LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE
Staff Report
Meeting Date : April 11, 2023
To: Legislative Subcommittee
From : Jason Haber, Intergovernmental Affairs Director
Staff Contact: Jason Haber, Intergovernmental Affairs Director [email protected], 442-339-2958
Subject:
District:
Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act
(2024 Ballot Measure)
All
Recommended Action
Review and discuss options concerning the city's position on the 2024 Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act ballot measure; determine the Subcommittee 's recommendation, if any, to the City Council.
Discussion
On February 21, 2023, the City of Carlsbad received written correspondence from the League of California Cities Executive Director and CEO calling on the city to adopt a resolution formally opposing a 2024 ballot measure being proposed by the California Business Roundtable (Exhibit 1).
The League correspondence referenced a February 6, 2023, letter and fact sheet that was sent from the Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Ad Committee to Mayors and Council Members throughout the state requesting they endorse the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act ballot measure (Exhibit 2). Additional information, including the group's reasons for pursuing the initiative, is available at https ://taxpayerprotect ion .com/ .
The League's correspondence references an Action Alert (available at http s://www.ca lcities.org/advocacy/take -action#O), which characterizes the proposed measure as a "State Ballot Measure Restricting Voters' Input and Local Taxing Authority." The Leagues' Action Alert states that "the anti-local control California Business Roundtable measure has qualified for the November 2024 ballot. This anti-local control measure will decimate vital local and state services to the benefit of the largest and wealthiest corporations in California. Cal Cities, along with a broad coalition of local governments, labor, public safety, education, and infrastructure advocates, strongly oppose this initiative." The League's Action Alert requests that cities "make sure your city's voice is heard by adopting a resolution opposing the harmful measure." A sample resolution and a sample letter of opposition, as proposed by Cal Cities, are attached for Subcommittee consideration (Exhibits 3 and 4).
Representatives from the League of California Cities and the California Business Roundtable have been notified of this agenda item, and were invited to address the Subcommittee at this meeting.
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 1 of 12
State law allows a public agency to adopt a position on a ballot measure as long as the position is taken at an open meeting where all voices have the opportunity to be heard. However, state law prohibits the use of public resources to campaign for or against a ballot measure. A summary of permissible and impermissible activities is included in Exhibit 5.
Next Steps
' If the Subcommittee decides to recommend that the city adopt a position concerning the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Ballot Measure, staff will work with the City Manager to place an item on a future City Council agenda for consideration. The language of any proposed resolution will be reviewed and revised, if needed, by the City Attorney's Office to ensure legal compliance.
Public Notification
Public notice of this item was posted in keeping with the Ralph M. Brown Act and was available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date.
Exhibits
1. Correspondence from the League of California Cities Executive Director and CEO
2. Endorsement Request from the Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Committee
3. Sample resolution of opposition
4. Sample letter of opposition
5. Ballot Measure Activities & Public Resources
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 2 of 12
Exhibit 1
February 21, 2023
To: City Managers
From: Carolyn Coleman, Executive Director and CEO, League of California Cities Re: California Business Roundtable
Great to see everyone at the City Managers Conference in Carlsbad! As a follow up to my remarks during the Conference, I wanted to let you know that the California Business Roundtable has mailed a letter and fact sheet to Mayors and Council Members throughou t the state req uesting they endorse the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (see attachment).
In anticipation of you receiving questions from your elected officials , I want you to know the letter and fact sheet mischaracterize the impacts the measure will have on cities if the voters approve it in November 2024.
Specifically, the measu re:
1. Does not clear up "confusion" abo ut what a tax is. Rather, it expands what a tax is by converting some fees into taxes.
2. Does not preserve the predictability of tax dollars. It actually creates fiscal uncertainty by making the measure retroactive to Jan. 1, 2022.
3. Does not preserve local contro l. It prevents a city from negotiating the rental and sale of its own proper ty.
4. Cannot "eliminate hidden taxes" because there is no such thing as a hidden tax.
s. Cannot "require truthful descriptions of new tax proposals" because truthful descriptions are already required. A general tax can be used for any governmental purpose, and a special tax must be used for the particular purpose earmarked by the voters.
6. Falsely argues that "massive increases in taxes and fees" punish hard-working families, when the measure in fact makes it more difficu lt for a city to punish municipal code violators and protect residents.
No matter how the California Business Roundtable tries to paint a different picture , let me be clear: this measure is one of the biggest threats to local control that we have ever faced.
Why do we all oppose it?
1. This measure cal ls for stricter rules for raising taxes, fees, assessments, and property-rela ted fees that fund critical local services.
