name, address,

social security number, medical conditions, or the names

of their primary caregivers. Such an application system or

database may only contain a unique user identiﬁcation

number, and when that number is entered, the only

information that may be provided is whether the card is

valid or invalid.

SEC. 5.3. Section 11362.755 of the Health and Safety

Code is amended to read:

11362.755. (a) The department shall establish

application and renewal fees for persons seeking to obtain

or renew identiﬁcation cards that are sufﬁcient to cover the

expenses incurred by the department, including the startup

cost, the cost of reduced fees for Medi-Cal beneﬁciaries in

accordance with subdivision (b), the cost of identifying

and developing a cost-effective Internet Web-based

system, and the cost of maintaining the 24-hour toll-free

telephone number. Each county health department or the

county’s designee may charge an additional

a fee for all

costs incurred by the county or the county’s designee for

administering the program pursuant to this article.

(b) In no event shall the amount of the fee charged by a

county health department exceed one hundred dollars

($100) per application or renewal.

(b)

eligibility in the Medi-Cal program, a Medi-Cal beneﬁciary

shall receive a 50 percent reduction in the fees established

pursuant to this section.

(d) Upon satisfactory proof that a qualiﬁed patient, or the

legal guardian of a qualiﬁed patient under the age of 18,

is a medically indigent adult who is eligible for and

participates in the County Medical Services Program, the

fee established pursuant to this section shall be waived.

(e) In the event the fees charged and collected by a county

health department are not sufﬁcient to pay for the

administrative costs incurred in discharging the county

health department’s duties with respect to the mandatory

identiﬁcation card system, the Legislature, upon request

by the county health department, shall reimburse the

county health department for those reasonable

administrative costs in excess of the fees charged and

collected by the county health department.

SEC. 5.4. Section 11362.84 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11362.84. The status and conduct of a qualiﬁed patient

who acts in accordance with the Compassionate Use Act

shall not, by itself, be used to restrict or abridge custodial

or parental rights to minor children in any action or

proceeding under the jurisdiction of family or juvenile

court.

184

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(w) “Operation” means any act for which licensure is

required under the provisions of this division, or any

commercial transfer of marijuana or marijuana products.

(x) “Package” means any container or receptacle used for

holding marijuana or marijuana products.

(y) “Person” includes any individual, ﬁrm, copartnership,

joint venture, association, corporation, limited liability

company, estate, trust, business trust, receiver, syndicate,

or any other group or combination acting as a unit, and the

plural as well as the singular.

(z) “Purchaser” means the customer who is engaged in a

transaction with a licensee for purposes of obtaining

marijuana or marijuana products.

(aa) “Sell,” “sale,” and “to sell” include any transaction

whereby, for any consideration, title to marijuana is

transferred from one person to another, and includes the

delivery of marijuana or marijuana products pursuant to an

order placed for the purchase of the same and soliciting or

receiving an order for the same, but does not include the

return of marijuana or marijuana products by a licensee to

the licensee from whom such marijuana or marijuana

product was purchased.

(bb) “Testing service” means a laboratory, facility, or entity

in the state, that offers or performs tests of marijuana or

marijuana products, including the equipment provided by

such laboratory, facility, or entity, and that is both of the

following:

(1) Accredited by an accrediting body that is independent

from all other persons involved in commercial marijuana

activity in the state.

(2) Registered with the State Department of Public Health.

(cc) “Unique identiﬁer” means an alphanumeric code or

designation used for reference to a speciﬁc plant on a

licensed premises.

(dd) “Unreasonably impracticable” means that the

measures necessary to comply with the regulations require

such a high investment of risk, money, time, or any other

resource or asset, that the operation of a marijuana

establishment is not worthy of being carried out in practice

by a reasonably prudent business person.

(ee) “Youth center” shall have the same meaning as in

Section 11353.1 of the Health and Safety Code.

HAPTER 2. ADMINISTRATION

26010. (a) The Bureau of Medical Marijuana Regulation

established in Section 19302 is hereby renamed the

Bureau of Marijuana Control. The director shall administer

and enforce the provisions of this division in addition to

the provisions of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8. The director shall have the

same power and authority as provided by subdivisions (b)

and (c) of Section 19302.1 for purposes of this division.

(b) The bureau and the director shall succeed to and are

vested with all the duties, powers, purposes, responsibilities,

and jurisdiction vested in the Bureau of Medical Marijuana

Regulation under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8.

responsibilities, and jurisdiction referenced in

subdivision (b), the bureau shall heretofore have the power,

duty, purpose, responsibility, and jurisdiction to regulate

commercial marijuana activity as provided in this division.

(f) “Customer” means a natural person 21 years of age or

over.

(g) “Day care center” shall have the same meaning as in

Section 1596.76 of the Health and Safety Code.

(h) “Delivery” means the commercial transfer of marijuana

or marijuana products to a customer. “Delivery” also

includes the use by a retailer of any technology platform

owned and controlled by the retailer, or independently

licensed under this division, that enables customers to

arrange for or facilitate the commercial transfer by a

licensed retailer of marijuana or marijuana products.

(i) “Director” means the Director of the Department of

Consumer Affairs.

(j) “Distribution” means the procurement, sale, and

transport of marijuana and marijuana products between

entities licensed pursuant to this division.

(k) “Fund” means the Marijuana Control Fund established

pursuant to Section 26210.

(l) “Kind” means applicable type or designation regarding

a particular marijuana variant or marijuana product type,

including, but not limited to, strain name or other grower

trademark, or growing area designation.

(m) “License” means a state license issued under this

division.

(n) “Licensee” means any person or entity holding a

license under this division.

(o) “Licensing authority” means the state agency

responsible for the issuance, renewal, or reinstatement of

the license, or the state agency authorized to take

disciplinary action against the licensee.

(p) “Local jurisdiction” means a city, county, or city and

county.

(q) “Manufacture” means to compound, blend, extract,

infuse, or otherwise make or prepare a marijuana product.

(r) “Manufacturer” means a person that conducts the

production, preparation, propagation, or compounding of

marijuana or marijuana products either directly or indirectly

or by extraction methods, or independently by means of

chemical synthesis, or by a combination of extraction and

chemical synthesis at a ﬁxed location that packages or

repackages marijuana or marijuana products or labels or

re-labels its container, that holds a state license pursuant

to this division.

(s) “Marijuana” has the same meaning as in Section 11018

of the Health and Safety Code, except that it does not

include marijuana that is cultivated, processed,

transported, distributed, or sold for medical purposes

under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of

Division 8.

(t) “Marijuana accessories” has the same meaning as in

Section 11018.2 of the Health and Safety Code.

(u) “Marijuana products” has the same meaning as in

Section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety Code, except

that it does not include marijuana products manufactured,

processed, transported, distributed, or sold for medical

purposes under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8.

(v) “Nursery” means a licensee that produces only clones,

immature plants, seeds, and other agricultural products

used speciﬁcally for the planting, propagation, and

cultivation of marijuana.

Text of Proposed Laws

185

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the

Government Code, and, for purposes of that chapter,

including Section 11349.6 of the Government Code, the

adoption of the regulation is an emergency and shall be

considered by the Ofﬁce of Administrative Law as necessary

for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health

and safety, and general welfare.

necessary to achieve the purposes of this division, based

on best available evidence, and shall mandate only

commercially feasible procedures, technology, or other

requirements, and shall not unreasonably restrain or inhibit

the development of alternative procedures or technology to

achieve the same substantive requirements, nor shall such

regulations make compliance unreasonably impracticable.

26014. (a) The bureau shall convene an advisory

committee to advise the bureau and licensing authorities

on the development of standards and regulations pursuant

to this division, including best practices and guidelines

that protect public health and safety while ensuring a

regulated environment for commercial marijuana activity

that does not impose such unreasonably impracticable

barriers so as to perpetuate, rather than reduce and

eliminate, the illicit market for marijuana.

(b) The advisory committee members shall include, but

not be limited to, representatives of the marijuana industry,

representatives of labor organizations, appropriate state

and local agencies, public health experts, and other

subject matter experts, including representatives from the

Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, with expertise

in regulating commercial activity for adult-use intoxicating

substances. The advisory committee members shall be

determined by the director.

committee shall publish an annual public report describing

its activities including, but not limited to, the

recommendations the advisory committee made to the

bureau and licensing authorities during the immediately

preceding calendar year and whether those

recommendations were implemented by the bureau or

licensing authorities.

26015. A licensing authority may make or cause to be

made such investigation as it deems necessary to carry out

its duties under this division.

26016. For any hearing held pursuant to this division,

except a hearing held under Chapter 4 (commencing with

Section 26040), a licensing authority may delegate the

power to hear and decide to an administrative law judge.

Any hearing before an administrative law judge shall be

pursuant to the procedures, rules, and limitations

prescribed in Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500)

of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

26017. In any hearing before a licensing authority

pursuant to this division, the licensing authority may pay

any person appearing as a witness at the hearing at the

request of the licensing authority pursuant to a subpoena,

his or her actual, necessary, and reasonable travel, food,

and lodging expenses, not to exceed the amount authorized

for state employees.

26018. A licensing authority may on its own motion at

any time before a penalty assessment is placed into effect,

and without any further proceedings, review the penalty,

but such review shall be limited to its reduction.

(d) Upon the effective date of this section, whenever

“Bureau of Medical Marijuana Regulation” appears in any

statute, regulation, or contract, or in any other code, it

shall be construed to refer to the bureau.

26011. Neither the chief of the bureau nor any member

of the Marijuana Control Appeals Panel established under

Section 26040 shall do any of the following:

(a) Receive any commission or proﬁt whatsoever, directly

or indirectly, from any person applying for or receiving any

license or permit under this division or Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 19300) of Division 8.

(b) Engage or have any interest in the sale or any insurance

covering a licensee’s business or premises.

for use upon the premises of a licensee engaged in

commercial marijuana activity.

(d) Knowingly solicit any licensee for the purchase of

tickets for beneﬁts or contributions for beneﬁts.

(e) Knowingly request any licensee to donate or receive

money, or any other thing of value, for the beneﬁt of any

person whatsoever.

26012. (a) It being a matter of statewide concern,

except as otherwise authorized in this division:

(1) The Department of Consumer Affairs shall have the

exclusive authority to create, issue, renew, discipline,

suspend, or revoke licenses for the transportation, storage

unrelated to manufacturing activities, distribution, and

sale of marijuana within the state.

(2) The Department of Food and Agriculture shall

administer the provisions of this division related to and

associated with the cultivation of marijuana. The

Department of Food and Agriculture shall have the authority

to create, issue, and suspend or revoke cultivation licenses

for violations of this division.

(3) The State Department of Public Health shall administer

the provisions of this division related to and associated

with the manufacturing and testing of marijuana. The

State Department of Public Health shall have the authority

to create, issue, and suspend or revoke manufacturing and

testing licenses for violations of this division.

(b) The licensing authorities and the bureau shall have the

authority to collect fees in connection with activities they

regulate concerning marijuana. The bureau may create

licenses in addition to those identiﬁed in this division that

the bureau deems necessary to effectuate its duties under

this division.

this division by January 1, 2018.

26013. (a) Licensing authorities shall make and

prescribe reasonable rules and regulations as may be

necessary to implement, administer and enforce their

respective duties under this division in accordance with

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1

of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. Such rules

and regulations shall be consistent with the purposes and

intent of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of

Marijuana Act.

(b) Licensing authorities may prescribe, adopt, and

enforce any emergency regulations as necessary to

implement, administer and enforce their respective duties

under this division. Any emergency regulation prescribed,

adopted or enforced pursuant to this section shall be

adopted in accordance with Chapter 3.5 (commencing

186

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

under state law, or be subject to a civil ﬁne or be a basis

for seizure or forfeiture of assets under state law.

(b) The actions of a person who, in good faith, allows his

or her property to be used by a licensee, its employees, and

its agents, as permitted pursuant to a state license and any

applicable local ordinances, are not unlawful under state

law and shall not be an offense subject to arrest,

prosecution, or other sanction under state law, or be

subject to a civil ﬁne or be a basis for seizure or forfeiture

of assets under state law.

26038. (a) A person engaging in commercial marijuana

activity without a license required by this division shall be

subject to civil penalties of up to three times the amount

of the license fee for each violation, and the court may

order the destruction of marijuana associated with that

violation in accordance with Section 11479 of the Health

and Safety Code. Each day of operation shall constitute a

separate violation of this section. All civil penalties

imposed and collected pursuant to this section by a

licensing authority shall be deposited into the General

Fund except as provided in subdivision (b).

(b) If an action for civil penalties is brought against a

licensee pursuant to this division by the Attorney General

on behalf of the people, the penalty collected shall be

deposited into the General Fund. If the action is brought

by a district attorney or county counsel, the penalty shall

ﬁrst be used to reimburse the district attorney or county

counsel for the costs of bringing the action for civil

penalties, with the remainder, if any, to be deposited into

the General Fund. If the action is brought by a city attorney

or city prosecutor, the penalty collected shall ﬁrst be used

to reimburse the city attorney or city prosecutor for the

costs of bringing the action for civil penalties, with the

remainder, if any, to be deposited into the General Fund.

shall continue to apply to an unlicensed person engaging

in commercial marijuana activity in violation of this

division.

HAPTER 4. APPEALS

26040. (a) There is established in state government a

Marijuana Control Appeals Panel which shall consist of

three members appointed by the Governor and subject to

conﬁrmation by a majority vote of all of the members

elected to the Senate. Each member, at the time of his or

her initial appointment, shall be a resident of a different

county from the one in which either of the other members

resides. Members of the panel shall receive an annual

salary as provided for by Chapter 6 (commencing with

Section 11550) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the

Government Code.

(b) The members of the panel may be removed from ofﬁce

by the Governor, and the Legislature shall have the power,

by a majority vote of all members elected to each house, to

remove any member from ofﬁce for dereliction of duty,

corruption or incompetency.

of the panel may be introduced in the Legislature only if 5

Members of the Senate, or 10 Members of the Assembly,

join as authors.

26041. All personnel of the panel shall be appointed,

employed, directed, and controlled by the panel consistent

with state civil service requirements. The director shall

furnish the equipment, supplies, and housing necessary

for the authorized activities of the panel and shall perform

HAPTER 3. ENFORCEMENT

26030. Grounds for disciplinary action include:

(a) Failure to comply with the provisions of this division or

any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to this division.

(b) Conduct that constitutes grounds for denial of licensure

pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 490) of

Division 1.5.

a licensing authority pursuant to this division.

(d) Failure to comply with any state law including, but not

limited to, the payment of taxes as required under the

Revenue and Taxation Code, except as provided for in this

division or other California law.

(e) Knowing violations of any state or local law, ordinance,

or regulation conferring worker protections or legal rights

on the employees of a licensee.

(f) Failure to comply with the requirement of a local

ordinance regulating commercial marijuana activity.

(g) The intentional and knowing sale of marijuana or

marijuana products by a licensee to a person under the

legal age to purchase or possess.

26031. Each licensing authority may suspend or revoke

licenses, after proper notice and hearing to the licensee, if

the licensee is found to have committed any of the acts or

omissions constituting grounds for disciplinary action. The

disciplinary proceedings under this chapter shall be

conducted in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing

with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the

Government Code, and the director of each licensing

authority shall have all the powers granted therein.

26032. Each licensing authority may take disciplinary

action against a licensee for any violation of this division

when the violation was committed by the licensee’s agent

or employee while acting on behalf of the licensee or

engaged in commercial marijuana activity.

26033. Upon suspension or revocation of a license, the

licensing authority shall inform the bureau. The bureau

shall then inform all other licensing authorities.

26034. Accusations against licensees under this division

shall be ﬁled within the same time limits as speciﬁed in

Section 19314 or as otherwise provided by law.

26035. The director shall designate the persons

employed by the Department of Consumer Affairs for

purposes of the administration and enforcement of this

division. The director shall ensure that a sufﬁcient number

of employees are qualiﬁed peace ofﬁcers for purposes of

enforcing this division.

26036. Nothing in this division shall be interpreted to

supersede or limit state agencies from exercising their

existing enforcement authority, including, but not limited

to, under the Fish and Game Code, the Food and

Agricultural Code, the Government Code, the Health and

Safety Code, the Public Resources Code, the Water Code,

or the application of those laws.

26037. (a) The actions of a licensee, its employees, and

its agents that are (1) permitted under a license issued

under this division and any applicable local ordinances

and (2) conducted in accordance with the requirements of

this division and regulations adopted pursuant to this

division, are not unlawful under state law and shall not be

an offense subject to arrest, prosecution, or other sanction

Text of Proposed Laws

187

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(8) Type 3A—Cultivation; Indoor; Medium.

(9) Type 3B—Cultivation; Mixed-light; Medium.

(10) Type 4—Cultivation; Nursery.

(11) Type 5—Cultivation; Outdoor; Large.

(12) Type 5A—Cultivation; Indoor; Large.

(13) Type 5B—Cultivation; Mixed-light; Large.

(14) Type 6—Manufacturer 1.

(15) Type 7—Manufacturer 2.

(16) Type 8—Testing.

(17) Type 10—Retailer.

(18) Type 11—Distributor.

(19) Type 12—Microbusiness.

(b) All licenses issued under this division shall bear a

clear designation indicating that the license is for

commercial marijuana activity as distinct from commercial

medical cannabis activity licensed under Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 19300) of Division 8. Examples

of such a designation include, but are not limited to, “Type

1—Nonmedical,” or “Type 1NM.”

for 12 months from the date of issuance. The license may

be renewed annually.

(d) Each licensing authority shall establish procedures for

the issuance and renewal of licenses.

(e) Notwithstanding subdivision (c), a licensing authority

may issue a temporary license for a period of less than

12 months. This subdivision shall cease to be operative on

January 1, 2019.

26051. (a) In determining whether to grant, deny, or

renew a license authorized under this division, a licensing

authority shall consider factors reasonably related to the

determination, including, but not limited to, whether it is

reasonably foreseeable that issuance, denial, or renewal of

the license could:

(1) Allow unreasonable restraints on competition by

creation or maintenance of unlawful monopoly power;

(2) Perpetuate the presence of an illegal market for

marijuana or marijuana products in the state or out of the

state;

(3) Encourage underage use or adult abuse of marijuana

or marijuana products, or illegal diversion of marijuana or

marijuana products out of the state;

(4) Result in an excessive concentration of licensees in a

given city, county, or both;

(5) Present an unreasonable risk of minors being exposed

to marijuana or marijuana products; or

(6) Result in violations of any environmental protection

laws.

(b) A licensing authority may deny a license or renewal of

a license based upon the considerations in subdivision (a).

means when the premises for a retail license, microbusiness

license, or a license issued under Section 26070.5 is

located in an area where either of the following conditions

exist:

(1) The ratio of a licensee to population in the census

tract or census division in which the applicant premises

are located exceeds the ratio of licensees to population in

such other mechanics of administration as the panel and

the director may agree upon.

26042. The panel shall adopt procedures for appeals

similar to the procedures used in Article 3 (commencing

with Section 23075) and Article 4 (commencing with

Section 23080) of Chapter 1.5 of Division 9 of the

Business and Professions Code. Such procedures shall be

adopted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure

Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of

Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

26043. (a) When any person aggrieved thereby appeals

from a decision of the bureau or any licensing authority

ordering any penalty assessment, issuing, denying,

transferring, conditioning, suspending or revoking any

license provided for under this division, the panel shall

review the decision subject to such limitations as may be

imposed by the Legislature. In such cases, the panel shall

not receive evidence in addition to that considered by the

bureau or the licensing authority.

(b) Review by the panel of a decision of the bureau or a

licensing authority shall be limited to the following

questions:

(1) Whether the bureau or any licensing authority has

proceeded without or in excess of its jurisdiction.

(2) Whether the bureau or any licensing authority has

proceeded in the manner required by law.

(3) Whether the decision is supported by the ﬁndings.

(4) Whether the ﬁndings are supported by substantial

evidence in the light of the whole record.

26044. (a) In appeals where the panel ﬁnds that there is

relevant evidence which, in the exercise of reasonable

diligence, could not have been produced or which was

improperly excluded at the hearing before the bureau or

licensing authority, it may enter an order remanding the

matter to the bureau or licensing authority for

reconsideration in the light of such evidence.

(b) Except as provided in subdivision (a), in all appeals,

the panel shall enter an order either afﬁrming or reversing

the decision of the bureau or licensing authority. When the

order reverses the decision of the bureau or licensing

authority, the board may direct the reconsideration of the

matter in the light of its order and may direct the bureau

or licensing authority to take such further action as is

specially enjoined upon it by law, but the order shall not

limit or control in any way the discretion vested by law in

the bureau or licensing authority.

26045. Orders of the panel shall be subject to judicial

review under Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure

upon petition by the bureau or licensing authority or any

party aggrieved by such order.

HAPTER 5. LICENSING

26050. (a) The license classiﬁcation pursuant to this

division shall, at a minimum, be as follows:

(1) Type 1—Cultivation; Specialty outdoor; Small.

(2) Type 1A—Cultivation; Specialty indoor; Small.

(3) Type 1B—Cultivation; Specialty mixed-light; Small.

(4) Type 2—Cultivation; Outdoor; Small.

(5) Type 2A—Cultivation; Indoor; Small.

(6) Type 2B—Cultivation; Mixed-light; Small.

(7) Type 3—Cultivation; Outdoor; Medium.

188

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

may apply for and be issued more than one license under

this division.

26054. (a) A licensee shall not also be licensed as a

retailer of alcoholic beverages under Division 9

(commencing with Section 23000) or of tobacco products.

(b) No licensee under this division shall be located within

a 600-foot radius of a school providing instruction in

kindergarten or any grades 1 through 12, day care center,

or youth center that is in existence at the time the license

is issued, unless a licensing authority or a local jurisdiction

speciﬁes a different radius. The distance speciﬁed in this

section shall be measured in the same manner as provided

in subdivision (c) of Section 11362.768 of the Health and

Safety Code unless otherwise provided by law.

not be a violation of state or local law, for a business

engaged in the manufacture of marijuana accessories to

possess, transport, purchase or otherwise obtain small

amounts of marijuana or marijuana products as necessary

to conduct research and development related to such

marijuana accessories, provided such marijuana and

marijuana products are obtained from a person or entity

licensed under this division or Chapter 3.5 (commencing

with Section 19300) of Division 8 permitted to provide or

deliver such marijuana or marijuana products.

26054.1. (a) No licensing authority shall issue or renew

a license to any person that cannot demonstrate continuous

California residency from or before January 1, 2015. In

the case of an applicant or licensee that is an entity, the

entity shall not be considered a resident if any person

controlling the entity cannot demonstrate continuous

California residency from and before January 1, 2015.

(b) Subdivision (a) shall cease to be operative on

December 31, 2019, unless reenacted prior thereto by the

Legislature.

26054.2. (a) A licensing authority shall give priority in

issuing licenses under this division to applicants that can

demonstrate to the authority’s satisfaction that the

applicant operated in compliance with the Compassionate

Use Act and its implementing laws before September 1,

2016, or currently operates in compliance with Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 19300) of Division 8.

(b) The bureau shall request that local jurisdictions

identify for the bureau potential applicants for licensure

based on the applicants’ prior operation in the local

jurisdiction in compliance with state law, including the

Compassionate Use Act and its implementing laws, and

any applicable local laws. The bureau shall make the

requested information available to licensing authorities.

subdivision (b), an applicant may furnish other evidence to

demonstrate operation in compliance with the

Compassionate Use Act or Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8. The bureau and licensing

authorities may accept such evidence to demonstrate

eligibility for the priority provided for in subdivision (a).

(d) This section shall cease to be operative on December 31,

2019, unless otherwise provided by law.

26055. (a) Licensing authorities may issue state

licenses only to qualiﬁed applicants.

(b) Revocation of a state license issued under this division

shall terminate the ability of the licensee to operate within

the county in which the applicant premises are located,

unless denial of the application would unduly limit the

development of the legal market so as to perpetuate the

illegal market for marijuana or marijuana products.

(2) The ratio of retail licenses, microbusiness licenses, or

licenses under Section 26070.5 to population in the

census tract, division or jurisdiction exceeds that allowable

by local ordinance adopted under Section 26200.

