Plan to Change Prop. 13 Tax-Hike Rule Pushed

With strong support from San Diego County government, the Senate on Thursday passed, 27-10, a proposed constitutional amendment that would make it easier for cities, counties and special districts to impose new taxes.

The measure would change Proposition 13 to allow voters in local jurisdictions to approve “special taxes” by a majority vote rather than the two-thirds vote now required. Local governments, however, would have to declare that the taxes were needed “to meet an urgent or emergency situation.”

San Diego County officials have pressed for the change in the wake of the defeat last November of a ballot proposition that would have added a half-cent to the sales tax to pay for jail and court expansion. Proposition A garnered 50.7% of the vote, but failed for lack of a two-thirds majority.

The proposed constitutional amendment, sponsored by Sen. Wadie Deddeh (D-Chula Vista), now goes to the Assembly, where its primary backer is Assemblyman Larry Stirling (R-San Diego). If it passes in that body, the measure would be placed on ballots statewide next year.

Statewide Impact

Though the proposal had its origins in San Diego, it would affect local governments throughout the state. As a result, the Deddeh measure drew support from numerous local government lobbies, including the County Supervisors Assn. of California and the League of California Cities.

Supporters of Deddeh’s proposed constitutional amendment said it could help government meet a variety of urgent local needs, including the provision of additional police, firefighters and jails. The existing two-thirds vote requirement for taxes to finance such activities is unreasonable, the proponents have argued.

Opponents, including those who voted against the measure on the Senate floor Thursday, argued that Proposition 13 should not be changed. Proposition 13, a historic constitutional amendment passed by the state’s voters in 1978, put a lid on property taxes and banned any new taxes unless approved by two-thirds of the voters affected by the tax.

Opponents of Deddeh’s measure included the Farm Bureau, which has said that virtually all arms of government would soon be declaring “urgent, emergency” needs for a new tax--thereby short-circuiting the Proposition 13 requirement of a two-thirds vote for tax hikes.

In its formal statement of opposition, the Farm Bureau said: “Every administrator whose program is suffering from lack of funds must feel himself or herself in an emergency or urgent situation. In other words, urgency or emergency is in the eye of the beholder.”

The proposed constitutional amendment, if it passes the Assembly by Jan. 30, would be on the June, 1988, statewide ballot. If the proposal misses the January deadline but passes the Assembly by June 30, it would be on the November, 1988, statewide ballot. The governor’s signature is not required for passage of a proposed constitutional amendment.