City councils, lawmakers and lobbyists in California are attempting to determine the fiscal and political ramifications of Proposition 26, according to a Los Angeles Times story.
The ballot initiative, which voters approved 53% to 47% on midterm ballots, will have wide-ranging effect in the state, making it much more difficult for lawmakers to attach fees to products that would pay for education or enforcement products aimed at dealing with associated environmental or health consequences. Examples include local ordinances that add fees on cigarettes to pay for litter cleanup or alcohol fees for education programs.
Proposition 26 redefines these fees as taxes that require a two-thirds vote in government bodies or in public referendums, rather than a simple majority.
"We think it was a fair way to go," said Allan Zaremberg, chief executive of the California Chamber of Commerce, the biggest contributor to the Proposition 26 campaign. "It clarifies what is a tax and what is a fee. Right now, the public doesn't want any taxes."
Read the Times story at the link below.
