SR-9-A (70)
( 0 '--f --- () -:r 9
9A
CA:f:atty\mlnl\strpts\mjm\homeless
City Council Meetlng 9-7-94
Santa Monlca, California
SEP 0 7 1991t
TO: Mayor and city Councll
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Initlatlve Measure On Park closure, Solicitation, Camplng
And Procedures Relating To The Provlsion of services To
The Homeless
INTRODUCTION
At its meetlng of August 9, 1994, the city Councll directed staff
to prepare a wrltten evaluatlon of an lnltlative measure pursuant
to Californla Electlons Code Sectlon 4009.5.
The inltlative
measure would amend Munlclpal Code provls1ons on nighttime park
closure and camplng on public property and add provisions on
abuslve sollcltation and the coordlnation of serVlce to homeless
persons. The measure would also address the City's allocation of
resources for serVlces to homeless persons and for law enforcement,
and it would require the reporting of lnformation relatlng to
certaln enforcement actlvlties.
The council specified that the evaluation should: (1) compare and
contrast the lnitiatlve measure to existlng law; (2) comment on the
legallty of the inltlatlve's provisions and upon any exposure to
SEP 0 7 1SSlt
llabllity WhlCh lt might create for the City; and (3) comment on
9A j
one section of the ~n~t1at~ve relat1ng to the number of homeless
persons covered by the c~ ty' s plan for serV1ces. This report
provides the information requested by the council.
DISCUSSION
Compar1son W1th Existing Law
The substant2ve provisions of the 2nit2ative deal with nighttime
park closure, camp1ng on publicly-owned property, and the manner
and location of solicitation. EX1sting provis1ons of the Municipal
Code address each of these tOp2CS. However, as explained below,
the spec2fic prov1s10ns of the 1n1tiat2ve d2ffer 2n certa1n
respects from present law.
As to park closure, the in1t1at2ve would lengthen the t2me that
parks are open at n1ght. The ~n~t1at1ve provides that city parks
shall be closed from 11 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., except for Palisades
Park which would be closed from 12 midnight to 5:00 a.m. A recent
amendment to the Mun~c2pal Code establishes park closure hours of
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. for all parks. See SMMC Sect10n 4.08.091.
Thus, w1th the except10n of Pal1sades Park, the 1n2tiative would
allow parks to stay open for an add2 tional half hour. The
in1tiat1ve would allow Pal1sades Park to stay open for an
additional 2 and 1/2 hours.
As to camping, the initiat1ve and present law use different
language and def2n2t1ons; but they impose similar prohibitions.
2
Both prohibit camping ln parks and other publlC places. Moreover,
both recognlze the City Councll's power to designate a place or
places for camping.
The l:1itiative makes it unlawful to erect, malntain or occupy
tents, huts, shelters, cots, sleeping bags, hammocks or bedrolls on
government property as "living accommodations. II The lnitiatlve
does not define the term "livlng accommodatlons.1I The Munlcipal
Code prohibits uSlng a public space for "living accommodations.1I
Section 4.08.095(a). It deflnes using a public space for "livlng
accommodations" as remainlng in the publl.c space for IIprolonged
lntervalsll while possessing belonglngs not associated wlth normal
usage of the space. In contrast, the initiative does not purport
to def ine when a person 15 us l.ng equipment as Jlli ving
accommodations" and does not mentlon any time interval. As is
discussed later In this report, both provisions may raise similar
legal lssues.
As to solicitation, the inltl.ative would add new restrlctions and
dupllcate the substance of existlng restrictions. Both the
initlative and present law permit a person to passively seek
donations, and both prohlbit certain aggressive conduct in
conjunction with solicltation. In s11ghtly dlfferent language,
both preclude Sollcitatlon WhlCh lncludes blocklng the solicltee's
way, threatening the solicltee wlth physical harm, following the
solicitee, abusing the solicltee wlth highly offenSlve language,
3
and touching the sol1ci~ee without h1S or her perm1ss10n. See SMMC
Sect10n 4.08.740. The most s1gnificant dlfference between the
lnitiative and the Munlclpal Code with regard to the manner of
solicltation is that the lnltiatlve prohib1ts corn1ng within 3 feet
of a solicitee until he or she agrees to the solicitation; the
Munic1pal Code does not.
