Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 (now Proposition 5) was a direct attack on Proposition 13 that would have lowered the two-thirds vote of the electorate required to pass local special taxes (and bonds) to 55 percent. But proponents of the bill said it was all about democracy.
“It’s just giving the opportunity for the citizens to vote on this,” said Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry.
That was until polling indicated that ACA 1 would fail. So, rather than giving citizens the opportunity to vote on it, because the legislators might not get their way, they rewrote ACA 1. Their new proposal removes the provision in ACA 1 lowering the two-thirds vote for special taxes but retains the provision lowering the two-thirds vote for local general obligation bonds.
Local bonds are almost always paid back through property-related fees and assessments. So, to get it to pass, they place all the burden of repayment on homeowners, small business owners, and other property owners. Speaking of bonds, there is an additional $20 billion in bonds on the ballot. Prop. 2 is a $10 billion bond for school facilities and Prop. 4 is a $10 billion bond for climate-programs.
To make matters worse, the Legislature missed the deadline to put them on the ballot. So, they passed a bill declaring a special election on the same day as the general election and consolidated the two together.
That’s also how they intended to sneak a watered-down Proposition 47 reform initiative on the ballot to compete with the citizen-initiated reform measure. Proposition 47 from 2014, you may recall, recategorized crimes like shoplifting, grand theft forgery from felonies to misdemeanors if that don’t exceed $950.
It may come as no surprise to hear that trivializing felonies and reducing the penalties for said crimes has encouraged more crime. So, public safety groups and commercial retailers lawfully collected signatures to put a Prop. 47 reform initiative on the ballot.
In response, the governor and Legislative leaders sought to put their own competing measure on the ballot. Fortunately for the citizens of California, a combination of media scrutiny and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s national aspirations made them rethink that.
You probably noticed there is a Proposition 2 and a Proposition 36 on the ballot. No, that doesn’t mean there are 35 ballot measures this year. In the same bill where the Legislature created a special election to put those bonds on the ballot past their deadline, they also gave themselves prime placement by picking their own numbers. They get Propositions 2 through 6 while we mere mortals get Propositions 32 through 36.
Finally, you might be asking, what happened to ACA 13? ACA 13 would have selectively increased the voter threshold. For example, citizens’ initiatives that require a two-thirds vote to raise taxes or borrow money would also require a two-thirds vote to pass, instead of the majority that all constitutional amendments have required since California’s 1849 handwritten constitution. We were told it was meant to protect the will of the majority. In reality, it was an attack on the Taxpayer Protection Act.
To prove our point, when the California Supreme Court removed TPA from the November ballot, the Legislature also removed ACA 13. Instead, they called another special election to move it to the November 2026 ballot in case we qualify a new TPA initiative by then.
“I trust the voters in weighing these and making their decision,” said Assemblyman Chris Ward when passing ACA 13.
Well, unless you might disagree with them.
Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
