(The Center Square) – California legislators and tax advocates gathered to sound the alarm on ACA 1, a bill that would reduce the constitutionally protected voting threshold for tax increases from 2/3 to 55% for state and municipal taxes and bonds. The bill, ACA 1, currently faces the California Assembly Appropriations Committee, where the Democratic supermajority is expected to favor the bill’s passage unless enough moderate Democrats defect to defeat the bill, which requires a ⅔ majority in both chambers. Should the bill pass both chambers 130 days before the March primary, the measure could be on the ballot as soon as next spring.
“ACA 1 is a direct attack on Proposition 13,” said Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association President Jon Coupal. “This reckless proposal is a time-bomb that will lead to an explosion of higher taxes, over and over again. The important two-thirds vote requirement protects Californians by forcing local governments to be thoughtful about how they spend existing tax dollars before they rush to the ballot for more.”
HJTA was founded in 1978 to protect Proposition 13, an initiative which created a constitutional amendment limiting property taxes to the value upon acquisition and tax increases of no more than 2% per year. In the late 1970s, skyrocketing property values combined with high inflation drove people out of their homes as property taxes from their rapidly appreciating property oustripped their stagnant incomes. Proposition 13 was passed to rectify this situation, and enjoys widespread support among voters. Combined with Proposition 218, another HJTA-sponsored initiative that created a constitutional amendment requiring voters approval for all new taxes at the state and local levels, and Proposition 26, which added voter approval for the increase of fees, the three constitutional amendments allow the California voter to serve as the final arbiter of new tax increases.
According to Coupal, who spoke at a press conference, California has the highest income, sales and gas taxes in the nation despite these tax protections, a fact that Coupal uses to say ACA 1 is “an engine to raise taxes over and over again” and “would simply return us to the days of the mid ’70s where people are getting taxed out of homes,” and thereby accelerate outmigration of the state that S&P analysts say could one threaten the state’s tax base and credit rating.
Advocates of ACA 1, such as primary sponsor Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D–Napa), say the bill could be used to build price-controlled “affordable” and subsidized “supportive” housing, water infrastructure, parks, and other projects deemed as “public infrastructure.”
In response to Democrats’ defense of the bill, Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego) said, “ACA 1 wrongly chips away at critical taxpayer protections by making it easier for greedy politicians and special interests to raise taxes. If this measure gets to the ballot, I implore the voters of California to not buy sham arguments that we need more taxes for housing and infrastructure.”
“ACA 1 wrongly chips away at critical taxpayer protections by making it easier for greedy politicians and special interests to raise taxes. If this measure gets to the ballot, I implore the voters of California to not buy sham arguments that we need more taxes for housing and infrastructure,” said Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego).