As to restrictlons on the location of solicltatlon, the initlatlve
would prohibit solicitation in more locations than existing law
does. The l.nit1ative and Mun1cipal Code Sect1.on 4.08.750 both
prohiblt soliclting one who is 1n a publlC parklng structure, on
a publ1.c transportation veh1cle, 1n the outdoor dlning area of a
restaurant, or 1n a veh1cle travelling on a public street. with
regard to these restr1ctlons, the ~nitiative duplicates existing
law. As to the locat1.on of SOllCl tatlon, the most slgn1ficant
difference 1.S that the lnltlatlve would add prohlbitlons against
solicltation of persons in certain places where solicltation is now
allowed: at bus stops, in publlC transportatlon facilities, in
public parking lots, in lines of more than flve persons who are
wa1ting for admission to a place or vehicle or wait1ng to purchase
tickets.
Both the inltiative and eXlsting law prah1bit solicitation in the
vicinlty of an automatlc teller machine (ATM). The initiative
prohibits sollcitatlon w1th1n 50 feet of an ATM; the Munlcipal Code
proh1bits sollC1tat1on with~n 80 feet of an ATM. Thus, the
4,
lnltiatlve would permlt sol1cltatlon closer to an ATM than present
law allows.
The lnitiative also contains prOV1S10ns on planning and procedures
which differ, or may differ, from present law. The inltiative
would require that the City Council adopt a plan for the
coordination of services to homeless persons, review the plan
annually, and conduct a public hearing as part of each annual
review. At present, plannlng of all City-funded services occurs
ln accordance with Communlty Develop Block Grant procedures
established by the Municipal Code. See SMMC 2.69.060(b). Those
procedures include annual public hearings relating to all City-
funded services in conjunction with the budget process.
The 1nltlatlve provides ln Sectlon 8 that its provlsions may only
be changed by a vote of 3/4 of the Council. city Charter section
615 requlres the affirmative vote of at least four council members
to adopt an ordinance.
The lnitlative mandates that the Council shall supply to the Police
Department all resources necessary to effectuate the initiative
and shall adopt a plan to prevent an increase in expenditures for
services to homeless persons. See Section 7. The city Charter
Sections 1502 through 1505 empower the Council to make budgetary
decisions annually.
5
The lnitiat1ve would requlre the City Attorney to report statlstlcs
on prosecutions brought under state laws govern~ng possession of
shopping carts and encampment. Such reports are not requlred by
present law.
Potential Leqal Issues
Certaln prov1sions of the lnltlatlve are subject to legal
challenge. Unfortunately, in virtually all cases, the results are
dlfficult to predict.
The initlatlve's provlsion on encampment is vulnerable to legal
challenge on several grounds. However, the lni tiative' s
encampment provlslon lS probably no more vulnerable than any local
encampment measure which prohlbits more than erectlng tents and
uS1.ng stoves in publ1C places and which is coupled with a law
closing public places at nlght.
At present, the degree of vulnerability of such measures is very
dlfficult to assess because the case law 1S in a state of flux.
As the Council knows from past discussions, local laws against
camping l.n publ1C places have been challenged in a number of recent
law suits. In some instances, courts have concluded that such laws
v1.olate the r1ght to travel and the r1ght to be free from cruel or
unusual punishment. See e.q., Pottinqer v. Miami, 810 F. Supp.
1551 (S.D. Fla.1992). The Court of Appeal reached this conclusion
as to a Santa Ana ordinance in the case entitled Tobe v. Clty of
6
Santa Ana. (OCSC Case No. 69-60-00, Fourth Dist. Case No. G-014257,
review aranted). In other cases, the courts have reJected simllar
constltutional challenges. see, e.q., Peo?le v. Scott, 20
Cal.App.4th Supp.S (1993).
In callfornla, the courts have not yet rendered a definitive
decision on these issues. However, the California Supreme Court
may render such a declsion in the next year in Tobe v. Santa Ana.
Untll the law is settled, 1.t wll1 be very dlfflcult to assess
whether local encampment provlslons, like the City's present
encampment provlsion and the encampment provlsion in the
init1.at1.ve, violate the r1.ght to travel or the prohibit1.on agalnst
cruel and unusual pun1.shment.
Add1.tionally, encampment prOV1S1.ons may be vulnerable as a class of
statutes because they tend to be somewhat vague and overbroad.
Cla1.ms of vagueness and overbreadth have already been asserted
against the Clty's present encampment law. As to the l.nitiative,
the cla1.rn could be made that the encampment section is
unconstitutionally vague because l.t does not clearly specify what
conduct constitutes uS1.ng a specified ltem, such as a bedroll, as
a "l1.ving accornmodatlon.1l Does merely unrolling and lying down on
a bedroll constltute US1.ng it as a "living accommodation?" Or must
the person in pOSseSS1.on of the bedroll intend to 11ve, or actually
live (in the sense of establlshlng a temporary place of residence),
at the location where the bedroll lS placed for a per1.od of time?
