BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE
Senator Lois Wolk, Chair
BILL NO: SCA 11 HEARING: 1/25/13
AUTHOR: Hancock FISCAL: No
VERSION: 1/25/13 TAX LEVY: No
CONSULTANT: Grinnell
LOCAL GOVERNMENT: SPECIAL TAXES: VOTER APPROVAL
Lowers the vote threshold for a local agency to levy,
increase, or extend any special tax from 2/3 to 55%.
Background and Existing Law
The California Constitution states that taxes levied by
local governments are either general taxes, subject to
majority approval of its voters, or special taxes, subject
to 2/3 vote (Article XIII C). Proposition 13 (1978)
required a 2/3 vote of each house of the Legislature for
state tax increases, and 2/3 vote of local voters for local
special taxes. Proposition 62 (1986) prohibited local
agencies from imposing general taxes without majority
approval of local voters, and a 2/3 vote for special taxes.
Proposition 218 (1996) extended those vote thresholds to
charter cities, and limited local agencies' powers to levy
new assessments, fees, and taxes. Local agencies generally
propose to increase taxes by adopting an ordinance or a
resolution at a public hearing. The Constitution further
bars school districts from imposing general taxes, but
allows school districts, community college districts, and
county offices of education to issue bonded indebtedness
for school facilities with 55% percent approval
(Proposition 39, 2000).
Proposed Law
Senate Constitutional Amendment 11 lowers the vote
threshold for local agencies imposing, extending, or
increasing any special tax from 2/3 to 55%. The measure
also makes conforming changes to the Constitution.
State Revenue Impact
SCA 11 - 1/25/13 -- Page 2
No estimate.
Comments
1. Purpose of the bill . According to the author, "SCA 11
would lower the vote threshold for increasing most special
taxes from 2/3 to 55%. By doing so, it would align the
general requirement with that of school bonds under
Proposition 39. It would lower the burden on cities,
counties, and special districts to increase revenue for
needed local services provided to Californians. It would
apply to nearly all services, from schools, to
transportation, to public safety agencies. SCA 11 would
not mandate any increase on special taxes. Cities,
counties, and special districts would still have to place
proposals on the ballot, and local voters would still have
to approve them. The existing exceptions to the 2/3 rule
(for instance, sales taxes on real property sales) under
Prop. 13 would remain in place.
The only change SCA 11 makes is existing law is to lower
the vote threshold so that 55% of local voters can choose
to increase revenue for their city, county or special
district."
2. More or less . Majority rule is a two-edged sword:
democratically elected governments are supposed to enact
policies that the voters want, but both federal and state
systems restrict the majority due to fears about its
ability to use its power to oppress minority interests.
For the great majority of public issues, fifty-percent plus
one of a legislative body or an electorate rule, but for
others the United States and California Constitutions
provide that a majority is not enough and a higher
threshold is necessary, such as amending the U.S.
Constitution, removing a president from office, ratifying a
treaty, or overriding a veto. States largely import the
2/3 vote from the United States Constitution into their own
for those same purposes, but also require 2/3 vote on taxes
or other measures. In a series of voter initiatives,
Californians have elevated local special tax increases and
legislatively enacted state tax increases to this level,
SCA 11 - 1/25/13 -- Page 3
while almost every other change can be enacted by majority
vote; local agencies can enact general taxes, and voters
can approve tax initiatives increasing state taxes by
majority vote, as they did with Proposition 30 (2012). As
such, local agencies need a majority vote to assess taxes
and spend the proceeds on whatever purposes they want to,
but 2/3 if they restrict the use of the tax proceeds.
Supermajorities of the Legislature are necessary to
increase taxes, but only majorities of voters can.
SCA 4 partially reverses the previously elevated standard
for local special taxes. If enacted, local agencies can
enact special taxes for any purpose at 55% vote,
paralleling Proposition 39's similar allowance for school
bonds. The policy question for the Committee is: what
should be the voting threshold for local special taxes?
The Legislative Analyst's Office says there's no right
answer, as requirements vary across states, but adds that
the process should be easy enough for voters to understand
and reflect overarching objectives for voter participation
in tax decisions. The Committee may wish to consider the
overall system of voter thresholds necessary to increase
taxes.
3. Join the party . The Committee will hear five other
measures that change the vote threshold for special taxes:
SCA 3 (Leno) - allows school districts, community
college districts, and county office of education to
levy parcel taxes at 55% vote.
SCA 4 (Liu) - allows local agencies to levy,
extend, or increase special taxes at 55% vote for
local transportation projects.
SCA 7 (Wolk) - lowers the vote threshold for bonded
indebtedness incurred to construct, reconstruct,
rehabilitate, or replace public libraries; allows
local agencies to levy, extend, or increase special
taxes at 55% vote to fund public libraries.
SCA 8 (Corbett) - allows local agencies to levy,
extend, or increase special taxes at 55% vote for
local transportation projects.
SCA 9 (Corbett) - allows local agencies to levy,
extend, or increase special taxes at 55% vote for
community and economic development projects.
Support and Opposition (05/09/13)
SCA 11 - 1/25/13 -- Page 4
Support : American Association of University Women;
Association of California Construction Managers;
Association of California Healthcare Districts; California
Association of Zoos and Aquariums; California Coalition for
Adequate School Housing; California Park and Recreation
Society; California Professional Firefighters; California
Special Districts Association; California State Association
of Counties; California Watershed Coalition; Chabot Space
and Science Center; Chino Valley Independent Fire District;
City and County of San Francisco; City of Rancho Cordova;
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District; Cordova
Recreation and Park District; Cucamonga Valley Water
District; Desert Recreation District; East Bay Municipal
Utility District; East Bay Zoological Society; Fulton-El
Camino Recreation and Park District; Hesperia Recreation
and Park District; Idyllwild Fire Protection District;
League of California Cities; Leucadia Wastewater District;
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District; Metropolitan
Transportation Commission; Olivehain Municipal Water
District; Olivehurst Public Utility District; Palos Verdes
Library District; Reclamation District No. 1000; Running
Springs Water District; Santa Clara County Board of
Supervisors; Santa Clara County Open Space; Small School
Districts Association; Three Valleys Municipal Water
District; Tomales Village Community Services District;
Vista Irrigation District;
1 individual
Opposition : American Council of Engineering Companies,
Apartment Association California Southern Cities; Apartment
Association of Orange County;
California; Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles;
Association of California Life and Health Insurance
Companies; California Ambulance Association; California
Apartment Association; California Business Properties
Association; California Chamber of Commerce; California
Grocers Association; California Healthcare Institute;
California Manufacturers and Technology Association;
California Restaurant Association; California Retailers
Association; California Taxpayers Association; California
Association of Winegrape Growers; East Bay Rental Housing
Association; Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association; National
Federation of Independent Business; Nor Cal Rental Property
Association;
Orange County Business Council; San Diego County Apartment
SCA 11 - 1/25/13 -- Page 5
Association; San Miguel Community Services District; Santa
Barbara Rental Property Association; Union Pacific
Railroad; Southwest California Legislative Council;
Trinity Center Community Services District; Western
Manufactured Housing Communities Association