Difference between revisions of "California Proposition 11, Rules Governing Local Sales and Use Taxes (1998)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Ballot Language)
m (Text replace - "==Ballot language==" to "==Text of measure==")
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
==Election results==
==Election results==
{{Short outcome
| title = Proposition 11
| title = Proposition 11
| yes = 3,898,165
| yes = 3,898,165
Line 41: Line 41:
==Ballot language==
==Text of measure==
Line 108: Line 108:
[[Category:California 1998 ballot measures]]
[[Category:California 1998 ballot measures]]
[[Category:Taxes, California]]
[[Category:Taxes, California]]
[[Category:Administration of government, California]]
[[Category:County and municipal governance, California]]
[[Category:Taxes, 1998]]
[[Category:Taxes, 1998]]
[[Category:Administration of government, 1998]]
[[Category:County and municipal governance, 1998]]

Latest revision as of 10:58, 20 September 2012

California Constitution
Flag of California.png
California Proposition 11, or the Local Sales and Use Tax Measure, was on the November 3, 1998 election ballot in California as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment voted onto the ballot as a proposed constitutional amendment by the California State Legislature as ACA 10.

Proposition 11 said that municipalities could enter into sales tax revenue-sharing agreements with other local governments as long as the governing bodies of those governments agreed. Prior to Prop 11, voters in areas with proposed revenue-sharing agreements had to consent to the arrangement.

Election results

Proposition 11
Approveda Yes 3,898,165 53.34%

Of voters who cast a vote in this election, 1,313,195 or 15.23% did not cast a vote on Proposition 11.

Impact of Proposition 11

At the time that Prop 11 was approved in 1998, the California Constitution allowed counties and cities to enter into contracts to share their sales tax revenues from the so-called Bradley-Burns sales tax rate and from other add-on sales taxes as long as a majority of voters in each affected jurisdiction agreed to the revenue-sharing contract.

  • In 1997-98, Californians paid $29 billion in sales tax.
  • The state sales tax rate was 6%.
  • There was a uniform local rate of 1.25%. This uniform local rate is known as the Bradley-Burns rate.
  • Municipalities had optional local "add-on" rates.
  • The minimum sales tax rate in any jurisdiction was 7.25%.

Proposition 11 authorized local governments to enter into revenue-sharing agreements if that agreement was approved by a two-thirds vote of each affected jurisdiction's governing body, rather than by a majority vote of the voters in the affected jurisdictions.

Constitutional changes

California Constitution

Proposition 11 amended Section 29 of Article XIII. In the text below, the new parts of Section 29 appear in italics.

SEC. 29. (a) The Legislature may authorize counties, cities and counties, and cities to enter into contracts to apportion between them the revenue derived from any sales or use tax imposed by them which that is collected for them by the State. Before any such the contract becomes operative, it shall be authorized by a majority of those voting on the question in each jurisdiction at a general or direct primary election.

(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), on and after the operative date of this subdivision, counties, cities and counties, and cities may enter into contracts to apportion between them the revenue derived from any sales or use tax imposed by them pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law, or any successor provisions, that is collected for them by the State, if the ordinance or resolution proposing each contract is approved by a two-thirds vote of the governing body of each jurisdiction that is a party to the contract.

Text of measure


The ballot title was:

Local Sales and Use Taxes--Revenue Sharing. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.


Proposition 11.PNG

The official ballot summary said:

"This measure would authorize local governments to voluntarily enter into sales tax revenue sharing agreements by a two-thirds vote of the local city council or board of supervisors of each participating jurisdiction."

Fiscal impact

The California Legislative Analyst's Office provided an estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact for Proposition 11. That estimate was:

  • No net change in total sales tax revenues going to cities and counties.
  • Potential shift of sales tax revenues among cities and counties.

Campaign Spending

There were no campaign contributions either for or against Proposition 11 which were reported to the Secretary of State.

Path to the ballot

Proposition 11 was referred to the ballot by the California State Legislature through ACA 10 (Proposition 11).

Votes in legislature to refer to ballot
Chamber Ayes Noes
Assembly 64 4
Senate 30 2

See also

External links