Special taxes and voter approval
This week, the California Court of Appeal, in City of San Diego v. Shapiro, overturned a special tax approved by the City of San Diego to help finance a potential expansion of the San Diego Convention Center. The tax was approved not by the City’s electorate but rather by the owner and lessees of land that would be subject to the special tax. The court of appeal ruled that the tax should have been presented to the City’s full electorate. California Constitution Article XIIIA requires that all new special taxes (i.e., taxes levied for a specific purpose) be approved by two-thirds of the “qualified electors” of the locality, whereas Article XIIIC requires that special taxes be approved by two-thirds of the “electorate.” The court of appeal interpreted these provisions to mean “registered voters,” regardless of any property qualification. Hence, the City’s special tax, having been approved by landowners not by registered voters, was illegal. It remains to be seen whether the court’s decision means that special taxes can never be levied constitutionally through special districts if the districts are undeveloped and thus lack registered voters.
What to read next
Shed a (crocodile) tear for Luke Skywalker today, as Mark Hamill’s much ballyhooed Autograph Law is set to be undone and reformed by the same California officials who made the mistake to pass it in the first place. AB 228 has arrived at the Governor’s desk, and in all likelihood will be signed into law any day.
Our new flagship publication, Sword&Scales, offers 16 pages of news and information to bring you up close to the vital work of our legal team. Our ardent defense of the right to own and use private property takes center stage in the inaugural issue. It’s at the core of our mission in the nation’s courts.
On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.
The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court. As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval.