BILL ANALYSIS Ó
ACA 8
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ACA 8 (Blumenfield)
As Amended April 4, 2013
2/3 vote.
SUMMARY : Amends the California Constitution to allow a city,
county, city and county, or special district, as defined, to
incur bonded indebtedness in order to fund specified public
improvements and facilities, with 55% voter approval of that
city, county, city and county, or special district.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Allows a city, county, city and county, or special district,
as applicable, to incur indebtedness in the form of general
obligation (GO) bonds to be adopted by 55% of the voters of
the city, county, city and county, or special district, where
the GO bonds fund the construction, reconstruction,
rehabilitation, or replacement of any of the following:
a) Public improvements, including, but not limited to,
improvements to transportation infrastructures, streets and
roads, sidewalks, transit systems, highways, freeways,
sewer systems, water systems, wastewater systems, storm
drain systems, and park and recreation facilities; and
b) Facilities or buildings used primarily to provide
sheriff, police, or fire protection services to the public,
including the furnishing and equipping of those facilities
or buildings.
1)Lowers to 55% the voter-approval threshold for a city, county,
or city and county to incur bonded indebtedness, in the form
of GO bonds, that exceeds in one year the income and revenue
provided in that year, for the construction, reconstruction,
rehabilitation, or replacement of any of the following:
a) Public improvements, including, but not limited to,
improvements to transportation infrastructures, streets and
roads, sidewalks, transit systems, highways, freeways,
sewer systems, water systems, wastewater systems, storm
drain systems, and park and recreation facilities; and
b) Facilities or buildings used primarily to provide
sheriff, police, or fire protection services to the public,
ACA 8
Page 2
including the furnishing and equipping of those facilities
or buildings.
1)Defines "special district," for purposes of this bill, as the
same meaning as that term is used in the California
Constitution for the section related to voter approval for
local tax levies, and includes a transit district, but does
not include a school district or redevelopment agency.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes cities, counties, and special districts to impose a
general tax for general governmental purposes with the
approval of a majority of the voters.
2)Authorizes cities, counties, and special districts to impose a
special tax for specified purposes with the approval of
two-thirds of the voters.
3)Authorizes school districts, community college districts, or
county offices of education to incur school bonded
indebtedness with the approval of 55% of the voters voting on
the bond measure, require that bond proceeds only be used for
purposes specified in the California Constitution, and
requires an audit to ensure that the funds have been expended
only on the specific projects listed.
4)Prohibits specified local government agencies from incurring
any indebtedness exceeding in one year the income and revenue
provided in that year, without the assent of two-thirds of the
voters.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown, there may be one-time General Fund
costs to include an analysis of the measure, and arguments for
and against the measure, in the state voter pamphlet.
COMMENTS : Article XIII of the California Constitution allows
for bonded indebtedness for a school district, community college
district, or county office of education to fund the
construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of
school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of
school facilities, among other provisions, if approved by 55% of
the voters. This section of the Constitution also requires that
the bond proceeds be used only for the purposes listed, and
ACA 8
Page 3
requires annual independent auditing to ensure that funds have
been expended on the specific projects listed.
This bill mirrors these requirements in the Constitution in
place for school districts by providing that a city, county, or
specified special district incur bonded indebtedness for
construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of
public improvements and public safety facilities or buildings,
if 55% of the voters approve. The current threshold to pass GO
bond measures for cities, counties and special districts is a
two-thirds vote.
The author notes that it is estimated that California needs at
least an additional $500 billion for maintenance, repair and
upkeep of the crumbling sewer and storm drain systems, streets
and sidewalks, overcrowded and outdates policy stations, jails,
fire stations, and libraries. The author argues that every $1
billion invested in infrastructure creates more than 15,000
California jobs. These infrastructure investments will enhance
public safety, increase the value of real estate, and improve
the quality of life in communities as vital facilities will be
better maintained to safely serve today's population.
Lowering the voter threshold for special taxes and bond
indebtedness has been tried several times in the past years.
ACA 7 (Nation) from the 2005-06 Legislative Session would have
lowered the constitutional vote requirement from two-thirds to
55% for any special tax. ACA 10 (Feuer), would have created an
additional exception to the 1% ad valorem property tax for
transportation projects with 55% voter approval. There were
several measures introduced in the 2009-10 session that would
have revised constitutional voting thresholds for different
purposes, including ACA 10 (Torlakson), ACA 15 (Arambula), SCA
12 (Kehoe), ACA 9 (Huffman), and SCA 6 (Simitian), none of which
were enacted.
There are currently several bills in the 2012-13 session that
would amend the California Constitution to lower the vote
threshold, including ACA 3 (Campos), SCA 3 (Leno), SCA 4 (Liu),
SCA 7 (Wolk), SCA 8 and 9 (Corbett), and SCA 11 (Hancock).
Support arguments: The Los Angeles Business Council, in
support, writes that communities throughout California have
fallen far behind in their ability to repair their local
ACA 8
Page 4
infrastructure.
Opposition arguments: The California Taxpayers Association, in
opposition, writes that a lower voter threshold undermines
Proposition 13 taxpayer protections.
Analysis Prepared by : Genevieve Morelos / BUDGET / (916)
319-2099
FN:
0001195