When it comes to taxes, Sacramento politicians always want the same old thing: more.
If you believe that California’s toughest problems could be solved if the state and local governments simply had more taxpayer money, then you’ll love the approach embraced by Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Democratic legislative supermajority. If they get their way, your taxes will go up often.
In June, the state passed a $311-billion budget. Last year, it had a $97.5-billion surplus. California taxes are overall among the highest in the nation. Yet homelessness, traffic congestion, housing shortages, crime and education metrics keep getting worse. Instead of trying to stretch their dollars or reform our bureaucracies, lawmakers are working on initiatives to boost taxes and spending.
For starters, the Legislature has placed Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 on the November 2024 statewide ballot. If approved by voters, the initiative would lower the vote threshold from two-thirds to 55 percent for local housing and infrastructure bonds. This is a direct and pernicious attack on Proposition 13’s historic taxpayer protections.
Fifty-five percent would be the same level as school bonds which, not surprisingly, pass around 80 percent of the time. A higher vote threshold means that districts have to craft better bonds and work harder to secure public approval. The state shouldn’t make it easier for local governments to seek higher taxes as their first-reach answer to every problem.
Even more nefarious is Assembly Constitutional Amendment 13. It is a pre-emptive strike against a November 2024 initiative backed by taxpayer and business groups, called the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act. TPA offers two important reforms. It requires statewide voter approval for any new state tax-raising measures. It requires two-thirds approval of local “special taxes,” but keeps the simple majority rule in place for general taxes.
Lawmakers obviously don’t have a philosophical problem with a two-thirds requirement, in that ACA 13 would impose that threshold on citizen initiatives that seek to limit government taxing authority. It is a cobbled together desperate effort to keep TPA from passing. The measure is on hold until November, to assure that it goes on the November rather than March ballot.
The League of California Cities pitches ACA 1 and ACA 13 as measures that “empower local voters,” but they only empower local tax collectors. But Newsom and legislative Democrats aren’t content with such cynicism. They have filed an anti-democratic lawsuit asking the state Supreme Court to keep TPA off the ballot by claiming it would destroy fundamental public services.
As this Editorial Board noted recently, these ballot measures revive the old Proposition 13 debates. Perhaps it’s time for fed up California taxpayers to take a page from 45 years ago and revive the Taxpayer Revolt. Supporting TPA and opposing ACA 1 and ACA 13 would be a good start.
Also for the November ballot, Newsom is pushing a $6.4-billion bond that promises to build 10,000 treatment units for the mentally ill. It also changes how localities spend proceeds from its special millionaires’ tax. California needs more treatment facilities, but we’re skeptical this business-as-usual approach will meet its targets. State bonds don’t directly raise taxes, but they grab existing revenues and create pressure for higher taxes. The state should fund these programs through the general-fund budget.
When it comes to taxes, Sacramento politicians always want the same old thing: more.
