Public Comment Re: 15-0002-S213 Title: Measure M / Instituting a New Half-Cent Sales Tax / Regional Transportation and Transit Projects {Exempt From Filing Fee • gotms 'Government Code § 6103] At^lSO 1 ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP SUNNY K. SOLTANI, State Bar No. 209774 2 ssoltani@awattorneys. com G. ROSS TRINDLE, Hi, State Bar No. 228654 FILED 3 gtrindle@awattorneys. com Superior Court of California CHRISTOPHER F. NEUMEYER, State Bar No. 257599 Countv of Cos An poles 4 cneumeyer(3>awattorneys. com AUG ^2016 2361 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 475 5 El Segundo, California 90245 Sherri R, Carter, Executive ulficer/Clerfc Telephone: (310) 527-6660 Bv M M?______ Deputy 6 Facsimile: (310) 532-7395 Moses Soto Attorneys for Petitioners, City of Carson, City of Norwalk, City of Torrance, City of Santa Fe Springs, City of Signal Hill, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Estates, City of Commerce, Jovito Morales, 1-5 Consortium Cities SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL DISTRICT CITY OF CARSON, a public entity; CITY OF Case No. fiS 1 6 4 5 5 4 NORWALK, a public entity; CITY OF TORRANCE, a public entity; CITY OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE SANTA FE SPRINGS, a public entity; CITY OF SIGNAL HILL, a public entity; CITY OF (California Elections Code §§ 9051(b), 9105, RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a public entity; 9106,13119(b), 13314; California Code of CITY OF COMMERCE, a public entity; Civil Procedure § 1085) JOVITO MORALES, an individual; 1-5 CONSORTIUM CITIES, a joint powers [DEEMED VERIFIED PER CALIFORNIA authority, CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 446] Petitioners, v. , f PRIORITY MATTER PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE S$ 9106 DEAN C. LOGAN, in his official capacity as 13314(a)(3)] COUNTY REGISTRAR- RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondent. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a special district, M0 FEE GOVT CODE SEC. 6183 ____________Real Party in Interest. AMOUNT RECOVERABLE PURSUANT TO 6103.5 GC $ PLUS A ONE TIME ADMINISTRATIVE FEE UPON JUDGEMENT IF THE PARTY BECOMES A JUDGEMENT CREDITOR /// fl28 m 01007.0002/310196.1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 2 Petitioners CITY OF CARSON, a public entity, CITY OF NORWALK, a public entity, CITY 3 OF TORRANCE, a public entity, CITY OF SANTA FE SPRINGS, a public entity, CITY OF 4 SIGNAL HILL, a public entity, CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, a public entity; CITY OF 5 COMMERCE, a public entity; and JOVITO MORALES, an individual; and the 1-5 CONSORTIUM 6 CITIES, a joint powers authority (all collectively referred to herein as “Petitioners”), hereby petition 7 this Court for a peremptory writ of mandate pursuant to Elections Code sections 9106, and 8 13314(a)(1), and Code of Civil Procedure section 1085. 9 10 EXPEDITED HEARING REQUIRED 11 As an elections-related writ, this Petition is entitled to preferential, expedited hearing per 12 Elections Code sections 9106 and 13314(a)(3). Petitioners will file an ex parte application for an 13 order shortening time for the Court to hold a trial setting conference in order to set an expedited 14 briefing and hearing schedule immediately after filing this Petition. Local Rule of Court 3.231(b)(1). 15 Counsel for Petitioners will provide an advance courtesy copy of this Petition in addition to regular 16 service. ' 17 18 Specifically, Petitioners allege as follows: 19 INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT AND ALLEGATIONS 20 1. The Petition seeks to direct Respondent DEAN C. LOGAN, in his official capacity as 21 REGISTRAR-RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 22 (“Respondent”), to correct the ballot title and label for the tax and use ordinance entitled “Los Angeles 23 County Traffic Improvement Plan” and designated as Measure M, submitted by Real Party in Interest 24 LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a special 25 district (“Metro”). 26 2. First, the current ballot label for Measure M fails to comply with Elections Code 27 section 13119(b), which requires that any ordinance that imposes a tax or raises the tax rate, “shall 28 /// 01007 0002/310196 1 .2- PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 1 include in the statement of the ordinance to be voted on the amount of money to be raised annually 2 and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied.” (emphasis added.) 3 a. The ballot label1 for Measure M does not include the amount of money to be 4 raised annually. 5 b. The ballot label for Measure M does not include the actual total rate of the tax 6 to be levied, which is one percent (1%), per the authorizing ordinance. 