7
Moreover, the potentlal lnflrolty of any camplng provislon may be
compounded lf it 15 coupled wlth a law closing public places at
night. In that situation, a court would llkely interpret a camplng
provision (like the one in the Initiative or the one l.n the
Municipal Code) as bel.ng lntended to prohIbit using eqUIpment such
as a bedroll l.n a public place durIng the daytime. Based on that
interpretatIon, a court could conclude such a campIng provision is
unconstitutionally overbroad because it effectlvely prohibits
harmless conduct such as lYIng down on a blanket during a slngle
afternoon. A court might also conclude that such a provl.sion
discrl.mInates irnpermisslbly between groups of people all of whom
engage in what lS fundamentally the same conduct: resting in the
park during the daytime. A court mlght reach such conclusions as
to elther the lnitlatl.Ve's camping provision or the City's present
encampment law.
On the other hand, no presently published decision in this
]Url.Sdlctlon lnvalldates as unconstItutional a prohl.bitlon against
camplng like the one contalned in the inl.tiative or the one
presently contalned in the Munlcipal Code. To the contrary, West
HOllYWOOd'S encampment ordinance (which is similar to both) was
challenged on constltutl.onal grounds and upheld in People v. Scott,
supra. That decisl.on was rendered by the Appellate Department of
the Los Angeles Munlcipal Court. The decision is pUblished and
therefore constItutes cl.table authorl.ty even though its legal
8
effect 1S limited because 1t was rendered the superior court and
not by the Court of Appeal.
Because the law is unsettled, we are presently unable to predict
with certainty whether the encampment provis1on of the initiative
would withstand a legal challenge.
The initiative's provisions on solicitation are also subject to
challenge; and the outcome of such a challenge 1S also difficult to
predict. However, certaln pr1nclples established by First
Amendment case law make the issues somewhat clearer.
As has been prev10usly expla1ned, the constitutional standard for
assessing limitations upon expressive conduct depends upon the
forum where expressions is being regulated. Cornellus v. NAACP
Leoal Defense And Educat10n Fund, Inc., 473 U.S. 788, 800 (1985).
In general, the government's right to restrict expression in a
class1c public forum -- such as the public streets -- is very
llmlted. United States v. Grace, 461 U.S. 171, 177 (1983).
Restrlctions on the t1me, place and manner of expression in such
locatlons will be upheld only if they are content neutral, serve a
slgnificant governmental lnterest, and leave open ample channels of
communication. Perry Educatlon Assn. v. Perry Local Education
Assn., 460 U.S. 37, 45 (1983).
9
Under that standard, there lS a signif1.cant chance that the
provlsions of the 1nitiative wh1.ch establ~sh a three-foot zone of
privacy, prohibit solicitatlon of persons ~n moVle lines and other
ques, and prohibit solicltat~on wlthin 50 feet of an ATM would be
deterwlned unconstl tutional. See, e. g., Ward v. Rock Aqainst
Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 791 (1989) [explainlng that the government's
purpose is the main consideration in determining whether an
ordinance is content neutral]; Madsen v. Women's Health Center
Inc., 62 U.S.L.W. 4686 (1994) [strlklng down a prohibition against
physlcally approaching any person seeking services of an abortion
clinlc unless such person lndicated a desire to communicate); Blair
v. Shanahan, 775 F. supp. 1315, 1324 (N.D.Cal., 1991) (explalning
that a statute prohiblting approachlng another for money was not
narrowly drawn].
Addltlonally, the prohibitions against aggressive conduct in
conjunctlon wlth solicitatlon could be challenged on the ground
that they are unnecessary because the crlmlnal law already
adequately regulates aggresslve conduct. Id. Agaln, Californla
law 15 uncerta1n at present, but we bel1.eve that these prohlbitions
would be upheld. See City of Seattle v. Webster, 802 P.2d 1333
(1990) [re)ectlng a challenge to the constitutional~ty of Seattle's
ordinance prohibitlng aggresslve panhandling].
Section B of the initiatlve provides in part that "no provision of
this measure shall be amended by the City Counc~l except upon the
10
aff1rmatlve vote of a least three-quarters of the City Counc1l."
