Support the LB businesses you see here:

Carter Wood Floor pic
Carter Wood Floors, a LB company, will restore your wood floor or install a new one. Special offer for LBReport.com readers, click photo.

Lovelace pic
Who is this guy, Bill Lovelace? Click on picture to find out.

NetKontent
NetKontent Digital Video Cutting Edge Services For The Internet, Broadcast and Multimedia. Click For Info

White House pic
This house is well insured. Are you? Want presidential treatment on auto, home, business, health, boat, motorcycle insurance? Call Pollman's Insurance: 23 yrs. in business, 4th generation LB family. Info, click photo


Nino's Ristorante: A delicious treasure in Bixby Knolls. Click here if you're hungry or for catering!
3853 Atlantic Ave.

The Enterlines
Bill & Karen Enterline are ELB realty experts. Click here for info on area property values.

Your E-Mail
Click here

  • Neighborhood Groups/Meetings
  • How To Recall a LB Elected Official
  • Crime Data
  • City Council Agendas
  • Port of LB Agendas
  • E-Mail Your Councilmember
  • Council District Map
  • LB Parks, Rec & Marine
  • LB Schools
  • LB Airport Watch.org
  • Sacramento
  • Washington
  • References & Archives
  • Lost, Found & Adoptable Pets
  • LBReport.com

    News

    LB Area Ass'ywoman Oropeza Votes To Advance Proposal To Change Prop 13's 2/3 Vote Req't To 55% For Local and Regional Transportation Planning, Projects & Mitigation Related To Impacts of Transportation Projects


    (April 27, 2003) -- LB area Assemblymember Jenny Oropeza (D, Carson-LB) has voted in a legislative committee to advance a Sacramento-proposed constitutional amendment that would change to Proposition 13 to let a local or regional transportation agency impose or raise sales and uses taxes with only 55% voter approval -- instead of Prop 13's now-required 2/3 -- to fund "local and regional transportation planning, research, design, construction, operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and environmental mitigation related to the impacts of transportation projects."

    The 13-5 vote on Assembly Constitutional Amendment 7 (ACA 7) in the Assembly Transportation Committee went along party lines with Democrats in favor and Republicans opposed. The measure is opposed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and favored by government transportation entities, including the MTA on whose board then-Councilwoman Oropeza once served (list from Assembly Committee analysis, below).

    Senator Joe Dunn, LB conf. April 26/03Speaking at an April 26 LB conference on Redevelopment practices [separate LBReport.com coverage, click here], Orange County State Senator Joe Dunn (D, Garden Grove) commented during audience Q & A on current Sacramento efforts to invite voters to reduce the vote level required to raise taxes:

    "The question is, what's the chance of the legislature passing a bill that lowers the vote threshhold on transportation bonds, right now which is a 2/3 support by voters to a 55% support which we did for education bonds a couple of years ago...I voted against lowering the threshhold on the education bonds. The reason I did that was my belief is that if the bonds are truly necessary, such as education, the voters in that area for local school bonds will give it the 2/3 majority, if the need is there and it's packaged correctly. If the need isn't there, the fanciest campaign ain't going to get it success. If the campaign is bad but the need is there, it could fail as well. But when both come together, no one's been able to point to me an area that lost a school bond vote on a 2/3 if the need really was there and it was packaged correctly, campaignwise.

    I know that's a balance of policy and politics but that's the nature of the beast, so I voted against the lowering of the vote threshhold.

    I will do the same on the transportation bonds. [applause begins] I will probably be the only Democrat to do that. [applause continues]. My reasoning in the same. I know that the 2/3 majority is a high obstacle. I love the profession of politics. I'm not ashamed to call myself a politician, but I also am quite well aware that we kind of as collective politicians, together, both parties, get into a little bit of gang mentality, meaning that where we see protections in the law as an obstacle to what we accomplish, instead of raising our performance to meet the obstacle, we lower the obstacle. That is not good long term. Might have some short term advantages, but for the operation of this democracy at both the state and federal level, those protections are there for a reason."

    The proposed CA constitutional amendment is also supported by the "League of CA Cities" [comment: in our view, the group should be more accurately called the "League of CA City Halls." The interests of City Halls are not always the same as city taxpayers. LB City Hall spends public money to pay dues to this non-official group, which supports and opposes legislation. LB Councilmembers have cancelled their public meetings to attend its events, also at city taxpayer expense.]

