Senate committee backs SB 512 to let transportation districts use ballot initiatives for sales taxes

A California State Senate committee voted to concur in assembly amendments to SB 512, the bill’s author, Senator Perez, said the measure clarifies that voters in transportation districts may qualify local transportation sales-tax measures by citizens’ ballot initiative.

SB 512, Perez said, “clarifies and ensures voters in a transportation district can exercise their right to propose and pass a transportation transactions and use tax measure by means of a citizen's ballot initiative.” The bill’s backers told the committee that aligning the Elections Code with Proposition 218 and other statutes will reduce litigation risk and allow voters to fund transportation projects that benefit their communities.

The bill matters because the committee was asked to resolve an apparent conflict between California’s Elections Code and Proposition 218, a 1996 measure that has been used to authorize local sales taxes for transportation in 25 counties. Senator Perez told the committee that without statutory clarity, “any transportation tax measure that is passed by Citizens Ballot Initiative may be susceptible to litigation, rendering these crucial transportation projects vulnerable to unnecessary delays and increased costs.”

Keith Dunn, representing the Self-Help Counties Coalition and the State Building and Construction Trades Council, testified in support and said the bill is “really about trusting our citizens who want to invest in their own communities.” Dunn added that the provision does not itself authorize new taxes but would allow voters to decide and provide oversight and labor protections if a measure is passed.

Jason Bridal, representing Transportation California, also testified in support. No witnesses spoke in opposition, and no organized opposition witnesses appeared during the hearing.

Senator Choi, identifying himself as the committee’s only Republican member, urged a no vote. He said the bill “bypass[es] the requirement that two‑thirds of the electorate must vote to approve local, special taxes,” and warned it would make it easier to enact sales taxes by simple majority through the initiative process. Choi added that sales taxes “disproportionately affect low income Californians” and said he feared the bill could weaken the two‑thirds safeguard established by Proposition 13 (1978) and clarified by later initiatives.

The committee moved and approved a motion “that the assembly amendments be concurred in.” Senator Lamone moved the motion; a second was not recorded in the transcript. The clerk recorded individual votes; the final tally reported by the secretary was 3 ayes and 1 no. The committee chair voted aye; Senator Choi voted no. The committee closed the roll and adjourned after the action.

The bill’s supporters said the change is intended to bring statutory consistency and protect transportation projects from legal challenge; opponents said it risks lowering the threshold for local special taxes. The bill will proceed consistent with the committee’s vote and any additional legislative steps required by the Senate and Assembly.