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 3 of 12
2. The measure puts at risk the billions of dollars currently dedicated to fund ing critical local services by creating new mechanisms to challenge or repeal local revenue-raising measures.
3. It could force cuts to public schoo ls, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services that support homeless residents, mental health services, and more.
4. The measure reduces funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads , public transportation, drinking wate r, new schools, sanitation, and utilities.
Your regiona l public affairs manager has shared an Action Alert calling on all cities to adopt a resolution formally oppos ing this measure. Currently, over 100 cities have passed resolutions. If you have not already adopted one, be sure your city is on record opposing this dangerous ballot measure as soon as possible.
Thank you for all you do and for suppor ting Ca l Cities! As always, please do not hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions.
Carolyn
Carolyn M. Coleman
Executive Director and CEO
League of California Cities
Office: 9 16.658.827 5
Cell: 916.7 69 .5729
ccole man @calcities.org I www.calcities .org
Twitter I Focebook I YouTube I Linkedln
CAUTION: Do not o en attachments or click on links unless know the content is safe.
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 4 of 12
TAXPAYER
PR5 TECTION
and Government Accountability Act
February 6, 2023
The Honorable Katherine Aleman
2870 Clark Ave
Norco, CA 92860-1903
Dear Council Member Aleman:
~,,-.-
1,;;r-;,
b. .•
RECEIVED
CITY OF NORCO
FEB 1 3 2023
CITY CLERK
.. .,,~
__ ,...;j
Exhibit 2
Five years ago, the will of the voters and the decades of tax law they created started unraveling in highly mistaken appellate court responses to the California State Supreme Court's decision in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland . Two Courts of Appeal took this case beyond its hold ing to create significant loopholes in established tax law and policy relied upon wisely by voters and government for over forty years. Combined with several other court cases, including Ca/Chamber v. California Air Resources Board, the courts have created uncertainty and confusion that must be addressed.
In an effort to close these loopholes and restore the tax policy prior to these decisions, we recently qualified the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act initiative for the November 2024 statewide ballot. The Act builds upon decades of popular voter-approved ballot measures, beginning with Prop. 13 in 1978 and further strengthened by Prop. 218 (1996) and Prop. 26 (2010). In the past decade, each of these ballot measures has been significantly weakened by the courts, unraveling the status quo and decades of established tax law for cities, counties, and the entire state.
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act has been enthusiastically supported by voters, as evidenced by the more than 1,430,000 signatures we submitted to local county registrars to qualify the Act for the 2024 ballot.
Prop. 218 was settled law- undisputed by cities and counties-and created a clear framework that provided taxpayers certainty on new and higher taxes, while giving local jurisdictions the ability to raise both general and special taxes. In fact, local governments were so comfortable with the framework of Prop. 218, and their ability to raise necessary revenue under its provision s, that the League of Cities defended Prop. 218's taxpayer protection provisions in an Amicus Curiae brief filed in the California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland case:
"The core issue in this case is whether a local tax measure proposed by a citizen of a municipal corporation (or other local government agency) through an initiative is subject to the same constitutional requirements as one proposed by the municipal corporation's governing body. The trial court held yes, but in an unprecedented Ad paid for by Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability. sponsored by California homeowners. taxpayers. and businesses
Ad Committee's Top Funders
California Business Roundtable
AMR Holdco
Kilroy Realty LP
Funding details at www.fppc.ca.qov
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 5 of 12 0000328
opinion the Court of Appeal held that article XIII Cs requirements do not apply to taxes imposed through the initiative process. As a result, the League finds itself ironically aligned in this case with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, proponents of Propositions 218 and 26, in arguing that a proper interpretation of the Constitution does not countenance different treatment for local tax measures, regardless of their origin, and certainly does not create an exemption for initiatives that swallows all the rules created by Proposition 218." (emphasis added)
So, what does the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountabl/lty Act do? In short, at the local level it restores the key provisions of Prop. 218, requiring special taxes placed on the ballot by citizen initiative to obtain a two-thirds vote of the electorate once again.
In addition, the Act clearly clarifies the existing definition of what is a 'tax,' and requires either voters, or the local governing body, to approve all taxes and exempt charges. Despite the clear intent of the voters when they passed Prop. 13, Prop. 218, and Prop. 26, the courts have, for the last decade, created significant loopholes that directly contradict what voters approved at the ballot box.
