California Two-Thirds Legislative Vote and Voter Approval for New or Increased Taxes Initiative (2024)
California Two-Thirds Legislative Vote and Voter Approval for Fee and Charge Increases Initiative | |
---|---|
Election date November 5, 2024 | |
Topic Direct democracy measures and Taxes | |
Status Qualified for the ballot | |
Type Constitutional amendment | Origin Citizens |
The California Two-Thirds Legislative Vote and Voter Approval for Fee and Charge Increases Initiative (#21-0042) has qualified for the ballot in California as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024.[1]
A "yes" vote supports amending the state constitution to define all state and local levies, charges, and fees as taxes and to require new state taxes proposed by the state legislature to be enacted via a two-thirds legislative vote and voter approval and new local taxes to be enacted via a two-thirds vote of the electorate. |
A "no" vote opposes amending the state constitution, thereby maintaining that new state taxes require a two-thirds vote in each legislative chamber or a simple majority vote of electors and new or increased local taxes require approval of the local governing board as well as voter approval. |
Overview
How would the initiative change the voter threshold for new or increased taxes?
- See also: Measure design
The initiative would amend the California Constitution to define all state and local levies, charges, and fees as taxes. The initiative would also require new or increased taxes to be passed by a two-thirds legislative vote in each chamber and approved by a simple majority of voters. It would also increase the vote requirement for local taxes proposed by local government or citizens to a two-thirds vote of the local electorate. The increased vote requirements for new or higher taxes would not apply to citizen-initiated state ballot measures. Currently, state tax increases require approval by a two-thirds vote in each chamber or a simple majority vote at a statewide election.[1]
The table below describes the current and proposed vote requirements for state and local tax changes.
Action | Current vote requirement | Proposed vote requirement |
---|---|---|
State tax increase by state legislature | Two-thirds legislative vote | Two-thirds legislative vote and simple majority of voters |
State tax decrease by state legislature | Simple majority legislative vote | No change |
State tax increase by citizen initiative | Simple majority of voters | No change |
Local general tax increase by local board | Two-thirds vote by governing board and simple majority of voters | No change |
Local special tax increase by local board | Two-thirds vote by governing board and two-thirds vote by voters | No change |
Local special tax increase by citizen initiative | Simple majority of voters | Two-thirds of voters |
Who supports and opposes the initiative?
- See also: Support and Opposition
Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability is leading the campaign in support of the initiative. The campaign was endorsed by the California Business Roundtable, California NAIOP, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. The campaign has received $17.2 million in contributions. The campaign explained the initiative, saying, "The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act will give voters the right to vote on all future state taxes and holds politicians accountable for new fees and other increased costs paid by working families and all Californians. The measure increases accountability by requiring politicians to spend new or higher tax revenue on its intended purpose. It will provide much-needed relief to families, farmers, and business owners, helping them to combat the growing cost-of-living crisis facing all Californians."[2]
AFSCME California, SEIU California State Council, California Special Districts Association, California State Association of Counties, and League of California Cities oppose the initiative. Graham Knaus, executive director of the California State Association of Counties (CSAC), said, "This deceptive initiative would undermine the rights of local voters and their elected officials to make decisions on critical local services that residents rely upon. It creates major new tax loopholes at the expense of residents and will weaken our local services and communities."[3]
Measure design
- See also: Text of measure
Click on the arrows (▼) below for summaries of the different provisions of the initiative.
Tax definition: Definition of state and local tax in state constitution
The initiative would define an exempt charge as:[1]
- a reasonable charge that does not exceed the cost of a specific government service provided only to payors;
- a charge equal to the regulatory costs for the state to issue licenses and permits; perform investigations, inspections, and audits; and enforce agricultural marketing orders;
- a charge collected by local governments, health care providers or service plans used to fund the non-federal portion of the Medi-Cal program;
- a reasonable charge for entrance, use, rental, purchase, or lease of state property;
- a fine or penalty imposed by the judiciary branch or state administrative enforcement agency as a result of a violation of law; and
- a charge for the promotion of California tourism according to state law.
The initiative would place the burden of proof on the state to present clear and convincing evidence that a charge is an exempt charge and not a tax and that the exempt charge does not exceed the actual cost of providing the service or product to the payor.
