A proposition to eliminate a loophole that enables local governments to raise your property taxes has qualified for the Nov. 3 ballot.
The Local Taxpayer Protection Act to Save Proposition 13 would limit voters’ ability to pass local special taxes by raising the vote approval threshold requirement from a simple majority to two-thirds. It would also overturn all existing voter-approved property-related taxes that were not passed by a two-thirds vote.
“This important new taxpayer initiative would not have been necessary were it not for the unrelenting attacks on Proposition 13 by anti-taxpayer forces that began in 1978, immediately after its passage,” wrote Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, in an opinion piece.
What is Proposition 13?
Proposition 13, officially known as the People’s Initiative to Limit Property Taxation, became an amendment to the California State Constitution when it was approved by almost two-thirds of California voters in the primary election on June 6, 1978.
The proposition, placed on the ballot through the initiative process, sought to cap property taxes and limit property reassessments upon ownership changes, and required a two-thirds majority in the state legislature for any tax increases.
But the courts and local governments have “significantly weakened taxpayer protections that had stood for over 40 years,” according to Coupal.
“The worst of these unjustified loopholes occurred in 2017 with the California Supreme Court’s ruling in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland,” he wrote. “That ruling, although somewhat oblique, gave the green light to local governments to impose local special taxes without the two-thirds vote required by the plain language of Prop. 13, if the taxes were put on the ballot by signatures on petitions instead of an action by the government.”
Following the decision, “local governments exploited the ruling to impose all kinds of unconstitutional taxes – backed by tax-and-spend special interests – costing taxpayers billions of dollars that they would not have had to pay if the courts had followed the letter and the spirit of the law,” Coupal stated.
“Even though the express language of Prop. 13 prohibits any ‘transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property,’ courts have created – out of whole cloth – a convoluted series of decisions to allow them to be imposed,” he added.
Who is supporting the ‘Local Taxpayer Protection Act to Save Proposition 13’?
In addition to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which was named after the main sponsor of Proposition 13, the as-yet-unnumbered proposition is supported by the California Business Roundtable, the California Taxpayers Association, and the California Business Properties Association.
The proposition received more than 962,106 valid signatures (874,641 were required) and was declared eligible for the ballot by California Secretary of State Shirley Weber on April 21.
How many taxes could be overturned if voters pass the Local Taxpayer Protection Act ?
There’s no exact count, but analysts say the number could be significant — likely dozens to more than 100 local taxes statewide.
Since a 2017 court ruling, many cities, counties, and school districts have passed special taxes by a simple majority rather than two‑thirds. These include parcel taxes, sales tax add‑ons, and some real estate transfer taxes.
If approved, the measure could wipe out many of those taxes, depending on how courts define “property-related” and whether the retroactive provision holds up.
Bottom line:
The final number would be decided in court — and could unwind years of voter-approved local funding.
What Local Taxpayer Protection Act opponents say
Opponents — including cities, schools, and labor groups — warn the measure could have wide ripple effects. They say overturning existing taxes could strip billions already approved by voters, hitting schools, public safety, homelessness programs, and infrastructure. Critics also argue it would erase voter-approved measures, rolling back local decisions in communities that passed taxes by majority vote.
Critics say restoring a blanket two‑thirds vote requirement would make it much harder for communities to fund basic needs, particularly in areas where voters support services but can’t reach a supermajority and costs (housing, public safety, climate infrastructure) are rising
This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Prop. 13 loophole initiative fight could raise bar for local taxes
Reporting by Steve Pastis, USA TODAY NETWORK / Palm Springs Desert Sun
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