26052. (a) No licensee shall perform any of the following

acts, or permit any such acts to be performed by any

employee, agent, or contractor of such licensee:

(1) Make any contract in restraint of trade in violation of

Section 16600;

(2) Form a trust or other prohibited organization in

restraint of trade in violation of Section 16720;

(3) Make a sale or contract for the sale of marijuana or

marijuana products, or to ﬁx a price charged therefor, or

discount from, or rebate upon, such price, on the condition,

agreement or understanding that the consumer or

purchaser thereof shall not use or deal in the goods,

merchandise, machinery, supplies, commodities, or

services of a competitor or competitors of such seller,

where the effect of such sale, contract, condition,

agreement or understanding may be to substantially lessen

competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of

trade or commerce;

(4) Sell any marijuana or marijuana products at less than

cost for the purpose of injuring competitors, destroying

competition, or misleading or deceiving purchasers or

prospective purchasers;

(5) Discriminate between different sections, communities,

or cities or portions thereof, or between different locations

in such sections, communities, cities or portions thereof in

this state, by selling or furnishing marijuana or marijuana

products at a lower price in one section, community, or city

or any portion thereof, or in one location in such section,

community, or city or any portion thereof, than in another,

for the purpose of injuring competitors or destroying

competition; or

(6) Sell any marijuana or marijuana products at less than

the cost thereof to such vendor, or to give away any article

or product for the purpose of injuring competitors or

destroying competition.

(b) Any person who, either as director, ofﬁcer or agent of

any ﬁrm or corporation, or as agent of any person, violates

the provisions of this chapter, assists or aids, directly or

indirectly, in such violation is responsible therefor equally

with the person, ﬁrm or corporation for which such person

acts.

appropriate regulation.

(d) Any person or trade association may bring an action to

enjoin and restrain any violation of this section for the

recovery of damages.

26053. (a) The bureau and licensing authorities may

issue licenses under this division to persons or entities

that hold licenses under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8.

(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a person or entity that

holds a state testing license under this division or

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of Division

8 is prohibited from licensure for any other activity, except

testing, as authorized under this division.

Text of Proposed Laws

189

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

individual square footage of separate cultivation areas, if

any.

26056.5. The bureau shall devise protocols that each

licensing authority shall implement to ensure compliance

with state laws and regulations related to environmental

impacts, natural resource protection, water quality, water

supply, hazardous materials, and pesticide use in

accordance with regulations, including but not limited to,

the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13

(commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources

Code), the California Endangered Species Act (Chapter

1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3 of the

Fish and Game Code), lake or streambed alteration

agreements (Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1600)

of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code), the Clean Water

Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.), the Porter-Cologne

Water Quality Control Act (Division 7 (commencing with

Section 13000) of the Water Code), timber production

zones, wastewater discharge requirements, and any permit

or right necessary to divert water.

26057. (a) The licensing authority shall deny an

application if either the applicant, or the premises for

which a state license is applied, do not qualify for licensure

under this division.

(b) The licensing authority may deny the application for

licensure or renewal of a state license if any of the following

conditions apply:

(1) Failure to comply with the provisions of this division,

any rule or regulation adopted pursuant to this division, or

any requirement imposed to protect natural resources,

including, but not limited to, protections for instream ﬂow

and water quality.

(2) Conduct that constitutes grounds for denial of licensure

under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 480) of

Division 1.5, except as otherwise speciﬁed in this section

and Section 26059.

(3) Failure to provide information required by the licensing

authority.

(4) The applicant or licensee has been convicted of an

offense that is substantially related to the qualiﬁcations,

functions, or duties of the business or profession for which

the application is made, except that if the licensing

authority determines that the applicant or licensee is

otherwise suitable to be issued a license, and granting the

license would not compromise public safety, the licensing

authority shall conduct a thorough review of the nature of

the crime, conviction, circumstances, and evidence of

rehabilitation of the applicant, and shall evaluate the

suitability of the applicant or licensee to be issued a

license based on the evidence found through the review. In

determining which offenses are substantially related to the

qualiﬁcations, functions, or duties of the business or

profession for which the application is made, the licensing

authority shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

(A) A violent felony conviction, as speciﬁed in

subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 of the Penal Code.

(B) A serious felony conviction, as speciﬁed in

subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7 of the Penal Code.

embezzlement.

(D) A felony conviction for hiring, employing, or using a

minor in transporting, carrying, selling, giving away,

preparing for sale, or peddling, any controlled substance to

a minor; or selling, offering to sell, furnishing, offering to

California until the licensing authority reinstates or reissues

the state license.

premises of any licensee having more than one location,

except as otherwise authorized by law or regulation.

(d) After issuance or transfer of a license, no licensee

shall change or alter the premises in a manner which

materially or substantially alters the premises, the usage of

the premises, or the mode or character of business

operation conducted from the premises, from the plan

contained in the diagram on ﬁle with the application,

unless and until prior written assent of the licensing

authority or bureau has been obtained. For purposes of this

section, material or substantial physical changes of the

premises, or in the usage of the premises, shall include,

but not be limited to, a substantial increase or decrease in

the total area of the licensed premises previously

diagrammed, or any other physical modiﬁcation resulting

in substantial change in the mode or character of business

operation.

(e) Licensing authorities shall not approve an application

for a state license under this division if approval of the

state license will violate the provisions of any local

ordinance or regulation adopted in accordance with

Section 26200.

26056. An applicant for any type of state license issued

pursuant to this division shall comply with the same

requirements as set forth in Section 19322 unless

otherwise provided by law, including electronic submission

of ﬁngerprint images, and any other requirements imposed

by law or a licensing authority, except as follows:

(a) Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of

Section 19322, an applicant need not provide

documentation that the applicant has obtained a license,

permit or other authorization to operate from the local

jurisdiction in which the applicant seeks to operate;

(b) An application for a license under this division shall

include evidence that the proposed location meets the

restriction in subdivision (b) of Section 26054; and

or manufacture nonmedical marijuana or marijuana

products, the application shall also include a detailed

description of the applicant’s operating procedures for all

of the following, as required by the licensing authority:

(1) Cultivation.

(2) Extraction and infusion methods.

(3) The transportation process.

(4) The inventory process.

(5) Quality control procedures.

(6) The source or sources of water the applicant will use

for the licensed activities, including a certiﬁcation that the

applicant may use that water legally under state law.

(d) The applicant shall provide a complete detailed

diagram of the proposed premises wherein the license

privileges will be exercised, with sufﬁcient particularity to

enable ready determination of the bounds of the premises,

showing all boundaries, dimensions, entrances and exits,

interior partitions, walls, rooms, and common or shared

entryways, and include a brief statement or description of

the principal activity to be conducted therein, and, for

licenses permitting cultivation, measurements of the

planned canopy including aggregate square footage and

190

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

Board to ensure that individual and cumulative effects of

water diversion and discharge associated with cultivation

do not affect the instream ﬂows needed for ﬁsh spawning,

migration, and rearing, and the ﬂows needed to maintain

natural ﬂow variability, and to otherwise protect ﬁsh,

wildlife, ﬁsh and wildlife habitat, and water quality.

(d) The regulations promulgated by the Department of

Food and Agriculture under this division shall, at a

minimum, address in relation to commercial marijuana

activity, the same matters described in subdivision (e) of

Section 19332.

(e) The Department of Pesticide Regulation, in consultation

with the State Water Resources Control Board, shall

promulgate regulations that require that the application of

pesticides or other pest control in connection with the

indoor, outdoor, or mixed light cultivation of marijuana

meets standards equivalent to Division 6 (commencing

with Section 11401) of the Food and Agricultural Code

and its implementing regulations.

26061. (a) The state cultivator license types to be

issued by the Department of Food and Agriculture under

this division shall include Type 1, Type 1A, Type 1B, Type

2, Type 2A, Type 2B, Type 3, Type 3A, Type 3B, Type 4,

and Type 5, Type 5A, and Type 5B unless otherwise

provided by law.

(b) Except as otherwise provided by law, Type 1, Type 1A,

Type 1B, Type 2, Type 2A, Type 2B, Type 3, Type 3A, Type

3B and Type 4 licenses shall provide for the cultivation of

marijuana in the same amount as the equivalent license

type for cultivation of medical cannabis as speciﬁed in

subdivision (g) of Section 19332.

(1) Type 5, or “outdoor,” means for outdoor cultivation

using no artiﬁcial lighting greater than one acre, inclusive,

of total canopy size on one premises.

(2) Type 5A, or “indoor,” means for indoor cultivation

using exclusively artiﬁcial lighting greater than 22,000

square feet, inclusive, of total canopy size on one premises.

(3) Type 5B, or “mixed-light,” means for cultivation using

a combination of natural and supplemental artiﬁcial

lighting at a maximum threshold to be determined by the

licensing authority, greater than 22,000 square feet,

inclusive, of total canopy size on one premises.

(d) No Type 5, Type 5A, or Type 5B cultivation licenses

may be issued before January 1, 2023.

(e) Commencing on January 1, 2023, a Type 5, Type 5A,

or Type 5B licensee may apply for and hold a Type 6 or

Type 7 license and apply for and hold a Type 10 license. A

Type 5, Type 5A, or Type 5B licensee shall not be eligible

to apply for or hold a Type 8, Type 11, or Type 12 license.

26062. The Department of Food and Agriculture, in

conjunction with the bureau, shall establish a certiﬁed

organic designation and organic certiﬁcation program for

marijuana and marijuana products in the same manner as

provided in Section 19332.5.

26063. (a) The bureau shall establish standards for

recognition of a particular appellation of origin applicable

to marijuana grown or cultivated in a certain geographical

area in California.

(b) Marijuana shall not be marketed, labeled, or sold as

grown in a California county when the marijuana was not

grown in that county.

furnish, administering, or giving any controlled substance

to a minor.

(E) A felony conviction for drug trafﬁcking with

enhancements pursuant to Section 11370.4 or 11379.8.

(5) Except as provided in subparagraphs (D) and (E) of

paragraph (4) and notwithstanding Chapter 2 (commencing

with Section 480) of Division 1.5, a prior conviction, where

the sentence, including any term of probation, incarceration,

or supervised release, is completed, for possession of,

possession for sale, sale, manufacture, transportation, or

cultivation of a controlled substance is not considered

substantially related, and shall not be the sole ground for

denial of a license. Conviction for any controlled substance

felony subsequent to licensure shall be grounds for

revocation of a license or denial of the renewal of a license.

(6) The applicant, or any of its ofﬁcers, directors, or

owners, has been subject to ﬁnes or penalties for cultivation

or production of a controlled substance on public or private

lands pursuant to Section 12025 or 12025.1 of the Fish

and Game Code.

(7) The applicant, or any of its ofﬁcers, directors, or

owners, has been sanctioned by a licensing authority or a

city, county, or city and county for unauthorized commercial

marijuana activities or commercial medical cannabis

activities, has had a license revoked under this division or

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of Division

8 in the three years immediately preceding the date the

application is ﬁled with the licensing authority, or has been

sanctioned under Section 12025 or 12025.1 of the Fish

and Game Code.

(8) Failure to obtain and maintain a valid seller’s permit

required pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with

Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation

Code.

(9) Any other condition speciﬁed in law.

26058. Upon the denial of any application for a license,

the licensing authority shall notify the applicant in writing.

26059. An applicant shall not be denied a state license

if the denial is based solely on any of the following:

(a) A conviction or act that is substantially related to the

qualiﬁcations, functions, or duties of the business or

profession for which the application is made for which the

applicant or licensee has obtained a certiﬁcate of

rehabilitation pursuant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 4852.01) of Title 6 of Part 3 of the Penal Code.

(b) A conviction that was subsequently dismissed pursuant

to Section 1203.4, 1203.4a, or 1203.41 of the Penal

Code or any other provision allowing for dismissal of a

conviction.

HAPTER 6. LICENSED CULTIVATION SITES

26060. (a) Regulations issued by the Department of

Food and Agriculture governing the licensing of indoor,

outdoor, and mixed-light cultivation sites shall apply to

licensed cultivators under this division.

(b) Standards developed by the Department of Pesticide

Regulation, in consultation with the Department of Food

and Agriculture, for the use of pesticides in cultivation,

and maximum tolerances for pesticides and other foreign

object residue in harvested cannabis shall apply to licensed

cultivators under this division.

conditions in each license requested by the Department of

Fish and Wildlife and the State Water Resources Control

Text of Proposed Laws

191

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(B) Information associated with the assigned unique

identiﬁer and licensee shall be included in the trace and

track program speciﬁed in Section 26170.

reasonable costs of issuing the unique identiﬁer and

monitoring, tracking, and inspecting each marijuana plant.

(D) The department may promulgate regulations to

implement this section.

(3) The department shall take adequate steps to establish

protections against fraudulent unique identiﬁers and limit

illegal diversion of unique identiﬁers to unlicensed persons.

(d) Unique identiﬁers and associated identifying

information administered by local jurisdictions shall

adhere to the requirements set by the department and be

the equivalent to those administered by the department.

(e) (1) This section does not apply to the cultivation of

marijuana in accordance with Section 11362.1 of the

Health and Safety Code or the Compassionate Use Act.

(2) Subdivision (b) does not apply to persons or entities

licensed under either paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of

Section 26070 or subdivision (b) of Section 26070.5.

(f) “Department” for purposes of this section means the

Department of Food and Agriculture.

HAPTER 7. RETAILERS AND DISTRIBUTORS

26070. Retailers and Distributors.

(a) State licenses to be issued by the Department of

Consumer Affairs are as follows:

(1) “Retailer,” for the retail sale and delivery of marijuana

or marijuana products to customers.

(2) “Distributor,” for the distribution of marijuana and

marijuana products. A distributor licensee shall be bonded

and insured at a minimum level established by the

licensing authority.

(3) “Microbusiness,” for the cultivation of marijuana on

an area less than 10,000 square feet and to act as a

licensed distributor, Level 1 manufacturer, and retailer

under this division, provided such licensee complies with

all requirements imposed by this division on licensed

cultivators, distributors, Level 1 manufacturers, and

retailers to the extent the licensee engages in such

activities. Microbusiness licenses that authorize cultivation

of marijuana shall include conditions requested by the

Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Water

Resources Control Board to ensure that individual and

cumulative effects of water diversion and discharge

associated with cultivation do not affect the instream ﬂows

needed for ﬁsh spawning, migration, and rearing, and the

ﬂow needed to maintain ﬂow variability, and otherwise

protect ﬁsh, wildlife, ﬁsh and wildlife habitat, and water

quality.

(b) The bureau shall establish minimum security and

transportation safety requirements for the commercial

distribution and delivery of marijuana and marijuana

products. The transportation safety standards established

by the bureau shall include, but not be limited to, minimum

standards governing the types of vehicles in which

marijuana and marijuana products may be distributed and

delivered and minimum qualiﬁcations for persons eligible

to operate such vehicles.

nonproﬁts under Section 26070.5, shall implement

security measures reasonably designed to prevent

the labeling, marketing, or packaging of marijuana products

unless the marijuana contained in the product was grown

in that county.

26064. Each licensed cultivator shall ensure that the

licensed premises do not pose an unreasonable risk of ﬁre

or combustion. Each cultivator shall ensure that all

lighting, wiring, electrical and mechanical devices, or

other relevant property is carefully maintained to avoid

unreasonable or dangerous risk to the property or others.

26065. An employee engaged in the cultivation of

marijuana under this division shall be subject to Wage

Order No. 4-2001 of the Industrial Welfare Commission.

26066. Indoor and outdoor marijuana cultivation by

persons and entities licensed under this division shall be

conducted in accordance with state and local laws related

to land conversion, grading, electricity usage, water usage,

water quality, woodland and riparian habitat protection,

agricultural discharges, and similar matters. State

agencies, including, but not limited to, the State Board of

Forestry and Fire Protection, the Department of Fish and

Wildlife, the State Water Resources Control Board, the

California regional water quality control boards, and

traditional state law enforcement agencies, shall address

environmental impacts of marijuana cultivation and shall

coordinate when appropriate with cities and counties and

their law enforcement agencies in enforcement efforts.

26067. (a) The Department of Food and Agriculture

shall establish a Marijuana Cultivation Program to be

administered by the Secretary of Food and Agriculture.

The secretary shall administer this section as it pertains to

the cultivation of marijuana. For purposes of this division,

marijuana is an agricultural product.

(b) A person or entity shall not cultivate marijuana without

ﬁrst obtaining a state license issued by the department

pursuant to this section.

limited to, the bureau, the State Water Resources Control

Board, and the Department of Fish and Wildlife, shall

implement a unique identiﬁcation program for marijuana.

In implementing the program, the department shall

consider issues including, but not limited to, water use

and environmental impacts. In implementing the program,

the department shall ensure that:

(A) Individual and cumulative effects of water diversion

and discharge associated with cultivation do not affect the

instream ﬂows needed for ﬁsh spawning, migration, and

rearing, and the ﬂows needed to maintain natural ﬂow

variability. If a watershed cannot support additional

cultivation, no new plant identiﬁers will be issued for that

watershed.

(B) Cultivation will not negatively impact springs, riparian

wetlands and aquatic habitats.

(2) The department shall establish a program for the

identiﬁcation of permitted marijuana plants at a cultivation

site during the cultivation period. A unique identiﬁer shall

be issued for each marijuana plant. The department shall

ensure that unique identiﬁers are issued as quickly as

possible to ensure the implementation of this division. The

unique identiﬁer shall be attached at the base of each

plant or as otherwise required by law or regulation.

(A) Unique identiﬁers will only be issued to those persons

appropriately licensed by this section.

192

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

division is not feasible, or if the bureau determines such

licenses are feasible, after the date a licensing agency

commences issuing state nonproﬁt licenses.

(2) If the bureau determines such licenses are feasible, no

temporary license issued under subdivision (b) shall be

renewed or extended after the date on which a licensing

agency commences issuing state nonproﬁt licenses.

(3) If the bureau determines that creation of nonproﬁt

licenses under this division is not feasible, the bureau

shall provide notice of this determination to all local

jurisdictions that have issued temporary licenses under

subdivision (b). The bureau may, in its discretion, permit

any such local jurisdiction to renew or extend on an annual

basis any temporary license previously issued under

subdivision (b).

HAPTER 8. DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSPORT

26080. (a) This division shall not be construed to

authorize or permit a licensee to transport or distribute, or

cause to be transported or distributed, marijuana or

marijuana products outside the state, unless authorized by

federal law.

(b) A local jurisdiction shall not prevent transportation of

marijuana or marijuana products on public roads by a

licensee transporting marijuana or marijuana products in

compliance with this division.

HAPTER 9. DELIVERY

26090. (a) Deliveries, as deﬁned in this division, may

only be made by a licensed retailer or microbusiness, or a

licensed nonproﬁt under Section 26070.5.

(b) A customer requesting delivery shall maintain a

physical or electronic copy of the delivery request and

shall make it available upon request by the licensing

authority and law enforcement ofﬁcers.

marijuana or marijuana products on public roads by a

licensee acting in compliance with this division and local

law as adopted under Section 26200.

CHAPTER 10. MANUFACTURERS AND TESTING LABORATORIES

26100. The State Department of Public Health shall

promulgate regulations governing the licensing of

marijuana manufacturers and testing laboratories. Licenses

to be issued are as follows:

(a) “Manufacturing Level 1,” for sites that manufacture

marijuana products using nonvolatile solvents, or no

solvents.

(b) “Manufacturing Level 2,” for sites that manufacture

marijuana products using volatile solvents.

products. Testing licensees shall have their facilities or

devices licensed according to regulations set forth by the

department. A testing licensee shall not hold a license in

another license category of this division and shall not own

or have ownership interest in a non-testing facility licensed

pursuant to this division.

(d) For purposes of this section, “volatile solvents” shall

have the same meaning as in subdivision (d) of

Section 11362.3 of the Health and Safety Code unless

otherwise provided by law or regulation.

26101. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, no

marijuana or marijuana products may be sold pursuant to

a license provided for under this division unless a

representative sample of such marijuana or marijuana

unauthorized entrance into areas containing marijuana or

marijuana products and theft of marijuana or marijuana

products from the premises. These security measures shall

include, but not be limited to, all of the following:

(1) Prohibiting individuals from remaining on the

licensee’s premises if they are not engaging in activity

expressly related to the operations of the dispensary.

(2) Establishing limited access areas accessible only to

authorized personnel.

(3) Other than limited amounts of marijuana used for

display purposes, samples, or immediate sale, storing all

ﬁnished marijuana and marijuana products in a secured

and locked room, safe, or vault, and in a manner reasonably

designed to prevent diversion, theft, and loss.

26070.5. (a) The bureau shall, by January 1, 2018,

investigate the feasibility of creating one or more

classiﬁcations of nonproﬁt licenses under this section. The

feasibility determination shall be made in consultation

with the relevant licensing agencies and representatives of

local jurisdictions which issue temporary licenses pursuant

to subdivision (b). The bureau shall consider factors

including, but not limited to, the following:

(1) Should nonproﬁt licensees be exempted from any or

all state taxes, licensing fees and regulatory provisions

applicable to other licenses in this division?

(2) Should funding incentives be created to encourage

others licensed under this division to provide professional

services at reduced or no cost to nonproﬁt licensees?

(3) Should nonproﬁt licenses be limited to, or prioritize

those, entities previously operating on a not-for-proﬁt basis

primarily providing whole-plant marijuana and marijuana

products and a diversity of marijuana strains and seed

stock to low-income persons?

(b) Any local jurisdiction may issue temporary local

licenses to nonproﬁt entities primarily providing whole-

plant marijuana and marijuana products and a diversity of

marijuana strains and seed stock to low-income persons so

long as the local jurisdiction:

(1) Conﬁrms the license applicant’s status as a nonproﬁt

entity registered with the California Attorney General’s

Registry of Charitable Trusts and that the applicant is in

good standing with all state requirements governing

nonproﬁt entities;

(2) Licenses and regulates any such entity to protect

public health and safety, and so as to require compliance

with all environmental requirements in this division;

(3) Provides notice to the bureau of any such local licenses

issued, including the name and location of any such

licensed entity and all local regulations governing the

licensed entity’s operation, and;

(4) Certiﬁes to the bureau that any such licensed entity

will not generate annual gross revenues in excess of two

million dollars ($2,000,000).

subdivision (b) shall expire after 12 months unless renewed

by the local jurisdiction.

(d) The bureau may impose reasonable additional

requirements on the local licenses authorized under

subdivision (b).

(e) (1) No new temporary local licenses shall be issued

pursuant to this section after the date the bureau

determines that creation of nonproﬁt licenses under this

Text of Proposed Laws

193

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(b) The State Department of Public Health shall develop

procedures to:

(1) Ensure that testing of marijuana and marijuana

products occurs prior to distribution to retailers,

microbusinesses, or nonproﬁts licensed under

Section 26070.5;

(2) Specify how often licensees shall test marijuana and

marijuana products, and that the cost of testing marijuana

shall be borne by the licensed cultivators and the cost of

testing marijuana products shall be borne by the licensed

manufacturer, and that the costs of testing marijuana and

marijuana products shall be borne by a nonproﬁt licensed

under Section 26070.5; and

(3) Require destruction of harvested batches whose

testing samples indicate noncompliance with health and

safety standards promulgated by the State Department of

Public Health, unless remedial measures can bring the

marijuana or marijuana products into compliance with

quality assurance standards as promulgated by the State

Department of Public Health.

26105. Manufacturing Level 2 licensees shall enact

sufﬁcient methods or procedures to capture or otherwise

limit risk of explosion, combustion, or any other

unreasonably dangerous risk to public safety created by

volatile solvents. The State Department of Public Health

shall establish minimum standards concerning such

methods and procedures for Level 2 licensees.

26106. Standards for the production and labeling of all

marijuana products developed by the State Department of

Public Health shall apply to licensed manufacturers and

microbusinesses, and nonproﬁts licensed under

Section 26070.5 unless otherwise speciﬁed by the State

Department of Public Health.

HAPTER 11. QUALITY ASSURANCE, INSPECTION, AND TESTING

26110. (a) All marijuana and marijuana products shall

be subject to quality assurance, inspection, and testing.

(b) All marijuana and marijuana products shall undergo

quality assurance, inspection, and testing in the same

manner as provided in Section 19326, except as otherwise

provided in this division or by law.

HAPTER 12. PACKAGING AND LABELING

26120. (a) Prior to delivery or sale at a retailer, marijuana

and marijuana products shall be labeled and placed in a

resealable, child resistant package.

(b) Packages and labels shall not be made to be attractive

to children.

shall include the following information prominently

displayed in a clear and legible fashion in accordance with

the requirements, including font size, prescribed by the

bureau or the State Department of Public Health:

(1) Manufacture date and source.

(2) The following statements, in bold print:

(A) For marijuana: “GOVERNMENT WARNING: THIS

PACKAGE CONTAINS MARIJUANA, A SCHEDULE I

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF

CHILDREN AND ANIMALS. MARIJUANA MAY ONLY BE

POSSESSED OR CONSUMED BY PERSONS 21 YEARS

OF AGE OR OLDER UNLESS THE PERSON IS A

QUALIFIED PATIENT. MARIJUANA USE WHILE

PREGNANT OR BREASTFEEDING MAY BE HARMFUL.

