The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 09091997 - C146 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , Contra Phil Batchelor, County Administrator _ FROM: �� '.< Costa September 3, 1997 County DATE: c�'rTA'couK� REQUESTS BY CITIES TO CONSOLIDATE ELECTIONS SUBJECT. SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. DIRECT the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, upon receipt of a request from a city to consolidate an election pursuant to Elections Code Section 1301, to forward the request to the County Clerk-Recorder, unless the request indicates that an ordinance has been adopted pursuant to Elections Code Section 1301 (b) and the request affects the first election subsequent to the adoption of the ordinance. 2. DIRECT the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, upon receipt of a request from a city to consolidate an election, indicating that an ordinance has been adopted, revised or repealed pursuant to Elections Code Section 1301 (b), to forward the request to the Board of Supervisors for consideration pursuant to Elections Code Section 1301 (b). 3. AUTHORIZE the County Clerk-Recorder, upon receipt of a request to consolidate an election where an ordinance has already been approved by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Election Code Section 1301 (b), to process the request without further consideration by the Board of Supervisors. 4. REQUEST each city to continue to request in writing an election by making a request to the County Clerk-Recorder that an election be held on the date approved for consolidation by the Board of Supervisors. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: _X RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOAR(((D COMMITTEE �) APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE (S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT--. AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: _NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC ATTESTED-_ September 9,19979, 1997 See Page 2 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR !� M382 (10/88) BY ,DEPUTY BACKGROUND: Under current law, a city council may seek to consolidate an election with the statewide direct primary election, statewide general election, or school district elections by enacting an ordinance, which, however, only becomes operative upon approval by the Board of Supervisors. The law further states that the election shall be held on the consolidated date for all subsequent elections, unless the city council revises or repeals the ordinance. It is only the approval of the initial ordinance by a city council (or a subsequently revised or amended ordinance) which requires action by the Board of Supervisors. As long as the election remains consolidated with the same election, no further action to approve each election consolidation is required by the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Rogers has suggested that the Board of Supervisors stop acting on each request to consolidate a city election after the initial ordinance has been approved. This can be done, as is noted in the attached opinion from the County Counsel's Office. The County Clerk-Recorder has no objection to this change, as long as each city continues to request the election in writing to avoid any confusion as to the city's intentions. Only when a city initially requests a consolidation or changes the date with which it wishes the election consolidated would the Board of Supervisors have to act on the request. cc: County Administrator County Clerk-Recorder County Counsel Each city (town) council in Contra Costa County (Via Clerk-Recorder) -2- CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MEMO TO: Claude Van Marter RECEIVED s AUG 2 6 1997 FROM: Steve Weir- OFFICE OF RE: Election Consolidation COUNTY ADMWISTRATOR r U.� DATE: August 22, 1997 Some time back, Supervisor Jim Rogers asked if we could stop asking the Board of Supervisors to consolidate elections that had already been consolidated through resolution of the Board. We have received the attached from Kevin Kerr, County Counsel. He states that, once the original consolidation has been approved by the Board, additional resolutions do not have to be approved by the Board. We would still like to have each agency request the election. Those that arrive at the Clerk of the Board can be forwarded directly to Elections provided that they are not an initial request to change the date of their election. COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA Date: August 14, 1997 AUG 1 51997 To: Stephen L. Weir, County Clerk-Recorder �J��TRa�_. ;i,- -u dTY Attn: Roxanna Dunning Davis, Elections Office From: Victor J. Wes'tman, County Counsel KIK By: Kevin T. Kerr, Deputy County Counsel Re: Requests By Cities to Consolidate Elections This responds to your July 21, 1997 memorandum asking whether cities must adopt an ordinance each time they request the consolidation of an election. The County's practice has been to require an ordinance from a city the first time it requests consolidation, but, as to subsequent elections, only require requests for consolidation from the city. Election Code section 1301 states, in pertinent part: "(a) Except as required by Section 57379 of the Government Code [regarding the first election following an incorporation election], and except as provided in subdivision (b), a general municipal election shall be held on the second Tuesday in April of even- numbered years, or on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March of odd- numbered years. "(b)(1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a city council may enact an ordinance, pursuant to Division 10 (commencing with Section 10000), requiring its general municipal election to be held on the same day as the statewide direct primary election, the day of the statewide general election, or on the day of school district elections as set forth in Section 1302. Any ordinance adopted pursuant to this subdivision shall become operative upon approval by the board of supervisors. . . . "(c) If a city adopts an ordinance described in subdivision (b), the municipal election following the adoption of the ordinance and each municipal election thereafter shall be conducted on the date specified by the city council, in accordance with subdivision (b), unless the ordinance in question is later repealed by the city council. "(d) If the date of a general municipal election is changed pursuant to subdivision (b), at least one election shall be held before the ordinance, as approved by the board of supervisors, may be subsequently repealed or amended." August 14, 1997 Page 2 Subdivision (a) of section 1301 provides for the dates of city elections. However, under subdivision (b), a city council may seek to consolidate the election with different elections by enacting an ordinance, which only becomes operative upon approval by the board of supervisors. Subdivision (c) states that, if such an ordinance is adopted, each municipal election thereafter shall be conducted on the date specified by the city council, unless the ordinance is subsequently repealed. Subdivision (d) provides that the ordinance may not be repealed or amended until after at least one election following the approval of the ordinance. Based on Elections Code section 1301 (c), after the city adopts an initial ordinance seeking the consolidation of elections, it need not adopt an ordinance for each election thereafter that it seeks to consolidate. The ordinance remains effective until repealed or amended. KTK\kv kkerr\elections\memos\consolid