    LB City Hall is not listed among those taking a position on ACA 7.

    However, as previously reported by LBReport.com, in December 2002 the City Council voted to support legislation that reduces Prop 13's 2/3 vote requirement to 55% to raise property taxes for "public safety bonds."

    As also previously reported in LBReport.com, in March 2003 LB State Senator Betty Karnette voted in a legislative committee to advance a measure inviting voters to change Prop 13 to allow sales tax hikes on a majority vote for transportation projects and services and "smart growth planning."

    LBReport.com posts the Assembly Transportaion Committee's analysis of ACA 7, the Assembly Committee's recorded vote, and the current amended text of the legislation below.

    The measure will now go to the Assembly Committee on Elections, Redistricting and Constitutional Amendments (none of its members are from the LB area). If ACA 7 is ultimately passed by the full Assembly, and Senate and not vetoed by the Governor, it would likely appear on the March, 2004 ballot where it could be enacted on majority passage.



    Assembly Transportation Committee Vote
    
    VOTES - ROLL CALL
    MEASURE:	ACA 7
    AUTHOR:	Dutra
    TOPIC:	Transportation funding:  sales and use tax.
    DATE:	04/21/2003
    LOCATION:	ASM. TRANS.
    MOTION:	Be adopted as amended and be re-referred
    to the Committee on Elections, Redistricting
    and Constitutional Amend.
    (AYES  13. NOES   5.)  (PASS)
    
    COMM. VOTE SUMMARY  :  Ayes:   13	Noes: 05	PASS
    
    TITLE	:  A resolution to propose to the people of the State of
    California an amendment to the Constitution of the
    State, by adding Article XIXC thereto, relating to
    transportation.
    
    AYES
    
    Dutra	Berg	Chan	Chu
    Kehoe	Liu	Longville	Nakano
    Oropeza	Parra	Pavley	Salinas
    Simitian
    
    NOES
    
    Houston	Bates	Benoit	Leslie
    Mountjoy
    
    ABSENT OR NOT VOTING
    
    La Suer	Spitzer
    
    					   

    BILL ANALYSIS
    
    Date of Hearing: April 21, 2003
    
    ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
              John Dutra, Chair
    ACA 7 (Dutra) - As Amended:  March 19, 2003
    
    SUBJECT  :  Transportation sales and taxes: voter approval
    
     SUMMARY  :  Authorizes, upon approval of the state's voters, a
    local transportation agency and a regional transportation
    agency, as defined, to impose or extend a sales and use tax at
    the rate of  percent to fund transportation projects with the
    approval of 55% of the voters in their jurisdiction.
    Specifically,  this bill  :
    
    1)Authorizes a local transportation agency or a regional
    transportation agency, with the approval of 55% of the voters
    in their respective jurisdiction, to impose a sales and use
    tax at a rate of  percent for the exclusive purpose of
    funding local and regional transportation planning, research,
    design, construction, operation, maintenance, rehabilitation,
    and environmental mitigation related to the impacts of
    transportation projects.
    
    2)Provides that if a local transportation sales tax of limited
    duration  is not in effect  in the jurisdiction of a local or
    regional transportation agency on the date that the tax is
    approved by the voters, the tax is imposed for a period of 20
    years.  The new tax would be effective on the first day of the
    first calendar quarter that commences more than 90 days after
    the approval of the tax by the voters.
    
    3)Provides that if a local transportation sales tax of limited
    duration,  is in effect  in the county or region on the date
    that the tax is approved by the voters, the tax is imposed for
    a period of not more than 30 years.  The new tax would be
    effective upon the first day that that the prior tax is
    repealed or otherwise becomes inoperative.
    
    4)Defines a local transportation agency as either of the
    following:
    
    a)   The local public entity designated within a county or a
    city and county, or authorized by statute whose function it
    is to administer, deliver, or implement a voter-approved
    transportation sales tax for transportation projects and
    programs within the boundaries of a county or a city and
    county, or its successor.  If an entity meeting this
    criteria does not exist, the designated congestion
    management agency within a county or a city and county, or
    its successor, or the county transportation commission, or
    its successor;
    
    b)   A local council of governments with the authority to
    administer or deliver a county transportation expenditure
    plan, or its successor.
    
