1,722 / 36.66% Yes votes ...... 2,975 / 63.34% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

In 1988, the voters adopted, as Measure B, Chapter 2.72 of the Municipal Code. Under Section 2.72.010, any appropriation or expenditure of public revenues or funds in excess of $1,000,000 by any City representative( s) or agency (including the Housing Authority and Redevelopment Agency) for the (re) development of certain public facilities requires the prior approval of the voters.

Proposition L would amend Chapter 2.72 in two respects:

First, the $1,000,000 expenditure limit in Section 2.72.010 would be increased to $1,400,000. The City Council directed staff to calculate the present dollar value of the expenditure limit in Measure B. Staff reported that a public project costing $1,000,000 in 1988 would cost $1,415,000 in 2000.

Second, the proposed new expenditure limit could increase annually based on the Consumer Price Index. This "cost of living" proviso would increase the expenditure limit equal to the annual rate of inflation.

Proposition L does not impose new fees or taxes on City residents, property owners, or businesses.

The impartial analysis prepared for Measure B in 1988 advised: "The courts have clearly established that an initiative measure such as this cannot apply to the administrative acts of a city council. Administrative actions include such things as buying public park lands and purchasing supplies for use in the current operation of local government. In addition, an initiative may not restrict the city council with respect to matters delegated by the State legislature and where it is carrying out State legislative policy. Housing authorities and redevelopment agencies come into existence by action of the city council but act as an agency of the State acting under State law. Therefore, the courts have held, 'The functioning of such an agency is beyond the reach of, or controlled by, a municipal initiative or referendum. '"

Proposition L does not eliminate the legal infirmity originally included in Measure B. To the extent the City of Lawndale is required to expend public funds or revenues mandated by state or federal law, or to the extent Chapter 2.72 purports to apply to the Lawndale Housing Authority or Redevelopment Agency, then, and to that extent only, Chapter 2.72 of the Municipal Code is unenforceable.

Your YES vote means you want to increase the expenditure limit (or cap) contained in Chapter 2.72 of the Municipal Code from $1,000,000 to $1,400,000, subject to further annual increases based on the Consumer Price Index. Your NO vote means you do not want to increase the expenditure limit (or cap) contained in Chapter 2.72 at this time.

/s/ William W. Wynder, City Attorney

The people of the City of Lawndale, California, do hereby ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Lawndale Municipal Code Section 2.72.010 is hereby amended, in its entirety, to read as follows:

2.72.010 When Required.

The appropriation and/or expenditure of public funds/revenue in excess of one million four hundred thousand dollars (inclusive of financing), which amount may increase annually by a rate not to exceed the applicable Consumer Price Index from and after the date of enactment of this Section, by any city representative or representatives, or agency (inclusive of housing authorities and/or redevelopment agencies) for the redevelopment or development of public facilities, shall be contingent on a mandate expressed by the registered voters of the city of Lawndale, county of Los Angeles. For purposes of this section, the term "a mandate expressed by the registered voters" means approval by a majority of those registered voters of the city voting on any ballot measure submitted to them as required by this section and the term "public funds/ revenue" means all funds administered or controlled by the city. This section shall not apply to any appropriation and/ or expenditure where the action of the city representative or representatives or city agency in approving an appropriation or expenditure is administrative in nature and not legislative, or where this section is in conflict with or preempted by state or federal law.