AMENDED IN SENATE FEBRUARY 2, 2021
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 5
Introduced by Senator Melendez
(Coauthors: Senators Bates, Dahle, Grove, Jones, Nielsen, Ochoa Bogh, and Wilk)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Megan Dahle, Gallagher, Nguyen, and Patterson)
December 22, 2020
Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 5—Relati ve to terminating the state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020. legislative counsel’s digest
SCR 5, as amended, Melendez. State of emer gency: COVID-19:
termination.
This measure, in accordance with specified la w, would declare that the state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020, is at an end, thereby terminating the emergency powers granted to the Governor as a result of that proclamation.
Fiscal committee: yes.
line 1 WHEREAS, On March 4, 2020, Go vernor Ga vin Ne wsom line 2 proclaimed a state of emergency in California to mitigate the spread line 3 of COVID-19; and
line 4 WHEREAS, Since proclaiming a state of emergency on March line 5 4, Go vernor Ne wsom has issued o ver mor e than 47 e xecutive line 6 orders, unilaterally changing 200 laws spanning most divisions of line 7 the California codes; and
line 8 WHEREAS, Section 8629 of the Go vernment Code, which is line 9 part of the California Emer gency Services Act (Chapter 7
98 line 1 (commencing with Section 8550) of Di vision 1 of Title 2 of the line 2 Government Code), authorizes the State Le gislature to terminate line 3 a state of emergency “by concurrent resolution of the Legislature line 4 declaring it at an end”; and
line 5 WHEREAS, A “state of emer gency” in California is a le gal line 6 term describing not merely conditions of e xtreme peril, but also line 7 the inadequacy of state and local institutions to combat the threat line 8 within the constraints of the California Constitution; and line 9 WHEREAS, On May 17, 2020, the nonpartisan Le gislative line 10 Analyst’s Office released a report stating that the y are “v ery line 11 troubled” by the authority the Governor seeks to take away from line 12 the Legislature in the May Revision, and stated that “we urge the line 13 Legislature to jealously guard its constitutional role and authority”; line 14 and
line 15 WHEREAS, The California Emergency Services Act (Chapter line 16 7 (commencing with Section 8550) of Division 1 of Title 2 of the line 17 Government Code) (CESA) also pro vides local governments the line 18 ability to proclaim a local emer gency in response to COVID-19, line 19 which authorizes the state to pro vide “mutual aid, including line 20 personnel, equipment, and other a vailable resources, to assist line 21 political subdivisions during a local emergency or in accordance line 22 with mutual aid agreements or at the direction of the Go vernor”; line 23 and
line 24 WHEREAS, Nothing in this resolution pre vents a local line 25 jurisdiction from proclaiming a local emer gency to mitig ate the line 26 spread of COVID-19; and
line 27 WHEREAS, On November 2, 2020, the Superior Court of the line 28 County of Sutter issued a tentative ruling in the case of Gallagher line 29 and Kile y v . Ne wsom (CVCS20-0912) that found all of the line 30 following: (1) The Governor’s Executive Order N-67-20, issued line 31 on June 3, 2020, which, among other things, required all line 32 Californians registered to vote in the November 3, 2020, General line 33 Election to recei ve vote-by-mail ballots and required all county line 34 elections officials to use the Secretary of State’ s v ote-by-mail line 35 ballot tracking system and Intelligent Mail Barcodes on all line 36 vote-by-mail ballot envelopes, was not authorized by the CESA line 37 because it improperly amended existing statutory law, exceeding line 38 the Governor’s authority and violating the separation of po wers; line 39 (2) Executive Order N-67-20 was declared void and without further line 40 force or effect as an unconstitutional exercise of legislative power 98 — 2 — SCR 5
line 1 in that the CESA does not authorize or empower the Governor to line 2 amend or make statutory law; and (3) the Governor was enjoined line 3 and prohibited from e xercising any power under the CESA that line 4 amends, alters, or changes e xisting statutory la w or mak es new line 5 statutory law or legislative policy. The final ruling was issued on line 6 November 13, 2020; and
line 7 WHEREAS, An open-ended state of emergency, with boundless line 8 powers vested in a chief executive, is incompatible with democratic line 9 government; and
line 10 WHEREAS, It is critical that a proper balance be restored line 11 between the le gislative and e xecutive branches; no w, therefore, line 12 be it
line 13 Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, the Assembly line 14 thereof concurring , That the Le gislature, in accordance with line 15 Section 8629 of the Go vernment Code, declares that the state of line 16 emergency proclaimed by Governor Gavin Newsom on March 4, line 17 2020, is at an end and that the emer gency powers granted to the line 18 Governor as a result of that proclamation are hereby terminated; line 19 and be it further
line 20 Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of line 21 this resolution to the Governor of California.
O
98 SCR 5 — 3 —