This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
News

Environmental & Energy,
Government,
Civil Litigation

Mar. 13, 2018

Judge approves compromise ballot language in cap-and-trade state proposition

A judge has approved compromise ballot language for Proposition 70, a cap-and-trade measure voters will decide in June.

SACRAMENTO -- A judge has approved compromise ballot language for Proposition 70, a cap-and-trade measure voters will decide in June.

Assemblyman Chad Mayes, R-Yucca Valley, sued last week to block what he said was "false, misleading" language written by Attorney General Xavier Becerra's office. Mayes v. Padilla, 80002819 (Sac. Super. Ct., filed March 5, 2018).

Prop. 70 itself was a compromise negotiated by Mayes and others. In return for his vote and that of several other Republicans, Mayes got the initiative placed on the ballot to give lawmakers another say on cap-and-trade funds in 2024.

It would require a one-time, two-thirds vote of both houses of the Legislature to move money in the reserve fund to another fund that could be appropriated by majority vote. This would potentially give Republicans leverage over the money in future years, since they currently hold about one-third of the Legislature.

Mayes' sought to change the words "Limits Legislature's Authority" in the ballot title with "Requires the Legislature." He argued Prop. 70 did not change the underlying rules about how the Legislature could use the money.

Instead, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Allen Sumner on Monday approved a negotiated compromise: "Requires Legislature Supermajority Vote" for Prop. 70's ballot title and label.

The words, "Revenues to Reduce Pollution," were changed to just "Reserve Fund." "Special fund" was changed to "reserve fund" in two parts of a short description of the initiative that will be seen by voters.

Mayes had also sought the removal of two references to the term "cap-and-trade" in the ballot description. Those stayed.

The policy director of a major group fighting Prop. 70 said the compromise language is "accurate" and that he is "OK" with it.

"I wish the word 'pollution' had been retained, because I think it would help voters understand what this is about, given that some of the jargon is difficult to decipher," said Bill Magavern.

Mayes' attorneys with Remcho, Johansen & Purcell LLP in Oakland did not return a call seeking comment.

#346517

Malcolm Maclachlan

Daily Journal Staff Writer
malcolm_maclachlan@dailyjournal.com

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com