CONSUMPTION OF MARIJUANA IMPAIRS YOUR ABILITY

product has been tested by a certiﬁed testing service to

determine:

(1) Whether the chemical proﬁle of the sample conforms

to the labeled content of compounds, including, but not

limited to, all of the following:

(A) Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).

(B) Tetrahydrocannabinolic Acid (THCA).

(D) Cannabidiolic Acid (CBDA).

(E) The terpenes described in the most current version of

the cannabis inﬂorescence monograph published by the

American Herbal Pharmacopoeia.

(F) Cannabigerol (CBG).

(G) Cannabinol (CBN).

(2) That the presence of contaminants does not exceed

the levels in the most current version of the American

Herbal Pharmacopoeia monograph. For purposes of this

paragraph, contaminants includes, but is not limited to, all

of the following:

(A) Residual solvent or processing chemicals, including

explosive gases, such as Butane, propane, 0

or H

, and

poisons, toxins, or carcinogens, such as Methanol, Iso-

propyl Alcohol, Methylene Chloride, Acetone, Benzene,

Toluene, and Tri-chloro-ethylene.

(B) Foreign material, including, but not limited to, hair,

insects, or similar or related adulterant.

microbial count, total yeast mold count, P. aeruginosa,

aspergillus spp., s. aureus, aﬂatoxin B1, B2, G1, or G2, or

ochratoxin A.

(b) Residual levels of volatile organic compounds shall

satisfy standards of the cannabis inﬂorescence monograph

set by the United States Pharmacopeia (U.S.P.

Chapter 467).

performed in a manner consistent with general requirements

for the competence of testing and calibrations activities,

including sampling, using standard methods established

by the International Organization for Standardization,

speciﬁcally ISO/IEC 17020 and ISO/IEC 17025 to test

marijuana and marijuana products that are approved by an

accrediting body that is a signatory to the International

Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation Mutual Recognition

Agreement.

(d) Any pre-sale inspection, testing transfer, or

transportation of marijuana products pursuant to this

section shall conform to a speciﬁed chain of custody

protocol and any other requirements imposed under this

division.

26102. A licensed testing service shall not handle, test,

or analyze marijuana or marijuana products unless the

licensed testing laboratory meets the requirements of

Section 19343 or unless otherwise provided by law.

26103. A licensed testing service shall issue a certiﬁcate

of analysis for each lot, with supporting data, to report the

same information required in Section 19344 or unless

otherwise provided by law.

26104. (a) A licensed testing service shall, in performing

activities concerning marijuana and marijuana products,

comply with the requirements and restrictions set forth in

applicable law and regulations.

194

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(4) Homogenized to ensure uniform disbursement of

cannabinoids throughout the product.

(5) Manufactured and sold under sanitation standards

established by the State Department of Public Health, in

consultation with the bureau, for preparation, storage,

handling and sale of food products.

(6) Provided to customers with sufﬁcient information to

enable the informed consumption of such product,

including the potential effects of the marijuana product

and directions as to how to consume the marijuana

product, as necessary.

(b) Marijuana, including concentrated cannabis, included

in a marijuana product manufactured in compliance with

law is not considered an adulterant under state law.

HAPTER 14. PROTECTION OF MINORS

26140. (a) No licensee shall:

(1) Sell marijuana or marijuana products to persons under

21 years of age.

(2) Allow any person under 21 years of age on its premises.

(3) Employ or retain persons under 21 years of age.

(4) Sell or transfer marijuana or marijuana products unless

the person to whom the marijuana or marijuana product is

to be sold ﬁrst presents documentation which reasonably

appears to be a valid government-issued identiﬁcation

card showing that the person is 21 years of age or older.

(b) Persons under 21 years of age may be used by peace

ofﬁcers in the enforcement of this division and to apprehend

licensees, or employees or agents of licensees, or other

persons who sell or furnish marijuana to minors.

Notwithstanding any provision of law, any person under 21

years of age who purchases or attempts to purchase any

marijuana while under the direction of a peace ofﬁcer is

immune from prosecution for that purchase or attempt to

purchase marijuana. Guidelines with respect to the use of

persons under 21 years of age as decoys shall be adopted

and published by the bureau in accordance with the

rulemaking portion of the Administrative Procedure Act

(Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1

of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

a dispensary licensed under Chapter 3.5 (commencing

with Section 19300) of Division 8 may:

(1) Allow on the premises any person 18 years of age or

older who possesses a valid identiﬁcation card under

Section 11362.71 of the Health and Safety Code and a

valid government-issued identiﬁcation card;

(2) Sell marijuana, marijuana products, and marijuana

accessories to a person 18 years of age or older who

possesses a valid identiﬁcation card under

Section 11362.71 of the Health and Safety Code and a

valid government-issued identiﬁcation card.

HAPTER 15. ADVERTISING AND MARKETING RESTRICTIONS

26150. For purposes of this chapter:

(a) “Advertise” means the publication or dissemination of

an advertisement.

(b) “Advertisement” includes any written or verbal

statement, illustration, or depiction which is calculated to

induce sales of marijuana or marijuana products, including

any written, printed, graphic, or other material, billboard,

sign, or other outdoor display, public transit card, other

periodical literature, publication, or in a radio or television

TO DRIVE AND OPERATE MACHINERY. PLEASE USE

EXTREME CAUTION.”

(B) For marijuana products: “GOVERNMENT WARNING:

THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS MARIJUANA, A SCHEDULE I

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF

CHILDREN AND ANIMALS. MARIJUANA PRODUCTS MAY

ONLY BE POSSESSED OR CONSUMED BY PERSONS 21

YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER UNLESS THE PERSON IS A

QUALIFIED PATIENT. THE INTOXICATING EFFECTS OF

MARIJUANA PRODUCTS MAY BE DELAYED UP TO TWO

HOURS. MARIJUANA USE WHILE PREGNANT OR

BREASTFEEDING MAY BE HARMFUL. CONSUMPTION

OF MARIJUANA PRODUCTS IMPAIRS YOUR ABILITY TO

DRIVE AND OPERATE MACHINERY. PLEASE USE

EXTREME CAUTION.”

(3) For packages containing only dried ﬂower, the net

weight of marijuana in the package.

(4) Identiﬁcation of the source and date of cultivation, the

type of marijuana or marijuana product and the date of

manufacturing and packaging.

(5) The appellation of origin, if any.

(6) List of pharmacologically active ingredients, including,

but not limited to, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol

(CBD), and other cannabinoid content, the THC and other

cannabinoid amount in milligrams per serving, servings

per package, and the THC and other cannabinoid amount

in milligrams for the package total, and the potency of the

marijuana or marijuana product by reference to the amount

of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol in each serving.

(7) For marijuana products, a list of all ingredients and

disclosure of nutritional information in the same manner

as the federal nutritional labeling requirements in

Section 101.9 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal

Regulations.

(8) A list of any solvents, nonorganic pesticides, herbicides,

and fertilizers that were used in the cultivation, production,

and manufacture of such marijuana or marijuana product.

(9) A warning if nuts or other known allergens are used.

(10) Information associated with the unique identiﬁer

issued by the Department of Food and Agriculture.

(11) Any other requirement set by the bureau or the State

Department of Public Health.

(d) Only generic food names may be used to describe the

ingredients in edible marijuana products.

(e) In the event the bureau determines that marijuana is

no longer a schedule I controlled substance under federal

law, the label prescribed in subdivision (c) shall no longer

require a statement that marijuana is a schedule I

controlled substance.

HAPTER 13. MARIJUANA PRODUCTS

26130. (a) Marijuana products shall be:

(1) Not designed to be appealing to children or easily

confused with commercially sold candy or foods that do

not contain marijuana.

(2) Produced and sold with a standardized dosage of

cannabinoids not to exceed ten (10) milligrams

tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) per serving.

(3) Delineated or scored into standardized serving sizes if

the marijuana product contains more than one serving and

is an edible marijuana product in solid form.

Text of Proposed Laws

195

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

of the advertised product bears an appellation of origin,

and such appellation of origin appears in the advertisement;

(d) Advertise or market on a billboard or similar advertising

device located on an Interstate Highway or State Highway

which crosses the border of any other state;

(e) Advertise or market marijuana or marijuana products

in a manner intended to encourage persons under the age

of 21 years to consume marijuana or marijuana products;

(f) Publish or disseminate advertising or marketing

containing symbols, language, music, gestures, cartoon

characters or other content elements known to appeal

primarily to persons below the legal age of consumption; or

(g) Advertise or market marijuana or marijuana products

on an advertising sign within 1,000 feet of a day care

center, school providing instruction in kindergarten or any

grades 1 through 12, playground, or youth center.

26153. No licensee shall give away any amount of

marijuana or marijuana products, or any marijuana

accessories, as part of a business promotion or other

commercial activity.

26154. No licensee shall publish or disseminate

advertising or marketing containing any health-related

statement that is untrue in any particular manner or tends

to create a misleading impression as to the effects on

health of marijuana consumption.

26155. (a) The provisions of subdivision (g) of

Section 26152 shall not apply to the placement of

advertising signs inside a licensed premises and which are

not visible by normal unaided vision from a public place,

provided that such advertising signs do not advertise

marijuana or marijuana products in a manner intended to

encourage persons under the age of 21 years to consume

marijuana or marijuana products.

(b) This chapter does not apply to any noncommercial

speech.

HAPTER 16. RECORDS

26160. (a) A licensee shall keep accurate records of

commercial marijuana activity.

(b) All records related to commercial marijuana activity as

deﬁned by the licensing authorities shall be maintained for

a minimum of seven years.

licensee and inspect the premises of a licensee as the

licensing authority, or a state or local agency, deems

necessary to perform its duties under this division. All

inspections shall be conducted during standard business

hours of the licensed facility or at any other reasonable

time.

(d) Licensees shall keep records identiﬁed by the licensing

authorities on the premises of the location licensed. The

licensing authorities may make any examination of the

records of any licensee. Licensees shall also provide and

deliver copies of documents to the licensing agency upon

request.

(e) A licensee, or its agent or employee, that refuses,

impedes, obstructs, or interferes with an inspection of the

premises or records of the licensee pursuant to this section,

has engaged in a violation of this division.

(f) If a licensee, or an agent or employee of a licensee,

fails to maintain or provide the records required pursuant

to this section, the licensee shall be subject to a citation

broadcast, or in any other media; except that such term

shall not include:

(1) Any label afﬁxed to any marijuana or marijuana

products, or any individual covering, carton, or other

wrapper of such container that constitutes a part of the

labeling under provisions of this division.

(2) Any editorial or other reading material (e.g., news

release) in any periodical or publication or newspaper for

the publication of which no money or valuable consideration

is paid or promised, directly or indirectly, by any licensee,

and which is not written by or at the direction of the

licensee.

or any other stationary or permanently afﬁxed advertisement

promoting the sale of marijuana or marijuana products

which are not cultivated, manufactured, distributed, or

sold on the same lot.

(d) “Health-related statement” means any statement

related to health, and includes statements of a curative or

therapeutic nature that, expressly or by implication,

suggest a relationship between the consumption of

marijuana or marijuana products and health beneﬁts, or

effects on health.

(e) “Market” or “Marketing” means any act or process of

promoting or selling marijuana or marijuana products,

including, but not limited to, sponsorship of sporting

events, point-of-sale advertising, and development of

products speciﬁcally designed to appeal to certain

demographics.

26151. (a) All advertisements and marketing shall

accurately and legibly identify the licensee responsible for

its content.

(b) Any advertising or marketing placed in broadcast,

cable, radio, print and digital communications shall only

be displayed where at least 71.6 percent of the audience

is reasonably expected to be 21 years of age or older, as

determined by reliable, up-to-date audience composition

data.

individualized communication or dialogue controlled by

the licensee shall utilize a method of age afﬁrmation to

verify that the recipient is 21 years of age or older prior to

engaging in such communication or dialogue controlled by

the licensee. For purposes of this section, such method of

age afﬁrmation may include user conﬁrmation, birth date

disclosure, or other similar registration method.

(d) All advertising shall be truthful and appropriately

substantiated.

26152. No licensee shall:

(a) Advertise or market in a manner that is false or untrue

in any material particular, or that, irrespective of falsity,

directly, or by ambiguity, omission, or inference, or by the

addition of irrelevant, scientiﬁc or technical matter, tends

to create a misleading impression;

(b) Publish or disseminate advertising or marketing

containing any statement concerning a brand or product

that is inconsistent with any statement on the labeling

thereof;

containing any statement, design, device, or representation

which tends to create the impression that the marijuana

originated in a particular place or region, unless the label

196

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

updates to third-party applications. The system should

provide a test environment for third-party applications to

access that mirrors the production environment.

HAPTER 18. LICENSE FEES

26180. Each licensing authority shall establish a scale

of application, licensing, and renewal fees, based upon the

cost of enforcing this division, as follows:

(a) Each licensing authority shall charge each licensee a

licensure and renewal fee, as applicable. The licensure

and renewal fee shall be calculated to cover the costs of

administering this division. The licensure fee may vary

depending upon the varying costs associated with

administering the various regulatory requirements of this

division as they relate to the nature and scope of the

different licensure activities, including, but not limited to,

the track and trace program required pursuant to

Section 26170, but shall not exceed the reasonable

regulatory costs to the licensing authority.

(b) The total fees assessed pursuant to this division shall

be set at an amount that will fairly and proportionately

generate sufﬁcient total revenue to fully cover the total

costs of administering this division.

licensing authority, dependent on the size of the business.

(d) The licensing authority shall deposit all fees collected

in a fee account speciﬁc to that licensing authority, to be

established in the Marijuana Control Fund. Moneys in the

licensing authority fee accounts shall be used, upon

appropriation by the Legislature, by the designated

licensing authority for the administration of this division.

26181. The State Water Resources Control Board, the

Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other agencies may

establish fees to cover the costs of their marijuana

regulatory programs.

HAPTER 19. ANNUAL REPORTS; PERFORMANCE AUDIT

26190. Beginning on March 1, 2020, and on or before

March 1 of each year thereafter, each licensing authority

shall prepare and submit to the Legislature an annual

report on the authority’s activities concerning commercial

marijuana activities and post the report on the authority’s

Internet Web site. The report shall include, but not be

limited to, the same type of information speciﬁed in

Section 19353, and a detailed list of the petitions for

regulatory relief or rulemaking changes received by the

ofﬁce from licensees requesting modiﬁcations of the

enforcement of rules under this division.

26191. (a) Commencing January 1, 2019, and by

January 1 of each year thereafter, the California State

Auditor’s Ofﬁce shall conduct a performance audit of the

bureau’s activities under this division, and shall report its

ﬁndings to the bureau and the Legislature by July 1 of that

same year. The report shall include, but not be limited to,

the following:

(1) The actual costs of the program.

(2) The overall effectiveness of enforcement programs.

(3) Any report submitted pursuant to this section shall be

submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the

Government Code.

(b) The Legislature shall provide sufﬁcient funds to the

California State Auditor’s Ofﬁce to conduct the annual

audit required by this section.

and ﬁne of up to thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) per

individual violation.

26161. (a) Every sale or transport of marijuana or

marijuana products from one licensee to another licensee

must be recorded on a sales invoice or receipt. Sales

invoices and receipts may be maintained electronically

and must be ﬁled in such manner as to be readily accessible

for examination by employees of the bureau or Board of

Equalization and shall not be commingled with invoices

covering other commodities.

(b) Each sales invoice required by subdivision (a) shall

include the name and address of the seller and shall

include the following information:

(1) Name and address of the purchaser.

(2) Date of sale and invoice number.

(3) Kind, quantity, size, and capacity of packages of

marijuana or marijuana products sold.

(4) The cost to the purchaser, together with any discount

applied to the price as shown on the invoice.

(5) The place from which transport of the marijuana or

marijuana product was made unless transport was made

from the premises of the licensee.

(6) Any other information speciﬁed by the bureau or the

licensing authority.

HAPTER 17. TRACK AND TRACE SYSTEM

26170. (a) The Department of Food and Agriculture, in

consultation with the bureau and the State Board of

Equalization, shall expand the track and trace program

provided for under Article 7.5 (commencing with Section

19335) of Chapter 3.5 of Division 8 to include the

reporting of the movement of marijuana and marijuana

products throughout the distribution chain and provide, at

a minimum, the same level of information for marijuana

and marijuana products as required to be reported for

medical cannabis and medical cannabis products, and in

addition, the amount of the cultivation tax due pursuant to

Part 14.5 (commencing with Section 34010) of Division 2

of the Revenue and Taxation Code. The expanded track

and trace program shall include an electronic seed to sale

software tracking system with data points for the different

stages of commercial activity including, but not limited to,

cultivation, harvest, processing, distribution, inventory,

and sale.

(b) The department, in consultation with the bureau, shall

ensure that licensees under this division are allowed to use

third-party applications, programs and information

technology systems to comply with the requirements of the

expanded track and trace program described in

subdivision (a) to report the movement of marijuana and

marijuana products throughout the distribution chain and

communicate such information to licensing agencies as

required by law.

system utilized by the department to implement the

expanded track and trace program shall support

interoperability with third-party cannabis business software

applications and allow all licensee-facing system activities

to be performed through a secure application programming

interface (API) or comparable technology which is well

documented, bi-directional, and accessible to any third-

party application that has been validated and has

appropriate credentials. The API or comparable technology

shall have version control and provide adequate notice of

Text of Proposed Laws

197

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

26211. (a) Funds for the initial establishment and

support of the regulatory activities under this division,

including the public information program described in

subdivision (c), and for the activities of the Board of

Equalization under Part 14.5 (commencing with Section

34010) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code

until July 1, 2017, or until the 2017 Budget Act is

enacted, whichever occurs later, shall be advanced from

the General Fund and shall be repaid by the initial proceeds

from fees collected pursuant to this division, any rule or

regulation adopted pursuant to this division, or revenues

collected from the tax imposed by Sections 34011 and

34012 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, by January 1,

2025.

(1) Funds advanced pursuant to this subdivision shall be

appropriated to the bureau, which shall distribute the

moneys to the appropriate licensing authorities, as

necessary to implement the provisions of this division, and

to the Board of Equalization, as necessary, to implement

the provisions of Part 14.5 (commencing with Section

34010) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

(2) Within 45 days of this section becoming operative:

(A) The Director of Finance shall determine an amount of

the initial advance from the General Fund to the Marijuana

Control Fund that does not exceed thirty million dollars

($30,000,000); and

(B) There shall be advanced a sum of ﬁve million dollars

($5,000,000) from the General Fund to the State

Department of Health Care Services to provide for the

public information program described in subdivision (c).

(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the Legislature shall

provide sufﬁcient funds to the Marijuana Control Fund to

support the activities of the bureau, state licensing

authorities under this division, and the Board of

Equalization to support its activities under Part 14.5

(commencing with Section 34010) of Division 2 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code. It is anticipated that this

funding will be provided annually beginning on July 1,

2017.

establish and implement a public information program no

later than September 1, 2017. This public information

program shall, at a minimum, describe the provisions of

the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act

of 2016, the scientiﬁc basis for restricting access of

marijuana and marijuana products to persons under the

age of 21 years, describe the penalties for providing access

to marijuana and marijuana products to persons under the

age of 21 years, provide information regarding the dangers

of driving a motor vehicle, boat, vessel, aircraft, or other

vehicle used for transportation while impaired from

marijuana use, the potential harms of using marijuana

while pregnant or breastfeeding, and the potential harms

of overusing marijuana or marijuana products.

SEC. 6.2. Section 147.6 is added to the Labor Code, to

read:

147.6. (a) By March 1, 2018, the Division of

Occupational Safety and Health shall convene an advisory

committee to evaluate whether there is a need to develop

industry-speciﬁc regulations related to the activities of

licensees under Division 10 (commencing with

Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code,

including but not limited to, whether speciﬁc requirements

are needed to address exposure to second-hand marijuana

smoke by employees at facilities where on-site consumption

CHAPTER 20. LOCAL CONTROL

26200. (a) Nothing in this division shall be interpreted

to supersede or limit the authority of a local jurisdiction to

adopt and enforce local ordinances to regulate businesses

licensed under this division, including, but not limited to,

local zoning and land use requirements, business license

requirements, and requirements related to reducing

exposure to secondhand smoke, or to completely prohibit

the establishment or operation of one or more types of

businesses licensed under this division within the local

jurisdiction.

(b) Nothing in this division shall be interpreted to require

a licensing authority to undertake local law enforcement

responsibilities, enforce local zoning requirements, or

enforce local licensing requirements.

revocation of any local license, permit, or authorization for

a licensee to engage in commercial marijuana activity

within the local jurisdiction. Within 10 days of notiﬁcation,

the bureau shall inform the relevant licensing authorities.

Within 10 days of being so informed by the bureau, the

relevant licensing authorities shall commence proceedings

under Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 26030) to

determine whether a license issued to the licensee should

be suspended or revoked.

(d) Notwithstanding paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of

Section 11362.3 of the Health and Safety Code, a local

jurisdiction may allow for the smoking, vaporizing, and

ingesting of marijuana or marijuana products on the

premises of a retailer or microbusiness licensed under this

division if:

(1) Access to the area where marijuana consumption is

allowed is restricted to persons 21 years of age and older;

(2) Marijuana consumption is not visible from any public

place or non-age restricted area; and

(3) Sale or consumption of alcohol or tobacco is not

allowed on the premises.

26201. Any standards, requirements, and regulations

regarding health and safety, environmental protection,

testing, security, food safety, and worker protections

established by the state shall be the minimum standards

for all licensees under this division statewide. A local

jurisdiction may establish additional standards,

requirements, and regulations.

26202. (a) A local jurisdiction may enforce this division

and the regulations promulgated by the bureau or any

licensing authority if delegated the power to do so by the

bureau or a licensing authority.

(b) The bureau or any licensing authority shall implement

the delegation of enforcement authority in subdivision (a)

through a memorandum of understanding between the

bureau or licensing authority and the local jurisdiction to

which enforcement authority is to be delegated.

HAPTER 21. FUNDING

26210. (a) The Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety

Act Fund established in Section 19351 is hereby renamed

the Marijuana Control Fund.

(b) Upon the effective date of this section, whenever

“Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act Fund”

appears in any statute, regulation, or contract, or in any

other code, it shall be construed to refer to the Marijuana

Control Fund.

198

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(d) “Marijuana” shall have the same meaning as set forth

in Section 11018 of the Health and Safety Code and shall

also mean medical cannabis.

(e) “Marijuana products” shall have the same meaning as

set forth in Section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety

Code and shall also mean medical concentrates and

medical cannabis products.

(f) “Marijuana ﬂowers” shall mean the dried ﬂowers of the

marijuana plant as deﬁned by the board.

(g) “Marijuana leaves” shall mean all parts of the

marijuana plant other than marijuana ﬂowers that are sold

or consumed.

(h) “Gross receipts” shall have the same meaning as set

forth in Section 6012.

(i) “Retail sale” shall have the same meaning as set forth

in Section 6007.

(j) “Person” shall have the same meaning as set forth in

Section 6005.

(k) “Microbusiness” shall have the same meaning as set

forth in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 26070 of

the Business and Professions Code.

(l) “Nonproﬁt” shall have the same meaning as set forth in

Section 26070.5 of the Business and Professions Code.

34011. (a) Effective January 1, 2018, a marijuana

excise tax shall be imposed upon purchasers of marijuana

or marijuana products sold in this state at the rate of 15

percent of the gross receipts of any retail sale by a

dispensary or other person required to be licensed pursuant

to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of

Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code or a

retailer, microbusiness, nonproﬁt, or other person required

to be licensed pursuant to Division 10 (commencing with

Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code to

sell marijuana and marijuana products directly to a

purchaser.

(b) Except as otherwise provided by regulation, the tax

levied under this section shall apply to the full price, if

nonitemized, of any transaction involving both marijuana

or marijuana products and any other otherwise distinct and

identiﬁable goods or services, and the price of any goods or

services, if a reduction in the price of marijuana or

marijuana products is contingent on purchase of those

goods or services.

pursuant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section

19300) of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code

or a retailer, microbusiness, nonproﬁt, or other person

required to be licensed pursuant to Division 10

(commencing with Section 26000) of the Business and

Professions Code shall be responsible for collecting this

tax and remitting it to the board in accordance with rules

and procedures established under law and any regulations

adopted by the board.

(d) The excise tax imposed by this section shall be in

addition to the sales and use tax imposed by the state and

local governments.

(e) Gross receipts from the sale of marijuana or marijuana

products for purposes of assessing the sales and use tax

under Part 1 of this division shall include the tax levied

pursuant to this section.

