2010 California Proposition 16

{{Infobox referendum

| name = Proposition 16

| title = Local Electricity Providers

|date=June 8, 2010

|country=California

| yes = 2,526,544

| no = 2,820,135

| total = 5,346,679

| invalid =

| map = 300px

| mapcaption = {{col-begin}}

For

Against

}}

2010 California Proposition 16 in the California state elections, June 2010, was an initiative that would have amended the state constitution to require two-thirds supermajority voter approval before local governments could use public funds or issue bonds to establish or expand public electricity service or community choice aggregation. The proposition was rejected by an approximate 5 point margin.

Supporters of the proposition dubbed it the "Taxpayers Right to Vote Act". Campaign materials, including statewide network television advertisements, cited a $2.5 billion cost for proposed new public electricity projects, and said that voters should have the final say on how public funds are spent.{{cite web|last=Hull|first=Dana|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_15263304?nclick_check=1|title=Public anger at PG&E helped sink Prop. 16|work=San Jose Mercury News|date=June 9, 2010|access-date=June 9, 2010}} According to the campaign committee's official financial disclosures, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company contributed $44.1 million of the committee's $44.2 million total receipts.{{cite web|url=http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1318623&session=2009&view=received|title=California Secretary of State - CalAccess - Campaign Finance|access-date=June 18, 2010}}

Opponents included municipal power agencies, which were prohibited by law from campaigning against it. Opponents cited a June 2008 study that found that customers of public electricity providers paid lower rates than customers of private utilities. The opposing campaign was outspent 500 to 1, and was conducted largely over the Internet and at local civic events.{{cite web|author=Marc Lifsher and Dianne Klein|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-california-prop16-20100610,0,6055763.story|title=PG&E's customers vote down Prop. 16|work=Los Angeles Times|date=June 9, 2010|access-date=June 9, 2010}}

Results

The election was marked by low overall voter turnout, with a stronger turnout from Republican voters, due to several high-profile Republican primary contests on the same ballot, and few Democratic primary contests. The California Republican Party endorsed Proposition 16,{{cite web|url=http://www.cagop.org/index.cfm/voter_guide.htm|title=Official Republican Voter Guide|access-date=June 12, 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100617003642/http://www.cagop.org/index.cfm/voter_guide.htm|archive-date=June 17, 2010|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}} while the California Democratic Party,{{cite web|url=http://www.cadem.org/atf/cf/%7BBF9D7366-E5A7-41C3-8E3F-E06FB835FCCE%7D/Endorsements_June2010.pdf |title=California Democratic Party 2010 State Convention Results — June Primary Positions |access-date=June 12, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100601150103/http://www.cadem.org/atf/cf/%7BBF9D7366-E5A7-41C3-8E3F-E06FB835FCCE%7D/Endorsements_June2010.pdf |archive-date=June 1, 2010 }} Green Party of California,{{cite web|author=Green Party of California|url=http://www.cagreens.org/elections/2010/Propositions.Plenary.shtml|title=Party Positions on Propositions|date=March 10, 2010|access-date=June 12, 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100518164327/http://www.cagreens.org/elections/2010/Propositions.Plenary.shtml|archive-date=May 18, 2010|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}} and Peace and Freedom Party{{cite web|url=http://peaceandfreedom.org/home/campaign |title=Peace and Freedom Party Campaign 2010 |access-date=June 12, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100409014856/http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/home/campaign |archive-date=April 9, 2010 }} opposed it, and the Libertarian Party of California took no position.{{cite web|url=http://ca.lp.org/article_399.shtml|title=LPC Proposition Recommendations -- June 2010|access-date=June 12, 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100614040338/http://ca.lp.org/article_399.shtml|archive-date=June 14, 2010|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}}

After the election, a wider, 16 point margin of defeat was noted in the northern and central California counties served by Pacific Gas & Electric, while other counties supported the proposition.

{{Referendum

| title = Proposition 16{{cite web|url=http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-primary/pdf/2010-complete-sov.pdf |title=June 8, 2010, Primary Election Statement of Vote |format=PDF |publisher=California Secretary of State |date=2010-07-16 |access-date=2010-08-21 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100722063405/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-primary/pdf/2010-complete-sov.pdf |archive-date=2010-07-22 }}

| no = 2,820,135

| nopct = 52.75

| yes = 2,526,544

| yespct = 47.25

| valid = 5,346,679

| validpct = 94.55

| invalid = 308,134

| invalidpct = 5.45

| total = 5,654,813

| turnoutpct = 33.31

| electorate = 16,977,031

}}

References

External links

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jun/07/california-ballot-pacific-gas-electric Guardian (2010-06-08): California ballot battle pits Pacific Gas and Electric against consumer groups]
[https://web.archive.org/web/20100610054346/http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/16/ Secretary of State of California: Voter Guide: Proposition 16]

Category:Electoral system ballot measures in the United States

Category:Failed amendments to the Constitution of California

Category:Initiatives in the United States