The valid1ty of th1s provislon l.S questl.onable. Pursuant to
California Elections Code Section 4013, an inltiative measure
(including a measure proposed as an initiatlve but adopted by the
legislative body) may only be amended by a vote of the people,
unless the measure provides otherWlse. On its face, the initiative
purports to prov1de otherwise. However, the City Charter
establishes that any ordinance requlres II [t)he affirmative votes of
at least four members of the City Counell .. (Emphasls
supplied.) It is unclear whether the words "at leastll leave open
the possibility of requiring more than four votes by ordinance. If
not, Section 8 would be determl.ned invalid because no ordinance may
overrlde a conflictlng provision of the city Charter. If Section
B were lnvalidated, that deCls10n would presumably not affect the
remalnder of the in1tiatlve because it lncludes a severance
provis10n 1n Section 11 which would permit a court to strike down
only the 1nval1d section.
Finally, the initiative requ1res the City Council to provide to the
Police Department resources adequate to enforce the prov1sions of
the initiative and other measures relating to safety. The
inltiative also requires the adoptlon of an annual plan Wh1Ch would
prevent an increase or achieve a reduction in City expenditures for
homeless services. Insofar as these two provisions purport to
limit the power of a future City Council to exercise its budgetary
discret1on, they may be unenforceable.
11
As to the quest~on of potent~al l~ab~l~ty arls~ng as a consequence
of the adoption of the ~n~t~atlve, ~f the measure ~s adopted and
successfully challenged, the c~ty would probably be held liable for
the prevailing party's attorney's fees. Moreover, anyone who is
aggrieved by the substantive prov~sions of the ~nit~ative could
challenge the measure's constitutionality in a lawsuit for money
damages based upon an alleged violat1on of h~s or her civil rights.
Number of Homeless Persons Served
The inlt1atlve would requlre the City to plan to achieve a balance
between the number of homeless persons who receive non-housing
services and the number who can be housed withln the City. The
city is presently movlng ln that dlrection.
The FY 1994-1995 Community Development Plan, adopted by the City
Councll in June of thls year, emphaslzed a llnkage between housing
(temporary and permanent) and supportlve serVlces. The Council
made several funding decIsions which in effect redirected grants
from daytime free standlng meals and emergency serVlce programs to
treatment and case management services targeted at mov~ng homeless
people lndoors. In FY 1994-95, approxlmately 300 people will
receive case management at any glven tlme. Once the new shelter
opens In September at 505 Olympic, there wlll be approximately the
same number of shelter beds in the City. Durlng the winter months
approxlmately 150 addltlonal beds are provided through the County's
Emergency Cold Weather Program. In 1995, there will be an
12
additional 156 new places for homeless people through step Up On
second (36 SRO units), Turnlng POlnt (20 new beds), and the new
federally funded Shelter Plus Care program (100 unlts or vouchers} .
These housing resources for homeless people wlll be linked to case
management and to other supportlve serVlces.
Thus, the City is already dOl.ng the planning which would be
required by the initiative. However, it is l.mportant to note that
agencies funded l.n part by the Cl.ty also recel.ved other public and
private funds to operate these programs. Thl.S means that, although
the City is already emphaslz1ng houslng linked wlth serVlces and
employment, agencies may continue to operate emergency services
Wl.th non-Clty fundl.ng. Furthermore, there are many charitable and
religlous groups (some formal, some lnformal) WhlCh continue to
distrlbute food, clothlng, blankets and other help to homeless
people in public and private places.
FINANCIAL/BUDGETARY IMPACT
The provisions of lnitlative would have no signiflcant immediate
budgetary impact. There may be some minor expenses associated with
the lmplementatlon of the initiatlve such as park slgnage. The
long-range impact would depend upon how the inltiative language is
interpreted and lmplemented. The long-range lmpact could be
substantlal if, for example, the City undertook the malntenance of
files on all recipients of service to the homeless.
13
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the City Counc~l either
~ntroduce the init~at~ve for fJ.rst read~ng, set a date for a
special election, or resolve to place the measure on the ballot for
the next regular election.
Prepared by:
Marsha Jones Moutr~e, City Attorney
JulJ.e Rusk, Human Services Manager
14
CA:f:atty\muni\laws\mtt\elect8
city council Meeting 9-7-94
Santa Monica, California
RESOLUTION NUMBER
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OF ITS
MEMBERS TO FILE WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING A MEASURE
TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT AT THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION ON TUESDAY, , 1995
WHEREAS, a special Municipal Election is to be held in the
City of Santa Monica on Tuesday,
, 1995; and
WHEREAS, Elections Code Sectlon 5010 et seq. provides for
procedures for arguments concerning city measures; and
WHEREAS, Electlons Code sections 5013 and 5014.5 authorize the
city Council, or any member or members of the city Council
authorized by the city Council, to file written arguments,
including rebuttal arguments in favor of any city measure,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
The Clty Council authorizes the following
Councilmembers to file written arguments as follows:
- 1 -
ARGID1ENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSED ADDITIONS AND
AMENDMENTS
TO
THE
MUNICIPAL
CODE:
ARGUMENTS AGAINST:
SECTION 2.
written arguments, not to exceed 300 words in
length, are to be filed with the city Clerk no later than
1995.
