# Convention Center Referendum Committee v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & Ethics

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · October 8, 1981 · 441 A.2d 889

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9645694

## Case

- **Full name:** CONVENTION CENTER REFERENDUM COMMITTEE, Et Al., Appellants, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD OF ELECTIONS AND ETHICS, Et Al., Appellees
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** October 8, 1981
- **Citations:** 441 A.2d 889; 1981 D.C. App. LEXIS 378
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Newman, Kelly, Kern, Nebeker, Harris, MacK, Ferren, Pryor, Gallagher
- **Cited by:** 42 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9645694

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that the IPA mandate that the Board exclude from the ballot a referendum measure that would negate a budget-request act “comports with the Charter Amendment limitations on the initiative right [and that] the reliance of the Board ... on that provision was entirely p…
- explaining that voters' power to legislate by initiative can be no broader than the Council's legislative power

## Opinion text

Outline op the Plurality Opinion
Page
I. Summary op Decision___892
II. History of the Cases_893
*892 Page
III. The CCRC Initiative Proposes a “Law” -- — . 896
A. The Scope of the Initiative Power-896
B. The Scope of the CCRC Initiative-898
1. The Significance of the Initiative Bill Itself-898
2. The CCRC Initiative-899
3. Postcirculation Revisions-900
C. The Powers of the Council-902
1. Home Rule Powers-903
2. The Budgetary Exception-904
a. The Budgetary Process-904
b. Deauthorization and Defunding-905
D. A Legislative Act_ 907
IV. The CCRC Initiative Proposes a “Law Appropriating Funds” 911
A. “Laws Appropriating Funds”-911
B. The “Dixon Amendment”-914
C. The Invalidity of the CCRC Initiative-915
V.Conclusion__ 916
VI.POSTSCRIPT: RESPONSE TO DISSENT_ 916
Appendix A: Initiative Measure No. 1... 919
Appendix B: Initiative Measure No. 2-920
Appencix C: Initiative Measure No. 3---920

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9645694. Public record. Not legal advice.