(f) No marijuana or marijuana products may be sold to a

purchaser unless the excise tax required by law has been

paid by the purchaser at the time of sale.

of marijuana is permitted under subdivision (d) of

Section 26200 of the Business and Professions Code, and

whether speciﬁc requirements are needed to address the

potential risks of combustion, inhalation, armed robberies

or repetitive strain injuries.

(b) By October 1, 2018, the advisory committee shall

present to the board its ﬁndings and recommendations for

consideration by the board. By October 1, 2018, the board

shall render a decision regarding the adoption of industry-

speciﬁc regulations pursuant to this section.

SEC. 6.3. Section 13276 of the Water Code is amended

to read:

13276. (a) The multiagency task force, the Department

of Fish and Wildlife and State Water Resources Control

Board pilot project to address the Environmental Impacts

of Cannabis Cultivation, assigned to respond to the

damages caused by marijuana cultivation on public and

private lands in California, shall continue its enforcement

efforts on a permanent basis and expand them to a

statewide level to ensure the reduction of adverse impacts

of marijuana cultivation on water quality and on ﬁsh and

wildlife throughout the state.

(b) Each regional board shall, and the State Water

Resources Control Board may, address discharges of waste

resulting from medical marijuana cultivation and

commercial marijuana cultivation under Division 10 of the

Business and Professions Code and associated activities,

including by adopting a general permit, establishing waste

discharge requirements, or taking action pursuant to

Section 13269. In addressing these discharges, each

regional board shall include conditions to address items

that include, but are not limited to, all of the following:

(1) Site development and maintenance, erosion control,

and drainage features.

(2) Stream crossing installation and maintenance.

(3) Riparian and wetland protection and management.

(4) Soil disposal.

(5) Water storage and use.

(6) Irrigation runoff.

(7) Fertilizers and soil.

(8) Pesticides and herbicides.

(9) Petroleum products and other chemicals.

(10) Cultivation-related waste.

(11) Refuse and human waste.

(12) Cleanup, restoration, and mitigation.

SEC. 7. Marijuana Tax.

SEC. 7.1. Part 14.5 (commencing with Section 34010)

is added to Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code,

to read:

PART 14.5. MARIJUANA TAX

34010. For purposes of this part:

(a) “Board” shall mean the Board of Equalization or its

successor agency.

(b) “Bureau” shall mean the Bureau of Marijuana Control

within the Department of Consumer Affairs.

created by Section 34018.

Text of Proposed Laws

199

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(j) The tax imposed by this section shall be imposed on all

marijuana cultivated in the state pursuant to rules and

regulations promulgated by the board, but shall not apply

to marijuana cultivated for personal use under

Section 11362.1 of the Health and Safety Code or

cultivated by a qualiﬁed patient or primary caregiver in

accordance with the Compassionate Use Act.

(k) Beginning January 1, 2020, the rates set forth in

subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall be adjusted by the board

annually thereafter for inﬂation.

34013. (a) The board shall administer and collect the

taxes imposed by this part pursuant to the Fee Collection

Procedures Law (Part 30 (commencing with Section 55001)

of Division 2). For purposes of this part, the references in

the Fee Collection Procedures Law to “fee” shall include

the tax imposed by this part, and references to “feepayer”

shall include a person required to pay or collect the tax

imposed by this part.

(b) The board may prescribe, adopt, and enforce

regulations relating to the administration and enforcement

of this part, including, but not limited to, collections,

reporting, refunds, and appeals.

to administer the taxes in this part. Such rules and

regulations may include methods or procedures to tag

marijuana or marijuana products, or the packages thereof,

to designate prior tax payment.

(d) The board may prescribe, adopt, and enforce any

emergency regulations as necessary to implement,

administer and enforce its duties under this division. Any

emergency regulation prescribed, adopted, or enforced

pursuant to this section shall be adopted in accordance

with Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of

Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code,

and, for purposes of that chapter, including Section 11349.6

of the Government Code, the adoption of the regulation is

an emergency and shall be considered by the Ofﬁce of

Administrative Law as necessary for the immediate

preservation of the public peace, health and safety, and

general welfare. Notwithstanding any other provision of

law, the emergency regulations adopted by the board may

remain in effect for two years from adoption.

(e) Any person who fails to pay the taxes imposed under

this part shall, in addition to owing the taxes not paid, be

subject to a penalty of at least one-half the amount of the

taxes not paid, and shall be subject to having its license

revoked pursuant to Section 26031 of the Business and

Professions Code or pursuant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing

with Section 19300) of Division 8 of the Business and

Professions Code.

(f) The board may bring such legal actions as are necessary

to collect any deﬁciency in the tax required to be paid,

and, upon the board’s request, the Attorney General shall

bring the actions.

34014. (a) All persons required to be licensed involved

in the cultivation and retail sale of marijuana or marijuana

products must obtain a separate permit from the board

pursuant to regulations adopted by the board. No fee shall

be charged to any person for issuance of the permit. Any

person required to obtain a permit who engages in business

as a cultivator, dispensary, retailer, microbusiness or

nonproﬁt pursuant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8 or Division 10 (commencing

with Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code

without a permit or after a permit has been canceled,

(g) The sales and use tax imposed by Part 1 (commencing

with Section 6001) shall not apply to retail sales of medical

cannabis, medical cannabis concentrate, edible medical

cannabis products or topical cannabis as those terms are

deﬁned in Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300)

of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code when a

qualiﬁed patient or primary caregiver for a qualiﬁed patient

provides his or her card issued under Section 11362.71 of

the Health and Safety Code and a valid government-issued

identiﬁcation card.

34012. (a) Effective January 1, 2018, there is hereby

imposed a cultivation tax on all harvested marijuana that

enters the commercial market upon all persons required to

be licensed to cultivate marijuana pursuant to Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 19300) of Division 8 of the

Business and Professions Code or Division 10 (commencing

with Section 26000) of the Business and Professions

Code. The tax shall be due after the marijuana is harvested.

(1) The tax for marijuana ﬂowers shall be nine dollars and

twenty-five cents ($9.25) per dry-weight ounce.

(2) The tax for marijuana leaves shall be set at two dollars

and seventy-five cents ($2.75) per dry-weight ounce.

(b) The board may adjust the tax rate for marijuana leaves

annually to reﬂect ﬂuctuations in the relative price of

marijuana ﬂowers to marijuana leaves.

categories of harvested marijuana, categories for

unprocessed or frozen marijuana or immature plants, or

marijuana that is shipped directly to manufacturers. These

categories shall be taxed at their relative value compared

with marijuana ﬂowers.

(d) The board may prescribe by regulation a method and

manner for payment of the cultivation tax that utilizes tax

stamps or state-issued product bags that indicate that all

required tax has been paid on the product to which the tax

stamp is afﬁxed or in which the marijuana is packaged.

(e) The tax stamps and product bags shall be of the

designs, speciﬁcations and denominations as may be

prescribed by the board and may be purchased by any

licensee under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8 of the Business and

Professions Code or under Division 10 (commencing with

Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code.

(f) Subsequent to the establishment of a tax stamp

program, the board may by regulation provide that no

marijuana may be removed from a licensed cultivation

facility or transported on a public highway unless in a

state-issued product bag bearing a tax stamp in the proper

denomination.

(g) The tax stamps and product bags shall be capable of

being read by a scanning or similar device and must be

traceable utilizing the track and trace system pursuant to

Section 26170 of the Business and Professions Code.

(h) Persons required to be licensed to cultivate marijuana

pursuant to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section

19300) of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code

or Division 10 (commencing with Section 26000) of the

Business and Professions Code shall be responsible for

payment of the tax pursuant to regulations adopted by the

board. No marijuana may be sold unless the tax has been

paid as provided in this part.

(i) All marijuana removed from a cultivator’s premises,

except for plant waste, shall be presumed to be sold and

thereby taxable under this section.

200

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(2) Inspections may be at any place at which marijuana or

marijuana products are sold to purchasers, cultivated, or

stored, or at any site where evidence of activities involving

evasion of tax may be discovered.

(3) Inspections shall be requested or conducted no more

than once in a 24-hour period.

(b) Any person who fails or refuses to allow an inspection

shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each offense shall be

punished by a ﬁne not to exceed ﬁve thousand dollars

($5,000), or imprisonment not exceeding one year in a

county jail, or both the ﬁne and imprisonment. The court

shall order any ﬁnes assessed be deposited in the California

Marijuana Tax Fund.

agency that a licensee or any other person possesses,

stores, owns, or has made a retail sale of marijuana or

marijuana products, without evidence of tax payment or

not contained in secure packaging, the board or the law

enforcement agency shall be authorized to seize the

marijuana or marijuana products. Any marijuana or

marijuana products seized by a law enforcement agency or

the board shall within seven days be deemed forfeited and

the board shall comply with the procedures set forth in

Sections 30436 through 30449, inclusive.

(d) Any person who renders a false or fraudulent report is

guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a ﬁne not to exceed

one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each offense.

(e) Any violation of any provisions of this part, except as

otherwise provided, is a misdemeanor and is punishable as

such.

(f) All moneys remitted to the board under this part shall

be credited to the California Marijuana Tax Fund.

34017. The Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce shall submit a

report to the Legislature by January 1, 2020, with

recommendations to the Legislature for adjustments to the

tax rate to achieve the goals of undercutting illicit market

prices and discouraging use by persons younger than

21 years of age while ensuring sufﬁcient revenues are

generated for the programs identiﬁed in Section 34019.

34018. (a) The California Marijuana Tax Fund is hereby

created in the State Treasury. The Tax Fund shall consist of

all taxes, interest, penalties, and other amounts collected

and paid to the board pursuant to this part, less payment

of refunds.

(b) Notwithstanding any other law, the California Marijuana

Tax Fund is a special trust fund established solely to carry

out the purposes of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult

Use of Marijuana Act and all revenues deposited into the

Tax Fund, together with interest or dividends earned by the

fund, are hereby continuously appropriated for the

purposes of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of

Marijuana Act without regard to ﬁscal year and shall be

expended only in accordance with the provisions of this

part and its purposes.

this part and the revenue derived therefrom, including

investment interest, shall not be considered to be part of

the General Fund, as that term is used in Chapter 1

(commencing with Section 16300) of Part 2 of Division 4

of the Government Code, shall not be considered General

Fund revenue for purposes of Section 8 of Article XVI of

the California Constitution and its implementing statutes,

and shall not be considered “moneys” for purposes of

suspended, or revoked, and each ofﬁcer of any corporation

which so engages in business, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(b) The board may require every licensed dispensary,

cultivator, microbusiness, nonproﬁt, or other person

required to be licensed, to provide security to cover the

liability for taxes imposed by state law on marijuana

produced or received by the cultivator, microbusiness,

nonproﬁt, or other person required to be licensed in

accordance with procedures to be established by the

board. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary,

the board may waive any security requirement it imposes

for good cause, as determined by the board. “Good cause”

includes, but is not limited to, the inability of a cultivator,

microbusiness, nonproﬁt, or other person required to be

licensed to obtain security due to a lack of service providers

or the policies of service providers that prohibit service to

a marijuana business. A person may not commence or

continue any business or operation relating to marijuana

cultivation until any surety required by the board with

respect to the business or operation has been properly

prepared, executed and submitted under this part.

board, the board shall give consideration to the ﬁnancial

hardship that may be imposed on licensees as a result of

any shortage of available surety providers.

34015. (a) The marijuana excise tax and cultivation tax

imposed by this part is due and payable to the board

quarterly on or before the last day of the month following

each quarterly period of three months. On or before the

last day of the month following each quarterly period, a

return for the preceding quarterly period shall be ﬁled with

the board by each person required to be licensed for

cultivation or retail sale under Chapter 3.5 (commencing

with Section 19300) of Division 8 or Division 10

(commencing with Section 26000) of the Business and

Professions Code using electronic media. Returns shall be

authenticated in a form or pursuant to methods as may be

prescribed by the board. If the cultivation tax is paid by

stamp pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 34012 the

board may by regulation determine when and how the tax

shall be paid.

(b) The board may require every person engaged in the

cultivation, distribution or retail sale of marijuana and

marijuana products required to be licensed pursuant to

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of

Division 8 or Division 10 (commencing with Section

26000) of the Business and Professions Code to ﬁle, on or

before the 25th day of each month, a report using electronic

media respecting the person’s inventory, purchases, and

sales during the preceding month and any other information

as the board may require to carry out the purposes of this

part. Reports shall be authenticated in a form or pursuant

to methods as may be prescribed by the board.

34016. (a) Any peace ofﬁcer or board employee granted

limited peace ofﬁcer status pursuant to paragraph (6) of

subdivision (a) of Section 830.11 of the Penal Code, upon

presenting appropriate credentials, is authorized to enter

any place as described in paragraph (3) and to conduct

inspections in accordance with the following paragraphs,

inclusive.

(1) Inspections shall be performed in a reasonable manner

and at times that are reasonable under the circumstances,

taking into consideration the normal business hours of the

place to be entered.

Text of Proposed Laws

201

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

ﬁndings at a minimum of every two years and shall make

the reports available to the public. The bureau shall select

the universities to be funded. The research funded

pursuant to this subdivision shall include but not

necessarily be limited to:

(1) Impacts on public health, including health costs

associated with marijuana use, as well as whether

marijuana use is associated with an increase or decrease

in use of alcohol or other drugs.

(2) The impact of treatment for maladaptive marijuana

use and the effectiveness of different treatment programs.

(3) Public safety issues related to marijuana use, including

studying the effectiveness of the packaging and labeling

requirements and advertising and marketing restrictions

contained in the act at preventing underage access to and

use of marijuana and marijuana products, and studying

the health-related effects among users of varying potency

levels of marijuana and marijuana products.

(4) Marijuana use rates, maladaptive use rates for adults

and youth, and diagnosis rates of marijuana-related

substance use disorders.

(5) Marijuana market prices, illicit market prices, tax

structures and rates, including an evaluation of how to

best tax marijuana based on potency, and the structure

and function of licensed marijuana businesses.

(6) Whether additional protections are needed to prevent

unlawful monopolies or anti-competitive behavior from

occurring in the nonmedical marijuana industry and, if so,

recommendations as to the most effective measures for

preventing such behavior.

(7) The economic impacts in the private and public

sectors, including, but not necessarily limited to, job

creation, workplace safety, revenues, taxes generated for

state and local budgets, and criminal justice impacts,

including, but not necessarily limited to, impacts on law

enforcement and public resources, short and long term

consequences of involvement in the criminal justice

system, and state and local government agency

administrative costs and revenue.

(8) Whether the regulatory agencies tasked with

implementing and enforcing the Control, Regulate and Tax

Adult Use of Marijuana Act are doing so consistent with

the purposes of the act, and whether different agencies

might do so more effectively.

(9) Environmental issues related to marijuana production

and the criminal prohibition of marijuana production.

(10) The geographic location, structure, and function of

licensed marijuana businesses, and demographic data,

including race, ethnicity, and gender, of license holders.

(11) The outcomes achieved by the changes in criminal

penalties made under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult

Use of Marijuana Act for marijuana-related offenses, and

the outcomes of the juvenile justice system, in particular,

probation-based treatments and the frequency of up-

charging illegal possession of marijuana or marijuana

products to a more serious offense.

million dollars ($3,000,000) annually to the Department

of the California Highway Patrol beginning ﬁscal year

2018–2019 until ﬁscal year 2022–2023 to establish and

adopt protocols to determine whether a driver is operating

a vehicle while impaired, including impairment by the use

of marijuana or marijuana products, and to establish and

subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 8 of Article XVI of the

California Constitution and its implementing statutes.

34019. (a) Beginning with ﬁscal year 2017–2018 the

Department of Finance shall estimate revenues to be

received pursuant to Sections 34011 and 34012 and

provide those estimates to the Controller no later than

June 15 of each year. The Controller shall use these

estimates when disbursing funds pursuant to this section.

Before any funds are disbursed pursuant to subdivisions (b),

(c), (d), and (e) of this section, the Controller shall disburse

from the Tax Fund to the appropriate account, without

regard to ﬁscal year, the following:

(1) Reasonable costs incurred by the board for

administering and collecting the taxes imposed by this

part; provided, however, such costs shall not exceed 4

percent of tax revenues received.

(2) Reasonable costs incurred by the bureau, the

Department of Consumer Affairs, the Department of Food

and Agriculture, and the State Department of Public

Health for implementing, administering, and enforcing

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 19300) of

Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code and

Division 10 (commencing with Section 26000) of the

Business and Professions Code to the extent those costs

are not reimbursed pursuant to Section 26180 of the

Business and Professions Code or pursuant to Chapter 3.5

(commencing with Section 19300) of Division 8 of the

Business and Professions Code. This paragraph shall

remain operative through ﬁscal year 2022–2023.

(3) Reasonable costs incurred by the Department of Fish

and Wildlife, the State Water Resources Control Board,

and the Department of Pesticide Regulation for carrying

out their respective duties under Chapter 3.5 (commencing

with Section 19300) of Division 8 or Division 10

(commencing with Section 26000) of the Business and

Professions Code to the extent those costs are not otherwise

reimbursed.

(4) Reasonable costs incurred by the Controller for

performing duties imposed by the Control, Regulate and

Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act, including the audit

required by Section 34020.

(5) Reasonable costs incurred by the State Auditor for

conducting the performance audit pursuant to

Section 26191 of the Business and Professions Code.

(6) Reasonable costs incurred by the Legislative Analyst’s

Ofﬁce for performing duties imposed by Section 34017.

(7) Sufﬁcient funds to reimburse the Division of Labor

Standards Enforcement and the Division of Occupational

Safety and Health within the Department of Industrial

Relations and the Employment Development Department

for the costs of applying and enforcing state labor laws to

licensees under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section

19300) of Division 8 and Division 10 (commencing with

Section 26000) of the Business and Professions Code.

(b) The Controller shall next disburse the sum of ten

million dollars ($10,000,000) to a public university or

universities in California annually beginning with ﬁscal

year 2018–2019 until ﬁscal year 2028–2029 to research

and evaluate the implementation and effect of the Control,

Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act, and shall, if

appropriate, make recommendations to the Legislature

and Governor regarding possible amendments to the

Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. The

recipients of these funds shall publish reports on their

202

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

care providers, juvenile and family courts, and others to

recognize and reduce risks related to substance use, and

the early signs of problematic use and of substance use

disorders.

(B) Grants to schools to develop and support student

assistance programs, or other similar programs, designed

to prevent and reduce substance use, and improve school

retention and performance, by supporting students who

are at risk of dropping out of school and promoting

alternatives to suspension or expulsion that focus on school

retention, remediation, and professional care. Schools

with higher than average dropout rates should be prioritized

for grants.

treatment for homeless youth and out-of-school youth with

substance use disorders.

(D) Access and linkage to care provided by county

behavioral health programs for youth, and their families

and caregivers, who have a substance use disorder or who

are at risk for developing a substance use disorder.

(E) Youth-focused substance use disorder treatment

programs that are culturally and gender competent,

trauma-informed, evidence-based and provide a continuum

of care that includes screening and assessment (substance

use disorder as well as mental health), early intervention,

active treatment, family involvement, case management,

overdose prevention, prevention of communicable diseases

related to substance use, relapse management for

substance use and other co-occurring behavioral health

disorders, vocational services, literacy services, parenting

classes, family therapy and counseling services,

medication-assisted treatments, psychiatric medication

and psychotherapy. When indicated, referrals must be

made to other providers.

(F) To the extent permitted by law and where indicated,

interventions shall utilize a two-generation approach to

addressing substance use disorders with the capacity to

treat youth and adults together. This would include

supporting the development of family-based interventions

that address substance use disorders and related problems

within the context of families, including parents, foster

parents, caregivers and all their children.

(G) Programs to assist individuals, as well as families and

friends of drug using young people, to reduce the stigma

associated with substance use including being diagnosed

with a substance use disorder or seeking substance use

disorder services. This includes peer-run outreach and

education to reduce stigma, anti-stigma campaigns, and

community recovery networks.

(H) Workforce training and wage structures that increase

the hiring pool of behavioral health staff with substance

use disorder prevention and treatment expertise. Provide

ongoing education and coaching that increases substance

use treatment providers’ core competencies and trains

providers on promising and evidenced-based practices.

(I) Construction of community-based youth treatment

facilities.

(J) The departments may contract with each county

behavioral health program for the provision of services.

(K) Funds shall be allocated to counties based on

demonstrated need, including the number of youth in the

county, the prevalence of substance use disorders among

adults, and conﬁrmed through statistical data, validated

adopt protocols setting forth best practices to assist law

enforcement agencies. The department may hire personnel

to establish the protocols speciﬁed in this subdivision. In

addition, the department may make grants to public and

private research institutions for the purpose of developing

technology for determining when a driver is operating a

vehicle while impaired, including impairment by the use of

marijuana or marijuana products.

(d) The Controller shall next disburse the sum of ten

million dollars ($10,000,000) beginning ﬁscal year

2018–2019 and increasing ten million dollars

($10,000,000) each ﬁscal year thereafter until ﬁscal year

2022–2023, at which time the disbursement shall be ﬁfty

million dollars ($50,000,000) each year thereafter, to the

Governor’s Ofﬁce of Business and Economic Development,

in consultation with the Labor and Workforce Development

Agency and the State Department of Social Services, to

administer a community reinvestments grants program to

local health departments and at least 50 percent to

qualiﬁed community-based nonproﬁt organizations to

support job placement, mental health treatment, substance

use disorder treatment, system navigation services, legal

services to address barriers to reentry, and linkages to

medical care for communities disproportionately affected

by past federal and state drug policies. The ofﬁce shall

solicit input from community-based job skills, job

placement, and legal service providers with relevant

expertise as to the administration of the grants program. In

addition, the ofﬁce shall periodically evaluate the programs

it is funding to determine the effectiveness of the programs,

shall not spend more than 4 percent for administrative

costs related to implementation, evaluation and oversight

of the programs, and shall award grants annually, beginning

no later than January 1, 2020.

(e) The Controller shall next disburse the sum of two

million dollars ($2,000,000) annually to the University of

California San Diego Center for Medicinal Cannabis

Research to further the objectives of the center including

the enhanced understanding of the efﬁcacy and adverse

effects of marijuana as a pharmacological agent.

(f) By July 15 of each ﬁscal year beginning in ﬁscal year

2018–2019, the Controller shall, after disbursing funds

pursuant to subdivisions (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e), disburse

funds deposited in the Tax Fund during the prior ﬁscal year

into sub-trust accounts, which are hereby created, as

follows:

(1) Sixty percent shall be deposited in the Youth Education,

Prevention, Early Intervention and Treatment Account, and

disbursed by the Controller to the State Department of

Health Care Services for programs for youth that are

designed to educate about and to prevent substance use

disorders and to prevent harm from substance use. The

State Department of Health Care Services shall enter into

interagency agreements with the State Department of

Public Health and the State Department of Education to

implement and administer these programs. The programs

shall emphasize accurate education, effective prevention,

early intervention, school retention, and timely treatment

services for youth, their families and caregivers. The

programs may include, but are not limited to, the following

components:

(A) Prevention and early intervention services including

outreach, risk survey and education to youth, families,

caregivers, schools, primary care health providers,

behavioral health and substance use disorder service

providers, community and faith-based organizations, foster

Text of Proposed Laws

203

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

General Fund appropriations to the Department of Fish

and Wildlife and the Department of Parks and Recreation

shall not be reduced below the levels provided in the

Budget Act of 2014 (Chapter 25 of the Statutes of 2014).

(3) Twenty percent shall be deposited into the State and

Local Government Law Enforcement Account and disbursed

by the Controller as follows:

(A) To the Department of the California Highway Patrol for

conducting training programs for detecting, testing and

enforcing laws against driving under the inﬂuence of

alcohol and other drugs, including driving under the

inﬂuence of marijuana. The department may hire personnel

to conduct the training programs speciﬁed in this

subparagraph.

(B) To the Department of the California Highway Patrol to

fund internal California Highway Patrol programs and

grants to qualiﬁed nonproﬁt organizations and local

governments for education, prevention and enforcement of

laws related to driving under the inﬂuence of alcohol and

other drugs, including marijuana; programs that help

enforce trafﬁc laws, educate the public in trafﬁc safety,

provide varied and effective means of reducing fatalities,

injuries and economic losses from collisions; and for the

purchase of equipment related to enforcement of laws

related to driving under the inﬂuence of alcohol and other

drugs, including marijuana.

making grants to local governments to assist with law

enforcement, ﬁre protection, or other local programs

addressing public health and safety associated with the

implementation of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use

of Marijuana Act. The board shall not make any grants to

local governments which have banned the cultivation,

including personal cultivation under paragraph (3) of

subdivision (b) of Section 11362.2 of the Health and

Safety Code, or retail sale of marijuana or marijuana

products pursuant to Section 26200 of the Business and

Professions Code or as otherwise provided by law.

