BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  ACA 9
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          ACA 9 (Huffman)
          As Amended  June 26, 2009
          2/3 vote 

           LOCAL GOVERNMENT    5-2         REVENUE AND TAXATION    6-3     
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Caballero, Arambula,      |Ayes:|Charles Calderon, Beall,  |
          |     |Davis, Krekorian, Skinner |     |Coto, Ma, Portantino,     |
          |     |                          |     |Saldana                   |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Knight, Duvall            |Nays:|DeVore, Harkey, Hagman    |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

           APPROPRIATIONS      12-5                                        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano,         |     |                          |
          |     |Charles Calderon, Coto,   |     |                          |
          |     |Davis,                    |     |                          |
          |     |Fuentes, Hall, John A.    |     |                          |
          |     |Perez,                    |     |                          |
          |     |Skinner, Solorio,         |     |                          |
          |     |Torlakson, Hill           |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller,   |     |                          |
          |     |Nielsen,                  |     |                          |
          |     |Audra Strickland          |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Makes changes to the voting requirements contained in  
          the California Constitution for special taxes and bonded  
          indebtedness for local governments.  Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Allows a city, county, or city and county, to incur  
            indebtedness in the form of general obligation (GO) bonds to  
            be adopted by 55% of the voters of the city, county, or city  
            and county, where the GO bonds fund any or all of the  
            following:

             a)   Construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or  








                                                                  ACA 9
                                                                  Page  2


               replacement of any of the following:

               i)     Public improvements, including, but not limited to,  
                 improvements to transportation infrastructure, streets,  
                 highways, sewer systems, water systems, wastewater  
                 systems, and park and recreation facilities;

               ii)    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; or,

               iii)   Housing affordable to lower and moderate-income  
                 households.

             b)   Acquisition or lease of real property for the public  
               improvements, facilities or buildings, and housing  
               described in sub part (a).

          2)Provides that a proposition approved by the voters resulting  
            in bonded indebtedness has to include the following  
            accountability requirements:

             a)   A requirement that the proceeds from the sale of the  
               bonds be used only for the purposes specified, and not for  
               any other purpose, including public employee salaries and  
               other operating expenses of a public improvement, facility  
               or building, or housing development;

             b)   A requirement that the city council, county board of  
               supervisors, or governing body of the special district  
               conduct an annual, independent performance audit to ensure  
               that the proceeds from the sale of the bonds have been  
               expended only on the specific projects listed;

             c)   A requirement that the city council, county board of  
               supervisors, or governing body of the special district  
               conduct an annual, independent financial audit of the  
               proceeds from the sale of the bonds until all of those  
               proceeds have been expended for the specific projects to be  
               funded from the bonds; and,

             d)   A requirement for a public process that solicits a wide  
               range of public comment from the community about the type  








                                                                  ACA 9
                                                                  Page  3


               of facilities that should be funded with the bond.

          3)Provides that a city, county, city and county, or special  
            district, by a 55% vote of its voters voting on the  
            proposition, may impose a special tax within that city,  
            county, city and county, or special district, except an ad  
            valorem tax on real property or a transactions tax or sales  
            tax on the sale of real property within that city, county,  
            city and county, or special district.

          4)Revises requirements in the Article XIII of the Constitution  
            to allow an agency to assess a special tax approved by the  
            voters of the city, county, city and county, or special  
            district, as required by the Constitution.

           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, requires that bond proceeds only be used for  
            purposes specified in the Constitution, and requires an audit  
            to ensure that the funds have been expended only on the  
            specific projects listed.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:

          1)Moderate General Fund costs of about $220,000 in 2009-10 to  
            the Secretary of State to place this measure in the statewide  
            election voter pamphlet.  This estimate assumes about four  
            pages at $55,000 per page.

          2)Potentially substantial local government special tax revenue  
            increases, to the extent that lowering the voter approval  
            threshold from two-thirds to 55% results in the approval of  








                                                                  ACA 9
                                                                  Page  4


            more special tax measures.

          3)Potential increases in local infrastructure spending, to the  
            extent the exemption from the 1% property tax rate limitation  
            and the reduced voter approval threshold results in greater  
            use of infrastructure bonds.

           COMMENTS  :   

          1)Constitutional requirements for voter approval of tax measures  
            were initiated with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, and  
            solidified with the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996.  The  
            latter measure clarified that general taxes for general  
            governmental purposes require approval of a majority of  
            voters, while special taxes for any specified purposes must be  
            approved by two-thirds of voters.  Proposition 39, which was  
            narrowly approved by 53% of California voters in 2000,  
            provided an exception to the two-thirds vote requirement for  
            special taxes by authorizing the passage of local school bond  
            measures by approval of 55% of the voters.

          2)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 requires annual independent auditing to ensure  
            that funds have been expended on the specific projects listed.  
             This measure mirrors these requirements in the Constitution  
            already in place for school districts, and instead, provides  
            that a city, county, city and county, or special district can  
            incur bonded indebtedness for construction, reconstruction,  
            rehabilitation, or replacement of public improvements, public  
            safety facilities or buildings, and affordable housing, if 55%  
            of the voters approve.

          3)This measure will amend the California Constitution to lower  
            the constitutional vote requirement from two-thirds to 55% for  
            approval of a special tax.  The author maintains that "ACA 9  
            brings the conversation back to the voters about how to fund  
            local needs."  Specifically, the author notes that "for many  








                                                                  ACA 9
                                                                  Page  5


            communities around the state, the quality, and indeed the  
            viability of critical services like police and fire  
            protection, schools, libraries, parks, road maintenance, and  
            flood control will be in jeopardy without additional revenues.  
            Yet, to secure essential funding for these services, local  
            governments face the daunting prospect of bringing a special  
            tax measure to the voters and winning two-thirds approval.   
            Such measures often fail despite being supported by a strong  
            majority of the community."

          4)Shifting to a 55% vote for special taxes and bond indebtedness  
            has been tried several times in the last 10 years.  Among  
            others, ACA 7 (Nation) from the 2005-06 session would have  
            lowered the constitutional vote requirement from two-thirds to  
            55% for any special tax.  ACA 10 (Feuer), 2008, would have  
            created an additional exception to the 1% ad valorem property  
            tax for transportation projects with 55% voter approval.  

            There were several other measures introduced in the 2009-10  
            session that would revise constitutional voting thresholds for  
            different purposes, including ACA 10 (Torlakson), ACA 15  
            (Arambula), SCA 12 (Kehoe), and SCA 6 (Simitian).


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)  
          319-3958                                          FN: 0002572