Supermajority vote requirements for taxes: Increase in vote requirements for state and local taxes
Currently, state tax increases require approval by a two-thirds vote in each chamber or a simple majority vote at a statewide election. Taxes can be reduced with a simple majority legislative vote.[1]
For local tax increases, the state constitution currently requires a two-thirds vote by the local governing body to place the measure on the ballot. If the tax is for a general purpose, it needs a simple majority vote by the local electorate. If the tax is for a special specific purpose, it needs a two-thirds vote by the local electorate. For citizen-initiated local tax measures, case law surrounding Proposition 218 (1996) has ruled that a simple majority, not a two-thirds vote, is required to pass such measures.[4]
The initiative would also prohibit local governments from placing a non-binding advisory question on the same ballot as a general tax proposal asking how the revenue should be spent.
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title is as follows:[5]
“ |
Limits Ability of Voters and State and Local Governments to Raise Revenues for Government Services. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.[6] |
” |
Petition summary
The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets is as follows:[5]
“ |
For new or increased state taxes currently enacted by two-thirds vote of Legislature, also requires statewide election and majority voter approval. Limits voters’ ability to pass voter-proposed local special taxes by raising vote requirement to two-thirds. Eliminates voters’ ability to advise how to spend revenues from proposed general tax on same ballot as the proposed tax. Expands definition of 'taxes' to include certain regulatory fees, broadening application of tax approval requirements. Requires Legislature or local governing body set certain other fees.[6] |
” |
Fiscal impact
The fiscal impact statement is as follows:[5]
“ |
Lower annual state and local revenues, potentially substantially lower, depending on future actions of the Legislature, local governing bodies, voters, and the courts.[6] |
” |
Full text
The full text of the ballot measure is below:[5]
Support
Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability is leading the campaign in support of the initiative.[2]
Supporters
Organizations
- California Business Roundtable
- California NAIOP
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Arguments
Opposition
Opponents
Unions
- AFSCME California
- California Professional Firefighters
- California State Council of Laborers
- SEIU California State Council
Organizations
- California Alliance for Jobs
- California Contract Cities Association
- California Special Districts Association
- California State Association of Counties
- League of California Cities
- Rebuild SoCal Partnership
Arguments
Campaign finance
Ballotpedia identified one committee registered in support of the initiative—Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability. The committee reported $17.2 million in contributions.[7]
Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Support | $17,202,850.00 | $36,344.90 | $17,239,194.90 | $16,853,978.09 | $16,890,322.99 |
Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Support
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the measure.[7]
Committees in support of Two-Thirds Legislative Vote and Voter Approval for New or Increased Taxes Initiative | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability | $17,202,850.00 | $36,344.90 | $17,239,194.90 | $16,853,978.09 | $16,890,322.99 |
Total | $17,202,850.00 | $36,344.90 | $17,239,194.90 | $16,853,978.09 | $16,890,322.99 |
Donors
The following were the top donors who contributed to the support committees.[7]
Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
---|---|---|---|
California Business Roundtable Issues PAC | $7,945,000.00 | $0.00 | $7,945,000.00 |
AMR Holdco | $3,100,000.00 | $0.00 | $3,100,000.00 |
Douglas Emmett Properties | $1,500,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,500,000.00 |
Kilroy Realty LP | $1,500,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,500,000.00 |
Michael K. Hayde, including Western National Group & affiliated entities | $1,400,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,400,000.00 |
Methodology
To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.
Background
Constitutional definition of a tax
Section 3 of Article XVIII A of the California Constitution defines a tax as:
“ | [A]ny levy, charge, or exaction of any kind imposed by the state, except the following:
|
” |
The section requires that any increase to a tax be imposed by a law passed by two-thirds of all members of the state legislature. The constitution puts the burden on the state to provide evidence that a charge is not a tax; and therefore not subject to the two-thirds vote requirement.
Vote requirements for tax changes
The state constitution and case law govern the vote requirements needed to increase or decrease state and local taxes. The table below describes the current and proposed vote requirements for state and local tax changes.