    5)Defines a regional transportation agency as all of the
    following:
    
    a)   The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as
    that entity was established in state law as of January 1,
    2002;
    
    b)   The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
    Authority (MTA), or its successor;
    
    c)   Any transportation entity designated or authorized by
    state law as a regional transportation agency.
    
    6)Specifies that the tax shall be collected and administered by
    the State Board of Equalization (BOE), or its successor
    agency.  The revenues derived by the tax shall deposited in
    the Local Transportation Infrastructure Account, which the
    bill establishes in the State Transportation Fund.
    
    7)Directs the BOE, after collecting its costs for collection and
    administration and making refunds as appropriate, to allocate
    the balance of revenues, on less frequently than a quarterly
    basis, to each local or regional transportation agency where
    the tax revenues were collected.
    
    8)Specifies that the local sales tax revenues that are derived
    under this measure are not General Fund proceeds for specified
    state budgetary purposes.  The bill also specifies that
    allocations that from the Local Transportation Improvement ACT
    (LTIA) that are made under this act shall not be considered
    "appropriations subject to limitation" under specified
    provisions of the State Constitution.
    
     EXISTING LAW  , the California Constitution, conditions the
    imposition of a special tax by a city, county, or special
    district upon the approval of two-thirds of the voters of the
    city, county, or special district voting on that tax, and
    prohibits these entities from imposing an ad valorem tax on real
    property or a transactions or sales tax on the sale of real
    property.
    
     FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown
    
     COMMENTS  :  The Legislature has authorized local governments to
    impose sales taxes to generate additional revenue for local
    transportation improvements.  Counties use these local
    transportation sales taxes for purposes similar to state and
    federal transportation funds.  In 1996-97, local transportation
    sales taxes generated about $1.2 billion, while state and
    federal gas taxes generated approximately $5.3 billion.
    
    Although these local option sales taxes were authorized with
    majority votes, all of the sales tax programs that require
    renewal must be reauthorized within a 15 to 20 year period.
    There are 17 counties in the state that have voter-approved
    countywide sales tax measures.  Most of the locally approved
    sales tax measures were passed on a limited-term basis.  Many
    are scheduled to expire between now and 2011.
    
    A decision rendered by the State Supreme Court in 1995 (Santa
    Clara County Local Transportation Authority v. Guardino),
    however, may make many of the reauthorizations very difficult or
    virtually impossible to achieve.  Current law requires that
    these measures receive two-thirds voter approval for
    reauthorization.  The loss of local sales taxes as a viable
    revenue source for transportation purposes will only increase
    the funding burden on the state.
    
    In November of 2002, voters cast their ballots on a number of
    transportation issues, including five sales tax measures.  While
    only Riverside County received the necessary two-thirds YES
    vote, all five won the majority of votes:
    
    
    
    --------------------------------------------------
    |County          |Percent YES     |Percent NO      |
    |----------------+----------------+----------------|
    |Madera County:  |50.7%           |49.3%           |
    |----------------+----------------+----------------|
    |Fresno County:  |53.68%          |46.32%          |
    |----------------+----------------+----------------|
    |Solano County:  |59.87%          |40.13%          |
    |----------------+----------------+----------------|
    |Merced County:  |61.31%          |38.69%          |
    |----------------+----------------+----------------|
    |Riverside       |69.07%          |30.93%          |
    |County:         |                |                |
    --------------------------------------------------
    
    In a report to the Legislature, the Legislative Analyst's Office
    (LAO) estimated that in 1999-00,  local funds  constituted half,
    or about $7.5 billion of all revenues for transportation.  Over
    one-third of local funds for transportation are derived from
    optional local sales taxes (on all sales, not just gasoline)
    dedicated for transportation purposes.
    
    In February of 2002, the Governor's Commission on Building for
    the 21st Century released its final report, which included
    several proposals for improving the planning, financing, and
    delivery of infrastructure projects in the state.  One of the
    recommendations in the report suggested that the Legislature
    should amend the State Constitution to lower the threshold for
    voter approval of local transportation sales tax initiatives
    from the current level (2/3rds) to 55%.  ACA 7 would implement
    this recommendation.
    
