Palmdale City Council unanimously adopts resolution opposing Measure ER

Palmdale City Council on May 11 adopted a resolution formally opposing Measure ER, a Los Angeles Countywide 0.5% transaction-and-use tax set for the June 2026 ballot, and directed city staff to post factual, nonadvocacy information online and continue legal and intergovernmental analysis.

The council voted unanimously after amending the resolution to remove a clause declaring all recitals to be formal findings and to revise language describing how an increase in sales tax could disproportionately affect city residents who face higher transportation costs and longer travel distances.

City staff told the council the countywide general tax would be collected by the county and would not be guaranteed for Palmdale, and that it could reduce the city's ability to pursue certain local special taxes. “These increases in countywide taxes reduce the city's ability to either increase our own, pursuant to state legislation,” city staff said, explaining the difference between a general tax and a special tax and the potential fiscal effects on local revenue capacity.

Council debate focused on whether a resolution alone would be effective. Members discussed legal and time constraints on direct city-funded advocacy ahead of the June ballot and the difference between permissible informational materials and prohibited campaign activity. City staff advised the council it can post factual, informational flyers on the city's website but must avoid partisan advocacy; staff also flagged a tight timeline of roughly two weeks before ballots are counted.

A resident who spoke during public comment said mailed ballot materials were misleading about Measure ER’s promised benefits and urged the city to help educate voters. “It’s very misleading,” the resident said, adding that the measure’s name, Measure ER, suggests guaranteed health-care funding that may not be delivered.

One council member moved to adopt the recommended resolution as amended; the motion was seconded and put to a voice vote. The chair called for ayes, heard none opposed, and declared the resolution adopted. After the vote the chair encouraged members to publicize the council’s position, contact state legislators and coordinate with other cities and county partners.

The council also discussed next steps should Measure ER pass, including potential legislative requests for exemptions and further legal review; staff said continued legal analysis and intergovernmental coordination were part of the recommendations approved by the council. The meeting adjourned following a brief procedural dispute about non-agenda public comment.