Arguments so submitted may be changed or
withdrawn by the authors until and 1ncluding the date fixed by the
City Clerk after which no arguments for or against the measure may
be submitted to the city Clerk. Rebuttal arguments not exceeding
250 words may be submitted by persons for or against the Referendum
in accordance with Elections Code Section 5014.5.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolut1on, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
city Attorney
- 2 -
CA:f:\atty\muni\laws\rntt\elect10
City council Meeting 9-7-94
Santa Monica, California
RESOLUTION NUMBER
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA SETTING
FORTH ITS INTENT TO PLACE AN INITIATIVE
AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE SANTA
MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE ON THE BALLOT FOR
THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1996
WHEREAs,~:nitiative petition1 (" initiative petition~") to
/l , l
amend the Santa Monlca Municlpal Code regarding park closure hours,
camping in public places, restrictions on the manner and place of
solicitation, requlrements as to the coordination of services to
homeless persons, the provision of resources to the police
department, and reports on specified prosecutorial activities have
been circulated pursuant to Elections Code Sections 4000 et seq.;
and
WHEREAS, the city Clerk has certified that the initiative
petitionl contain not less than 10 percent of the voters of the
city of Santa Monica; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 9, 1994, the City council
ordered the preparation of a report on the effect of the provisions
of the initiative; and
1
WHEREAS, the report was duly submitted to the city council at
its meeting of September 7, 1994; and
\VHEREAS, Elections Code section 4011 requires the City council
to either adopt the initiative provisions without change or submit
the initiative provisionf to the voters at the next regular
municipal election occurring not less than 88 days after the order
of the City council;
WHEREAS, City Charter Section 1400 provides that a General
Municipal Election shall be held on the first Tuesday following the
first Monday of Nove~ber of each even numbered year for the purpose
of election of elected officers; and
WHEREAS, the next regular municipal election occurring not
less than 88 days after the date of this resolution is November 5,
1996; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. It is the intent of this C1ty council to place the
initiative amending the Santa Monica Municipal Code before the
voters at the next General Municipal Election, which shall be held
in the City of Santa Monica on November 5, 1996.
2
SECTION 2. The city Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
city Attorney
3
"
CA:f:atty\munl\laws\mtt\elect9
City Council Meeting 9-7-94
santa Monica, California
RESOLUTION NUMBER
(City council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK
TO OBTAIN SPECIFIED SERVICES TO THE CITY RELATING
TO THE CONDUCT OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON 1995
WHEREAS, a Special Munlcipal Election is to be held in the
City of Santa Monica on
, 1995.
WHEREAS, in the course of conduct of the election it is
necessary for the City Clerk to obtain the services of a
professional election supplier; and
WHEREAS, all necessary expenses in performing these services
shall be paid by the City of Santa Monica,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the firm of Martln & Chapman Co., being a
sole source, is approved to furnish to the City all necessary
services and supplies authorized by the City Clerk to conduct
either a concurrent or consolidated election, consisting of the
following services:
- 1 -
1. Provide a Calendar of Election Events setting out dates
and requirements of the Election Code.
2. Provide suggested forms of resolutlons and notices
required for the election.
3. Provide necessary ballots, supplies and instructions for
voting in the precinct and for absentee voting.
4. Provide Self-Mailer Sample Ballot & Voters Pamphlet with
candidates statements, measures and absent voter
application.
S. Prepare and attach special labels to Self-Mailer pamphlet
and arrange for delivery to the post office.
6. Have a qual~fied person available by telephone or ~n
person at all times to assist the Clty Clerk should
problems arise at any tlme during the election process.
7. Furnish general guidance throughout the election.
SECTION 2. That the City shall pay Martin & Chapman Co. for
all election supplies and services rendered. In the event any
election supplies requested by the City and furnished by Martin &
Chapman Co. are not correct, or contain errors so that the same are
not acceptable to or usable by the City, there shall be no charge
therefor made upon the City.
SECTION 3. That Martln & Chapman Co. shall submit an itemized
invoice to the City detaillng the supplies furnlshed. The City
shall pay all sums due and owing within 15 days of the receipt of
the statement.
- 2 -
SECTION 4. That the total amount of these services shall not
exceed $ : ~ 5] 00(.)