     Author's amendments  :  The author intends to offer the following,
    clarifying amendments:
    
    1)Clarify that the sales tax proceeds can be used for transit as
    well as transportation projects, operations and facilities.
    
    2)Revise the measure to allow a local or regional transportation
    sales tax to be imposed for 30 years in situations where a
    local transportation sales tax already existed, regardless of
    the duration of the previous tax. The bill currently would
    allow this only in situations where the previous tax is
    imposed for a limited duration.
    
    3)Clarify that a local or regional sales tax that is imposed,
    under this measure, for 30 years could take effect on the
    first day of the first calendar quarter that commences more
    than 90 days after the approval of the tax by the voters.
    
    4)Make technical changes in reference to the Sales and Use Tax
    Law (Revenue and Taxation Code) that were suggested by the
    BOE.
    
    Double referral  :  This measure has also been referred to the
    Committee on Elections and Reapportionment.
    
    REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :
    
    Support
    
    Alameda County Congestion Management Agency
    Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority
    Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
    American Planning Association California Chapter
    Associated General Contractors
    California Asphalt Pavement Alliance
    California Association of Councils of Government
    California Association of Realtors
    California Building Industry Association
    California Business Roundtable
    California Chamber of Commerce
    California State Association of Counties
    California Transit Association
    Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority
    CH2MHill
    City of Burlingame
    City of Redwood City; Offices of the Mayor and Vice Mayor,
    County of Sacramento
    County of Santa Cruz
    Engineering and Utility Contractor's Association
    Granite Construction
    International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO
    League of California Cities
    Madera County Transportation Commission
    Metropolitan Transportation Commission
    Morgner Technology Management
    Napa County Transportation Planning Agency
    Orange County Business Council
    Orange County Transportation Authority
    Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board
    Sacramento Regional Transit District
    San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation
    San Mateo City/County Association of Governments
    San Mateo County Transportation Authority
    Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
    Self Help Counties Coalition
    Solano Transportation Authority
    South Bay Cities Council of Governments
    Transportation California
    Water Transit Authority
    