7 c. The ballot label for Measure M does not include the actual duration of the tax to 8 be levied; the proposed tax is permanent. 9 3. Second, the current ballot label for Measure M fails to comply with Elections Code 10 sections 13119(a); and 9501(c) and 9106. Section 13119(a) requires the ballot label to state “the 11 nature” of the proposed ordinance in specific language. Nor does the Measure comply with Section 12 9106, which requires the ballot label to be “a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the 13 measure” and that it shall not “be an argument, nor likely to create prejudice, for or against the 14 proposed measure.” See also, Cal. Elec, Code § 9501(c). The ballot label for Measure M does not 15 state the nature of the measure in a way that is true to, or even accurate with, the text of the 16 authorizing ordinance, and actually creates prejudice in favor of adoption: ' 17 a. The ballot label misrepresents the tax structure and how it will work ifenacted, 18 as demonstrated by the plain language of the ordinance. 19 b. The ballot label misrepresents the amount of the tax people will have to pay, as 20 demonstrated by the plain language of the ordinance. 21 c. The ballot label is confusing and misleading as to how long the tax will last; it 22 is designed to be a permanent tax. 23 d. The phrase “existing 14 £ traffic relief tax” is misleading; the tax enacted by 24 Measure R in 2008 also was a transactions and use tax, per Public Utilities Code sections 130350, 25 130350.4, and 130350.5. 26 27 1 Section 13119(a) uses the phrase “statement of the ordinance” interchangeably with the phrase 28 “ballot label” as used in the relevant section of the Elections Code, and as referenced in this Petition. 01007.0002/310196,1 .3. PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 1 e. The ballot label implies that the tax measure specifically is intended to “create 2 jobs,” which is misleading as it is outside the scope of Metro’s authority and purpose, per Public 3 Utilities Code sections 130001, 130050.2. 4 f. The title “Los Angeles County Traffic Improvement Plan” conveys a false 5 impression of equal distribution of tax dollars to improve traffic conditions throughout the county. 6 Measure M tax dollars will be spent disproportionally on high dollar value projects in the more 7 affluent western and northern regions of the county. 8 g. The title conveys a false impression of equal distribution of projects over time. 9 In reality, projects in the western and northern regions of the county will be completed much sooner, 10 within the next few years, while south county regions will not see local return until 2039-2040 11 4. Petitioners ask the Court to correct these inaccuracies, misstatements, and 12 misrepresentations, by amending the ballot label as provided for herein. California law requires that 13 voters receive complete and truthful information before deciding whether government can tax them. 14 15 THE PARTIES 16 5. Petitioner CITY OF CARSON, is a California municipal corporation, organized under 17 the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, California, and petitions on behalf 18 of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors, as defined in Elections Code § 321(a) (“Electors”). 19 6. Petitioner CITY OF NORWALK, is a California municipal corporation, organized 20 under the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, California, and petitions on 21 behalf of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors. 22 7. Petitioner CITY OF TORRANCE, is a California municipal corporation, organized 23 under the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, California, and petitions on 24 behalf of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors. 25 8. Petitioner CITY OF SANTA FE SPRINGS, is a California municipal corporation, 26 organized under the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, California, and 27 petitions on behalf of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors. 28 /// 01007.0002/310196.1 .4. PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE 1 9. Petitioner CITY OF SIGNAL HILL, is a California municipal corporation, organized 2 under the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, California, and petitions on 3 behalf of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors. 4 10. Petitioner CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, is a California municipal 5 corporation, organized under the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, 6 California, and petitions on behalf of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors. 7 11. Petitioner CITY OF COMMERCE, is a California municipal corporation, organized 8 under the laws of the State of California, located in Los Angeles County, California, and petitions on 9 behalf of itself and on behalf of its resident Electors. 10 12.