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall
be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
- 3 -
CA:f:atty\muni\laws\mtt\elect7
city council Meeting 9-7-94
Santa Monica, California
RESOLUTION NUMBER
(city council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA CALLING FOR AND GIVING NOTICE
OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, , 1995
WHEREAS, Elections Code section 17050 authorizes the City
Council to provide that all ballots cast at the Special Municipal
Election be counted at a central counting place; and
WHEREAS, Elect~ons Code Sect~on 5011 authorizes the City
Council to direct the City Clerk to transmit a measure appearing on
the ballot to the city Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A Special Munic~pal Election shall be held in the
city of Santa Monica on
, 1995, which is the election
ordered in accordance with Elections code section 4055 for the
purpose of submitting an initiative amending the Santa Monica
Municipal Code to the voters of the City of Santa Monica.
- 1 -
SECTION 2. At the Special Munlcipal Electlon called for
1995, the following proposi tlon shall be submitted to the
qualified electors of the City of Santa Monica:
PROPOSITION II II Shall City
Municipal Code sections 4.08.091,
4.08.093 and 4.08.095 be amended,
and Sections 2.69.010, 2.69.020,
2.69.030, 4.08.092, 4.54.010,
4.54.020, 4.54.030, 4.54.040 be
added, regardlng park closure
hours, camping in publlC places,
restrictions on the manner and
place of solicitation, require-
ments as to the coordination of
services to homeless persons, the
provision of resources to the
police department, and reports on
specified prosecutorial
actlvities.
Yes
No
The City Clerk shall cause the text of the proposition, which is
contained in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and incorporated by
reference, to be mailed to all qualified voters with the sample
ballot. The City Clerk shall cause the text of the proposition to
be published in the official newspaper and in each edition thereof
during the day of publication in the manner required by law.
SECTION 4. The ballots to be used at the Special Municipal
Election shall be both as to form and matter contained therein such
as may be required by law.
- 2 -
SECTION 5. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and
directed to procure and furnish any and all official ballots,
notices, printed matter, and all supplies, equipment, and
paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and
lawfully conduct the Special Munlcipal Election.
, I'
SECTION 6. The polls for the Special Municipal Election shall
be open at 7:00 a.m. of the day of the electlon and shall remaln
open continuously until 8:00 p.m. of the same day when the polls
shall be closed, except as provlded in Elections Code Section
14301.
SECTION 7. The notice of the tlme and place of holding of the
Special Municipal Election is hereby given and the city Clerk is
authorized, instructed and directed to give such further or
additlonal notice of the electlon in the time, form and manner
required by law.
SECTION 8. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 17050, the city
Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give such notice of
the central counting place in the time, form and manner required by
law.
SECTION 9. Pursuant to Elections Code section 5011, the City
Clerk is directed to transnll t a copy of each measure to be
submitted to the voters to the City Attorney and the city Attorney
is directed to prepare an impartial analysis of each measure
- 3 -
showing the effect of the measure on the eX1sting law and the
operation of the measure in accordance w1th the provisions of
Elections Code section 5011. The impartial analysis shall be filed
by the date set by the City Clerk for the filing of primary
arguments.
SECTION 10.
In all particulars not recited in this
Resolution, the Special Municipal Election shall be held and
conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections in the
City of Santa Monica.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
- 4 -
( 0 '-1- 0-;; 9
98
CC CED (PC:am:\electIon\In1t)
CIty Council MeetIng August 9, 1994
Santa MOllica, Califorma
AUG 0 9 199't
TO
Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM
Clance E. Dykhouse, City Clerk _
~Ai( /0~~'-c
SUBJECT
Certification of QualIfICatIOn of an IrntiatIve PetItIon entItled "Public Safety
and Homeless Services Act of 1994"
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends the City CouncIl receIve and fIle the attached CertifICatiOn of
Qualification for an initiative petItIon entitled t'PublIc Safety and Homeless ServIces Act of
1994."
BACKGROUND
On August 2, 1994, the initiative petition was filed WIth the CIty Clerk The petition requested
adoption of the "PublIc Safety and Homeless ServIces Act of 1994" or that It be subnutted to
a vote of the people of Santa Moruca at the next regular electIon or at a SpecIal ElectIOn
The signatures on the petitIon were qualIfIed by the Registrar-Recorder of Los Angeles County
and the City Clerk.