(D) For purposes of this paragraph, the Department of

Finance shall determine the allocation of revenues between

the agencies; provided, however, beginning in ﬁscal year

2022–2023 the amount allocated pursuant to

subparagraph (A) shall not be less than ten million dollars

($10,000,000) annually and the amount allocated

pursuant to subparagraph (B) shall not be less than forty

million dollars ($40,000,000) annually. In determining

the amount to be allocated before ﬁscal year 2022–2023

pursuant to this paragraph, the Department of Finance

shall give initial priority to subparagraph (A).

(g) Funds allocated pursuant to subdivision (f) shall be

used to increase the funding of programs and purposes

identiﬁed and shall not be used to replace allocation of

other funding for these purposes.

(h) Effective July 1, 2028, the Legislature may amend

this section by majority vote to further the purposes of the

Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act,

including allocating funds to programs other than those

speciﬁed in subdivisions (d) and (f). Any revisions pursuant

to this subdivision shall not result in a reduction of funds

to accounts established pursuant to subdivisions (d) and (f)

in any subsequent year from the amount allocated to each

account in ﬁscal year 2027–2028. Prior to July 1, 2028,

the Legislature may not change the allocations to programs

speciﬁed in subdivisions (d) and (f).

assessments or submitted reports prepared by the

applicable county to demonstrate and validate need.

(L) The departments shall periodically evaluate the

programs they are funding to determine the effectiveness

of the programs.

(M) The departments may use up to 4 percent of the

moneys allocated to the Youth Education, Prevention,

Early Intervention and Treatment Account for administrative

costs related to implementation, evaluation and oversight

of the programs.

(N) If the Department of Finance ever determines that

funding pursuant to marijuana taxation exceeds demand

for youth prevention and treatment services in the state,

the departments shall provide a plan to the Department of

Finance to provide treatment services to adults as well as

youth using these funds.

(O) The departments shall solicit input from volunteer

health organizations, physicians who treat addiction,

treatment researchers, family therapy and counseling

providers, and professional education associations with

relevant expertise as to the administration of any grants

made pursuant to this paragraph.

(2) Twenty percent shall be deposited in the Environmental

Restoration and Protection Account, and disbursed by the

Controller as follows:

(A) To the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the

Department of Parks and Recreation for the cleanup,

remediation, and restoration of environmental damage in

watersheds affected by marijuana cultivation and related

activities including, but not limited to, damage that

occurred prior to enactment of this part, and to support

local partnerships for this purpose. The Department of

Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Parks and

Recreation may distribute a portion of the funds they

receive from the Environmental Restoration and Protection

Account through grants for purposes speciﬁed in this

paragraph.

(B) To the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the

Department of Parks and Recreation for the stewardship

and operation of state-owned wildlife habitat areas and

state park units in a manner that discourages and prevents

the illegal cultivation, production, sale and use of marijuana

and marijuana products on public lands, and to facilitate

the investigation, enforcement and prosecution of illegal

cultivation, production, sale, and use of marijuana or

marijuana products on public lands.

funding the watershed enforcement program and

multiagency taskforce established pursuant to

subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 12029 of the Fish and

Game Code to facilitate the investigation, enforcement,

and prosecution of these offenses and to ensure the

reduction of adverse impacts of marijuana cultivation,

production, sale, and use on ﬁsh and wildlife habitats

throughout the state.

(D) For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary of the

Natural Resources Agency shall determine the allocation

of revenues between the departments. During the ﬁrst ﬁve

years of implementation, ﬁrst consideration should be

given to funding purposes speciﬁed in subparagraph (A).

(E) Funds allocated pursuant to this paragraph shall be

used to increase and enhance activities described in

subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), and not replace allocation

of other funding for these purposes. Accordingly, annual

204

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

convictions for an offense speciﬁed in clause (iv) of

subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of

Section 667 of the Penal Code or for an offense requiring

registration pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 290 of

the Penal Code.

(b) (a) Except as authorized by law, every person who

possesses possession of not more than 28.5 grams of

marijuana, other than

or not more than four grams of

concentrated cannabis, is guilty of an infraction punishable

by a ﬁne of not more than one hundred dollars ($100). or

both, shall be punished or adjudicated as follows:

(1) Persons under the age of 18 shall be guilty of an

infraction and shall be required to:

(A) Upon a ﬁnding that a ﬁrst offense has been committed,

complete four hours of drug education or counseling and

up to 10 hours of community service over a period not to

exceed 60 days.

(B) Upon a ﬁnding that a second offense or subsequent

offense has been committed, complete six hours of drug

education or counseling and up to 20 hours of community

service over a period not to exceed 90 days.

(2) Persons at least 18 years of age but less than 21 years

of age shall be guilty of an infraction and punishable by a

ﬁne of not more than one hundred dollars ($100).

(c)

(b) Except as authorized by law, every person who

possesses possession of more than 28.5 grams of

marijuana, or more than four grams of other than

concentrated cannabis, shall be punished as follows:

(1) Persons under the age of 18 who possess more than

28.5 grams of marijuana or more than four grams of

concentrated cannabis, or both, shall be guilty of an

infraction and shall be required to:

(A) Upon a ﬁnding that a ﬁrst offense has been committed,

complete eight hours of drug education or counseling and

up to 40 hours of community service over a period not to

exceed 90 days.

(B) Upon a ﬁnding that a second or subsequent offense

has been committed, complete 10 hours of drug education

or counseling and up to 60 hours of community service

over a period not to exceed 120 days.

(2) Persons 18 years of age or over who possess more than

28.5 grams of marijuana, or more than four grams of

concentrated cannabis, or both, shall be punished by

imprisonment in a county jail for a period of not more than

six months or by a ﬁne of not more than ﬁve hundred

dollars ($500), or by both such ﬁne and imprisonment.

(d)

of age or over who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of

marijuana, or not more than four grams of other than

concentrated cannabis, upon the grounds of, or within, any

school providing instruction in kindergarten or any of

grades 1 through 12 during hours the school is open for

classes or school-related programs is guilty of a

misdemeanor and shall be punished by a

as follows:

(1) A ﬁne of not more than two hundred ﬁfty dollars

($250), upon a ﬁnding that a ﬁrst offense has been

committed.

(2) A ﬁne of not more than ﬁve hundred dollars ($500), or

by imprisonment in a county jail for a period of not more

than 10 days, or both, upon a ﬁnding that a second or

subsequent offense has been committed.

(e)

(d) Except as authorized by law, every person under

the age of 18 who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of

34020. The Controller shall periodically audit the Tax

Fund to ensure that those funds are used and accounted

for in a manner consistent with this part and as otherwise

required by law.

34021. The taxes imposed by this part shall be in

addition to any other tax imposed by a city, county, or city

and county.

34021.5. (a) (1) A county may impose a tax on the

privilege of cultivating, manufacturing, producing,

processing, preparing, storing, providing, donating, selling,

or distributing marijuana or marijuana products by a

licensee operating under Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 19300) of Division 8 or Division 10 (commencing

with Section 26000) of the Business and Professions

Code.

(2) The board of supervisors shall specify in the ordinance

proposing the tax the activities subject to the tax, the

applicable rate or rates, the method of apportionment, if

necessary, and the manner of collection of the tax. The tax

may be imposed for general governmental purposes or for

purposes speciﬁed in the ordinance by the board of

supervisors.

(3) In addition to any other method of collection authorized

by law, the board of supervisors may provide for the

collection of the tax imposed pursuant to this section in

the same manner, and subject to the same penalties and

priority of lien, as other charges and taxes ﬁxed and

collected by the county. A tax imposed pursuant to this

section is a tax and not a fee or special assessment. The

board of supervisors shall specify whether the tax applies

throughout the entire county or within the unincorporated

area of the county.

(4) The tax authorized by this section may be imposed

upon any or all of the activities set forth in paragraph (1),

as speciﬁed in the ordinance, regardless of whether the

activity is undertaken individually, collectively, or

cooperatively, and regardless of whether the activity is for

compensation or gratuitous, as determined by the board of

supervisors.

(b) A tax imposed pursuant to this section shall be subject

to applicable voter approval requirements imposed by law.

limit or prohibit the levy or collection of any other fee,

charge, or tax, or a license or service fee or charge upon, or

related to, the activities set forth in subdivision (a) as

otherwise provided by law. This section shall not be

construed as a limitation upon the taxing authority of a

county as provided by law.

(d) This section shall not be construed to authorize a

county to impose a sales or use tax in addition to the sales

and use tax imposed under an ordinance conforming to the

provisions of Sections 7202 and 7203 of the Revenue and

Taxation Code.

SEC. 8. Criminal Offenses, Records, and Resentencing.

SEC. 8.1. Section 11357 of the Health and Safety Code

is amended to read:

11357. Possession. (a) Except as authorized by law,

every person who possesses any concentrated cannabis

shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a

period of not more than one year or by a ﬁne of not more

than ﬁve hundred dollars ($500), or by both such ﬁne and

imprisonment, except that such person may instead be

punished pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of

the Penal Code if that person has one or more prior

Text of Proposed Laws

205

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(E) Violation of Section 374.8 of the Penal Code relating

to hazardous substances or Section 25189.5, 25189.6, or

25189.7 of the Health and Safety Code relating to

hazardous waste;

(F) Violation of Section 2080 of the Fish and Game Code

relating to endangered and threatened species or

Section 3513 of the Fish and Game Code relating to the

Migratory Bird Treaty Act; or

(G) Intentionally or with gross negligence causing

substantial environmental harm to public lands or other

public resources.

SEC. 8.3. Section 11359 of the Health and Safety Code

is amended to read:

11359. Possession for Sale.

Every person who possesses for sale any marijuana, except

as otherwise provided by law, shall be punished as follows:

(a) Every person under the age of 18 who possesses

marijuana for sale shall be punished in the same manner

provided in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of

Section 11357.

(b) Every person 18 years of age or over who possesses

marijuana for sale shall be punished by imprisonment in a

county jail for a period of not more than six months or by a

ﬁne of not more than ﬁve hundred dollars ($500), or by

both such ﬁne and imprisonment.

age or over who possesses marijuana for sale may be

punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of

Section 1170 of the Penal Code if:

(1) The person has one or more prior convictions for an

offense speciﬁed in clause (iv) of subparagraph (C) of

paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 667 of the

Penal Code or for an offense requiring registration pursuant

to subdivision (c) of Section 290 of the Penal Code;

(2) The person has two or more prior convictions under

subdivision (b); or

(3) The offense occurred in connection with the knowing

sale or attempted sale of marijuana to a person under the

age of 18 years.

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a person 21 years of

age or over who possesses marijuana for sale may be

punished by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of

Section 1170 of the Penal Code if the offense involves

knowingly hiring, employing, or using a person 20 years of

age or younger in unlawfully cultivating, transporting,

carrying, selling, offering to sell, giving away, preparing for

sale, or peddling any marijuana.

SEC. 8.4. Section 11360 of the Health and Safety Code

is amended to read:

11360. Unlawful Transportation, Importation, Sale, or

Gift.

(a) Except as otherwise provided by this section or as

authorized by law, every person who transports, imports

into this state, sells, furnishes, administers, or gives away,

or offers to transport, import into this state, sell, furnish,

administer, or give away, or attempts to import into this

state or transport any marijuana shall be punished as

follows:

(1) Persons under the age of 18 years shall be punished in

the same manner as provided in paragraph (1) of

subdivision (b) of Section 11357.

marijuana, or not more than four grams of other than

concentrated cannabis, upon the grounds of, or within, any

school providing instruction in kindergarten or any of

grades 1 through 12 during hours the school is open for

classes or school-related programs is guilty of a

misdemeanor an infraction and shall be punished in the

same manner provided in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).

subject to the following dispositions:

(1) A ﬁne of not more than two hundred ﬁfty dollars

($250), upon a ﬁnding that a ﬁrst offense has been

committed.

(2) A ﬁne of not more than ﬁve hundred dollars ($500), or

commitment to a juvenile hall, ranch, camp, forestry camp,

or secure juvenile home for a period of not more than 10

days, or both, upon a ﬁnding that a second or subsequent

offense has been committed.

SEC. 8.2. Section 11358 of the Health and Safety Code

is amended to read:

11358. Planting, Harvesting, or Processing.

Every person who plants, cultivates, harvests, dries, or

processes any

marijuana plants, or any part thereof, except

as otherwise provided by law, shall be punished as follows:

(a) Every person under the age of 18 who plants, cultivates,

harvests, dries, or processes any marijuana plants shall be

punished in the same manner provided in paragraph (1) of

subdivision (b) of Section 11357.

(b) Every person at least 18 years of age but less than 21

years of age who plants, cultivates, harvests, dries, or

processes not more than six living marijuana plants shall

be guilty of an infraction and a ﬁne of not more than one

hundred dollars ($100).

cultivates, harvests, dries, or processes more than six living

marijuana plants shall be punished by imprisonment in a

county jail for a period of not more than six months or by a

ﬁne of not more than ﬁve hundred dollars ($500), or by

both such ﬁne and imprisonment.

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (c), a person 18 years of

age or over who plants, cultivates, harvests, dries, or

processes more than six living marijuana plants, or any

part thereof, except as otherwise provided by law, shall

may be punished by imprisonment pursuant to

subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code if:

(1) The person has one or more prior convictions for an

offense speciﬁed in clause (iv) of subparagraph (C) of

paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 667 of the

Penal Code or for an offense requiring registration pursuant

to subdivision (c) of Section 290 of the Penal Code;

(2) The person has two or more prior convictions under

subdivision (c); or

(3) The offense resulted in any of the following:

(A) Violation of Section 1052 of the Water Code relating to

illegal diversion of water;

(B) Violation of Section 13260, 13264, 13272, or 13387

of the Water Code relating to discharge of waste;

Section 5652 of the Fish and Game Code relating to waters

of the state;

(D) Violation of Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code

relating to rivers, streams and lakes;

206

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

(a) Records of any court of this state, any public or private

agency that provides services upon referral under

Section 1000.2 of the Penal Code, or of any state agency

pertaining to the arrest or conviction of any person for a

violation of subdivision (b), (c), (d), or (e) of

Section 11357

or subdivision (b) of Section 11360, or pertaining to the

arrest or conviction of any person under the age of 18 for

a violation of any provision of this article except

Section 11357.5, shall not be kept beyond two years from

the date of the conviction, or from the date of the arrest if

there was no conviction, except with respect to a violation

of subdivision (e)

(d) of Section 11357, or any other

violation by a person under the age of 18 occurring upon

the grounds of, or within, any school providing instruction

in kindergarten or any of grades 1 through 12 during hours

the school is open for classes or school-related programs,

the records shall be retained until the offender attains the

age of 18 years at which time the records shall be destroyed

as provided in this section. Any court or agency having

custody of the records, including the statewide criminal

databases, shall provide for the timely destruction of the

records in accordance with subdivision (c), and such

records must also be purged from the statewide criminal

databases. As used in this subdivision, “records pertaining

to the arrest or conviction” shall include records of arrests

resulting in the criminal proceeding and records relating to

other offenses charged in the accusatory pleading, whether

defendant was acquitted or charges were dismissed. The

two-year period beyond which records shall not be kept

pursuant to this subdivision shall not apply to any person

who is, at the time at which this subdivision would

otherwise require record destruction, incarcerated for an

offense subject to this subdivision. For such persons, the

two-year period shall begin to run from the date the person

is released from custody. The requirements of this

subdivision do not apply to records of any conviction

occurring prior to January 1, 1976, or records of any arrest

not followed by a conviction occurring prior to that date, or

records of any arrest for an offense speciﬁed in subdivision

of the Penal Code.

(b) This subdivision applies only to records of convictions

and arrests not followed by conviction occurring prior to

January 1, 1976, for any of the following offenses:

(1) Any violation of Section 11357 or a statutory

predecessor thereof.

(2) Unlawful possession of a device, contrivance,

instrument, or paraphernalia used for unlawfully smoking

marijuana, in violation of Section 11364, as it existed

prior to January 1, 1976, or a statutory predecessor

thereof.

(3) Unlawful visitation or presence in a room or place in

which marijuana is being unlawfully smoked or used, in

violation of Section 11365, as it existed prior to January 1,

1976, or a statutory predecessor thereof.

(4) Unlawfully using or being under the inﬂuence of

marijuana, in violation of Section 11550, as it existed

prior to January 1, 1976, or a statutory predecessor

thereof.

Any person subject to an arrest or conviction for those

offenses may apply to the Department of Justice for

destruction of records pertaining to the arrest or conviction

if two or more years have elapsed since the date of the

conviction, or since the date of the arrest if not followed by

a conviction. The application shall be submitted upon a

form supplied by the Department of Justice and shall be

(2) Persons 18 years of age or over shall be punished by

imprisonment in a county jail for a period of not more than

six months or by a ﬁne of not more than ﬁve hundred

dollars ($500), or by both such ﬁne and imprisonment.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), a person 18 years of

age or over may be punished by imprisonment pursuant to

subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for a

period of two, three or four years if:

(A) The person has one or more prior convictions for an

offense speciﬁed in clause (iv) of subparagraph (C) of

paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 667 of the

Penal Code or for an offense requiring registration pursuant

to subdivision (c) of Section 290 of the Penal Code;

(B) The person has two or more prior convictions under

paragraph (2);

or the knowing offer to sell, furnish, administer or give

away marijuana to a person under the age of 18 years; or

(D) The offense involved the import, offer to import, or

attempted import into this state, or the transport for sale,

offer to transport for sale, or attempted transport for sale

out of this state, of more than 28.5 grams of marijuana or

more than four grams of concentrated cannabis.

(b) Except as authorized by law, every person who gives

away, offers to give away, transports, offers to transport, or

attempts to transport not more than 28.5 grams of

marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, is guilty of

an infraction misdemeanor

and shall be punished by a ﬁne

of not more than one hundred dollars ($100). In any case

in which a person is arrested for a violation of this

subdivision and does not demand to be taken before a

magistrate, such person shall be released by the arresting

ofﬁcer upon presentation of satisfactory evidence of

identity and giving his or her written promise to appear in

court, as provided in Section 853.6 of the Penal Code, and

shall not be subjected to booking.

transport for sale.

(d) This section does not preclude or limit prosecution for

any aiding and abetting or conspiracy offenses.

SEC. 8.5. Section 11361.1 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11361.1. (a) The drug education and counseling

requirements under Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, and

11360 shall be:

(1) Mandatory, unless the court ﬁnds that such drug

education or counseling is unnecessary for the person, or

that a drug education or counseling program is unavailable;

(2) Free to participants, and the drug education provides

at least four hours of group discussion or instruction based

on science and evidence-based principles and practices

speciﬁc to the use and abuse of marijuana and other

controlled substances.

(b) For good cause, the court may grant an extension of

time not to exceed 30 days for a person to complete the

drug education and counseling required under

Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, and 11360.

SEC. 8.6. Section 11361.5 of the Health and Safety

Code is amended to read:

11361.5. Destruction of Arrest and Conviction Records;

Procedure; Exceptions.

Text of Proposed Laws

207

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

than two years have elapsed from the date of the conviction

or arrest without conviction.

SEC. 8.7. Section 11361.8 is added to the Health and

Safety Code, to read:

11361.8. (a) A person currently serving a sentence for a

conviction, whether by trial or by open or negotiated plea,

who would not have been guilty of an offense, or who would

have been guilty of a lesser offense under the Control,

Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act had that act

been in effect at the time of the offense may petition for a

recall or dismissal of sentence before the trial court that

entered the judgment of conviction in his or her case to

request resentencing or dismissal in accordance with

Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, 11360, 11362.1,

11362.2, 11362.3, and 11362.4 as those sections have

been amended or added by that act.

(b) Upon receiving a petition under subdivision (a), the

court shall presume the petitioner satisﬁes the criteria in

subdivision (a) unless the party opposing the petition

proves by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner

does not satisfy the criteria. If the petitioner satisﬁes the

criteria in subdivision (a), the court shall grant the petition

to recall the sentence or dismiss the sentence because it

is legally invalid unless the court determines that granting

the petition would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to

public safety.

(1) In exercising its discretion, the court may consider,

but shall not be limited to evidence provided for in

subdivision (b) of Section 1170.18 of the Penal Code.

(2) As used in this section, “unreasonable risk of danger

to public safety” has the same meaning as provided in

subdivision (c) of Section 1170.18 of the Penal Code.

pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be given credit for any

time already served and shall be subject to supervision for

one year following completion of his or her time in custody

or shall be subject to whatever supervision time he or she

would have otherwise been subject to after release,

whichever is shorter, unless the court, in its discretion, as

part of its resentencing order, releases the person from

supervision. Such person is subject to parole supervision

under Section 3000.08 of the Penal Code or post-release

community supervision under subdivision (a) of

Section 3451 of the Penal Code by the designated agency

and the jurisdiction of the court in the county in which the

offender is released or resides, or in which an alleged

violation of supervision has occurred, for the purpose of

hearing petitions to revoke supervision and impose a term

of custody.

(d) Under no circumstances may resentencing under this

section result in the imposition of a term longer than the

original sentence, or the reinstatement of charges

dismissed pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement.

(e) A person who has completed his or her sentence for a

conviction under Sections 11357, 11358, 11359, and

11360, whether by trial or open or negotiated plea, who

would not have been guilty of an offense or who would have

been guilty of a lesser offense under the Control, Regulate

and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act had that act been in

effect at the time of the offense, may ﬁle an application

before the trial court that entered the judgment of

conviction in his or her case to have the conviction

dismissed and sealed because the prior conviction is now

legally invalid or redesignated as a misdemeanor or

infraction in accordance with Sections 11357, 11358,

accompanied by a fee, which shall be established by the

department in an amount which will defray the cost of

administering this subdivision and costs incurred by the

state under subdivision (c), but which shall not exceed

thirty-seven dollars and ﬁfty cents ($37.50). The

application form may be made available at every local

police or sheriff’s department and from the Department of

Justice and may require that information which the

department determines is necessary for purposes of

identiﬁcation.

The department may request, but not require, the applicant

to include a self-administered ﬁngerprint upon the

application. If the department is unable to sufﬁciently

identify the applicant for purposes of this subdivision

without the ﬁngerprint or without additional ﬁngerprints, it

shall so notify the applicant and shall request the applicant

to submit any ﬁngerprints which may be required to effect

identiﬁcation, including a complete set if necessary, or,

alternatively, to abandon the application and request a

refund of all or a portion of the fee submitted with the

application, as provided in this section. If the applicant

fails or refuses to submit ﬁngerprints in accordance with

the department’s request within a reasonable time which

shall be established by the department, or if the applicant

requests a refund of the fee, the department shall promptly

mail a refund to the applicant at the address speciﬁed in

the application or at any other address which may be

speciﬁed by the applicant. However, if the department has

notiﬁed the applicant that election to abandon the

application will result in forfeiture of a speciﬁed amount

which is a portion of the fee, the department may retain a

portion of the fee which the department determines will

defray the actual costs of processing the application,

provided the amount of the portion retained shall not

exceed ten dollars ($10).

Upon receipt of a sufﬁcient application, the Department of

Justice shall destroy records of the department, if any,

pertaining to the arrest or conviction in the manner

prescribed by subdivision (c) and shall notify the Federal

Bureau of Investigation, the law enforcement agency which

arrested the applicant, and, if the applicant was convicted,

the probation department which investigated the applicant

and the Department of Motor Vehicles, of the application.

to subdivision (a) or (b) shall be accomplished by

permanent obliteration of all entries or notations upon the

records pertaining to the arrest or conviction, and the

record shall be prepared again so that it appears that the

arrest or conviction never occurred. However, where (1) the

only entries upon the record pertain to the arrest or

conviction and (2) the record can be destroyed without

necessarily effecting the destruction of other records, then

the document constituting the record shall be physically

destroyed.

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) or (b), written

transcriptions of oral testimony in court proceedings and

published judicial appellate reports are not subject to this

section. Additionally, no records shall be destroyed

pursuant to subdivision (a) if the defendant or a codefendant

has ﬁled a civil action against the peace ofﬁcers or law

enforcement jurisdiction which made the arrest or

instituted the prosecution and if the agency which is the

custodian of those records has received a certiﬁed copy of

the complaint in the civil action, until the civil action has

ﬁnally been resolved. Immediately following the ﬁnal

resolution of the civil action, records subject to subdivision

(a) shall be destroyed pursuant to subdivision (c) if more

208

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

stalks, except the resin or ﬂowering tops extracted produced

therefrom, ﬁber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed, or any

component of the seed, of the plant that is incapable of

germination.