Lastly, to preserve local control and predictability of tax dollars, the Act requires local property tax revenue to stay in the county in which it is collected. There have been repeated attempts to direct this revenue to the state for redistribution back to the counties, forcing some counties to lose millions of dollars in local property tax revenue. Thanks to Prop. 13, local property tax revenue is one of the most predictable and stable funding sources for a county. The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act ensures these dollars-and the certainty they provide-stay within the county in which they were generated.
The Act also applies many of these same provisions at the state level, requiring voters to approve all statewide taxes passed by the Legislature and requ iring the Legislature to approve all fees and other charges, as defined by the measure.
Attached please find a fact sheet on the measure, which gives additional information on the key provisions of the Act. Please do not hesitate to r~ach out if you have any questions regarding the measure or its provisions.
Thank you,
Robert C. Lapsley
President
California Business Roundtable
April 11, 2023
Matthew Hargrove
President and CEO
California Business Properties
Association
Jon Coupal
President
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Asso
ciation
Item #2 Page 6 of 12
TAXPAYER
PReTECTION
and Government Accountablllty Act
TaxpayerProtection.com
California has the highest tax rates in America. Massive increases in taxes and fees over the past decade only add to the state's already sky-high cost of living - punishing hard-working families who are now struggling with soaring inflation.
Even still, politicians, bureaucrats and special interests continue to make it harder for Californians to make ends meet. In 2022 alone, they considered nearly $200 billion in higher taxes and fees.
THE SOLUTION
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act is a simple measure that gives voters the final say on new and higher taxes and closes court-created loopholes that have made it easier for special interests and politicians to raise taxes. ✓ Gives voters the final say on all new and higher taxes Requires all new taxes passed by the Legislature to be approved by voters.
Restores two-thirds voter approval for all new local special tax increases. ✓ Eliminates all "hidden taxes"
Clearly defines what is a tax or fee - addressing recent court decisions that overturned decades of established taxpayer protections.
Prevents unelected boards and commissions from passing hidden taxes or fees without approval from elected officials or voters.
✓ Requires truthful descriptions of new tax proposals
Holds politicians accountable by requiring they clearly identify how revenue will be spent before any tax or fee is enacted and ensures it is not diverted to other purposes.
Ensures that the tax rate and length of time a new or higher tax will be in effect is listed on the ballot.
With families across California struggling and the cost of living continuing to skyrocket, we must act now.
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act will guarantee voters, not politicians, have the final say on whether or notto raise taxes, while maintaining current revenue and spending.
Join our coalition to protect taxpayers and hold the government accountable! Ad paid for by Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability. sponsored by California homeowners. taxpayers. and businesses Ad Committee's Top Funders
California Business Roundtable
AMR Holdco
Kilroy Realty LP
April 11, 023 Funding details at www.fppc,ca,qov Item #2 Pa e 7 of 12 Exhibit 3
Sample Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A 1
WHEREAS, an association representing California 's wealthiest corpora tions and developers is spendin g millions to push a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2024 statewide ballot; and
WHEREAS, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund loca l services and infrastructure , and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spen t; and
WHEREAS, the measure crea tes new const ituti ona l loopho les that allow corpora tions to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our comm unities, including loca l infrastructur e and our environment; and WHEREAS, the measure may make it much more difficu lt for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that vio late laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to local services at risk and cou ld force cuts to fire and emergency response , law enfo rcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordab le housing, services to suppor t homeless reside nts, menta l hea lth services, and more; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City/Town of [NAME] opposes Initiative 21 - 0042A l ;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City/Town of [NAME] will join the No on Initia tive 2 l-0042A l coalition, a grow ing coa lition of public safety, education , labor, local gove rnment, and infrastructur e groups throughou t the state .
We direct staff to email a copy of this adopted resolution to the League of Cali fornia Cities at BallotMeasu [email protected] .
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day __ of __ , 2023.
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 8 of 12
SAMPLE OPPOSE LETTER
Ema il a copy to BallotMeasures @calcities.org as well as you r Regio na l Publi c Affairs M anager.
***C ITY LETTERHEAD***
DATE
Bismarck Obando
Director of Public Affairs, League of Californ ia Cities 1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Letter Opposing Initiative 21-0042A 1
On DA TE, the City /Town of ____ voted to oppose Initiative 2 l-0042A 1, a Exhibit 4
deceptive, developer-sponsored propos ition aimed for the November 2024 statewide ballot that would significant ly jeopardize cities' abili ty to provide essential services and infrastructure for our residents.
The measu re includes undemocra tic provisions that wou ld make it more difficu lt for loca l vote rs to pass measures needed to fund local services and projects and would limit vote r input by prohibiting local advisory measures where vote rs can express a preference on how they want the ir local tax dollars spent.