DISCUSSION
CIty CouncIl actIOn to receIve and fIle the CertIficatlon IS reqUIred followed by direction to
eIther
1 Introduce the Ordmance for fIrst reading, or
2 Order a report pursuant to ElectIOn Code SectIOn 4009 5, which states
"Dunng the cIrculatlon of the petltlon, or before takIng eIther actIon descnbed In
subdIVISIOns (a) and (b) of Section 4010, or Section 4011, the legIslative body
may refer the proposed IrntIatIve measure to any CIty agency or agenCIes for a
report on any or all of the followmg.
(1) Its fiscal Impact.
(2) Its effect on the Internal conSIstency of the CIty's general and specific
plans IncludIng the housmg element, the conSIstency between planmng and
zoning, the lunitatIOns on city actions under Sectlon 65008 of the
Government Code, Chapters 4.2 (commencmg WIth Section 65913) and
AUG 0 9 1994
98
1
4 3 (commencing WIth Section 65915) of DIvisIOn 1 of TItle 7 of the
Government Code
(3) Any other matters the CouncIl requests to be m the report
The report shall be presented to the legIslatIve body wlthm the tune prescribed
by the legislatIve body but no later than 30 days after the clerk certIfIes to the
legislatIve body the sufficiency of the petItIon," or
3 Place the measure on the next regular mumclpal electIon occurring not less than 88 days
after the Council order or after the CouncIl IS presented with the above report , or
4 Call a SpecIal ElectIOn.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The estImated cost to place the measure on the ballot would be as follows'
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
Cost. $25,000
SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
Cost: $125,000
RECOMMENDATION
ReceIVe and file Cenlfication of Quahflcanon, and take appropriate action.
Prepared by Clarice E. Dykhouse, Cny Clerk
Attachment: CertIficate of Signature Count of ImtIauve PetIuon
2
CERTIFICATE OF SIGNATURE COUNT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )S5.
CITY OF SANTA MON ICA )
t CLARICE E. DYKHOUSE, City Clerk of the Santa Monica do hereby certify that at 9:00
A.M on August 2, 1994, JEAN SEDILLAS submitted to my office an mltlatlve petition
entitled IIPUBLlC SAFETY AND HOMELESS SERVICES ACT OF 199411
In accordance wIth ElectIon Code Section 4051 It has been determined that the last
official report of registration to the Secretary of State at the time of fdmg was 53,942
registered voters and 10% of said registration would require 5,394 valid signatures and
15% would require 8,091 valid signatures to qualify the mltlatlve petition.
In accordance with ElectIon Code Section 3708, a sample exammatlon of 500 signatures
has determined that said petition contains 290 qualified signatures which IS 58% and
qualifies the petition to be sufficient with more than 10% but less than 15% of the
registered voters Said petition IS hereby qualified this 9th day of August, 1994
~-<<,.-e-f --a~
- CLAAICE E DYKHOUSE, tMC
City Clerk of the City of Santa Mon lea
CITY CLERK'S PETITION QUALIFICATION REPORT
NUMBER OF
SIGNATURES
PERCENT OF
SIGNATURES
QUALIFIED
UNQUALIFIED
TOTALS
290
210
500
58 000
42.000
100.000
UNQUALIFIED
NOT FOUND ON LACES 82
NOT REGISTERED 1
OUT OF DISTRICT ADDRESS 1
INVALID REGISTRATION DATE 3
INVALID CIRCULATOR 123
16.400
200
200
600
24.600
SAMPLE EXAMINATION OF SIGNATURES
Elections Code 9 3708
10%
A REQUIRED 5,394
B FILED 12,111
NEED:
95% x 5,394 = 5,124
110% x 5,394 = 5,933
95%" 5,124 - 12,111 = 42.31 %
110% 5,933 - 12,111 = 48 99%
15%
A. REQUIRED 8,091
B FILED 12,111
NEED:
95% x 8,091 = 7,686
110% x 8,091 = 8,900
95%:
110%'
7,686 - 12,111 = 63.46%
8,900 - 12,111 = 73.48%
OVER 110% - QUALIFIES
95-110% - EXAMINE EACH SIGNATURE FILED
UNDER 95% - PETITION INSUFFICIENT TO QUALIFY
ELECTIONS OFFICE
ID:3108632039
RUG 09'94
17:19 No.002 P 02
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
REGISTRAR-RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK
12400 IMPERIAL HVVY - POBOX 1024, NORWALK, CALIFORNIA 906tl1-1024
BEATRIZ VALDEZ
REGIS1RMI-RECOROER/COUNTV Cl FRK
August 9, 1994
Mrs. Clarice E. Dykhouse. City Clerk
City of Santa MOnica
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa MOnica, California 90407-2200
Dear Mrs. Dykhouse:
Enclosed are 945 petition sections pertaining to an initiative measure which you
submitted for signature verrficatlon on August 2, 1994.
