By Scott Kaufman, Legislative Director
We are in the first year of the Legislature’s two-year cycle. When the session started, Democratic leaders urged their colleagues to prioritize issues of affordability. Then came all the tax hike proposals. There was a proposal to raise the already highest-in-the-nation income tax, to raise the corporate tax, to place a $5-per-square-foot vacancy tax on commercial property, a tax on social media platforms and a bill to allow private individuals, with the support of the attorney general’s office, to sue taxpayers they believed weren’t paying enough taxes. Luckily, through our efforts and those of our allies, we have been successful in defeating (or severely watering down) all those bills.
But hundreds of bills remain, and we are still monitoring dozens of them (both good and bad). Here are some of the bills we are still watching closely:
Assembly Bill 418 (Support): Requires a public hearing and specific findings before the sale of tax-defaulted properties to ensure that property owners are justly compensated.
Assembly Bills 569 and 1383 (Opposed): These bills would allow cities to offer “supplemental” retirement plans and lower the retirement age to 55 and increase the percentage of pay to 3 percent, or 90% of their final average salary. Unfunded pension liabilities are a threat to the solvency of local governments, crowding out needed public spending or burdening residents with the need for tax increases to fund basic public services.
Assembly Bill 632 (Opposed): This bill would strip away the due process that protects property owners from mistaken or improper liens on their property when local governments or agencies seek administrative fines or penalties.
Assembly Bill 699 (Opposed): This bill reduces ballot transparency. It exempts certain tax increase and bond measures from an existing law that requires the ballot to include in the statement of the measure the amount of money to be raised annually and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied.
Assembly Bill 761 and Senate Bill 333 (Opposed): These bills would allow two transportation districts (in Monterey and San Luis Obispo) to adopt, with voter approval, a 1 percent transactions and use tax that would, in combination with other taxes, exceed the state’s two percent cap for combined local sales taxes (on top of the state’s 7.25% sales tax).
Assembly Bill 1188 (Opposed): This bill would require voters to write their initials in a box on an initiative or referendum petition attesting that they have read the official top funders list, and it would require the ballot label to include a list of the top funders of each citizensʼ initiative or referendum. These requirements needlessly add to the burden on voters who are exercising the direct democracy rights guaranteed to them by the State Constitution.
Assembly Bill 1223 (Opposed): This bill allows the Sacramento Transportation Authority to impose a tax in specific areas for transportation projects, develop toll facilities, and expand the allowable expenditure categories to widely sweep in “infra-structure.ˮ
Assembly Bill 1237 (Opposed): This bill would authorize the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority to impose an unconstitutional $5 charge on the purchase of a ticket to the 2026 World Cup or the 2028 Olympics or Par-alympics to support LA Metro transit systems.
Senate Bill 239 (Opposed): This bill would weaken the Ralph M. Brown Act by removing critical transparency protections, making local government less open and accessible to the press and public.
Senate Bill 255 (Support): This bill requires counties to establish a notification program for recorded property documents by 2027, with provisions for mail and electronic notifications, fee collection, and exemptions for government-granted documents.
Senate Bill 284 (Support): This bill clarifies that eligible family members who inherit a family home can consolidate ownership under the one-year timeline of Proposition 19. This measure will also provide protection for individuals who are not able to take ownership of a home because of a probate process. By adding clarity to Prop. 19, this measure eases some of the burdens on families that wish to preserve an important asset and not be unduly burdened by a sudden tax reassessment.
HJTA will continue to track these bills and keep you informed on our website under Legislative Updates.
Or drop me an email at Scott@HJTA.org. I’m happy to answer your questions.