Gov. Newsom and the Legislature want to unleash local tax measures

Taxpayers can expect to be hammered next year as “citizen-proposed” tax increases are rushed to local ballots across the state.

There are two ways to amend the state constitution in California. The legislature can pass a proposed amendment with a two-thirds vote in each house, followed by the approval of a majority of voters statewide. The voters themselves can propose a constitutional amendment by initiative, through the collection of a required number of signatures on a petition, followed by majority voter approval in a statewide election.

But now, it appears that a third way has become normalized: the state Supreme Court can suggest without deciding that the constitution doesn’t really mean what it says, and the appellate courts can go with the flow, and local governments statewide can incorporate that new interpretation into plans to raise taxes.

That’s what’s happening right now as a result of the California Supreme Court’s decision in the 2017 case known as California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland. In that ruling, the justices left room to conclude that local tax increases for a specific purpose, known as “special taxes,” need only the approval of a simple majority of the electorate if those taxes are proposed by a citizens’ initiative instead of by a government body such as a city council.

An initiative that has already qualified for the November 2024 ballot, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, would restore what the constitution actually says, which is that local special taxes require the approval of two-thirds of the electorate.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state legislature are suing to have this measure taken off the ballot before the voters have a chance to approve it.

A recent report by CapRadio is an example of how normalized the new court-created loophole has become. The story said the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act would “raise the threshold for voter approval of citizen-proposed taxes in cities, towns and counties from a simple majority to a two-thirds vote.”

There is nothing in the state constitution that even hints that “citizen-proposed taxes” can pass with less than the required two-thirds vote. The courts have simply allowed, without ever actually deciding the issue, that a majority vote is sometimes enough to raise local taxes. Taxpayers can expect to be hammered next year as “citizen-proposed” tax increases are rushed to local ballots across the state.