The results of the signature verification based on a random sampling check are as
follows:
Number of signatures filed
12,111
Number of signatures venfied
500
- Number of signatures qualified
413
- Number of signatures not qualified
87
Projected valid signatures based on
random sample
10,003
Please call Allee Rivers of the Election Coordination Unit at (310) 462~2632 If you need
any additional information.
Very truly yours,
~~~~~
~T~I~ V~EZ 0
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
03 SM5
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
REGISTRAR-RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK
12400 IMPERIAL HWY - POBOX 1024. NORWALK, CALIFORNIA 90651-1024
BEATRIZ VALDEZ
gEGIST~""P RECORDEfli:OU"ny CLER;.;,
August 9, 1994
Mrs Clance E Dykhouse, City Clerk
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa MOnica, California 90407 -2200
Dear M rs Dykhouse
Enclosed are 945 petition sections pertaining to an initiative measure which you
submitted for signature Verification on August 2, 1994
The results of the signature Verification based on a random sampling check are as
follows
Number of signatures filed
12,111
Number of signatures verified
500
- Number of signatures qualified
413
- Number of signatures not qualified
87
Projected valid signatures based on
random sample
10,003
Please call Alice Rivers of the Election Coordination Unit at (310) 462-2632 If you need
any additional Information
Very truly yours,
~~t~~~~~'li'(J
Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk
D3 SM5
RECEIPT FOR INITIATIVE PETITION
AND
CERTIFICATE OF SIGNATURE COUNT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
I, CLARICE E DYKHOUSE, City Clerk of the Santa Monica do hereby certify that at g.oo
AM on August 2, 1994, JEAN SEOlllAS submitted to my office an Initiative petition
entitled "PUBLlC SAFITY AND HOMELESS SERVICES ACT OF 1994".
Pursuant to the provisions of Election Code Section 4008, said petition was examined on
said date and found to contain 947 petition sections (268 - 22 page petitions and 679 - 4
page petitions), as shown in Exhibit itA" attached hereto
In accordance With Election Code Section 4051 It has been determined that the last
offiCial report of registration to the Secretary of State at the time of filing was 53,942
registered voters and 10% of said registration would require 5,394 val id signatures to
qualify the initiative petitIOn. 15% of the registered voters would require 8,091 valid
signatures.
In accordance With Election Code Section 4008(b), It has been determined that said
petition contains 12,257 signatures, prima facie, which IS In excess of the minimum
number of sIgnatures required In order to qualify for filing and saId petItIon IS hereby
acknowledged as officially filed thIS 2nd day of August, 1994 at Santa Monica, CA.
~j /r7 -1/ #_ _
-~ /// C .. ~j.:_.
CLARICE E. DYKHOUSE, 'cMC/AAE
City Clerk of the CIty of Santa MOnica, California
I contacted the Registrar-Recorder regarding their verificatIOn of the petltIOn and was advised
that they would not be able to guarantee the signature venficatlons of the petitIOn wIthm the time
frame needed to place a measure on the November 8, 1994 ballot - August 9, 1994, unless I
authorized the random samphng technIque.
I, therefore, approve the use of a random signature method.
The ElectIon Code
1 authorizes the City Clerk to verify the sIgnatures using either method,
2 provides for the expeditIous processmg of voter mmatlve petltlons, and,
3 directs all elections to be held on establIshed electIon dates
If the petition is certified as being sufficient, I will present this information to
the Council at their meeting of August 9, 1994:
Electlon Code Sectlon 4009 5 states "Dunng the CirculatIOn of the petltIOn, or before talang
eIther action descnbed m subdIVisions (a) and (b) of Section 4010, or Section 4011, the
legislatIve body may refer the proposed ImtlatIve measure to any City agency or agencies for a
report on any or all of the followmg
(1) Its fiscal Impact
(2) Its effect on the internal consIstency of the CIty's general and speCIfic plans
includmg the housing element, the consistency between planrung and zomng, the
lImitatIOns on CIty actIOns under SectIon 65008 of the Government Code,
Chapters 4.2 (commencmg WIth SectIOn 65913) and 43 (commencmg With
Sectlon 65915) of DIVISion 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code
(3) Any other matters the Councll requests to be In the report.
The report shall be presented to the legIslatIve body within the time prescribed by the legislative
body but no later than 30 days after the clerk certIfies to the legIslative body the sufficiency of
the petmon
If the petItion IS suffICIent WIth 15 % of the voters,
2