Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 & 05 - CorrespondenceReceived after Agenda Printed October 24, 2023 Item No. 4 & 5 From: Rieff, Kim To: Mulvey. Jennifer Subject: FW: Support for Resolution Opposing ACA1 and 13 Date: October 24, 2023 7:05:05 AM From: Aidan Chao <achaostock@gmail.com> Sent: October 23, 2023 11:38 PM To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Support for Resolution Opposing ACA1 and 13 [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attac nts unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Members of the City Council of Newport Beach, The Los Angeles County Taxpayers Association voices its strongest support for Mayor Heft's resolution opposing ACA 1 and 13, which threaten the vital taxpayer protections provided by Proposition 13 and Proposition 218. These protections have been a lifeline for Californians living on fixed or low incomes, including seniors, students, and working-class families. In light of the recent wave of inflation, soaring gas prices, and increasing taxes and fees, it is essential that we preserve the financial stability of our communities. Proposition 13, passed in 1978, and Proposition 218, enacted in 1996, have been instrumental in capping property tax increases and ensuring that homeowners, apartment landlords, and business owners have stability and predictability in their tax obligations. These measures are the twin fortresses guarding the spending power of fixed -income households and preventing them from being forced out of their homes due to unaffordable property tax bills. However, the sanctity of these taxpayer protections is now under threat, and ACA 1 and 13 pose a clear and deliberate challenge. The changing of California's initiative rules, similar to recent efforts by activist courts, is a concerning attempt to undermine the ability of voters to have a say in matters of taxation and financial burden. We must not allow this undemocratic and underhanded attempt to diminish the rights of California voters and take more of our hard-earned money. The positives brought by Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 are at risk, and we cannot imagine the consequences of property taxes without these safeguards. We urge you to support the upcoming resolution to oppose ACA 1 and 13 and to make a stand for the financial stability and well-being of our community. Let us remember that Propositions 13 and 218 were born from the collective voice of Californians who said, "Enough is enough." Now, it is time for us to come together and raise our voices for LA County Taxpayers. Sincerely, Aidan Chao Chairman, Los Angeles County Taxpayers Association �7ax Los Angeles County Taxpayers Association Received after Agenda Printed October 24, 2023 Item No. 4 H WAR JtAR [ '[fAXPAYI RSASSOCINIION October 24, 2023 Newport Beach City Council Council Chambers 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Resolution No. 2023-60: Onnosiniz Assemblv Constitutional Amendment 1 Dear Councilmembers, This is to inform you that the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association supports your Resolution No. 2023-60. ACA 1 is a direct attack on Proposition 13. This is irrefutable. It amends Article XIII A of the California Constitution. That is Proposition. 13. ACA 1 would make it easier to raise taxes on the people of California, cutting the vote threshold needed to pass virtually all local special taxes from the current two-thirds vote required by Proposition 13 to only 55%. The loss of that important taxpayer protection in Proposition 13 would mean it is more likely that struggling taxpayers will be hit with higher local taxes, again and again after every election. And it is not necessary. According to the League of California Cities, from 2001-2018, 5 1 % of city tax measures with a two-thirds vote requirement reached that threshold and passed, because cities were able to persuade two-thirds of voters to approve those taxes. It should be noted that we are only talking about special taxes here. General taxes pass with a simple majority. In fact, in that same period, all local tax measures passed by 70 percent. It is apparently not enough for some politicians that new and higher special taxes passed most of the time and that all tax measures passed 70 percent of the time. New and higher taxes must seemingly pass every time for the proponents of ACA 1 to be satisfied. That is likely why since Proposition 13 was enacted in 1978, voters have continued to support the important two-thirds vote protection. That support was reaffirmed with the passage of pro -taxpayer initiatives like Proposition 62 in 1986, Proposition 218 in 1996, Proposition 26 in 2010. Further, the two-thirds vote requirement is not a new idea. It has been in the California Constitution since 1879. For more than a century, local property owners have been protected against excessive bond debt by the requirement that local bonds — repaid only by property owners — need a two-thirds vote of the local electorate. The logic behind a two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes is the same. While everyone can vote on special taxes, they are often paid only by property owners through parcel taxes, bonds, assessments, and fees. For that reason, it is not enough that a majority support these measures, but also that those who ultimately pay for them do as well. That is why a two-thirds vote is necessary. That is why the protection of the two-thirds vote for special taxes is in Proposition 13. Sincerely, k Ii Jon Coupal President Received after Agenda Printed October 24, 2023 Item No. 5 HOB ARD JtAR [ '[fAXPAYI RSASSO IN1ION October 24, 2023 Newport Beach City Council Council Chambers 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Resolution No. 2023-61: Opposing Assembly Constitutional Amendment 13 Noting Thresholds) Dear Councilmembers, This is to inform you that the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association