Action | Current vote requirement | Proposed vote requirement |
---|---|---|
State tax increase by state legislature | Two-thirds legislative vote | Two-thirds legislative vote and simple majority of voters |
State tax decrease by state legislature | Simple majority legislative vote | No change |
State tax increase by citizen initiative | Simple majority of voters | No change |
Local general tax increase by local board | Two-thirds vote by governing board and simple majority of voters | No change |
Local special tax increase by local board | Two-thirds vote by governing board and two-thirds vote by voters | No change |
Local special tax increase by citizen initiative | Simple majority of voters | Two-thirds of voters |
California Proposition 218, Voter Approval Requirement for Local Tax Increases Initiative (1996)
- See also: California Proposition 218 (1996)
In 1996, California voters approved Proposition 218 by a vote of 56.5% to 43.5%. Proposition 218 required local governments to refer ordinances to impose taxes or property-related assessments, fees, and charges to the ballot for voter consideration. It also required that elections for general taxes be held at regulation elections and required a two-thirds supermajority vote of approval for special taxes.
Lawsuits regarding Proposition 218 vote requirements
An August 2017 California Supreme Court decision raised questions about how to interpret the constitutional voting requirements for special taxes proposed through citizen initiatives.
California voters approved Proposition 218 in 1996, adding Article XII C Voter Approval For Local Tax Levies to the California Constitution. The article includes the requirement that local governments may only enact, extend, or increase a special tax with a two-thirds (66.67%) vote of the electorate.[8][9] Following the passage of Proposition 218, the two-thirds supermajority vote requirement was applied to legislative referrals, referendums, and citizen initiatives.
In August 2017, however, the California Supreme Court ruled in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland that one requirement contained in Article XIII C—that general taxes must be put on the ballot during general elections—did not apply to citizen initiatives. The court categorized taxes imposed by citizen initiatives as separate from taxes imposed by local governments. This ruling brought the two-thirds (66.67%) vote requirement into question for special taxes proposed through citizen initiatives.
City and county officials in San Francisco argued that the court's 2017 decision meant that a simple majority—not a two-thirds supermajority—was required for the approval of local citizen initiatives, including tax measures that designate funds for specific purposes. Based on those arguments, the city certified the measures as approved. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association filed a lawsuit against the city and county in August 2018 stating that the Proposition C, a commercial rent tax for childcare initiative, did not receive sufficient votes because it needed a two-thirds supermajority vote.[10]
On January 27, 2021, the First District Court of Appeal ruled that the supermajority requirement did not apply to Proposition C and only applied to measures placed on the ballot by the city council, board of supervisors, or school board.[11]
Path to the ballot
Process in California
In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated constitutional amendment is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Petitions are allowed to circulate for 180 days from the date the attorney general prepares the petition language. Signatures need to be certified at least 131 days before the general election. As the verification process can take multiple months, the secretary of state provides suggested deadlines for ballot initiatives.
The requirements to get the initiative certified for the ballot:
- Signatures: 997,139 valid signatures were required.
- Deadline: The deadline for the initiative was August 2, 2022.
Signatures are first filed with local election officials, who determine the total number of signatures submitted. If the total number is equal to at least 100 percent of the required signatures, then local election officials perform a random check of signatures submitted in their counties. If the random sample estimates that more than 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, the initiative is eligible for the ballot. If the random sample estimates that between 95 and 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, a full check of signatures is done to determine the total number of valid signatures. If less than 95 percent are estimated to be valid, the initiative does not make the ballot.
Initiative #21-0042
Thomas W. Hiltachk filed the ballot initiative on November 30, 2021.[12] The Attorney General of California issued ballot language for the initiative on February 3, 2022, allowing a signature drive to begin. Signatures were due on August 2, 2022.
On March 16, 2022, the sponsors of the initiative reported to the secretary of state that the campaign had collected at least 25% of the required number of signatures.[13]
On May 12, the campaign announced that proponents would target the 2024 ballot.[14]
On August 26, 2022, the secretary of state reported that sponsors had submitted over 1.4 million signatures.[15]
On November 7, 2022, a court directed counties to finish a full check of the signatures submitted 30 days after the certification of the November 8, 2022, election results instead of the original deadline of November 10, 2022.[16]
On February 1, 2023, the secretary of state announced that the initiative had qualified for the ballot. The final full check found that the campaign had submitted 1,075,585 valid signatures.[17]
On September 26, 2023, the state legislature, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), and John Burton filed an emergency petition with the state Supreme Court seeking to remove the initiative from the ballot. The petition argues that the initiative tries to revise rather than amend the state constitution.[18]
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in California
Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in California.