(b) The possession, use, purchase, sale, cultivation,

processing, manufacture, packaging, labeling, transporting,

storage, distribution, use and transfer of industrial hemp

shall not be subject to the provisions of this division or of

Division 10 (commencing with Section 26000) of the

Business and Professions Code, but instead shall be

regulated by the Department of Food and Agriculture in

accordance with the provisions of Division 24 (commencing

with Section 81000) of the Food and Agricultural Code,

inclusive.

SEC. 9.2. Section 81000 of the Food and Agricultural

Code is amended to read:

81000. Deﬁnitions.

For purposes of this division, the following terms have the

following meanings:

(a) “Board” means the Industrial Hemp Advisory Board.

(b) “Commissioner” means the county agricultural

commissioner.

a public or private institution or organization that maintains

land for agricultural research, including colleges,

universities, agricultural research centers, and conservation

research centers. any institution that is either:

(1) A public or private institution or organization that

maintains land or facilities for agricultural research,

including colleges, universities, agricultural research

centers, and conservation research centers; or

(2) An institution of higher education (as deﬁned in

Section 1001 of the Higher Education Act of 1965

(20 U.S.C. 1001)) that grows, cultivates or manufactures

industrial hemp for purposes of research conducted under

an agricultural pilot program or other agricultural or

academic research.

(d) “Industrial hemp” has the same meaning as that term

is deﬁned in Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety

Code.

(e) “Secretary” means the Secretary of Food and

Agriculture.

(f) “Seed breeder” means an individual or public or private

institution or organization that is registered with the

commissioner to develop seed cultivars intended for sale

or research.

(g) “Seed cultivar” means a variety of industrial hemp.

(h) “Seed development plan” means a strategy devised by

a seed breeder, or applicant seed breeder, detailing his or

her planned approach to growing and developing a new

seed cultivar for industrial hemp.

SEC. 9.3. Section 81006 of the Food and Agricultural

Code is amended to read:

81006. Industrial Hemp Growth Limitations;

Prohibitions; Imports; Laboratory Testing.

(a) (1) Except when grown by an established agricultural

research institution or a registered seed breeder, industrial

hemp shall be grown only as a densely planted ﬁber or

oilseed crop, or both, in acreages of not less than ﬁve acres

one-tenth of an acre at the same time and no portion of an

11359, 11360, 11362.1, 11362.2, 11362.3, and

11362.4 as those sections have been amended or added

by that act.

(f) The court shall presume the petitioner satisﬁes the

criteria in subdivision (e) unless the party opposing the

application proves by clear and convincing evidence that

the petitioner does not satisfy the criteria in subdivision (e).

Once the applicant satisﬁes the criteria in subdivision (e),

the court shall redesignate the conviction as a misdemeanor

or infraction or dismiss and seal the conviction as legally

invalid as now established under the Control, Regulate and

Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.

(g) Unless requested by the applicant, no hearing is

necessary to grant or deny an application ﬁled under

subdivision (e).

(h) Any felony conviction that is recalled and resentenced

under subdivision (b) or designated as a misdemeanor or

infraction under subdivision (f) shall be considered a

misdemeanor or infraction for all purposes. Any

misdemeanor conviction that is recalled and resentenced

under subdivision (b) or designated as an infraction under

subdivision (f) shall be considered an infraction for all

purposes.

(i) If the court that originally sentenced the petitioner is

not available, the presiding judge shall designate another

judge to rule on the petition or application.

(j) Nothing in this section is intended to diminish or

abrogate any rights or remedies otherwise available to the

petitioner or applicant.

(k) Nothing in this and related sections is intended to

diminish or abrogate the ﬁnality of judgments in any case

not falling within the purview of the Control, Regulate and

Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.

(l) A resentencing hearing ordered under the Control,

Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act shall

constitute a “post-conviction release proceeding” under

paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 28 of Article I

of the California Constitution (Marsy’s Law).

(m) The provisions of this section shall apply equally to

juvenile delinquency adjudications and dispositions under

Section 602 of the Welfare and Institutions Code if the

juvenile would not have been guilty of an offense or would

have been guilty of a lesser offense under the Control,

Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act.

(n) The Judicial Council shall promulgate and make

available all necessary forms to enable the ﬁling of the

petitions and applications provided in this section.

SEC. 9. Industrial Hemp.

SEC. 9.1. Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety

Code is amended to read:

11018.5. Industrial Hemp.

(a) “Industrial hemp” means a ﬁber or oilseed crop, or

both, that is limited to nonpsychoactive

types of the plant

Cannabis sativa L. and the seed produced therefrom,

having no more than three-tenths of 1 percent

tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contained in the dried

ﬂowering tops, whether growing or not; and that is

cultivated and processed exclusively for the purpose of

producing the mature stalks of the plant, ﬁber produced

from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the

plant;,

the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and

or any other

every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative,

mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds or mature

Text of Proposed Laws

209

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

shall indicate the date and location of samples taken, and

shall state the Global Positioning System coordinates and

total acreage of the crop. If the laboratory test report

indicates a percentage content of THC that is equal to or

less than three-tenths of 1 percent, the words “PASSED

AS CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL HEMP” shall appear at or

near the top of the laboratory test report. If the laboratory

test report indicates a percentage content of THC that is

greater than three-tenths of 1 percent, the words “FAILED

AS CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL HEMP” shall appear at or

near the top of the laboratory test report.

(5) If the laboratory test report indicates a percentage

content of THC that is equal to or less than three-tenths of

1 percent, the laboratory shall provide the person who

requested the testing not less than 10 original copies

signed by an employee authorized by the laboratory and

shall retain one or more original copies of the laboratory

test report for a minimum of two years from its date of

sampling.

(6) If the laboratory test report indicates a percentage

content of THC that is greater than three-tenths of 1

percent and does not exceed 1 percent, the registrant that

grows industrial hemp shall submit additional samples for

testing of the industrial hemp grown.

(7) A registrant that grows industrial hemp shall destroy

the industrial hemp grown upon receipt of a ﬁrst laboratory

test report indicating a percentage content of THC that

exceeds 1 percent or a second laboratory test report

pursuant to paragraph (6) indicating a percentage content

of THC that exceeds three-tenths of 1 percent but is less

than 1 percent. If the percentage content of THC exceeds

1 percent, the destruction shall take place within 48 hours

after receipt of the laboratory test report. If the percentage

content of THC in the second laboratory test report exceeds

three-tenths of 1 percent but is less than 1 percent, the

destruction shall take place as soon as practicable, but no

later than 45 days after receipt of the second test report.

(8) A registrant that intends to grow industrial hemp and

who complies with this section shall not be prosecuted for

the cultivation or possession of marijuana as a result of a

laboratory test report that indicates a percentage content

of THC that is greater than three-tenths of 1 percent but

does not exceed 1 percent.

(9) Established agricultural research institutions shall be

permitted to cultivate or possess industrial hemp with a

laboratory test report that indicates a percentage content

of THC that is greater than three-tenths of 1 percent if that

cultivation or possession contributes to the development of

types of industrial hemp that will comply with the three-

tenths of 1 percent THC limit established in this division.

(10) Except for an established agricultural research

institution, a registrant that grows industrial hemp shall

retain an original signed copy of the laboratory test report

for two years from its date of sampling, make an original

signed copy of the laboratory test report available to the

department, the commissioner, or law enforcement ofﬁcials

or their designees upon request, and shall provide an

original copy of the laboratory test report to each person

purchasing, transporting, or otherwise obtaining from the

registrant that grows industrial hemp the ﬁber, oil, cake, or

seed, or any component of the seed, of the plant.

(g) If, in the Attorney General’s opinion issued pursuant to

Section 8 of the act that added this division, it is

determined that the provisions of this section are not

sufﬁcient to comply with federal law, the department, in

acreage of industrial hemp shall include plots of less than

one contiguous acre.

(2) Registered seed breeders, for purposes of seed

production, shall only grow industrial hemp as a densely

planted crop in acreages of not less than one-tenth of an

two

acres at the same time and no portion of the acreage

of industrial hemp shall include plots of less than one

contiguous acre.

(3) Registered seed breeders, for purposes of developing a

new California seed cultivar, shall grow industrial hemp as

densely as possible in dedicated acreage of not less than

one-tenth of an acre and in accordance with the seed

development plan. The entire area of the dedicated acreage

is not required to be used for the cultivation of the

particular seed cultivar.

(b) Ornamental and clandestine cultivation of industrial

hemp is prohibited. All plots shall have adequate signage

indicating they are industrial hemp.

plants is prohibited, except when grown by an established

agricultural research institution or when the action is

necessary to perform the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)

testing described in this section.

(d) Culling of industrial hemp is prohibited, except when

grown by an established agricultural research institution,

when the action is necessary to perform the THC testing

described in this section, or for purposes of seed production

and development by a registered seed breeder.

(e) Industrial hemp shall include products imported under

the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

(2013) of the United States International Trade

Commission, including, but not limited to, hemp seed, per

subheading 1207.99.03, hemp oil, per

subheading 1515.90.80, oilcake, per

subheading 2306.90.01, true hemp, per heading 5302,

true hemp yarn, per subheading 5308.20.00, and woven

fabrics of true hemp ﬁbers, per subheading 5311.00.40.

(f) Except when industrial hemp is grown by an established

agricultural research institution, a registrant that grows

industrial hemp under this section shall, before the harvest

of each crop and as provided below, obtain a laboratory

test report indicating the THC levels of a random sampling

of the dried ﬂowering tops of the industrial hemp grown.

(1) Sampling shall occur as soon as practicable when the

THC content of the leaves surrounding the seeds is at its

peak and shall commence as the seeds begin to mature,

when the ﬁrst seeds of approximately 50 percent of the

plants are resistant to compression.

(2) The entire fruit-bearing part of the plant including the

seeds shall be used as a sample. The sample cut shall be

made directly underneath the inﬂorescence found in the

top one-third of the plant.

(3) The sample collected for THC testing shall be

accompanied by the following documentation:

(A) The registrant’s proof of registration.

(B) Seed certiﬁcation documentation for the seed cultivar

used.

(4) The laboratory test report shall be issued by a laboratory

registered with the federal Drug Enforcement

Administration, shall state the percentage content of THC,

210

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 64 CONTINUED

that are in addition to the protections provided for in this

act or that otherwise expand the legal rights of such

employees or workers of licensees under Sections 6 to 6.3,

inclusive, of this act shall be deemed to be consistent with

and further the purposes and intent of this act. The

Legislature may by majority vote amend, add, or repeal any

provisions to further reduce the penalties for any of the

offenses addressed by this act. Except as otherwise

provided, the provisions of the act may be amended by a

two-thirds vote of the Legislature to further the purposes

and intent of the act.

SEC. 11. Construction and Intepretation.

The provisions of this act shall be liberally construed to

effectuate the purposes and intent of the Control, Regulate

and Tax the Adult Use of Marijuana Act; provided, however,

no provision or provisions of this act shall be interpreted or

construed in a manner to create a positive conﬂict with

federal law, including the federal Controlled Substances

Act, such that the provision or provisions of this act and

federal law cannot consistently stand together.

SEC. 12. Severability.

If any provision in this act, or part thereof, or the application

of any provision or part to any person or circumstance is

held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, the

remaining provisions and parts shall not be affected, but

shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the

provisions of this act are severable.

SEC. 13. Conﬂicting Initiatives.

In the event that this measure and another measure or

measures concerning the control, regulation, and taxation

of marijuana, medical marijuana, or industrial hemp

appear on the same statewide election ballot, the provisions

of the other measure or measures shall be deemed to be in

conﬂict with this measure. In the event that this measure

receives a greater number of afﬁrmative votes, the

provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety,

and the provisions of the other measure shall be null and

void.

PROPOSITION 65

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure adds sections to the Public

Resources Code; therefore, new provisions proposed to be

added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are

new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Title.

This act shall be known and may be cited as the

Environmental Fee Protection Act.

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

The people of the State of California ﬁnd and declare as

follows:

(a) In 2014, the California State Legislature enacted a

ban on plastic carryout bags after lobbying by special

interests including the California Grocers Association.

(b) The law further mandated that stores sell every paper

or reusable carryout bag they provide to consumers for a

minimum of 10 cents. Stores can charge even more if they

so choose, and the grocers and retailers are speciﬁcally

consultation with the board, shall establish procedures for

this section that meet the requirements of federal law.

SEC. 9.4. Section 81007 of the Food and Agricultural

Code is repealed.

81007. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b) or as

necessary to perform testing pursuant to subdivision (f) of

Section 81006, the possession, outside of a ﬁeld of lawful

cultivation, of resin, ﬂowering tops, or leaves that have

been removed from the hemp plant is prohibited.

(b) The presence of a de minimis amount, or insigniﬁcant

number, of hemp leaves or ﬂowering tops in hemp bales

that result from the normal and appropriate processing of

industrial hemp shall not constitute possession of

marijuana.

SEC. 9.5. Section 81008 of the Food and Agricultural

Code is amended to read:

81008. Attorney General Reports; Requirements.

(a) Not later than January 1, 2019, or ﬁve years after the

provisions of this division are authorized under federal law,

whichever is later, the Attorney General shall report to the

Assembly and Senate Committees on Agriculture and the

Assembly and Senate Committees on Public Safety the

reported incidents, if any, of the following:

(1) A ﬁeld of industrial hemp being used to disguise

marijuana cultivation.

(2) Claims in a court hearing by persons other than those

exempted in subdivision (f) of Section 81006 that

marijuana is industrial hemp.

(b) A report submitted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be

submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the

Government Code.

this section is repealed on January 1, 2023, or four years

after the date that the report is due, whichever is later.

SEC. 9.6. Section 81010 of the Food and Agricultural

Code is amended to read:

81010. Operation of Division.

(a) This division, and Section 221 shall not

become

operative unless authorized under federal law

on January 1,

2017.

(b) The possession, use, purchase, sale, production,

manufacture, packaging, labeling, transporting, storage,

distribution, use, and transfer of industrial hemp shall be

regulated in accordance with this division. The Bureau of

Marijuana Control has authority to regulate and control

plants and products that ﬁt within the deﬁnition of

industrial hemp but that are produced, processed,

manufactured, tested, delivered, or otherwise handled

pursuant to a license issued under Division 10 (commencing

with Section 26000) of the Business and Professions

Code.

SEC. 10. Amendment.

This act shall be broadly construed to accomplish its

purposes and intent as stated in Section 3. The Legislature

may by majority vote amend the provisions of this act

contained in Sections 5 to 5.5, inclusive, and Sections 6

to 6.3, inclusive, to implement the substantive provisions

of those sections, provided that such amendments are

consistent with and further the purposes and intent of this

act as stated in Section 3. Amendments to this act that

enact protections for employees and other workers of

licensees under Sections 6 to 6.3, inclusive, of this act

Text of Proposed Laws

211

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 65 CONTINUED

(2) “State law” means any statute, law, regulation, or

other legal authority adopted, enacted, or implemented

before or after the effective date of this section by the

State of California or any agency or department thereof.

(3) “Carryout bag” means single-use carryout bags, paper

bags, recycled paper bags, plastic bags, recyclable plastic

bags, reusable plastic bags, compostable bags, reusable

grocery bags, or any other kind of bags used to carry

purchased items away from a store.

regulations, and coordinate or contract with other state or

local agencies, in furtherance of the administration and

implementation of subdivision (a) of this section,

Section 42272, and Section 42273.

(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a loan in

the amount of ﬁve hundred thousand dollars ($500,000)

is hereby made from the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality

and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection

Fund of 2006 (Section 75009) to the Wildlife Conservation

Board for the purpose of adopting regulations for the

administration and implementation of subdivision (a) of

this section, Section 42272, and Section 42273. If the

moneys in the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and

Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Fund

of 2006 are insufﬁcient to make the loan required by this

paragraph, then the loan shall be made from the Water

Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Fund of

2014 (Section 79715 of the Water Code). All moneys

deposited into the Environmental Protection and

Enhancement Fund shall ﬁrst be used to repay the loan

until the full loan amount is repaid. The Controller and all

other responsible state ofﬁcials shall take all actions

necessary to effectuate the loan required by this paragraph.

42272. (a) The Environmental Protection and

Enhancement Fund is hereby established in the State

Treasury.

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the

Environmental Protection and Enhancement Fund is a

trust fund established solely to carry out the purposes of

this chapter. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the

Government Code, all moneys deposited in the fund,

together with interest earned by the fund, are hereby

continuously appropriated, without regard to ﬁscal years,

to the Wildlife Conservation Board solely for the purposes

set forth in subdivision (c).

in the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Fund

to fund environmental protection and enhancement grants.

Projects and programs eligible for grants are as follows:

(1) Drought mitigation projects including, but not limited

to, drought-stressed forest remediation and projects that

expand or restore wetlands, ﬁsh habitat, or waterfowl

habitat.

(2) Recycling.

(3) Clean drinking water supplies.

(4) State, regional, and local parks.

(5) Beach cleanup.

(6) Litter removal.

(7) Wildlife habitat restoration.

(d) The Wildlife Conservation Board shall use no more

than 2 percent of the moneys in the Environmental

Protection and Enhancement Fund for administrative

required by the law to keep these mandated sales charges

as extra revenue.

state law will go to environmental purposes. The Legislature

speciﬁcally wrote the law in such a way as to make these

sales charges additional revenue to grocers and retailers.

(d) This special interest deal will provide grocers and

retailers over $400 million in added revenue every year—

all at the expense of California consumers and with little or

no beneﬁt to the environment.

(e) The people of California have every right to expect that

any sales charges on carryout bags they are required by

state law to pay are dedicated to protecting the environment,

not enriching corporations.

SEC. 3. Statement of Purpose.

The purpose of the Environmental Fee Protection Act is to

fulﬁll Californians’ expectations by requiring that any

charges on carryout bags paid by consumers in connection

with, or to advance, any plastic bag ban are dedicated to

appropriate and worthy environmental objectives like

drought mitigation, recycling, clean drinking water

supplies, parks, beach cleanup, litter removal, and wildlife

habitat restoration.

SEC. 4. Chapter 5.2 (commencing with Section 42270)

is added to Part 3 of Division 30 of the Public Resources

Code, to read:

HAPTER 5.2. CARRYOUT BAG CHARGES:

NVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT

42270. This chapter shall be known, and may be cited,

as the Environmental Fee Protection Act.

42271. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,

all moneys generated or collected by a store pursuant to a

state law that bans free distribution of any type of carryout

bag, and mandates the sale of any other type of carryout

bag, shall be deposited into the Environmental Protection

and Enhancement Fund, which is established in the State

Treasury and administered by the Wildlife Conservation

Board pursuant to Section 42272.

(b) For purposes of this chapter:

(1) “Store” means a retail establishment that meets any

of the following requirements:

(A) A full-line, self-service retail store with gross annual

sales of two million dollars ($2,000,000) or more that

sells a line of dry groceries, canned goods, or nonfood

items, and some perishable items.

(B) Has at least 10,000 square feet of retail space that

generates sales or use tax pursuant to the Bradley-Burns

Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law (Part 1.5

(commencing with Section 7200) of Division 2 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code) and has a pharmacy licensed

pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000) of

Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code.

that is engaged in the retail sale of a limited line of goods,

generally including milk, bread, soda, and snack foods,

and that holds a Type 20 or Type 21 license issued by the

Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

(D) Is a convenience food store, foodmart, or other entity

that is engaged in the retail sale of goods intended to be

consumed off the premises, and that holds a Type 20 or

Type 21 license issued by the Department of Alcoholic

Beverage Control.

212

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 65 CONTINUED

conﬂicting initiative is later held invalid, this measure

shall be self-executing and given full force and effect.

SEC. 7. Severability.

The provisions of this act are severable. If any portion,

section, subdivision, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase,

word, or application of this act is for any reason held to be

invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction,

that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining

portions of this act. The people of the State of California

hereby declare that they would have adopted this act and

each and every portion, section, subdivision, paragraph,

clause, sentence, phrase, word, and application not

declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to

whether any portion of this act or application thereof would

be subsequently declared invalid.

SEC. 8. Legal Defense.

If this act is approved by the voters of the State of California

and thereafter subjected to a legal challenge alleging a

violation of federal law, and both the Governor and Attorney

General refuse to defend this act, then the following

actions shall be taken:

(a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in

Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 12500) of Part 2 of

Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code or any other

law, the Attorney General shall appoint independent

counsel to faithfully and vigorously defend this act on

behalf of the State of California.

(b) Before appointing or thereafter substituting

independent counsel, the Attorney General shall exercise

due diligence in determining the qualiﬁcations of

independent counsel and shall obtain written afﬁrmation

from independent counsel that independent counsel will

faithfully and vigorously defend this act. The written

afﬁrmation shall be made publicly available upon request.

General Fund to the Controller, without regard to ﬁscal

years, in an amount necessary to cover the costs of

retaining independent counsel to faithfully and vigorously

defend this act on behalf of the State of California.

PROPOSITION 66

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in

accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of

the California Constitution.

This initiative measure amends and adds sections to the

Government Code and the Penal Code; therefore, existing

provisions proposed to be deleted are printed in strikeout

type and new provisions proposed to be added are printed

in italic type to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Short Title.

This Act shall be known and may be cited as the Death

Penalty Reform and Savings Act of 2016.

SEC. 2. Findings and Declarations.

1. California’s death penalty system is ineffective because

of waste, delays, and inefﬁciencies. Fixing it will save

California taxpayers millions of dollars every year. These

wasted taxpayer dollars would be better used for crime

prevention, education, and services for the elderly and

disabled.

expenses. Grant recipients shall use no more than 5 percent

of any moneys received for administrative expenses.

(e) Prior to disbursing any grants pursuant to this chapter,

the Wildlife Conservation Board shall develop project

solicitation and evaluation guidelines. The guidelines may

include a limitation on the dollar amounts of grants to be

awarded. Prior to ﬁnalizing the guidelines, the Wildlife

Conservation Board shall post the draft guidelines on its

Internet Web site and conduct three public hearings to

consider public comments. One public hearing shall be

held in Northern California, one hearing shall be held in

the Central Valley, and one hearing shall be held in

Southern California.

(f) (1) The nonpartisan California State Auditor shall

conduct a biennial independent ﬁnancial audit of the

programs receiving funds pursuant to this chapter. The

California State Auditor shall report its ﬁndings to the

Governor and both houses of the Legislature, and shall

make the ﬁndings available to the public on its Internet

Web site.

(2) (A) The California State Auditor shall be reimbursed

from moneys in the Environmental Protection and

Enhancement Fund for actual costs incurred in conducting

the biennial audits required by this subdivision, in an

amount not to exceed four hundred thousand dollars

($400,000) per audit.

(B) The four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000) per

audit maximum limit shall be adjusted biennially to reﬂect

any increase or decrease in inﬂation as measured by the

Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U).

The Treasurer’s ofﬁce shall calculate and publish the

adjustments required by this paragraph.

42273. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, local

governments may require moneys generated or collected

pursuant to any local law that bans free distribution of any

type of carryout bag, and mandates the sale of any other

type of carryout bag, to be deposited into the Environmental

Protection and Enhancement Fund and used for the

purposes set forth in Section 42272.

(b) For purposes of this section, “local law” means any

ordinance, resolution, law, regulation, or other legal

authority adopted, enacted, or implemented by any city,

county, city and county, charter city, charter county, special

district, school district, community college, or other local

or regional governmental entity.

SEC. 5. Liberal Construction.

This act shall be liberally construed in order to effectuate

its purposes.

SEC. 6. Conﬂicting Measures.

(a) In the event that this measure and another measure or

measures relating to the use of moneys generated or

collected by stores pursuant to laws that ban free

distribution, and mandates the sale, of any or all types of

carryout bags shall appear on the same statewide election

ballot, the other measure or measures shall be deemed to

be in conﬂict with this measure. In the event that this

measure receives a greater number of afﬁrmative votes,

the provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety,

and the provisions of the other measure or measures shall

be null and void.

(b) If this measure is approved by the voters but superseded

in whole or in part by any other conﬂicting initiative

approved by the voters at the same election, and such

Text of Proposed Laws

213

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 66 CONTINUED

certiﬁcation of the record for completeness under

subdivision (d) of Section 190.8 or receipt by the

appellant’s counsel of the completed record, whichever is

later, except for good cause. However, in those cases where

the trial transcript exceeds 10,000 pages, the brieﬁng

shall be completed within the time limits and pursuant to

the procedures set by the rules of court adopted by the

Judicial Council.

imposed on or after January 1, 1997, it is the Legislature’s

goal that the appeal be decided and an opinion reaching

the merits be ﬁled within 210 days of the completion of

the brieﬁng. However, where the appeal and a petition for

writ of habeas corpus is heard at the same time, the

petition should be decided and an opinion reaching the

merits should be ﬁled within 210 days of the completion

of the brieﬁng for the petition.

