A New Prop 13?

The state Supreme Court is considering a challenge to allowing a ballot proposition regarding limitation of tax increases to be put on the November ballot. Sufficient signatures have already been submitted and the proposition will appear unless the Court blocks it on constitutional grounds.

It should be noted that courts have been reluctant to strike things from the ballot, since they might not pass anyway and there are other options if they do pass. In effecr, why do something controversial about an issue that might not arise at all if normal electoral procedures are allowed to occur?

From the San Francisco Chronicle: The state Supreme Court seemed reluctant Wednesday to grant Democrats’ request to remove from the November ballot a business-supported initiative that would require voter approval for any increase in state and local taxes or fees. But the justices appeared willing to put the tax-cut provisions on hold if the measure passes and then decide their legality.

As the hearing began, Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero asked a lawyer for Gov. Gavin Newsom and Legislative Democrats why the court should take the rare step of blocking the ballot measure “instead of allowing the voters to consider it.” 

Justice Joshua Groban asked a similar question, and Justice Martin Jenkins said less-drastic actions were available, like a freeze on provisions that would slash government revenue. Justice Leondra Kruger noted that the court usually considers a ballot measure’s challenged sections individually rather than taking up the entire measure, and asked, “Why shouldn’t we do so here?”

The measure “is already causing negative consequences,” replied attorney Margaret Prinzing. “Governments up and down the state have to balance their budgets … without knowing what revenue is available to them” or whether they will need to ask their voters to approve every increase in taxes or fees.

But Sacramento attorney Thomas Hiltachk, the official proponent of the ballot measure, said its removal is being sought by “people in government who do not want change.” If it passes in November, he told the court, any provisions subject to challenge could be reviewed separately, leaving the rest of the measure in effect.

The Legislature now can increase state taxes by a two-thirds majority vote. The initiative would retain that standard but would also require a majority of California voters to approve the increase before it could take effect.

It would also require local voters to approve any increases in their taxes or licensing fees, with a two-thirds majority required to raise funds for specific programs. And it would apply retroactively to all taxes and fees since the start of 2022, canceling them unless approved within 12 months by the lawmakers and voters cited in the ballot measure...

Full story at https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/california-tax-ballot-19445263.php.