How to cast a vote in California | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poll timesAll polls in California are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.[19] Registration
To vote in California, an individual must be a U.S. citizen and California resident. A voter must be at least 18 years of age on Election Day. Pre-registration is available at 16 years of age. Pre-registration automatically registers voters when they turn 18.[20] On October 10, 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown (D) signed into law Assembly Bill No. 1461, also known as the New Motor Voter Act. The legislation, which took effect in 2016, authorized automatic voter registration in California for any individuals who visit the Department of Motor Vehicles to acquire or renew a driver's license.[21][22] Automatic registrationCalifornia automatically registers eligible individuals to vote when they complete a driver's license, identification (ID) card, or change of address transaction through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Online registration
California has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Same-day registrationCalifornia allows same-day voter registration. Californians must be registered to vote at least 15 days before Election Day. If the registration deadline has passed for an upcoming election, voters may visit a location designated by their county elections official during the 14 days prior to, and including Election Day to conditionally register to vote and vote a provisional ballot. The state refers to this process as Same Day Voter Registration.[23] Residency requirementsTo register to vote in California, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible. Verification of citizenshipCalifornia's constitution requires that voters be U.S. citizens. When registering to vote, proof of citizenship is not required. Individuals who become U.S. citizens less than 15 days before an election must bring proof of citizenship to their county elections office to register to vote in that election.[23] Verifying your registrationThe site Voter Status, run by the California Secretary of State's office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online. Voter ID requirementsCalifornia does not require voters to present photo identification. However, some voters may be asked to show a form of identification when voting if they are voting for the first time after registering to vote by mail and did not provide a driver license number, California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number.[24][25] The following list of accepted ID was current as of March 2023. Click here for the California Secretary of State page to ensure you have the most current information.
|
See also
|
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 California Attorney General, "Initiative 21-0042," November 30, 2021
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Taxpayer Protection, "Home," accessed May 19, 2022
- ↑ Gold Rush Cam, "League of California Cities Says Opposition Mounts to Wealthy Corporation-Backed Ballot Measure Threatening Voter Rights and Local Services," March 31, 2022
- ↑ Legislative Analyst's Office, "Initiative 42 analysis," accessed May 4, 2022
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 California Secretary of State, "Initiatives and Referenda Cleared for Circulation," accessed October 20, 2021
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Cal-Access, "Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability," accessed April 15, 2022
- ↑ Article XII C of the California Constitution defines a special tax as “any tax imposed for specific purposes, including a tax imposed for specific purposes, which is placed into a general fund.”
- ↑ California Legislative Information, “California Constitution, Article XIII C, Voter Approval For Local Tax Levies,” accessed December 8, 2021
- ↑ The San Francisco Chronicle, "Judge says SF correct in passing two tax measures on simple majority vote," July 5, 2019
- ↑ San Francisco Chronicle, "Calif. appeals court upholds S.F.'s commercial rent tax to pay for children's services," accessed February 11, 2021
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Initiatives," accessed November 30, 2021
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "25% Signature Threshold Certification for Initiative 21-0042," accessed March 24, 2022
- ↑ Bloomberg Tax, "California Vote to Raise Bar for Tax Increases Delayed to 2024," May 12, 2022
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Random sample," accessed August 26, 2022
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Judgment," accessed November 9, 2022
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Full check," accessed February 2, 2023
- ↑ Bloomberg Tax, "Newsom Asks High Court to Kick Anti-Tax Measure Off 2024 Ballot," September 26, 2023
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Section 3: Polling Place Hours," accessed April 4, 2023
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Voter Registration," accessed April 4, 2023
- ↑ The Los Angeles Times, "Gov. Brown approves automatic voter registration for Californians," October 10, 2015
- ↑ The Sacramento Bee, "California voter law could register millions–for a start," October 20, 2015
- ↑ 23.0 23.1 California Secretary of State, "Registering to Vote," accessed April 4, 2023
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "What to Bring to Your Polling Place," accessed April 4, 2023
- ↑ BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, "Section 20107," accessed April 4, 2023
|