What is a referendum?

Useful Rulings on Referendum

Recent Rulings on Referendum

CHATSWORTH CAS, LLC VS OREN LANG

One referendum would not allow for a cannabis business at the Premises. Lang Decl. ¶7. Due to the potential change in policy and without the $ 2 million, Lang’s company was not yet created. Lang Decl. ¶8. Chatsworth and Lang, as an individual, entered a fictional Lease for Chatsworth to secure funding from the bank. Lang Decl. ¶8. They did not intend the Lease to be a valid contract and intended to later amend it to form one. Lang Decl. ¶8, Ex. A.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

LUMINA V. UMINA

The state constitutional right of initiative or referendum is “one of the most precious rights of our democratic process.” [Citation.] These powers are reserved to the people, not granted to them. Thus, it is our duty to “ ‘ “jealously guard” ’ ” these powers and construe the relevant constitutional provisions liberally in favor of the people’s right to exercise the powers of initiative and referendum. [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Jun 12, 2020

LUMINA V. UMINA

The state constitutional right of initiative or referendum is “one of the most precious rights of our democratic process.” [Citation.] These powers are reserved to the people, not granted to them. Thus, it is our duty to “ ‘ “jealously guard” ’ ” these powers and construe the relevant constitutional provisions liberally in favor of the people’s right to exercise the powers of initiative and referendum. [Citation.]

  • Hearing

    Jun 12, 2020

RICHARD HERNANDEZ VS CITY OF COMMERCE, ET AL.

After the ordinances were passed, Plaintiffs circulated 22 referendum petitions to Commerce citizens, each entitled “Referendum Against an Ordinance Passed by the City Council,” and gathered the requisite number of signatures required to present each petition to the City Council. (Compl. ¶¶ 41-42.) Plaintiffs allege that the City Clerk improperly rejected all the petitions. (Compl. ¶¶ 43-44.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 17, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

  • Judge

    Richard E. Rico or Jon R. Takasugi

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

GREATER SGV SAFE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION VS CITY OF EL MONTE, ET AL.

Similarly, the City points out that the Elections Code provided Petitioner with a workaround — a referendum petition. “If a petition protesting the adoption of an ordinance … is submitted to the elections official of the legislative body of the city … and is signed by not less than 10 percent of the voters of the city …, the effective date of the ordinance shall be suspended and the legislative body shall reconsider the ordinance.” (Elec. Code § 9237.)

  • Hearing

    Mar 06, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

OAK HILL PARK CO. VS. THE CITY OF ANTIOCH

The Scope Of Initiative And Referendum. Oak Hill argues that the Richland Initiative exceeded the scope of initiative and referendum. (See, Cal. Const., Art. II, § 8.) This is because the powers of initiative and referendum apply only to legislative acts, and do not extend to administrative acts.

  • Hearing

    Nov 21, 2019

CITIZENS FOR AMENDING PROPOSITION L, ET AL. VS CITY OF POMONA, ET AL.

In November 1993, after the Development Agreement had already gone into effect, the City adopted Proposition L through a referendum, which added section .503-K-K to the City’s Municipal Code. (Pomona Municipal Code § .503-K-K, Editor's Note.) Section .503-K-K states, in relevant part, that no new or structurally altered offsite billboards shall be permitted within the City. The first term of the Development Agreement ended in 2004 but was automatically extended for a subsequent 10-year term. (SAC ¶ 16.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 09, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

MONTE NIDO RESIDENTIAL CENTER LLC VS TERRY EAGAN M D

In Walmart, by successfully opposing Walmart’s petition for writ of mandate plaintiff protected the rights of thousands of voters to decide an issue by a referendum in accordance with state law. And in City of Sacramento the plaintiff successfully prevented the city from imposing the cost of building schools on its citizens without a vote by those citizens.

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GOVERNOR EDMUND G. BROWN JR. IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY VS. SECRETARY OF STATE ALEX PADILLA, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY

The initiative had three basic parts: one would have made the selection of public parking sites the subject of popular referendum, a second would have abrogated local officials’ authority to acquire public parking sites through eminent domain, and a third would have halted a particular parking project. (Id., pp. 819-820, 830.) The court held that the initiative was invalid because the transfer of power it contemplated could not be achieved through an initiative ordinance.

  • Hearing

    May 31, 2019

OAK HILL PARK VS. CITY OF ANTIOCH

County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th 763, 787, fn. 9 [“[I]t is well established that any legislative act may be enacted by initiative and may be subject to referendum, regardless of whether that act is denominated an ‘ordinance" or ‘resolution.’”].) Whether a voter initiative may adopt an ordinance or resolution is a slightly different question than whether the City Council may adopt an initiative by ordinance or resolution.

  • Hearing

    May 02, 2019

MOLLOY VS VU

Real Parties are registered voters and proponents of the proposed referendum. The petition challenges the validity of the referendum petition, as well as activities associated with gathering signatures for the referendum petition – activity within the protections of CCP 425.16. In the second step, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate a "probability of prevailing" based on admissible evidence. (Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 384; City of Santa Monica v.

  • Hearing

    Apr 18, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

THOMAS D. VENCE V. CINDY TZAFOPOULOS, ET AL.

Certain citizens of the City, including Petitioner filed a petition and referendum against the adoption of the ordinance. The City was then required to either repeal the RSO or present it as a referendum to all of the voters. On February 26, 2019, the City Council considered a resolution calling for a special election on June 4, 2019, to present to St. Helena voters the question of whether to adopt the RSO. The agenda packet prepared by staff for the meeting included a draft resolution.

  • Hearing

    Apr 11, 2019

  • Judge

    Monique Langhorne

  • County

    Napa County, CA

LORIE ANN GUZMAN V. MANDARICH LAW GROUP, LLP, ET AL.

Courts have thus refused “for example, to withhold a measure from the ballot because of the theoretical possibility that a smaller type size in a title might have affected potential signers when the actual type size utilized was not unduly small and was clearly readable, or to invalidate a referendum petition because of the theoretical possibility that minor errors in the text of the measure attached to the petition might have been read and relied upon by some of the persons who signed the petition.”

  • Hearing

    Apr 05, 2019

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS MALAND

"The electorate has the power to initiate legislative acts, but not administrative ones: "While it has been generally said that the reserved power of initiative and referendum accorded by article IV, section 1, of the Constitution is to be liberally construed to uphold it whenever reasonable [citations], it is established beyond dispute that the power of referendum may be invoked only with respect to matters which are strictly legislative in character [citations].

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

MOLLOY VS VU

In response to the Board's GPA approval, the Committee Against Newland Sierra and Bad Development (the "Committee" or "Referendum Proponents"), a coalition of County residents and public interest groups, gathered over 117,000 signatures on a petition to refer the GPA to a vote. At issue in this writ is the validity of the referendum petition. Plaintiff Scott Molloy seeks to invalidate the referendum.

  • Hearing

    Dec 07, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

GAIDO V. MCLAUGHLIN

to do so;” and (2) “On the First Cause of Action, that this Court issue a peremptory writ of mandate prohibition commanding Respondents and their officers, agents, and all persons acting by, through or in concert with them, from including the Ballot Label adopted by the City Council for the Referendum in the ballot and sample ballot for use this June.”

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2018

GLEASON VS. DEBRA BOWEN IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Petitioner needed 504,760 valid qualifying signatures to qualify the referendum for the November 2014 statewide election ballot. Petitioner submitted about 620,000 signatures in support of the referendum. However, after reviewing the petitions, county election officials disqualified over 130,000 o f t h e signatures, leaving the referendum 17,276 signatures short of the number needed to qualify for the ballot.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2018

GLEASON VS. DEBRA BOWEN IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Petitioner needed 504,760 valid qualifying signatures to qualify the referendum for the November 2014 statewide election ballot. Petitioner submitted about 620,000 signatures in support of the referendum. However, after reviewing the petitions, county election officials disqualified over 130,000 of the signatures, leaving the referendum 17,276 signatures short of the number needed to qualify for the ballot.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2018

JOSE VILLANUEVA VS CITY OF WEST HOLLYWOOD ET AL

While the Referendum Petitions were being circulated, unknown persons solicited voters to sign pre-printed cards asking the City to withdraw their names and signatures from the petitions (“Withdrawal Cards”). Pet. ¶20. Each Withdrawal Card, referencing both Referendum Petitions, declared a “wish to withdraw my name and signature from the referendum petitions that are seeking the reconsideration of the ordinances.” Ibid. On March 6, 2017, the Referendum Petitions were timely filed with the City Clerk.

  • Hearing

    Aug 21, 2018

MARK I. GREENE VS CALIFORNIA COSTAL COMMISSION

Absent a referendum passed by the people…, the Supreme Court again held again [sic.] that such a taking by ordinance or commission imposed condition would be illegal….. Thus, we believe that the setback condition suggested by the Commission Staff is legally untenable and in conflict with State and Federal court precedent.” AR 645. Observing that this letter mentions “taking,” Petitioners argue that it qualifies to exhaust the taking issue. Reply at 7.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2018

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS MALAND

"The electorate has the power to initiate legislative acts, but not administrative ones: "While it has been generally said that the reserved power of initiative and referendum accorded by article IV, section 1, of the Constitution is to be liberally construed to uphold it whenever reasonable [citations], it is established beyond dispute that the power of referendum may be invoked only with respect to matters which are strictly legislative in character [citations].

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS MALAND

"The electorate has the power to initiate legislative acts, but not administrative ones: "While it has been generally said that the reserved power of initiative and referendum accorded by article IV, section 1, of the Constitution is to be liberally construed to uphold it whenever reasonable [citations], it is established beyond dispute that the power of referendum may be invoked only with respect to matters which are strictly legislative in character [citations].

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS MALAND

"The electorate has the power to initiate legislative acts, but not administrative ones: "While it has been generally said that the reserved power of initiative and referendum accorded by article IV, section 1, of the Constitution is to be liberally construed to uphold it whenever reasonable [citations], it is established beyond dispute that the power of referendum may be invoked only with respect to matters which are strictly legislative in character [citations].

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS MALAND

"The electorate has the power to initiate legislative acts, but not administrative ones: "While it has been generally said that the reserved power of initiative and referendum accorded by article IV, section 1, of the Constitution is to be liberally construed to uphold it whenever reasonable [citations], it is established beyond dispute that the power of referendum may be invoked only with respect to matters which are strictly legislative in character [citations].

  • Hearing

    Jul 11, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS MALAND

Courts have described the initiative and referendum as articulating one of the most precious rights of our democratic process. It has long been judicial policy to apply a liberal construction to this power wherever it is challenged in order that the right be not improperly annulled. If doubts can reasonably be resolved in favor of the use of this reserve power, courts will preserve it. (Associated Home Builders etc., Inc. v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 03, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

1 2 3     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.