Proposition 218 comes to the rescue of Proposition 13

Proposition 13 was a law designed chiefly to protect property taxpayers. It put limits on how high and how fast property taxes could climb and required a vote of the people on new local taxes. After Proposition 13’s success, bureaucrats looked for ways to raise revenues while avoiding Proposition 13’s restrictions. They hit upon assessment districts, which had been historically used to fund capital improvements that directly benefited property. Over time, bureaucrats molded assessments into property taxes that avoided Proposition 13’s restrictions.
Following the failure in the state legislature of 7 HJTA-sponsored bills over a 9-year period, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association qualified Proposition 218 for the November 1996 ballot. It gave the people the right to vote on all local taxes, and required taxpayer approval of assessments and property related
According to the League of Women Voters:
Proposition 218 provides that:
• all future local general taxes must be approved by majority vote of the people and existing local general taxes established after December 31, 1994, without a vote of the people, be placed before the voters within two years.
• only property owners could vote on assessments, or, if a court voids this provision, approval would require a two-thirds vote of the electorate.
• proposed assessments and fees must be submitted to property owners for approval, after a detailed notice and public hearing.
• schools and other public agencies that own parcels in an assessment district must pay assessments.
• votes on assessments must be weighted proportionately on the basis of the amount that each parcel owner would pay.
• no assessment or fee can be higher than a parcel’s share of a project’s cost or service delivered to that parcel.
• a property-related fee cannot be charged for police, fire, library, ambulance, or any other service available to the general public.
Fiscal effect: The Legislative Analyst estimates that local governments would probably lose more than $100 million annually in the near future, and longer-term losses could potentially exceed hundreds of millions of dollars annually. There would be comparable reductions in spending for local services.
Supporters Say
• local government can still raise money for local services, such as police, fire, and education, as long as officials convince voters that the taxes are really necessary.
• property owners will be guaranteed the right to vote on homeowner assessments or fees and on taxes levied on utilities.
• utility lifeline rates for the elderly and disabled would not be affected.
Opponents Say
• Proposition 218 would reduce current funding for police, fire, library, park, emergency programs, and senior and disabled services in California.
• corporations, wealthy landowners, foreigners, and developers would have more voting power than average homeowners.
• subsidized Lifeline utility programs for seniors and disabled citizens, which are funded by property tax assessment, would be prohibited.

More from Monrovia Weekly