County workers install official ballot boxes in River Park Shopping Center. Photo by Edward Smith

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber on Friday filed a lawsuit against Fresno County challenging its recently passed initiative, Measure A, which amended the county’s charter to move elections for district attorney and sheriff away from the presidential cycle to the gubernatorial cycle.

In the lawsuit, Bonta and Weber allege that Measure A is preempted by a state law that explicitly requires counties, including charter counties, to hold elections for district attorney and sheriff during the presidential election cycle, which traditionally has higher voter turnout.

“Our democracy works best when everyone can participate and make their voices heard. Fresno’s Measure A unlawfully conflicts with California law and has the potential to suppress voter turnout,” said Bonta in a news release. “State election law already provides election timing requirements crucial for voter turnout across the state. Ensuring that a large and more inclusive pool of voters can vote for candidates who reflect their values is a fundamental step to making democracy work.”

Bonta said they are asking the court to block Measure A. Fresno County released a statement Friday afternoon, saying these elected officials are attempting to overturn the will of 55% of Fresno County voters.

“The broadest participation by the electorate is essential for local elected offices, like sheriffs and district attorneys, because these positions have a direct impact on public safety,” said Weber.“Because this attempt to move these elections away from the presidential election cycle violates state law and would suppress participation, we have filed this lawsuit to ensure that the rights of all voters are protected.”

Today’s lawsuit comes after the Fresno County Board of Supervisors approved Resolution 23-287 in August 2023, which, among other things, called a Special Election to place Measure A on the ballot for the March 5 primary election for the purpose of amending the Fresno County Charter.  Having been approved by the county voters at the primary election, Measure A amended Section 15 of the County Charter to set the election dates for sheriff and district attorney in gubernatorial, non-presidential election years. 

In the lawsuit, the complainants argue that Measure A is preempted by Assembly Bill 759, which was signed into law in September 2022 and declares that “an election to select a district attorney and sheriff shall be held with the presidential primary.” AB 759 shifted elections for these local offices from gubernatorial election years to higher-turnout presidential election years in order to ensure a larger and more inclusive pool of voters can weigh in on the important county offices of district attorney and sheriff. The Legislature and elections code further declared that AB 759 applies to both general law and charter counties. The only exception the Legislature allowed was for charter counties that, on or before January 1, 2021, had specified when the elections of district attorney and sheriff would occur. But this exception does not apply to Fresno County’s Charter, which was silent on the timing of these elections prior to Measure A’s passage this year. 

Fresno County officials argue that AB 759 was an unconstitutional overreach by the Legislature. The law also extended these elected officials terms to six years, though citizens in the June 2021 Fresno County primary had no notice of an extension and were deciding candidates for four-year terms, according to the statement.

The statement continues that the California Constitution gives charter counties like Fresno the authority to set the term and election of its officers.

“There are substantial reasons for a county to keep the elections for local county officials in the gubernatorial election cycle rather than the presidential cycle,” according to the statement from Fresno County.  “Local issues and candidates can become lost in the intense campaigning that occurs during presidential cycle elections both for the office of president and the congressional and senate seats that are up for election the same time. The costs to conduct a campaign are much higher during presidential cycles as down-ticket candidates must compete with national campaigns for advertising time and other campaign services, which can make running for local office prohibitively expensive for some candidates. These concerns are presumably why there is no push to move the California Governor’s election to presidential elections.”

According to a 2002 Public Policy Institute of California Research Briefing, about half of the difference in turnout among California cities can be explained by election timing, according to the news release. Since a century ago, many California cities have scheduled off-cycle or “local-only” elections, most of which occur in spring. However, local contests that coincided with presidential elections drew 36 percent more turnout than these off-cycle elections.