|
1-1 of 1 messages
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
CA initiatives/petition regarding aniamls/property
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on November 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We need this in every state.
Zuzana
=====
http://www.rexano.org//StatePages/CaliforniaFrame.htm
California Initiatives regarding animals in MSDOC and PDF files
Requests for petitions need to be sent to wethepeople2007@gmail.com
1292. (07-0060)
Property Ownership. Constitutional Amendment.
Summary Date: 11/21/07 Circulation Deadline: 04/21/08 Signatures Required: 694,354
Proponent: Richard Byrd
Amends California Constitution to declare that governmental entities within California, including cities and counties, may not make any law or ordinance that prevents any citizen from owning or legally acquiring property, or that limits the amount of property one may acquire, grow, produce, or own. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: The fiscal effect of this measure cannot be determined, as it would depend largely on how the measureʼs terms are interpreted by the courts and implemented by government. (Initiative 07-0060.) (Full Text)
1294. (07-0062)
Recognition of Animals as Property. Constitutional Amendment.
Summary Date: 11/21/07 Circulation Deadline: 04/21/08 Signatures Required: 694,354
Proponent: Jill Holt (951) 541-1669
Amends California Constitution to declare that all animals owned by citizens, including pets and animals used for agricultural purposes, are property. Prohibits enactment or enforcement of any law that would characterize privately-owned animals as anything other than property. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Probably no fiscal effect on state and local governments. (Initiative 07-0062.) (Full Text)
1295. (07-0063)
Prohibition on Required or Coerced Sterilization of Animals or Humans. Constitutional Amendment.
Summary Date: 11/21/07 Circulation Deadline: 04/21/08 Signatures Required: 694,354
Proponent: Dianne-Margaret Hedgcock
Prohibits enactment or enforcement of any law requiring or coercing by any means, including financial penalty, sexual sterilization of any human or animal. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Short-term savings to local governments because of the elimination of spay and neuter enforcement and surgery costs, offset in the long-term by unknown, but potentially significant, increased costs to operate shelters and provide animal control services to an increased dog and cat population. Unknown, but potentially significant loss of local government animal control revenue, because jurisdictions will no longer be able to charge a higher license or adoption fee for unaltered animals than for animals that are spayed or neutered. Potential avoidance of state costs of a few tens of thousands of dollars annually associated with the prohibition of chemical castration of certain prisoners upon their parole. (Initiative 07-0063.) (Full Text)
REXANO opposes AB 1634 (please note the AB 1634 is dead for now, we are just leaving this info her so you can learn the background on this bill as it might be reintroduced)
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