(d) The right of victims of crime to a prompt and ﬁnal

conclusion, as provided in paragraph (9) of subdivision (b)

of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution,

includes the right to have judgments of death carried out

within a reasonable time. Within 18 months of the effective

date of this initiative, the Judicial Council shall adopt

initial rules and standards of administration designed to

expedite the processing of capital appeals and state habeas

corpus review. Within ﬁve years of the adoption of the

initial rules or the entry of judgment, whichever is later,

the state courts shall complete the state appeal and the

initial state habeas corpus review in capital cases. The

Judicial Council shall continuously monitor the timeliness

of review of capital cases and shall amend the rules and

standards as necessary to complete the state appeal and

initial state habeas corpus proceedings within the ﬁve-year

period provided in this subdivision.

(d)

(e) The failure of the parties or the Supreme Court to

meet or comply with the time limit provided by this section

shall not be a ground for granting relief from a judgment of

conviction or sentence of death of a court to comply with

the time limit in subdivision (b) shall not affect the validity

of the judgment or require dismissal of an appeal or habeas

corpus petition. If a court fails to comply without

extraordinary and compelling reasons justifying the delay,

either party or any victim of the offense may seek relief by

petition for writ of mandate. The court in which the petition

is ﬁled shall act on it within 60 days of ﬁling. Paragraph (1)

of subdivision (c) of Section 28 of Article I of the California

Constitution, regarding standing to enforce victims’ rights,

applies to this subdivision and subdivision (d).

SEC. 4. Section 1227 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

1227. (a) If for any reason other than the pendency of

an appeal pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1239 of

this code a judgment of death has not been executed, and

it remains in force, the court in which the conviction was

had shall, on application of the district attorney, or may

upon its own motion, make and cause to be entered an

order appointing a day upon

specifying a period of 10 days

during which the judgment shall be executed, which must

not be less than 30 days nor more than 60 days from the

time of making such order; and immediately thereafter.

The 10-day period shall begin no less than 30 days after

the order is entered and shall end no more than 60 days

after the order is entered. Immediately after the order is

entered, a certiﬁed copy of such

the order, attested by the

clerk, under the seal of the court, shall, for the purpose of

execution, be transmitted by registered mail to the warden

2. Murder victims and their families are entitled to justice

and due process. Death row killers have murdered over

1,000 victims, including 229 children and 43 police

ofﬁcers; 235 victims were raped and 90 victims were

tortured.

3. Families of murder victims should not have to wait

decades for justice. These delays further victimize the

families who are waiting for justice. For example, serial

killer Robert Rhoades, who kidnapped, raped, tortured,

and murdered 8-year-old Michael Lyons and also raped

and murdered Bay Area high school student Julie Connell,

has been sitting on death row for over 16 years. Hundreds

of killers have sat on death row for over 20 years.

4. In 2012, the Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce found that

eliminating special housing for death row killers will save

tens of millions of dollars every year. These savings could

be invested in our schools, law enforcement, and

communities to keep us safer.

5. Death row killers should be required to work in prison

and pay restitution to their victims’ families consistent

with the Victims’ Bill of Rights (Marsy’s Law). Refusal to

work and pay restitution should result in loss of special

privileges.

6. Reforming the existing inefﬁcient appeals process for

death penalty cases will ensure fairness for both defendants

and victims. Right now, capital defendants wait ﬁve years

or more for appointment of their appellate lawyer. By

providing prompt appointment of attorneys, the defendants’

claims will be heard sooner.

7. A defendant’s claim of actual innocence should not be

limited, but frivolous and unnecessary claims should be

restricted. These tactics have wasted taxpayer dollars and

delayed justice for decades.

8. The state agency that is supposed to expedite secondary

review of death penalty cases is operating without any

effective oversight, causing long-term delays and wasting

taxpayer dollars. California Supreme Court oversight of this

state agency will ensure accountability.

9. Bureaucratic regulations have needlessly delayed

enforcement of death penalty verdicts. Eliminating

wasteful spending on repetitive challenges to these

regulations will result in the fair and effective

implementation of justice.

10. The California Constitution gives crime victims the

right to timely justice. A capital case can be fully and fairly

reviewed by both the state and federal courts within ten

years. By adopting state rules and procedures, victims will

receive timely justice and taxpayers will save hundreds of

millions of dollars.

11. California’s Death Row includes serial killers, cop

killers, child killers, mass murderers, and hate crime

killers. The death penalty system is broken, but it can and

should be ﬁxed. This initiative will ensure justice for both

victims and defendants, and will save hundreds of millions

of taxpayer dollars.

SEC. 3. Section 190.6 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

190.6. (a) The Legislature ﬁnds that the sentence in all

capital cases should be imposed expeditiously.

(b) Therefore, in all cases in which a sentence of death

has been imposed on or after January 1, 1997, the opening

appellate brief in the appeal to the State Supreme Court

shall be ﬁled no later than seven months after the

214

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 66 CONTINUED

of the state prison having the custody of the defendant;

provided, that if the defendant be at large, a warrant for his

apprehension may be issued, and upon being apprehended,

he shall be brought before the court, whereupon the court

shall make an order directing the warden of the state

prison to whom the sheriff is instructed to deliver the

defendant to execute the judgment at a speciﬁed time

within a period of 10 days, which shall not be

begin less

than 30 days nor end more than 60 days from the time of

making such order.

(b) From an order ﬁxing the time for and directing the

execution of such judgment as herein provided, there shall

be no appeal.

SEC. 5. Section 1239.1 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

1239.1. (a) It is the duty of the Supreme Court in a

capital case to expedite the review of the case. The court

shall appoint counsel for an indigent appellant as soon as

possible. The court shall only grant extensions of time for

brieﬁng for compelling or extraordinary reasons.

(b) When necessary to remove a substantial backlog in

appointment of counsel for capital cases, the Supreme

Court shall require attorneys who are qualiﬁed for

appointment to the most serious non-capital appeals and

who meet the qualiﬁcations for capital appeals to accept

appointment in capital cases as a condition for remaining

on the court’s appointment list. A “substantial backlog”

exists for this purpose when the time from entry of

judgment in the trial court to appointment of counsel for

appeal exceeds 6 months over a period of 12 consecutive

months.

SEC. 6. Section 1509 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

1509. (a) This section applies to any petition for writ of

habeas corpus ﬁled by a person in custody pursuant to a

judgment of death. A writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

this section is the exclusive procedure for collateral attack

on a judgment of death. A petition ﬁled in any court other

than the court which imposed the sentence should be

promptly transferred to that court unless good cause is

shown for the petition to be heard by another court. A

petition ﬁled in or transferred to the court which imposed

the sentence shall be assigned to the original trial judge

unless that judge is unavailable or there is other good

cause to assign the case to a different judge.

(b) After the entry of a judgment of death in the trial court,

that court shall offer counsel to the prisoner as provided in

Section 68662 of the Government Code.

initial petition must be ﬁled within one year of the order

entered under Section 68662 of the Government Code.

(d) An initial petition which is untimely under

subdivision (c) or a successive petition whenever ﬁled shall

be dismissed unless the court ﬁnds, by the preponderance

of all available evidence, whether or not admissible at trial,

that the defendant is actually innocent of the crime of

which he or she was convicted or is ineligible for the

sentence. A stay of execution shall not be granted for the

purpose of considering a successive or untimely petition

unless the court ﬁnds that the petitioner has a substantial

claim of actual innocence or ineligibility. “Ineligible for the

sentence of death” means that circumstances exist placing

that sentence outside the range of the sentencer’s

discretion. Claims of ineligibility include a claim that none

of the special circumstances in subdivision (a) of

Section 190.2 is true, a claim that the defendant was

under the age of 18 at the time of the crime, or a claim

that the defendant has an intellectual disability, as deﬁned

in Section 1376. A claim relating to the sentencing

decision under Section 190.3 is not a claim of actual

innocence or ineligibility for the purpose of this section.

(e) A petitioner claiming innocence or ineligibility under

subdivision (d) shall disclose all material information

relating to guilt or eligibility in the possession of the

petitioner or present or former counsel for petitioner. If the

petitioner willfully fails to make the disclosure required by

this subdivision and authorize disclosure by counsel, the

petition may be dismissed.

(f) Proceedings under this section shall be conducted as

expeditiously as possible, consistent with a fair

adjudication. The superior court shall resolve the initial

petition within one year of ﬁling unless the court ﬁnds that

a delay is necessary to resolve a substantial claim of actual

innocence, but in no instance shall the court take longer

than two years to resolve the petition. On decision of an

initial petition, the court shall issue a statement of decision

explaining the factual and legal basis for its decision.

(g) If a habeas corpus petition is pending on the effective

date of this section, the court may transfer the petition to

the court which imposed the sentence. In a case where a

judgment of death was imposed prior to the effective date

of this section, but no habeas corpus petition has been

ﬁled prior to the effective date of this section, a petition

that would otherwise be barred by subdivision (c) may be

ﬁled within one year of the effective date of this section or

within the time allowed under prior law, whichever is

earlier.

SEC. 7. Section 1509.1 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

1509.1. (a) Either party may appeal the decision of a

superior court on an initial petition under Section 1509 to

the court of appeal. An appeal shall be taken by ﬁling a

notice of appeal in the superior court within 30 days of the

court’s decision granting or denying the habeas petition. A

successive petition shall not be used as a means of

reviewing a denial of habeas relief.

(b) The issues considered on an appeal under

subdivision (a) shall be limited to the claims raised in the

superior court, except that the court of appeal may also

consider a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel if

the failure of habeas counsel to present that claim to the

superior court constituted ineffective assistance. The court

of appeal may, if additional ﬁndings of fact are required,

make a limited remand to the superior court to consider

the claim.

court granting relief on a successive petition. The petitioner

may appeal the decision of the superior court denying

relief on a successive petition only if the superior court or

the court of appeal grants a certiﬁcate of appealability. A

certiﬁcate of appealability may issue under this subdivision

only if the petitioner has shown both a substantial claim

for relief, which shall be indicated in the certiﬁcate, and a

substantial claim that the requirements of subdivision (d)

of Section 1509 have been met. An appeal under this

subdivision shall be taken by ﬁling a notice of appeal in

the superior court within 30 days of the court’s decision.

The superior court shall grant or deny a certiﬁcate of

appealability concurrently with a decision denying relief on

the petition. The court of appeal shall grant or deny a

Text of Proposed Laws

215

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 66 CONTINUED

request for a certiﬁcate of appealability within 10 days of

an application for a certiﬁcate. The jurisdiction of the court

of appeal is limited to the claims identiﬁed in the certiﬁcate

and any additional claims added by the court of appeal

within 60 days of the notice of appeal. An appeal under

this subdivision shall have priority over all other matters

and be decided as expeditiously as possible.

SEC. 8. Section 2700.1 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

2700.1. Section 2700 applies to inmates sentenced to

death, except as otherwise provided in this section.

Every person found guilty of murder, sentenced to death,

and held by the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation pursuant to Sections 3600 to 3602 shall be

required to work as many hours of faithful labor each day

he or she is so held as shall be prescribed the rules and

regulations of the department.

Physical education and physical ﬁtness programs shall not

qualify as work for purposes of this section. The Department

of Corrections and Rehabilitation may revoke the privileges

of any condemned inmate who refuses to work as required

by this section.

In any case where the condemned inmate owes a restitution

ﬁne or restitution order, the Secretary of the Department of

Corrections and Rehabilitation shall deduct 70 percent or

the balance owing, whichever is less, from the condemned

inmate’s wages and trust account deposits, regardless of

the source of the income, and shall transfer those funds to

the California Victim Compensation and Government

Claims Board according to the rules and regulations of the

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, pursuant to

Sections 2085.5 and 2717.8.

SEC. 9. Section 3600 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

3600. (a)

Every male person, upon whom has been

imposed the judgment of death, shall be delivered to the

warden of the California state prison designated by the

department for the execution of the death penalty, there to

be kept until the execution of the judgment, except as

provided in subdivision (b). The inmate shall be kept in a

California prison until execution of the judgment. The

department may transfer the inmate to another prison

which it determines to provide a level of security sufﬁcient

for that inmate. The inmate shall be returned to the prison

designated for execution of the death penalty after an

execution date has been set.

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law:

(1) A condemned inmate who, while in prison, commits

any of the following offenses, or who, as a member of a

gang or disruptive group, orders others to commit any of

these offenses, may, following disciplinary sanctions and

classiﬁcation actions at San Quentin State Prison, pursuant

to regulations established by the Department of Corrections,

be housed in secure condemned housing designated by

the Director of Corrections, at the California State Prison,

Sacramento:

(A) Homicide.

(B) Assault with a weapon or with physical force capable

of causing serious or mortal injury.

(D) Repeated serious rules violations that substantially

threaten safety or security.

(2) The condemned housing program at California State

Prison, Sacramento, shall be fully operational prior to the

transfer of any condemned inmate.

(3) Specialized training protocols for supervising

condemned inmates shall be provided to those line staff

and supervisors at the California State Prison, Sacramento,

who supervise condemned inmates on a regular basis.

(4) An inmate whose medical or mental health needs are

so critical as to endanger the inmate or others may,

pursuant to regulations established by the Department of

Corrections, be housed at the California Medical Facility or

other appropriate institution for medical or mental health

treatment. The inmate shall be returned to the institution

from which the inmate was transferred when the condition

has been adequately treated or is in remission.

shall apply:

(1) Those local procedures relating to privileges and

classiﬁcation procedures provided to Grade B condemned

inmates at San Quentin State Prison shall be similarly

instituted at California State Prison, Sacramento, for

condemned inmates housed pursuant to paragraph (1) of

subdivision (b) of Section 3600. Those classiﬁcation

procedures shall include the right to the review of a

classiﬁcation no less than every 90 days and the opportunity

to petition for a return to San Quentin State Prison.

(2) Similar attorney-client access procedures that are

afforded to condemned inmates housed at San Quentin

State Prison shall be afforded to condemned inmates

housed in secure condemned housing designated by the

Director of Corrections, at the California State Prison,

Sacramento. Attorney-client access for condemned

inmates housed at an institution for medical or mental

health treatment shall be commensurate with the

institution’s visiting procedures and appropriate treatment

protocols.

(3) A condemned inmate housed in secure condemned

housing pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be returned to

San Quentin State Prison at least 60 days prior to his

scheduled date of execution.

(4) No more than 15 condemned inmates may be rehoused

pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).

(d) Prior to any relocation of condemned row from San

Quentin State Prison, whether proposed through legislation

or any other means, all maximum security Level IV,

180-degree housing unit facilities with an electriﬁed

perimeter shall be evaluated by the Department of

Corrections for suitability for the secure housing and

execution of condemned inmates.

SEC. 10. Section 3604 of the Penal Code is amended to

read:

3604. (a) The punishment of death shall be inﬂicted by

the administration of a lethal gas or by an intravenous

injection of a substance or substances in a lethal quantity

sufﬁcient to cause death, by standards established under

the direction of the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation.

(b) Persons sentenced to death prior to or after the

operative date of this subdivision shall have the opportunity

to elect to have the punishment imposed by lethal gas or

lethal injection. This choice shall be made in writing and

shall be submitted to the warden pursuant to regulations

established by the Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation. If a person under sentence of death does

216

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 66 CONTINUED

not choose either lethal gas or lethal injection within 10

days after the warden’s service upon the inmate of an

execution warrant issued following the operative date of

this subdivision, the penalty of death shall be imposed by

lethal injection.

on the date set for execution and a new execution date is

subsequently set, the inmate again shall have the

opportunity to elect to have punishment imposed by lethal

gas or lethal injection, according to the procedures set

forth in subdivision (b).

(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), if either manner of

execution described in subdivision (a) is held invalid, the

punishment of death shall be imposed by the alternative

means speciﬁed in subdivision (a).

(e) The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, or

any successor agency with the duty to execute judgments

of death, shall maintain at all times the ability to execute

such judgments.

SEC. 11. Section 3604.1 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

3604.1. (a) The Administrative Procedure Act shall not

apply to standards, procedures, or regulations promulgated

pursuant to Section 3604. The department shall make the

standards adopted under subdivision (a) of that section

available to the public and to inmates sentenced to death.

The department shall promptly notify the Attorney General,

the State Public Defender, and counsel for any inmate for

whom an execution date has been set or for whom a motion

to set an execution date is pending of any adoption or

amendment of the standards. Noncompliance with this

subdivision is not a ground for stay of an execution or an

injunction against carrying out an execution unless the

noncompliance has actually prejudiced the inmate’s ability

to challenge the standard, and in that event the stay shall

be limited to a maximum of 10 days.

(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of Section 3604, an

execution by lethal injection may be carried out by means

of an injection other than intravenous if the warden

determines that the condition of the inmate makes

intravenous injection impractical.

exclusive jurisdiction to hear any claim by the condemned

inmate that the method of execution is unconstitutional or

otherwise invalid. Such a claim shall be dismissed if the

court ﬁnds its presentation was delayed without good

cause. If the method is found invalid, the court shall order

the use of a valid method of execution. If the use of a

method of execution is enjoined by a federal court, the

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation shall adopt,

within 90 days, a method that conforms to federal

requirements as found by that court. If the department

fails to perform any duty needed to enable it to execute the

judgment, the court which rendered the judgment of death

shall order it to perform that duty on its own motion, on

motion of the District Attorney or Attorney General, or on

motion of any victim of the crime as deﬁned in subdivision (e)

of Section 28 of Article I of the California Constitution.

SEC. 12. Section 3604.3 is added to the Penal Code, to

read:

3604.3. (a) A physician may attend an execution for the

purpose of pronouncing death and may provide advice to

the department for the purpose of developing an execution

protocol to minimize the risk of pain to the inmate.

(b) The purchase of drugs, medical supplies or medical

equipment necessary to carry out an execution shall not be

subject to the provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with

Section 4000) of Division 2 of the Business and Professions

Code, and any pharmacist, or supplier, compounder, or

manufacturer of pharmaceuticals is authorized to dispense

drugs and supplies to the secretary or the secretary’s

designee, without prescription, for carrying out the

provisions of this chapter.

accreditation agency that oversees or regulates the practice

of health care or certiﬁes or licenses health care

professionals may deny or revoke a license or certiﬁcation,

censure, reprimand, suspend, or take any other disciplinary

action against any licensed health care professional for any

action authorized by this section.

SEC. 13. Section 68660.5 is added to the Government

Code, to read:

68660.5. The purposes of this chapter are to qualify the

State of California for the handling of federal habeas

corpus petitions under Chapter 154 of Title 28 of the

United States Code, to expedite the completion of state

habeas corpus proceedings in capital cases, and to provide

quality representation in state habeas corpus for inmates

sentenced to death. This chapter shall be construed and

administered consistently with those purposes.

SEC. 14. Section 68661 of the Government Code is

amended to read:

68661. There is hereby created in the judicial branch of

state government the California Habeas Corpus Resource

Center, which shall have all of the following general powers

and duties:

(a) To employ up to 34 attorneys who may be appointed by

the Supreme Court pursuant to Section 68662 to represent

any person convicted and sentenced to death in this state

who is without counsel, and who is determined by a court

of competent jurisdiction to be indigent, for the purpose of

instituting and prosecuting postconviction actions

habeas

corpus petitions in the state and federal courts, challenging

the legality of the judgment or sentence imposed against

that person, subject to the limitations in Section 68661.1,

and preparing petitions for executive clemency. An

Any

such appointment may be concurrent with the appointment

of the State Public Defender or other counsel for purposes

of direct appeal under Section 11 of Article VI of the

California Constitution.

(b) To seek reimbursement for representation and expenses

pursuant to Section 3006A of Title 18 of the United States

Code when providing representation to indigent persons in

the federal courts and process those payments via the

Federal Trust Fund.

courts in recruiting

members of the private bar to accept death penalty habeas

corpus case appointments.

(d) To establish and periodically update

recommend

attorneys to the Supreme Court for inclusion in a roster of

attorneys qualiﬁed as counsel in postconviction

habeas

corpus proceedings in capital cases, provided that the ﬁnal

determination of whether to include an attorney in the

roster shall be made by the Supreme Court and not

delegated to the center.

(e) To establish and periodically update a roster of

experienced investigators and experts who are qualiﬁed to

Text of Proposed Laws

217

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 66 CONTINUED

assist counsel in postconviction habeas corpus proceedings

in capital cases.

(f) To employ investigators and experts as staff to provide

services to appointed counsel upon request of counsel,

provided that when the provision of those services is to

private counsel under appointment by the Supreme Court

those services shall be pursuant to contract between

appointed counsel and the center.

(g) To provide legal or other advice or, to the extent not

otherwise available, any other assistance to appointed

counsel in postconviction

habeas corpus proceedings as is

appropriate when not prohibited by law.

(h) To develop a brief bank of pleadings and related

materials on signiﬁcant, recurring issues that arise in

postconviction

habeas corpus proceedings in capital cases

and to make those briefs available to appointed counsel.

(i) To evaluate cases and recommend assignment by the

court of appropriate attorneys.

(j) To provide assistance and case progress monitoring as

needed.

(k) To timely review case billings and recommend

compensation of members of the private bar to the court.

(l) The center shall report annually to the people, the

Legislature, the Governor, and the Supreme Court on the

status of the appointment of counsel for indigent persons

in postconviction

habeas corpus capital cases, and on the

operations of the center. On or before

January 1, 2000, the

Legislative Analyst’s Ofﬁce shall evaluate the available

reports. The report shall list all cases in which the center

is providing representation. For each case that has been

pending more than one year in any court, the report shall

state the reason for the delay and the actions the center is

taking to bring the case to completion.

SEC. 15. Section 68661.1 is added to the Government

Code, to read:

68661.1. (a) The center may represent a person

sentenced to death on a federal habeas corpus petition if

and only if (1) the center was appointed to represent that

person on state habeas corpus, (2) the center is appointed

for that purpose by the federal court, and (3) the executive

director determines that compensation from the federal

court will fully cover the cost of representation. Neither the

center nor any other person or entity receiving state funds

shall spend state funds to attack in federal court any

judgment of a California court in a capital case, other than

review in the Supreme Court pursuant to Section 1257 of

Title 28 of the United States Code.

(b) The center is not authorized to represent any person in

any action other than habeas corpus which constitutes a

collateral attack on the judgment or seeks to delay or

prevent its execution. The center shall not engage in any

other litigation or expend funds in any form of advocacy

other than as expressly authorized by this section or

Section 68661.

SEC. 16. Section 68662 of the Government Code is

amended to read:

68662. The Supreme Court

superior court that imposed

the sentence shall offer to appoint counsel to represent all

a state prisoners

prisoner subject to a capital sentence for

purposes of state postconviction proceedings, and shall

enter an order containing one of the following:

(a) The appointment of one or more counsel to represent

the prisoner in postconviction state

proceedings pursuant

to Section 1509 of the Penal Code upon a ﬁnding that the

person is indigent and has accepted the offer to appoint

counsel or is unable to competently decide whether to

accept or reject that offer.

(b) A ﬁnding, after a hearing if necessary, that the prisoner

rejected the offer to appoint counsel and made that

decision with full understanding of the legal consequences

of the decision.

person is not indigent.

SEC. 17. Section 68664 of the Government Code is

amended to read:

68664. (a) The center shall be managed by an executive

director who shall be responsible for the day-to-day

operations of the center.

(b) The executive director shall be chosen by a ﬁve-

member board of directors and conﬁrmed by the Senate.

Each Appellate Project shall appoint one board member,

all of whom shall be attorneys. However, no attorney who is

employed as a judge, prosecutor, or in a law enforcement

capacity shall be eligible to serve on the board the Supreme

Court. The executive director shall serve at the will of the

board

Supreme Court.

a four-year term, and vacancies shall be ﬁlled in the same

manner as the original appointment. Members of the board

shall receive no compensation, but shall be reimbursed for

all reasonable and necessary expenses incidental to their

duties. The ﬁrst members of the board shall be appointed

no later than February 1, 1998. The executive director

shall ensure that all matters in which the center provides

representation are completed as expeditiously as possible

consistent with effective representation.

(d) The executive director shall meet the appointment

qualiﬁcations of the State Public Defender as speciﬁed in

Section 15400.

(e) The executive director shall receive the salary that

shall be speciﬁed for the executive director

State Public

Defender in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 11550)

of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2. All other attorneys

employed by the center shall be compensated at the same

level as comparable positions in the Ofﬁce of the State

Public Defender.

SEC. 18. Section 68665 of the Government Code is

amended to read:

68665. (a) The Judicial Council and the Supreme Court

shall adopt, by rule of court, binding and mandatory

competency standards for the appointment of counsel in

death penalty direct appeals and habeas corpus

proceedings, and they shall reevaluate the standards as

needed to ensure that they meet the criteria in

subdivision (b).

