Electoral Reform: Should It Be Easier to Pass Local Taxes?

Written by Patch editors Jennifer Squires and Dan Abendschein

Special districts and other local agencies may find it easier for local communities to pass funding measures if two proposed amendments to the state Constitution move forward. 

The proposals would lower the threshold of votes required to approve bonds and special taxes from two-thirds to 55 percent.

Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8 passed the state House on Saturday with a 54-25 vote. ACA 8 would let communities pass infrastructure bond measures with the same 55 majority that now applies to school bonds. 

The state Senate will take up ACA 11 on Wednesday.  If passed and signed by the governor, it would go on the ballot for California voters to approve or reject.

In recent years, some local tax measures have been easily defeated, while some were close enough that they came close to the 55 percent figure.

For example, a 2010 Pasadena Unified parcel tax, Measure CC, fell well short of the necessary two-thirds requirement, but came close to the 55 percent margin, with 53.75 percent of voters in favor.

The changes are inspired, in part, by the narrow failure of Measure J in Los Angeles last year. It would have continued a half-cent sales tax that pays for transit improvements, but fell just short of the required two-thirds vote with 66.11 percent of voters in favor of the measure. 

“Our infrastructure investment need exceeds what the state budget can provide, and state bonds cannot be a substitute for local initiative and responsibility,” said Rep. Bob Blumenfield, a Democrat from the San Fernando Valley who authored ACA 8. 

ACA 8 and 11 would also include new accountability actions for local bond and revenue measures, according to the California Special Districts Association. These are the requirements: 

• Specify all purposes of tax proceeds to voters;
• Include annual independent audits of the proceeds collected and programs funded;
• Establish a citizens’ oversight committee to review all expenditures and financial audits.

The amendments would reverse a portion of Prop. 13, a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 1978 that limited property taxes and set the two-thirds requirement for tax measures. 

If approved by the Senate, the constitutional changes would then go on the ballot for California voters to decide on.

What do you think? Should it be easier to pass bonds and special taxes?

Editor's note: The original version of this story mentioned Sierra Madre's defeated user utility tax measure, which required only a majority vote to pass.