Why Would the Legislature Request?

Why Would the Legislature Request? By Chris Micheli

            We know in drafting California statutes, the term “shall” is mandatory and the term “may” is permissive. In other words, required conduct found in a statute uses the word “shall,” while discretionary conduct found in a statute used the word “may.” So, would the Legislature “request” something? In other words, why would the Legislature not tell someone or some entity to do something or authorize them to do something, rather than request them to do something?

            Although it is not common in California statute for the Legislature to request something, this term does need to be used when it comes to legislation affecting the University of California, which enjoys some degree of constitutional autonomy. As a result, although the Legislature can require the California State University system and the community colleges in this state to do something, it is actually the UC Board of Regents that enacts policy for the 10-campus UC system.

            Because of this partial constitutional autonomy, the reader will come across a statement similar to the following in some UC-related legislation: “The Legislature requests that the Regents of the University of California….”

            Other than UC-related legislation, how often does the Legislature request something? Not often. But there are instances in California law where we do find this term. For example, in the Unemployment Insurance Code, in Section 9912, it provides in subdivision (a): “The Legislature requests that the Senior Worker Advocate Office of the Employment Development Department…to join in this effort.” Similarly, in subdivision (b), it states: “The Legislature requests that this outreach…”

            So, while not common in California statute, there are occasions where the Legislature does not direct or authorize, but simply “requests” that something be done. Does this phrase have the force and effect of law? Or does it not because it is just a request of the Legislature?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?

Another Reason to Limit Bill Introductions?  By Chris Micheli             As I did my final review of Governor Newsom’s actions on the 1,046 bills sent to him after the 2023 Legislative Session, I noticed that some of the Governor’s veto messages provide additional rationales for limiting bill introductions.             Out of 156 vetoes from the 2023 Session, the number one reason for the Governor’s veto was budget concerns or cost pressures. In fact, 41% of the vetoes used that basis. That by itself is not a reason to limit bill introductions, but another statistic may provide such a reason…             By my count, just over 1/3 of the bills vetoed by Governor Newsom likely should not have been sent to his Desk and, arguably, should not have made it through the process at all. In fact, perhaps they should not h...
Read more

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process

Frequently Asked Questions about California’s Budget Process  By Chris Micheli             What are the main parts of the California state budget? They are the Budget Bill, Budget Bill Junior, Trailer Bills, and Supplemental Reports.             What is the Budget Bill? This bill contains the appropriations and “Budget Bill Language”. Note that only a Budget Bill (or BBJ) can contain multiple appropriations. It requires a majority vote for passage and the bill takes effect immediately. There is just one Budget Bill. What is the “Budget Bill Jr.”? This is the bill that amends the main Budget Bill by making changes to multiple appropriations. There are often multiple BBJs. What is a Trailer Bill? This bill makes the statutory changes needed to implement the budget. It is the same as any other bill, but it takes effect immediately with a majority vote if it contain...
Read more

Can Any Bill Call an Election?

Can Any Bill Call an Election?  By Chris Micheli             In June 2024, we saw two bills that contain a provision to call an election.             Both bills contain a “plus” section at the end of the bill, which is an uncodified statute, stating the following: “this act calls an election within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.” Such a measure only requires a majority vote, unless some other constitutional provision requires a higher vote threshold (e.g., a tax increase). What is the basis for this statement? Section 8(c)(3) of Article IV of the state Constitution provides: “ Statutes calling elections, statutes providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the State, and urgency statutes shall go into effect immediately upon their enactment.” However, there is no further gui...
Read more