(b) In establishing and reevaluating the standards, the

Judicial Council and the Supreme Court shall consider the

qualiﬁcations needed to achieve competent representation,

the need to avoid unduly restricting the available pool of

attorneys so as to provide timely appointment, and the

standards needed to qualify for Chapter 154 of Title 28 of

the United States Code. Experience requirements shall not

be limited to defense experience.

SEC. 19. Effective Date. Except as more speciﬁcally

provided in this act, all sections of this act take effect

218

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 66 CONTINUED

immediately upon enactment and apply to all proceedings

conducted on or after the effective date.

SEC. 20. Amendments. The statutory provisions of this

act shall not be amended by the Legislature, except by a

statute passed in each house by rollcall vote entered in the

journal, three-fourths of the membership of each house

concurring, or by a statute that becomes effective only

when approved by the voters.

SEC. 21. Severability/Conﬂicting Measures/Standing.

If any provision of this act, or any part of any provision, or

its application to any person or circumstance is for any

reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining

provisions and applications which can be given effect

without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or

application shall not be affected, but shall remain in full

force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this act

are severable.

This measure is intended to be comprehensive. It is the

intent of the people that in the event this measure or

measures relating to the subject of capital punishment

shall appear on the same statewide election ballot, the

provisions of the other measure or measures shall be

deemed to be in conﬂict with this measure. In the event

that this measure receives a greater number of afﬁrmative

votes, the provisions of this measure shall prevail in their

entirety, and all provisions of the other measure or measures

shall be null and void.

The people of the State of California declare that the

proponent of this act has a direct and personal stake in

defending this act and grant formal authority to the

proponent to defend this act in any legal proceeding, either

by intervening in such legal proceeding, or by defending

the act on behalf of the people and the state in the event

that the state declines to defend the act or declines to

appeal an adverse judgment against the act. In the event

that the proponent is defending this act in a legal

proceeding because the state has declined to defend it or

to appeal an adverse judgment against it, the proponent

shall: act as an agent of the people and the state; be

subject to all ethical, legal, and ﬁduciary duties applicable

to such parties in such legal proceedings; take and be

subject to the oath of ofﬁce prescribed by Section 3 of

Article XX of the California Constitution for the limited

purpose of acting on behalf of the people and the state in

such legal proceeding; and be entitled to recover reasonable

legal fees and related costs from the state.

PROPOSITION 67

This law proposed by Senate Bill 270 of the 2013–2014

Regular Session (Chapter 850, Statutes of 2014) is

submitted to the people as a referendum in accordance

with the provisions of Section 9 of Article II of the California

Constitution.

This proposed law adds sections to the Public Resources

Code; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are

printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1. Chapter 5.3 (commencing with

Section 42280) is added to Part 3 of Division 30 of the

Public Resources Code, to read:

HAPTER 5.3. SINGLE-USE CARRYOUT BAGS

Article 1. Deﬁnitions

42280. (a) “Department” means the Department of

Resources Recycling and Recovery.

(b) “Postconsumer recycled material” means a material

that would otherwise be destined for solid waste disposal,

having completed its intended end use and product life

cycle. Postconsumer recycled material does not include

materials and byproducts generated from, and commonly

reused within, an original manufacturing and fabrication

process.

provided by a store to a customer at the point of sale that

meets all of the following requirements:

(1) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), contains

a minimum of 40 percent postconsumer recycled materials.

(B) An eight pound or smaller recycled paper bag shall

contain a minimum of 20 percent postconsumer recycled

material.

(2) Is accepted for recycling in curbside programs in a

majority of households that have access to curbside

recycling programs in the state.

(3) Has printed on the bag the name of the manufacturer,

the country where the bag was manufactured, and the

minimum percentage of postconsumer content.

(d) “Reusable grocery bag” means a bag that is provided

by a store to a customer at the point of sale that meets the

requirements of Section 42281.

(e) (1) “Reusable grocery bag producer” means a person

or entity that does any of the following:

(A) Manufactures reusable grocery bags for sale or

distribution to a store.

(B) Imports reusable grocery bags into this state, for sale

or distribution to a store.

(2) “Reusable grocery bag producer” does not include a

store, with regard to a reusable grocery bag for which there

is a manufacturer or importer, as speciﬁed in subparagraph

(A) or (B) of paragraph (1).

(f) (1) “Single-use carryout bag” means a bag made of

plastic, paper, or other material that is provided by a store

to a customer at the point of sale and that is not a recycled

paper bag or a reusable grocery bag that meets the

requirements of Section 42281.

(2) A single-use carryout bag does not include either of

the following:

(A) A bag provided by a pharmacy pursuant to Chapter 9

(commencing with Section 4000) of Division 2 of the

Business and Professions Code to a customer purchasing a

prescription medication.

(B) A nonhandled bag used to protect a purchased item

from damaging or contaminating other purchased items

when placed in a recycled paper bag, a reusable grocery

bag, or a compostable plastic bag.

(D) A nonhandled bag that is designed to be placed over

articles of clothing on a hanger.

(g) “Store” means a retail establishment that meets any of

the following requirements:

Text of Proposed Laws

219

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 67 CONTINUED

Health and Safety Code and, notwithstanding subdivision (c)

of Section 25257.1 of the Health and Safety Code, the

reusable grocery bag shall not be considered as a product

category already regulated or subject to regulation.

(6) Complies with Section 260.12 of Part 260 of Title 16

of the Code of Federal Regulations related to recyclable

claims if the reusable grocery bag producer makes a claim

that the reusable grocery bag is recyclable.

(b) (1) In addition to the requirements in subdivision (a),

a reusable grocery bag made from plastic ﬁlm shall meet

all of the following requirements:

(A) On and after January 1, 2016, it shall be made from a

minimum of 20 percent postconsumer recycled material.

(B) On and after January 1, 2020, it shall be made from a

minimum of 40 percent postconsumer recycled material.

return at stores subject to the at-store recycling program

(Chapter 5.1 (commencing with Section 42250)) for

recycling.

(D) It shall have, in addition to the information required to

be printed on the bag or on a tag, pursuant to paragraph (4)

of subdivision (a), a statement that the bag is made partly

or wholly from postconsumer recycled material and stating

the postconsumer recycled material content percentage,

as applicable.

(E) It shall be capable of carrying 22 pounds over a

distance of 175 feet for a minimum of 125 uses and be at

least 2.25 mils thick, measured according to the American

Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard

D6988-13.

(2) A reusable grocery bag made from plastic ﬁlm that

meets the speciﬁcations of the American Society of Testing

and Materials (ASTM) International Standard Speciﬁcation

for Compostable Plastics D6400, as updated, is not

required to meet the requirements of subparagraph (A) or

(B) of paragraph (1), but shall be labeled in accordance

with the applicable state law regarding compostable

plastics.

reusable grocery bag that is not made of plastic ﬁlm and

that is made from any other natural or synthetic fabric,

including, but not limited to, woven or nonwoven nylon,

polypropylene, polyethylene-terephthalate, or Tyvek, shall

satisfy all of the following:

(1) It shall be sewn.

(2) It shall be capable of carrying 22 pounds over a

distance of 175 feet for a minimum of 125 uses.

(3) It shall have a minimum fabric weight of at least 80

grams per square meter.

(d) On and after July 1, 2016, a store as deﬁned in

paragraph (3), (4), or (5) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

shall comply with the requirements of this section.

42281.5. On and after July 1, 2015, a producer of

reusable grocery bags made from plastic ﬁlm shall not sell

or distribute a reusable grocery bag in this state unless the

producer is certiﬁed by a third-party certiﬁcation entity

pursuant to Section 42282. A producer shall provide proof

of certiﬁcation to the department demonstrating that the

reusable grocery bags produced by the producer comply

with the provisions of this article. The proof of certiﬁcation

shall include all of the following:

(1) A full-line, self-service retail store with gross annual

sales of two million dollars ($2,000,000) or more that

sells a line of dry groceries, canned goods, or nonfood

items, and some perishable items.

(2) Has at least 10,000 square feet of retail space that

generates sales or use tax pursuant to the Bradley-Burns

Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law (Part 1.5

(commencing with Section 7200) of Division 2 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code) and has a pharmacy licensed

pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000) of

Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code.

(3) Is a convenience food store, foodmart, or other entity

that is engaged in the retail sale of a limited line of goods,

generally including milk, bread, soda, and snack foods,

and that holds a Type 20 or Type 21 license issued by the

Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

(4) Is a convenience food store, foodmart, or other entity

that is engaged in the retail sale of goods intended to be

consumed off the premises, and that holds a Type 20 or

Type 21 license issued by the Department of Alcoholic

Beverage Control.

(5) Is not otherwise subject to paragraph (1), (2), (3), or

(4), if the retail establishment voluntarily agrees to comply

with the requirements imposed upon a store pursuant to

this chapter, irrevocably notiﬁes the department of its

intent to comply with the requirements imposed upon a

store pursuant to this chapter, and complies with the

requirements established pursuant to Section 42284.

Article 2. Reusable Grocery Bags

42281. (a) On and after July 1, 2015, a store, as deﬁned

in paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

may sell or distribute a reusable grocery bag to a customer

at the point of sale only if the reusable bag is made by a

producer certiﬁed pursuant to this article to meet all of the

following requirements:

(1) Has a handle and is designed for at least 125 uses, as

provided in this article.

(2) Has a volume capacity of at least 15 liters.

(3) Is machine washable or made from a material that can

be cleaned and disinfected.

(4) Has printed on the bag, or on a tag attached to the bag

that is not intended to be removed, and in a manner visible

to the consumer, all of the following information:

(A) The name of the manufacturer.

(B) The country where the bag was manufactured.

designed for at least 125 uses.

(D) If the bag is eligible for recycling in the state,

instructions to return the bag to the store for recycling or

to another appropriate recycling location. If recyclable in

the state, the bag shall include the chasing arrows recycling

symbol or the term “recyclable,” consistent with the

Federal Trade Commission guidelines use of that term, as

updated.

(5) Does not contain lead, cadmium, or any other toxic

material that may pose a threat to public health. A reusable

bag manufacturer may demonstrate compliance with this

requirement by obtaining a no objection letter from the

federal Food and Drug Administration. This requirement

shall not affect any authority of the Department of Toxic

Substances Control pursuant to Article 14 (commencing

with Section 25251) of Chapter 6.5 of Division 20 of the

220

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 67 CONTINUED

(3) Based on its determination, the court shall direct the

department to remove the reusable grocery bag producer

from, or retain the reusable grocery bag producer on, its

list published pursuant to subdivision (e).

(4) If the court directs the department to remove a

reusable grocery bag producer from its published list, the

reusable grocery bag producer shall remain off of the

published list for a period of one year from the date of the

court’s determination.

42282.1. (a) A reusable grocery bag producer shall

submit the fee established pursuant to subdivision (b) to

the department when providing proof of certiﬁcation or

recertiﬁcation pursuant to Sections 42281.5 and 42282.

(b) The department shall establish an administrative

certiﬁcation fee schedule that will generate fee revenues

sufﬁcient to cover, but not exceed, the department’s

reasonable costs to implement this article. The department

shall deposit all moneys submitted pursuant to this section

into the Reusable Grocery Bag Fund, which is hereby

established in the State Treasury. Notwithstanding

Section 11340 of the Government Code, moneys in the

fund are continuously appropriated, without regard to

ﬁscal year, to the department for the purpose of

implementing this article.

Article 3. Single-Use Carryout Bags

42283. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (e), on and

after July 1, 2015, a store, as deﬁned in paragraph (1) or

(2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280, shall not provide

a single-use carryout bag to a customer at the point of sale.

(b) (1) On and after July 1, 2015, a store, as deﬁned in

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

shall not sell or distribute a reusable grocery bag at the

point of sale except as provided in this subdivision.

(2) On and after July 1, 2015, a store, as deﬁned in

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

may make available for purchase at the point of sale a

reusable grocery bag that meets the requirements of

Section 42281.

(3) On and after July 1, 2015, a store, as deﬁned in

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

that makes reusable grocery bags available for purchase

pursuant to paragraph (2) shall not sell the reusable

grocery bag for less than ten cents ($0.10) in order to

ensure that the cost of providing a reusable grocery bag is

not subsidized by a customer who does not require that

bag.

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

shall not sell or distribute a recycled paper bag except as

provided in this subdivision.

(2) A store, as deﬁned in paragraph (1) or (2) of

subdivision (g) of Section 42280, may make available for

purchase a recycled paper bag. On and after July 1, 2015,

the store shall not sell a recycled paper bag for less than

ten cents ($0.10) in order to ensure that the cost of

providing a recycled paper bag is not subsidized by a

consumer who does not require that bag.

(d) Notwithstanding any other law, on and after July 1,

2015, a store, as deﬁned in paragraph (1) or (2) of

subdivision (g) of Section 42280, that makes reusable

grocery bags or recycled paper bags available for purchase

at the point of sale shall provide a reusable grocery bag or

a recycled paper bag at no cost at the point of sale to a

customer using a payment card or voucher issued by the

(a) Names, locations, and contact information of all

sources of postconsumer recycled material and suppliers

of postconsumer recycled material.

(b) Quantity and dates of postconsumer recycled material

purchases by the reusable grocery bag producer.

(d) Information demonstrating that the postconsumer

recycled material is cleaned using appropriate washing

equipment.

42282. (a) Commencing on or before July 1, 2015, the

department shall accept from a reusable grocery bag

producer proof of certiﬁcation conducted by a third-party

certiﬁcation entity, submitted under penalty of perjury, for

each type of reusable grocery bag that is manufactured,

imported, sold, or distributed in the state and provided to

a store for sale or distribution, at the point of sale, that

meets all the applicable requirements of this article. The

proof of certiﬁcation shall be accompanied by a certiﬁcation

fee, established pursuant to Section 42282.1.

(b) A reusable grocery bag producer shall resubmit to the

department proof of certiﬁcation as described in

subdivision (a) on a biennial basis. A reusable grocery bag

producer shall provide the department with an updated

proof of certiﬁcation conducted by a third-party certiﬁcation

entity if any modiﬁcation that is not solely aesthetic is

made to a previously certiﬁed reusable bag. Failure to

comply with this subdivision shall result in removal of the

relevant information posted on the department’s Internet

Web site pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (e)

for each reusable bag that lacks an updated proof of

certiﬁcation conducted by a third-party certiﬁcation entity.

independent, accredited (ISO/IEC 17025) laboratory. A

third-party certiﬁcation entity shall certify that the

producer’s reusable grocery bags meet the requirements of

Section 44281.

(d) The department shall provide a system to receive

proofs of certiﬁcation online.

(e) On and after July 1, 2015, the department shall

publish a list on its Internet Web site that includes all of

the following:

(1) The name, location, and appropriate contact

information of certiﬁed reusable grocery bag producers.

(2) The reusable grocery bags of producers that have

provided the required certiﬁcation.

(f) A reusable grocery bag producer shall submit applicable

certiﬁed test results to the department conﬁrming that the

reusable grocery bag meets the requirements of this article

for each type of reusable grocery bag that is manufactured,

imported, sold, or distributed in the state and provided to

a store for sale or distribution.

(1) A person may object to the certiﬁcation of a reusable

grocery bag producer pursuant to this section by ﬁling an

action for review of that certiﬁcation in the superior court

of a county that has jurisdiction over the reusable grocery

bag producer. The court shall determine if the reusable

grocery bag producer is in compliance with the requirements

of this article.

(2) A reusable grocery bag producer whose certiﬁcation is

being objected to pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be

deemed in compliance with this article pending a

determination by the court.

Text of Proposed Laws

221

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 67 CONTINUED

“store,” that provides the department with the irrevocable

written notice as speciﬁed in subdivision (c), shall be

regulated as a “store” for the purposes of this chapter.

signed by an authorized representative of the retail

establishment, and shall include the name and physical

address of all retail locations covered by the notice. The

department shall acknowledge receipt of the notice in

writing and shall specify the date the retail establishment

will be regulated as a “store,” which shall not be less than

30 days after the date of the department’s acknowledgment.

The department shall post on its Internet Web site,

organized by county, the name and physical location or

locations of each retail establishment that has elected to

be regulated as a “store.”

Article 4. Enforcement

42285. (a) A city, a county, a city and county, or the

state may impose civil liability on a person or entity that

knowingly violated this chapter, or reasonably should have

known that it violated this chapter, in the amount of one

thousand dollars ($1,000) per day for the ﬁrst violation of

this chapter, two thousand dollars ($2,000) per day for the

second violation, and ﬁve thousand dollars ($5,000) per

day for the third and subsequent violations.

(b) Any civil penalties collected pursuant to subdivision (a)

shall be paid to the ofﬁce of the city attorney, city

prosecutor, district attorney, or Attorney General, whichever

ofﬁce brought the action. The penalties collected pursuant

to this section by the Attorney General may be expended

by the Attorney General, upon appropriation by the

Legislature, to enforce this chapter.

Article 5. Preemption

42287. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (c), this

chapter is a matter of statewide interest and concern and

is applicable uniformly throughout the state. Accordingly,

this chapter occupies the whole ﬁeld of regulation of

reusable grocery bags, single-use carryout bags, and

recycled paper bags, as deﬁned in this chapter, provided

by a store, as deﬁned in this chapter.

(b) On and after January 1, 2015, a city, county, or other

local public agency shall not enforce, or otherwise

implement, an ordinance, resolution, regulation, or rule, or

any amendment thereto, adopted on or after September 1,

2014, relating to reusable grocery bags, single-use carryout

bags, or recycled paper bags, against a store, as deﬁned in

this chapter, unless expressly authorized by this chapter.

adopted, before September 1, 2014, an ordinance,

resolution, regulation, or rule relating to reusable grocery

bags, single-use carryout bags, or recycled paper bags may

continue to enforce and implement that ordinance,

resolution, regulation, or rule that was in effect before that

date. Any amendments to that ordinance, resolution,

regulation, or rule on or after January 1, 2015, shall be

subject to subdivision (b), except the city, county, or other

local public agency may adopt or amend an ordinance,

resolution, regulation, or rule to increase the amount that

a store shall charge with regard to a recycled paper bag,

compostable bag, or reusable grocery bag to no less than

the amount speciﬁed in Section 42283.

(2) A city, county, or other local public agency not covered

by paragraph (1) that, before September 1, 2014, has

passed a ﬁrst reading of an ordinance or resolution

expressing the intent to restrict single-use carryout bags

and, before January 1, 2015, adopts an ordinance to

California Special Supplemental Food Program for Women,

Infants, and Children pursuant to Article 2 (commencing

with Section 123275) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division

106 of the Health and Safety Code or an electronic beneﬁt

transfer card issued pursuant to Section 10072 of the

Welfare and Institutions Code.

(e) On and after July 1, 2015, a store, as deﬁned in

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280,

may distribute a compostable bag at the point of sale, if

the compostable bag is provided to the consumer at the

cost speciﬁed pursuant to paragraph (2), the compostable

bag, at a minimum, meets the American Society for Testing

and Materials (ASTM) International Standard Speciﬁcation

for Compostable Plastics D6400, as updated, and in the

jurisdiction where the compostable bag is sold and in the

jurisdiction where the store is located, both of the following

requirements are met:

(1) A majority of the residential households in the

jurisdiction have access to curbside collection of foodwaste

for composting.

(2) The governing authority for the jurisdiction has voted

to allow stores in the jurisdiction to sell to consumers at

the point of sale a compostable bag at a cost not less than

the actual cost of the bag, which the Legislature hereby

ﬁnds to be not less than ten cents ($0.10) per bag.

(f) A store, as deﬁned in paragraph (1) or (2) of

subdivision (g) of Section 42280, shall not require a

customer to use, purchase, or accept a single-use carryout

bag, recycled paper bag, compostable bag, or reusable

grocery bag as a condition of sale of any product.

42283.5. On and after July 1, 2016, a store, as deﬁned

in paragraph (3), (4), or (5) of subdivision (g) of

Section 42280, shall comply with the same requirements

of Section 42283 that are imposed upon a store, as

deﬁned in paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of

Section 42280.

42283.6. (a) The operator of a store, as deﬁned in

paragraph (1) or (2) of subdivision (g) of Section 42280

that makes recycled paper or reusable grocery bags

available at the point of sale, shall be subject to the

provisions of the at-store recycling program (Chapter 5.1

(commencing with Section 42250)).

(b) A store that voluntarily agrees to comply with the

provisions of this article pursuant to subdivision (g) of

Section 42280, shall also comply with the provisions of

the at-store recycling program (Chapter 5.1 (commencing

with Section 42250)).

42283.7. All moneys collected pursuant to this article

shall be retained by the store and may be used only for the

following purposes:

(a) Costs associated with complying with the requirements

of this article.

(b) Actual costs of providing recycled paper bags or

reusable grocery bags.

educational campaign encouraging the use of reusable

grocery bags.

42284. (a) A retail establishment not speciﬁcally

required to comply with the requirements of this chapter is

encouraged to reduce its distribution of single-use plastic

carryout bags.

(b) Pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (g) of

Section 42280, any retail establishment that is not a

222

Text of Proposed Laws

TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 67 CONTINUED

retrain existing employees for the manufacturing of

reusable grocery bags that, at a minimum, meet the

requirements of Section 42281.

(d) Any moneys appropriated pursuant to this section not

expended by the end of the 2015–16 ﬁscal year shall

revert to the Recycling Market Development Revolving

Loan Subaccount for expenditure pursuant to Article 3

(commencing with Section 42010) of Chapter 1.

(e) Applicants for funding under this section may also

apply for funding or beneﬁts from other economic

development programs for which they may be eligible,

including, but not limited to, both of the following:

(1) An income tax credit, as described in Sections

17059.2 and 23689 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

(2) A tax exemption pursuant to Section 6377.1 of the

Revenue and Taxation Code.

SEC. 2. No later than March 1, 2018, the department,

as a part of its reporting requirement pursuant to

Section 40507 of the Public Resources Code, shall provide

a status report on the implementation of Chapter 5.3

(commencing with Section 42280) of Part 3 of Division

30 of the Public Resources Code.

restrict single-use carryout bags, may continue to enforce

and implement the ordinance that was in effect before

January 1, 2015.

Article 6. Financial Provisions

42288.

[Subdivision (a) of this section is not subject to referendum]

(b) The department may expend, if there are applicants

eligible for funding from the Recycling Market Development

Revolving Loan Subaccount, the funds appropriated

pursuant to this section to provide loans for both of the

following:

(1) Development and conversion of machinery and

facilities for the manufacture of single-use plastic bags

into machinery and facilities for the manufacturer of

durable reusable grocery bags that, at a minimum, meet

the requirements of Section 42281.

(2) Development of equipment for the manufacture of

reusable grocery bags, that, at a minimum, meet the

requirements of Section 42281.

agree, as a condition of receiving the loan, to retain and

223

October 10, 2016

First day to vote-by-mail.

October 24, 2016

Last day to register to vote.

November 1, 2016

Last day that county elections

ofﬁcials will accept any

voter’s application for a

vote-by-mail ballot.

November 8, 2016

Election Day!

REMEMBER TO VOTE!

Polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Election Day!

DATES TO REMEMBER!

OCTOBER

S M T W T F S

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30 31

NOVEMBER

S M T W T F S

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27 28 29 30

California Secretary of State

Elections Division

1500 11th Street

Sacramento, CA 95814

NONPROFIT

U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

CALIFORNIA

SECRETARY

OF STATE

OFFICIAL VOTER INFORMATION GUIDE

Tuesday, November 8, 2016

Remember to Vote!

Polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

October 10

First day to vote-by-mail.

October 24

Last day to register to vote.

November 1

Last day that county elections ofﬁcials will

accept any voter’s application for a vote-by-mail ballot.

For additional copies of the Voter Information Guide

in any of the following languages, please call:

English: (800) 345-VOTE (8683)

TDD: (800) 833-8683

Español/Spanish: (800) 232-VOTA (8682)

中文/Chinese: (800) 339-2857

/Hindi: (888) 345-2692

/Japanese: (800) 339-2865

/Khmer: (888) 345-4917

/Korean: (866) 575-1558

Tagalog: (800) 339-2957

/Thai: (855) 345-3933

/Vietnamese: (800) 339-8163

Text Vote to GOVOTE (468683) to ﬁnd the location of your polling place.

In an effort to reduce election costs, the State Legislature has authorized the State and counties to mail only

one guide to addresses where more than one voter with the same surname resides. You may obtain additional

copies by contacting your county elections ofﬁcial or by calling (800) 345-VOTE.

CALIFORNIA

GENERAL ELECTION

OSP 16 140502