State Ballot Measure Initiative 21-
0042A1: “The Taxpayer
Protection and Government
Accountability Act”
City Council
Meeting
April 12, 2022
Scott Alonso
Intergovernmental Relations &
Legislative Affairs Officer
1 Introduction
League of California Cities (Cal Cities) Advocacy
Against Initiative 21-0042A1
• Earlier this year, the League of Cities North Bay
Division asked members of Cal Cities to consider
passing a formal Council resolution in opposition to
a proposed statewide ballot measure, Initiative 21-
0042A1, also known as “The Taxpayer Protection
and Government Accountability Act.”
• The proposed ballot measure would severely
impact the City of Santa Rosa’s finances and
potential to raise future revenue. The measure
would also impact citizens’ efforts in passing a
voter-initiated initiative.
1 2
Background
• Cal Cities is strongly opposed to this potential
measure. The proponents of the measure are
gathering signatures to place this measure on the
November 8 2022 ballot.
• So far, only one initiative has qualified for the
November ballot, 37 potential initiatives are under
circulation and 3 are eligible for the November election.
If an initiative qualifies and is eligible, the proponents can pull the measure for consideration by June 30,
2022.
• In 2018, a similar measure to Initiative 21-0042A1
qualified for the general election but was pulled by
proponents. Cal Cities was opposed to this measure
as well.
3 Background continued
• Cal Cities is strongly opposed to this potential measure.
The proponents of the measure are gathering
signatures to place this measure on the November 8
2022 ballot.
• So far, only one initiative has qualified for the
November ballot, 37 potential initiatives are under
circulation and 3 are eligible for the November election.
If an initiative qualifies and is eligible, the proponents can pull the measure for consideration by June 30,
2022.
• In 2018, a similar measure to Initiative 21-0042A1
qualified for the general election but was pulled by
proponents. Cal Cities was opposed to this measure as
well.
4 Analysis
• The lead proponent of this measure is the California
Business Roundtable. This group represents large
businesses and corporations.
• Cal Cities procured an analysis of this measure and
found if passed by the voters the measure could curtail local governments’ finances. If any tax measure passed
this year by the voters doesn’t meet this new measure’s requirements as amended by the State Constitution, the
passed measure would need to be readopted or void
within 12 months.
• If this is enacted, any special tax measure would need a 2/3 vote by the electorate to raise taxes. This would apply to an initiative placed on the ballot by citizens. 5 Analysis continued
• The measure would expand the definition of taxes. The measure would also prohibit any fees related to vehicle miles traveled as a condition of a property
development.
• Potentially under this measure, fees, charges,
assessments, fines and penalties would be considered
taxes and thus subject to voter approval. This would
include any violations of state or local laws – unless
there is an adjudicatory process – but the measure
does not define that process.
• The measure would also subject new fees for a product or service to an “actual cost” test and “reasonable”
standard.
6 Analysis continued
• Cal Cities’ analysis also conveyed that the measure
would require voter approval to expand an existing tax
to new territory – future annexations. In Cal Cities’ view, this would deter cities from trying to annex new land
and harm future development.
• The measure would also prohibit an advisory ballot
measure that accompanies a general sales tax
measure.
• Legislative Analyst’s Office also conducted an analysis.
LAO found this measure would lower state and local
revenue.
7 Recommendation
It is recommended by the Communications &
Intergovernmental Relations Office that the Council, by resolution, oppose Initiative 21-0042A1, The Taxpayer
Protection and Government Accountability Act, a
proposed statewide ballot measure.
8 QUESTIONS?
9