This measu re creates new constitutional loopho les that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communi ties, including impacts on loca l infrastructure and our environmen t.
This measure also may make it muc h more difficul t for state and local regu lators to issue fines and levies on corporat ions that violate laws intended to protect our environment , public health and safety , and our neighborhoods.
Unless defeated, the measure puts billions of dollars current ly dedicated to local services at risk, and could force cuts to fire and emergency respo nse, law enforcement , public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to suppor t home less residents, mental health services, and more.
PLEASE CITE SPECIFIC IMPACTS TO YOUR CITY THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THIS INITIATIVE.
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 9 of 12
The measure benefits wealthy corporat ions and real estate developers while decimating our local communities and neighborhoods.
You may list the City /Town of _____ in formal opposition to Initiative #2 l -0042A l and include our city as part of the growing coalition of public safety , labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the state opposed to this deceptive proposition.
Sincerely,
NAME
TITLE
CITY/TOWN of ____ ~ .
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 10 of 12
Exhibit 5
IIJII INSTITUTE FOR
llll LOCAL GOVERNMENT S."
Promoting Good Goven,ment at tire Local uv~/
As important as ballot measures are to policymaking, public agencies and officials face important restrictions and requirements related to ballot measure activities .
The basic rule is that public resources may not be used for ballot measure campaign activities. Public resources may be used, however , for informational activities . The key difference between campaign activities and informational activities is that campaign activities support or oppose a ballot measure, while informational activities provide accurate context and facts about a ballot measure to voters.
This document summarizes some of the key applications of these principles . The law, however , is not always clear and the stakes are high. Missteps in this area are punishable as both criminal and civil offenses. Always check with agency counsel for guidance on how these rules apply in any specific situation.
Public Agency Resources May Be Used To
✓ Place a measure on the ballot.
✓ Prepare and distribute an objective and fact-based analysis on the effect a ballot measure may have on the agency and those the agency serves.
✓ Express the agency 's views about the effect of the measure on the agency and its programs , provided the agency is exceedingly careful not to advocate for or against the measure's passage. ✓ Adopt a position on the measure, as long as that position is taken at an open meeting where all voices have the opportunity to be heard.
✓ Respond to inquiries about the ballot measure in an objective and fact-based manner. ✓ Agency communications about ballot measures should not contain inflammatory language or argumentative rhetoric.
✓ Public employees and elected officials may, on their own time and with their own resources, engage in the following activities:
o Work on ballot measure campaigns or attend campaign-related events on personal time (for example , evenings, weekends and lunch hours).
o Make campaign contributions to ballot measures , using one's own money or campa ign funds (while observing campaign reporting rules).
o Send and receive campaign related emails using one's personal (non-agency) computer and email address.
INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT www.ca-ilg.org
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 11 of 12
Ballot Measure Activities & Public Resources
Public Officials Should Not
x Engage in campaign activities while on agency time or with agency resources.
x Use agency resources (including office equipment, supplies , staff time , vehicles or public funds) to engage in advocacy related activities , including producing campaign-type materials or performing campaign tasks.
x Use public funds to pay for campaign-related expenses (for example , television or radio advertising , bumper stickers, or signs) or make campaign contributions.
x Use agency computers or email addresses for campaign
communication activities.
Best Practices
✓ Inform agency employees and public officials about these legal restrictions , particularly once a ballot measure affecting the agency has qualified for the ballot.
✓ Include language on informational materials that clarifies that they are for informational purposes only. For example , "these statements shall not be construed in support of or against XX ballot measure ."
WHEN DO THESE
RESTRICTIONS KICK
IN?
The rules against the use
of public resources for
campaign activities are
triggered once a measure
has qualified for the ballot.
There may be more
latitude before a measure
has qualified, but consult
with agency counsel
regarding the permissibility
of specific activities .
DISCLOSURE
REQUIREMENTS
Ballot measure activities
that cross the line into
advocacy are also subject
to disclosure
(transparency)
requirements under
California's Political
Reform Act (Government
Code sections 81000 et
seq.).
The Institute for Local Government (ILG) is the nonprofit 501 (c)(3) research and education affiliate of the League of California Cities, California State Association of Counties and the California Special Districts Association . Our mission is to promote good government at the local level with practical , impartial and easy-to-use resources for California communities. For more resources related to ballot measures and campaigns , visit www.ca-ilg.org/campaigns .
