@Marcus Detwiler
Last week, Assembly Member Cecilia Aguiar-Curry unveiled Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10 (ACA 10), a measure that would narrow the scope of her previously authored Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 (ACA 1). The State Legislature approved ACA 1 by two-thirds vote at the end of last year to place it before the voters for consideration.
If passed by two-thirds of the Legislature, ACA 10 would direct the Secretary of State to revise the text of ACA 1 as passed by the Legislature. This would mean that voters in the November 2024 general election would be presented with the text of ACA 1 as amended by ACA 10.
ACA 10 would amend ACA 1 to limit its application to general obligation bonds, amending the State Constitution to afford special districts, cities, and counties, the same 55 percent vote threshold allowed for approving school district bonds. It would affirmatively apply its provisions to any local bond measures submitted at the same election as ACA 1 or at a later election held after the effective date of ACA 1, subject to certain requirements.
ACA 10 would remove from ACA 1 a new 55 percent voter approval threshold for special taxes for the purposes of funding the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, foreclosing the possibility that public agencies would be able to utilize that provision following voter approval at the November election. The State Constitution currently requires two-thirds voter-approval for both special taxes and general obligation bonds placed on the ballot by special districts, cities, and counties.
Relatedly, Assembly Bill 2813 (Aguiar-Curry) continues to make its way through the Legislature. AB 2813 is the legislation necessary to implement ACA 1 and is largely technical in nature, however the bill was recently amended to provide fire protection districts with clarified authority to utilize the 55 percent vote threshold for bonded indebtedness contained within ACA 1.
The potential paring back of ACA 1 comes at a time when the Legislature has found itself dealing with a massive budget deficit and a lack of voter enthusiasm for additional state spending. Having passed a placeholder budget by the Constitutional deadline, the Legislature continues to negotiate with the Newsom Administration to finalize the various spending priorities and funding solutions.
Assembly Member Auguiar-Curry is responding to indications that the electorate may be reluctant to support lowering the threshold for the approval of special taxes. Indeed, a survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), released Friday, June 14, indicated an unfavorable response to a question on the topic. PPIC asked likely voters: “A legislative constitutional amendment that has qualified for the November state ballot would replace the two-thirds vote requirement with a 55 percent majority for voters to pass local tax and bond measures for public infrastructure and affordable housing. If the election were today, would you vote yes or no?” Voters responded:
45% yes
53% no
2% don't know
Lawmakers and stakeholders no doubt also recall the exceptionally slim margin by which California voters approved Proposition 1 in March, tempering expectations that the public will be willing to approve other revenue-related measures on the November ballot. If ACA 10 is passed by the Legislature, the original ACA 1 would become the latest casualty of perceived voter sentiment.
ACA 10 is currently on the third reading file on the Floor of the State Assembly. While legislative deadlines do not apply to constitutional amendments, the measure would need to be approved no later than June 27 in order to effectuate its amendments to ACA 1, as June 27 is the Secretary of State’s deadline to qualify or withdraw measures eligible for the November 5, 2024 general election.
#AdvocacyNews
#FeatureNews
#BondsandFinancings
#Revenue
#SpecialTaxes