Daily Brew: November 19, 2018

November 19, 2018

Today's Brew brings you an update on state constitutions + news regarding new civil service regulations   Welcome to the Monday, November 19 Brew. Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day: How much longer did your state constitution get this year? Anaheim's hospitality industry minimum wage increase passes, effects on Disney unclear OPM instructs agencies to comply with effective provisions of Trump’s civil service executive orders How much longer did your state constitution get this year? Voters in 25 states approved changes to their state constitutions in 2018. Together, the 25 state constitutions increased by a combined 42,696 words. The largest change was in Colorado, where voters approved four constitutional amendments, increasing the length of the state constitution by 11,327 words. Amendment Y and Amendment Z, which changed the state’s congressional and state legislative redistricting processes, accounted for 99.97 percent of the increase. Voters in Missouri increased the length of their state constitution by 9,453 words. Amendment 2, which added a medical marijuana program to the state constitution, accounted for 79.18 percent of the increase. The third largest change was in Michigan, where an independent redistricting commission amendment and a voting policies amendment added 3,906 words to the state constitution. Fourteen of the states increased the lengths of their state constitutions by less than 500 words. No states constitutions decreased in length as a result of ballot measures in 2018. Learn more Anaheim's hospitality industry minimum wage increase passes, effects on Disney unclear Voters in Anaheim, California, approved Measure L, a citizen initiative requiring hospitality employers that receive city subsidies to pay employees a minimum wage of $18 an hour by 2022. While results for the measure were too close to call on election night, the Orange County Registrar of Voters reported that support for Measure L had reached 52.5 percent on November 15. Measure L requires hospitality employers that receive city subsidies to pay a minimum wage of $15 an hour beginning on January 1, 2019, and to increase the minimum wage by $1 each year through January 1, 2022. The measure states that the wage increase applies to hospitality employers in the Anaheim or Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Zones. It is unclear, however, whether Disneyland Resort will be required to adopt the minimum wage increase. The Anaheim City Council voted unanimously to end tax incentives for Disneyland Resort on August 28, following a request from the resort president. The Anaheim city attorney's office has stated that this agreement appears to exempt Disneyland Resort from the wage increase. Unions represented by the Coalition of Labor Resort Unions—the group that petitioned to place Measure L on the ballot—have argued that the wage increase applies to Disneyland Resort due to a 1996 bond agreement between Disney and the city. Learn more→ P.S. Did you see last week's New York Times op-ed by Ballotpedia's own Josh Altic and Ryan Bryne? Check out their chart on 2018's biggest surprises in the world of ballot measures. OPM instructs agencies to comply with effective provisions of Trump’s civil service executive orders The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) released a memo last week instructing federal agencies to comply with the provisions of President Donald Trump’s (R) civil service executive orders that remain in effect. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson (nominated by Barack Obama (D)  of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia struck down several components of the executive orders in a ruling issued on August 25 on the grounds that they conflicted with provisions of the Civil Service Reform Act. The OPM memo encouraged agencies to review and implement the remaining provisions, which include guidelines related to employee discipline and the use of official union time. Trump issued the executive orders in May 2018. The three orders jointly sought to strengthen discipline and removal procedures for federal employees, ensure efficient use of taxpayer-funded union time, and streamline the collective bargaining process. Judge Brown Jackson struck down several provisions of the executive orders on the grounds that they conflicted with provisions of the Civil Service Reform Act. The enjoined provisions include limitations on the amount of taxpayer-funded time that full-time federal employees can dedicate to union activities, a reduction in the amount of time that poor-performing employees can demonstrate improvement, and certain restrictions on workplace issues that federal agencies can negotiate with unions. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) appealed the ruling on September 25. Three separate lawsuits aimed at blocking the executive orders were filed by the American Federation of Government Employees, the National Treasury Employees Union, and a coalition of 13 smaller public sector unions. The legal challenges claimed that the executive orders conflict with certain collective bargaining provisions of the Civil Service Reform Act and prevent unions from performing their statutorily-required representational duties. Judge Jackson consolidated the lawsuits in June 2018. Learn more→