supports your Resolution No. 2023-61. ACA 13 reminds us of the recently failed effort in Ohio to make it more difficult to pass constitutional amendments. In Ohio, when Republicans attempted to raise the voter threshold for all constitutional amendments, many in this Legislature expressed outrage. President Joe Biden called it a "blatant attempt to weaken voters' voices [...]" and Gov. Gavin Newsom said, "the GOP tried to silence the will of the voters." Unlike Ohio, this Legislature has notably exempted itself from ACA 13 and would seemingly only require higher constitutional thresholds to impose new limits on taxation. California voters have routinely and consistently demanded stronger requirements for new and higher taxes. Proposition 13 in 1978. Proposition 62 in 1986. Proposition 218 in 1996. Proposition 26 in 2010. How is creating a two -tiered system for amending the California Constitution any less undemocratic than Ohio? We would argue ACA 13 is even more so. ACA 13 is an attack on the will of the majority. Further, since our first state constitution was passed in 1849, constitutional amendments have required a majority vote of the electorate. At no time in the state's history have constitutional amendments had different thresholds for voter approval based on their content. ACA 13 is an attack on constitutional norms. It begs the question why the Legislature would impose such content -based distinctions to pass constitutional amendments when none existed before? Since there is no precedent for this, it seems an obvious attempt to undermine an initiative that has already qualified for the ballot. The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act will restore voter thresholds that the state Constitution already requires for new and higher taxes. These thresholds were set by voters when they approved Propositions 13 and 218. They are central tenants of Propositions 13 and 218. ACA 13 is an attack on Proposition 13. Sincerely, k j Jon Coupal President Received after Agenda Printed October 24, 2023 Ora WGouriyTapayersAwoaatm P.O. Box 5881, Orange, CA 92863 City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attn: Mayor and Councilmembers October 23, 2023 Re: Opposition to ACA 13 The Orange County Taxpayers Association was founded in 1986 by a group of Orange County taxpayers and business owners, is a non -partisan, non-profit organization with a solid history of working to support taxpayer issues. OC Tax is the only countywide organization whose exclusive focus is to represent taxpayers on governmental tax and spending policy issues. Our mission is to ensure that taxes and tax -supported programs are fair, understandable, cost-effective, and good for the economy. ACA 13 (Ward, Rivas), which was passed by the legislature, seeks to amend the constitution by limiting the initiative process by shifting the power to raise the voter threshold for new and higher taxes to the Legislature. ACA 13 will fundamentally change the initiative process by increasing the voter threshold to pass future limits on taxes and fees only for measures put on the ballot by signature gathering, not those put on by the Legislature. ACA 13 will change the power balance between the Legislature and voters and is yet another attempt to diminish the voice of voters as the right and necessary check -and -balance in our system of government. The initiative process is a vital tool for Californians to voice their concerns, propose changes, and stand up for their values. It allows citizens to bypass the usual legislative channels and bring about changes that matter deeply to them. However, ACA 13 diminishes these voices, shifting power away from the people and towards the Legislature in a drastic and unprecedented way. Under ACA 13, the power to increase voter thresholds for new and higher taxes would vest solely with the Legislature, taking away a fundamental and often -used tool for voters looking to better control their cost of living and higher taxes. However, the power to reduce voter thresholds would remain with both citizens and the Legislature, creating significant power imbalance and an unlevel playing field. Moreover, ACA 13 is a clear attempt to undermine and ultimately undo several voter -approved taxpayer protections, including Prop. 13, Prop. 218, and Prop. 26. These measures, while passed by voters, have been whittled away by both legislative and legal actions. Under ACA 13, these important voter -approved measures would be even more vulnerable to attack. While the 2/3 threshold for new and higher taxes has not stopped local governments from being able to raise revenue via special taxes, enacting a similar threshold at the OCTax: Fighting to make taxes fair, understandable, cost-effective and good for the economy! Orange County Taxpayers Associatim P.O. Box 5881, Orange, CA 92863 statewide level will again create a significant power imbalance whereby larger cities and urban areas will have significantly more say in how the entire state is taxed. The ballot measure process has posed a significant check -and -balance for both the Legislature and the courts. In fact, in many cases, it is the only recourse taxpayers have when the courts overstep their authority and rule against voters' will. Please join OC Tax, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the Orange County Business Council as well as local businesses and chambers of commerce to oppose ACA 13. The California Teachers Association has expressed their support for ACA 13 and will surely be supporting the measure on the November ballot. By opposing this bill, we aim to protect the integrity of California's direct democracy system, uphold the rights of voters, and advocate for transparent and accountable governance. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Sara Catalan President and CEO Orange County Taxpayers Association OCTax: Fighting to make taxes fair, understandable, cost-effective and good for the economy!