Proposition 13 is an amendment of the Constitution of California enacted during 1978, by means of the initiative process. The initiative was approved by California voters on June 6, 1978. It was upheld as constitutional by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1 (1992). Proposition 13 is embodied in Article XIII A of the Constitution of the State of California.
The Taxpayer Bill of Rights is a concept advocated by conservative and free market libertarian groups, primarily in the United States, as a way of limiting the growth of government. It is not a charter of rights but a provision requiring that increases in overall tax revenue be tied to inflation and population increases unless larger increases are approved by referendum.
Proposition 1A was a California ballot proposition on the November 2, 2004 ballot. The proposition passed with 9,411,198 (83.7%) votes in favor and 1,840,002 (16.3%) against.
Proposition 65 was a California ballot proposition on the November 2, 2004 ballot. It failed to pass with 3,901,748 (37.6%) votes in favor and 6,471,506 (62.4%) against. It was a state constitutional amendment that would have required voter approval for any state legislation reducing certain local government revenues from January 2003 levels. It was officially known as the Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act.
Proposition 2½ is a Massachusetts statute that limits property tax assessments and, secondarily, automobile excise tax levies by Massachusetts municipalities. The name of the initiative refers to the 2.5% ceiling on total property taxes annually as well as the 2.5% limit on property tax increases. It was passed by ballot measure, specifically called an initiative petition within Massachusetts state law for any form of referendum voting, in 1980 and went into effect in 1982. The effort to enact the proposition was led by the anti-tax group Citizens for Limited Taxation. It is similar to other "tax revolt" measures passed around the same time in other parts of the United States. This particular proposition followed the movements of states such as California.
Proposition 218 is an adopted initiative constitutional amendment which revolutionized local and regional government finance and taxation in California. Named the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act," it was sponsored by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association as a constitutional follow-up to the landmark property tax reduction initiative constitutional amendment, Proposition 13, approved in 1978. Proposition 218 was approved and adopted by California voters during the November 5, 1996, statewide general election.
California Proposition 92 was Californian ballot proposition that voters rejected on February 5, 2008. It was a state initiative that would have amended Proposition 98, which set a mandate for the minimum level of funding each year for elementary and secondary schools and for the California Community Colleges.
The Oregon tax rebate, commonly referred to as the kicker, is a rebate calculated for both individual and corporate taxpayers in the U.S. state of Oregon when a revenue surplus exists. The Oregon Constitution mandates that the rebate be issued when the calculated revenue for a given biennium exceeds the forecast revenue by at least two percent. The law was first enacted by ballot measure in 1980, and was entered into the Oregon Constitution with the enactment of Ballot Measure 86 in 2000.
California's state elections were held November 3, 1998. Necessary primary elections were held on March 3. Up for election were all the seats of the California State Assembly, 20 seats of the California Senate, seven constitutional officers, all the seats of the California Board of Equalization, as well as votes on retention of two Supreme Court justices and various appeals court judges. Twelve ballot measures were also up for approval. Municipal offices were also included in the election.
The November 2008 San Francisco general elections were held on November 4, 2008 in San Francisco, California. The elections included seven seats to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, one seat to the San Francisco County Superior Court, and twenty-two San Francisco ballot measures.
Proposition 1A was a defeated California ballot proposition that appeared on the May 19, 2009 special election ballot. It was a constitutional amendment that would have increased the annual contributions to the state's rainy day fund. The proposition was legislatively referred to voters by the State Legislature.
The California state elections was held on Election Day, November 6, 2012. On the ballot were eleven propositions, various parties' nominees for the United States presidency, the Class I Senator to the United States Senate, all of California's seats to the House of Representatives, all of the seats of the State Assembly, and all odd-numbered seats of the State Senate.
Proposition 39 is a ballot initiative in the state of California that modifies the way out-of-state corporations calculate their income tax burdens. The proposition was approved by voters in the November 6 general election, with 61.1% voting in favor of it.
Proposition 32 is a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. This initiative statute would have affected political contributions via payroll deductions, and contributions to political candidates. The proposition was defeated by voters by a margin of 56 to 44 percent.
Proposition 30, officially titled Temporary Taxes to Fund Education, is a California ballot measure that was decided by California voters at the statewide election on November 6, 2012. The initiative is a measure to increase taxes to prevent US$6 billion cuts to the education budget for California state schools. The measure was approved by California voters by a margin of 55 to 45 percent.
Proposition 55 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot, regarding extending by twelve years the temporary personal income tax increases enacted in 2012 on earnings over $250,000, with revenues allocated to K–12 schools, California Community Colleges, and, in certain years, healthcare. Proposition 55 will raise tax revenue by between $4 billion and $9 billion a year. Half of funds will go to schools and community colleges, up to $2 billion a year would go to Medi-Cal, and up to $1.5 billion will be saved and applied to debt.
California Proposition 69 was a legislatively referred constitutional amendment that appeared on ballots in California in the June primary election in 2018. This measure put the revenue from the Road Repair and Accountability Act, which increased fuel taxes, in a "lockbox" so that it can only be used for transportation-related purposes. It also exempts said gas tax revenue from the previously existing appropriations mandate and expenditures limit. This state constitution amendment ensures that revenues from SB1 Gas Taxes established by the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 can only be used for transportation-related purposes.
California Proposition 15 was a failed citizen-initiated proposition on the November 3, 2020, ballot. It would have provided $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion in new funding for public schools, community colleges, and local government services by creating a "split roll" system that increased taxes on large commercial properties by assessing them at market value, without changing property taxes for small business owners or residential properties for homeowners or renters. The measure failed by a small margin of about four percentage points.
The 2020 California Proposition 31 was officially titled "State Budget. State and Local Government. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute." and was a California ballot measure that appeared on the ballot in the November 2012 California elections. The initiative would have established a two-year state budget, allowed the Governor to make budget cuts in fiscal emergencies, would have prevented the state Legislature from spending more than $25 million without creating spending cuts or other budget offsets, and would have allowed local governments the ability to transfer certain amounts of property taxes among themselves instead of the state. Although the law was supported by the California Republican Party multiple conservative groups came out against proposition 31 including members of the tea party movement who viewed the law as a way to undermine property rights.