    Opposition
    
    Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
    
    BILL NUMBER: ACA 7 AMENDED BILL TEXT AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 19, 2003 INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Members Dutra and Wolk (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Wolk) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Diaz and Mullin) JANUARY 14, 2003 Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 7--A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State, by adding Article XIX C thereto, relating to transportation. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST ACA 7, as amended, Dutra. Transportation funding: sales and use tax. The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a city, county, or special district upon the approval of 2/3 of the voters of the city, county, or special district voting on that tax, and prohibits these entities from imposing an ad valorem tax on real property or a transactions or sales tax on the sale of real property. Existing statutory provisions and provisions in the California Constitution either impose or authorize the imposition of state or local sales and use taxes upon the gross receipts from the sale within the taxing jurisdiction of, or the storage, use, or other consumption in this jurisdiction of, tangible personal property. This measure would authorize a county, a city and county, local transportation agency and a regional transportation agency, as defined, notwithstanding any other provision of the California Constitution, to impose an additional sales and use tax for a period of 20 to 30 years, as specified, at a rate of 0.5% exclusively for transportation purposes within the jurisdiction of the county, city and county, local or regional transportation agency if the additional tax is approved by 55% of the voters of the jurisdiction voting on the proposition to impose the tax. This measure would require the revenues derived from these taxes to be deposited in the Local Transportation Infrastructure Account, which would be created in the State Transportation Fund. The measure would require the State Board of Equalization to collect and administer the tax revenue. The measure would require moneys in the account that were collected in each county, city and county, local or regional transportation agency, less administrative costs and refunds, to be allocated by the State Board of Equalization to the county, city and county, local or regional transportation agency imposing the tax, and to be used for specified transportation purposes. Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the Legislature of the State of California at its 2003-04 Regular Session commencing on the second day of December 2002, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to the people of the State of California that the Constitution of the State be amended by adding Article XIX C thereto, to read: ARTICLE XIX C TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE ACT SECTION 1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 4 of Article XIII A, Section 2 of Article XIII C, or any other provision of this Constitution, for the exclusive purpose of funding local and regional transportation planning, research, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation, and environmental mitigation related to the impacts of transportation projects, a county, a city and county, local transportation agency or a regional transportation agency may, with the approval of 55 percent of the voters of the jurisdiction voting on the proposition, impose the following sales and use tax within its jurisdiction: (1) For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, a sales tax upon all retailers at the rate of one-half of 1 percent of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in this state. (2) An excise tax upon the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer for storage, use, or other consumption in this state at the rate of one-half of 1 percent of the sales price of the property. (b) (1) If a transactions and use tax of limited duration, authorized to be imposed by the local or regional transportation agency for transportation purposes or general purposes, , has not been imposed and is not in effect in the jurisdiction of a county, a city and county, or a local or regional transportation agency on the date that a tax described in subdivision (a) is approved by 55 percent of the voters of the jurisdiction voting on the proposition to impose the tax, the tax described in subdivision (a) is imposed for a period of 20 years commencing with the first calendar quarter that commences more than 90 days after the effective date of the approval of the tax by the voters. (2) If a transactions and use tax of limited duration, imposed for transportation purposes or for general purposes by the local or regional transportation agency , is in effect in the jurisdiction of a county, a city and county, or a local or regional transportation agency on the date that a tax described in subdivision (a) is approved by 55 percent of the voters of the jurisdiction voting on the proposition to impose the tax, the tax described in subdivision (a) is imposed for a period of not more than 30 years commencing with the first day upon which the transactions and use tax then in effect is repealed or otherwise becomes inoperative. (3) (A) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (1) and (2), the tax described in subdivision (a) shall be imposed in a county, a city and county, or a local or regional transportation agency in addition to any other state or local sales and use tax or transactions and use tax imposed in that jurisdiction in accordance with law. (B) For purposes of this article, a transactions and use tax imposed for transportation purposes in accordance with this article does not include any portion of a local sales and use tax that is imposed pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law (Part 1.5 (commencing with Section 7200) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code), or its successor. (4) The tax described in subdivision (a) shall be administered in the same manner as the tax imposed pursuant to the Sales and Use Tax Law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code), or its successor, and shall be subject to any exemption from taxation set forth in that law. (c) For purposes of this section, "regional transportation agency" means all of the following: (1) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission created by Section 66502 of the Government Code, as that statute read on January 1, 2002. (2) The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or any successor to that authority. (3) The Orange County Transportation Authority. (4) Any local or regional transportation entity designated or authorized by statute as a regional transportation agency. (d) For purposes of this section, "local transportation agency" means both of the following: (1) (A) The local public entity designated within a county or a city and county, or authorized by statute, whose function is to administer, deliver, or implement a voter-approved transportation sales tax for transportation projects and programs within the boundaries of a county or a city and county, or its successor. (B) If an entity meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) does not exist, the designated congestion management agency within a county or a city and county, or its successor, or the county transportation commission, or its successor. (2) A local council of governments with the authority to administer or deliver a county transportation expenditure plan, or its successor. (e) The tax described in subdivision (a) shall be collected and administered by the State Board of Equalization, or its successor agency. The revenues derived from that tax shall be deposited in the Local Transportation Infrastructure Account, which is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. The State Board of Equalization shall allocate the moneys in that account no less frequently than on a quarterly basis as follows: (1) To the State Board of Equalization for its costs of collection and administration. (2) For the payment of refunds of amounts of tax improperly collected pursuant to this section. (3) The balance to each county, city and county, local or regional transportation agency of the remaining amount of those tax revenues that were collected with respect to a sale, use, storage, or other consumption of tangible personal property that occurred in the jurisdiction of the county, city and county, local or regional transportation agency imposing the tax. (e) (f) All revenues received by a county, a city and county, or a local or regional transportation agency pursuant to this section shall be expended exclusively for local and regional transportation planning, research, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and rehabilitation, and for environmental mitigation related to the impacts of transportation projects. (f) (g) Revenues derived from the tax imposed pursuant to subdivisions (a) and (b) are not General Fund proceeds of taxes within the meaning of Article XVI. (g) (h) Allocations made from the Local Transportation Infrastructure Account, and the expenditure by a county, a city and county, or a local or regional transportation agency of revenues received from that account, are not "appropriations subject to limitation" within the meaning of Article XIII B.


    Return To Front Page
     

    Copyright © 2003 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
    Third parties may cite portions as fair use if attributed to "LBReport.com" (print media) or "Long Beach Report dot com" (electronic media). Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here