© 2018 Institute for Local Government. All right s reserve d.
INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMEN T www.ca-ilg.org
April 11, 2023 Item #2 Page 12 of 12
2 Strengthening California Cities
through Advocacy and Education
California Business
Roundtable Measure:
Update
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Background
On Feb. 1, 2023, the “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act,” or AG# 21-0042A1, qualified for the November 2024 ballot. This anti-local control measure is sponsored by the California Business Roundtable (CBRT) — the lobbying arm of the largest and wealthiest corporations in California.
Cal Cities, along with a broad coalition of local governments, labor, public safety, education, and infrastructure advocates, strongly oppose this initiative.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Who is the California Business Roundtable?
Members include:
• Albertsons (Safeway)
• Blackstone
• Chevron
• Eli Lilly and Company
• Farmers Group Insurance
• KB Homes
• PepsiCo
• UPS
• Union Pacific Railroad
• Wells Fargo
The California Business Roundtable is an organization that advocates on behalf of the largest and wealthiest corporation in California.
Amount raised for 2018 ballot initiative: $6.5 million
Amount raised for 2024 ballot initiative: $15 million
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Taxpayer Protection and Government
Accountability Act = Big threat to cities
• Significant threat to local control and decision making. • Calls for stricter rules for raising taxes, fees, and assessments that fund local government services.
• Disrupts fiscal certainty needed for reliable local service delivery by creating new mechanisms to challenge or repeal local revenue measures.
• Puts at risk billions of dollars dedicated to funding local services. • Local measures adopted after Jan. 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules are void unless reenacted.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Uncertain Impacts
The measure goes beyond what people normally think
of as “taxes,” and would apply to fees and charges
imposed by local governments for the use of municipal
property or for contract services by businesses such as waste haulers, cable companies and utilities.
The measure would require that those charges, which
are customarily set at market rates, be “reasonable.”
That standard is undefined by the text, which obviously makes it subject to legal attack; in practice, it will mean “minimal” — effectively a cut in business fees.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Effective Date
• All new or increased taxes or fees adopted by the Legislature, a city council, or the local voters after Jan. 1, 2022, must comply with the Act’s new rules.
• All new or increased taxes adopted after Jan. 1, 2022, must include a sunset date.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Tax Requirements
Local Taxes
• Requires voter approval in order to apply an existing tax:
to territory that is annexed.
to a new service or product, for example when a utility user tax is applied to a new service (electricity, gas, water, sewer, telephone are some examples).
State taxes
• All new or increased state taxes require statewide voter approval. • Prohibits a property tax “surcharge” (increase).
• Prohibits any allocation of property tax to the state.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Voters
• Local advisory measures are prohibited. No measure may appear on the ballot asking for approval of a general tax that would allow the voters to express a preference for how the revenue from the general tax will, could, or should be used.
• Overturns Upland decision which upheld a special tax that had been placed on the ballot by the voters to be approved by a majority vote. Taxes proposed by initiative will be subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. • Voters may not amend a city charter to impose, extend, or increase a tax or fee.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Fees and Charges
• Requires that charges for access, use and rental of government property be “reasonable” such as fees charged for use of government facilities (community centers) and public works infrastructure to oil companies, utilities, gas companies, cable companies, and other corporations.
• Fees and charges for services and permits may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” Examples include planning services, excavation and encroachment permits, preparation of candidate statement, and permit parking.
• State and cities have burden of proving by “clear and convincing evidence” that a fee/charge is not a tax, that the amount is reasonable, and that it does not exceed the “actual cost.”
• No fee or charge or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed on new development.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Fines and Penalties
May require voter approval of fines and penalties for
corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties. Examples include nuisance abatement, organic waste reduction
requirements, and failure to maintain a vacant property.
Litigation is likely since there is a lack of clarity in the measure.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Fiscal Impact
• Puts approximately $2 billion from fees and charges at risk each year, subject to legal peril.
• Puts approximately $2 billion of annual tax revenue at risk.
Many tax measures approved between 2022-2024 will
need to be resubmitted to voters to comply and be
reapproved.
Strengthening California Cities through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org Recap
• Overturns Upland decision
• Requires new voter approvals
• Requires a sunset on new or increased taxes
• Impacts city charter amendments
• Prohibits local advisory measures
• Changes cities’ ability to charge fees for products and services • Prohibits fees associated with vehicle miles traveled as a condition of property development
• Jeopardizes authority to impose fines and penalties
Strengthening California Cities
through Advocacy and Education @calcities @calcities @calcities.org
THANK YOU