Four measures seeking to raise taxes will appear on Los Angeles’s June 2 ballot.
The measures, if passed, would subsidize LA County’s public health system amid federal funding cuts and fill in tax gaps for unlicensed cannabis businesses and online travel companies. An LA city proposal also seeks to raise the city’s tax rate through the 2027 Super Bowl and 2028 Olympics.
Measure ER would impose a 0.5% increase in the LA County sales tax for five years to fund local health departments and services. The measure is projected to generate $1 billion annually, according to a County of Los Angeles Public Health fact sheet.
President Donald Trump’s reconciliation law – the One Big Beautiful Bill Act – is estimated to reduce federal spending on healthcare by nearly $1 trillion over the next decade, according to health policy organization KFF.
Zev Yaroslavsky, the director of the Luskin School of Public Affairs’ Los Angeles Initiative, said the tax would be a temporary solution to federal funding cuts, adding that it could be difficult to fill the federal funding deficit after its expiration.
“When the Trump administration decided to cut back on Medicaid in Congress – part of the so-called Big Beautiful Bill – that hits people who are on the margins of the economy the hardest, and that’s a crisis,” he said.
The sales tax disproportionately burdens lower-income taxpayers, Yaroslavsky said. However, LA County does not have many other taxation options to mitigate losses from Trump’s Medicaid cuts, he added.
LA County residents have faced higher costs of living, which has created an increased sense of antipathy toward taxes, Yaroslavsky said.
Proposition CB – which seeks to levy taxes on unlicensed cannabis businesses – is also set to appear on the June 2 primary ballot. The proposition could generate $30 to $35 million for city services annually, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Jim Newton, a lecturer of communication studies and public policy and the executive director of UCLA’s Blueprint Magazine, said he believes the tax incentive could encourage unlicensed cannabis businesses to remain hidden. The state’s legalization of cannabis did not eliminate these unlicensed businesses and the economy surrounding them, he added.
“Where there’s money, there’s always going to be some pressure on a black market alternative,” Newton said. “This just adds to the financial incentive to do that.”
Similar to Proposition CB, which closes loopholes for unlicensed cannabis businesses, Measure TC aims to close tax loopholes for online hotel booking companies. Online hotel booking companies, such as Expedia and Booking.com, would be subject to LA County service charges and booking fees.
Measure TC would generate $5 million per year in revenue if passed, according to the LA Times. The measure comes ahead of the 2028 Olympics, which are predicted to bring in millions of spectators and 15,000 athletes, according to the LA28 website.
Measure TT, which would temporarily raise LA hotel tax rates by 2% through the 2028 Olympics, is set to appear on the June 2 ballot. The tax would generate $44 million annually for LA through 2028 and $22 million annually afterward, according to the LA Times.
In late June, the California Secretary of State will also decide which statewide proposals will appear on the November midterm ballot, with items including a billionaire tax and a voter ID law up for consideration.
Initiatives that seek to amend the state constitution must receive 874,641 signatures, and referendum and statutes initiatives must receive 546,651 signatures to appear in the general election. However, once they receive the given number of signatures, they still require approval from the Secretary of State.
Several initiatives have either met – or claim to have – the signature quota for the November ballot.
Proponents of California’s proposed one-time billionaire tax have claimed it has garnered enough signatures to appear on the ballot, according to the LA Times. If passed, the initiative would levy a 5% tax on state residents’ assets worth more than $1 billion and apply to about 200 people.
[Related: Petitioners push billionaire tax, other initiatives for California ballot]
Three UC professors and one from the University of Missouri proposed the initiative. Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, a healthcare workers union, and St. John’s Community Health, a network of community health centers, sponsored it.
More states have been considering state-sponsored wealth taxes because federal-level wealth taxes are less feasible, said Kirk Stark, a UCLA professor of tax law and policy.
“There’s a pretty deep sentiment among Californians that something needs to be done to address wealth inequality, and this would be one step in the direction of doing something in that regard,” he said.
However, opponents of the tax – including Gov. Gavin Newsom – have said it could cause billionaires to relocate out of state and impair California’s economy. However, Newsom or his successor – who will be elected in November – do not have the power to veto ballot initiatives.
A proposed voter ID law, which would require voters to show proof of citizenship before casting their ballots, qualified for the ballot in April, according to CalMatters.
How the initiative would be implemented if passed is unclear, said Richard Hasen, the Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law and the director of the UCLA School of Law’s Safeguarding Democracy Project, which focuses on research to maintain fair elections.
“It’s (the initiative is) very short, and it doesn’t provide any detail as to how this provision is going to work,” he said. “It seems to also require that election officials check citizenship of voters before they can be registered without saying how that’s going to be funded, how that’s going to happen, how citizenship is going to be checked. It’s also not clear what counts as a valid form of government-issued identification that would be valid for election officials to accept.”
The voter ID law could disproportionately affect students, people who have changed their names and people from low-income backgrounds who cannot access certified documents, Hasen added.
A common justification for these laws is voter fraud – something Hansen said is rare based on election data he has reviewed. Hasen added that he believes voter ID laws have become an increasingly partisan issue, and Democrats might paint the initiative as being supported by Trump.
“There’s likely to be a concerted effort to paint it as a Trump-backed measure that is supported only by Republicans,” he said. “Once voters get the message from Democrats and people on the left and labor unions and others that this is something that is supported by Republicans and probably also supported by Donald Trump, that’s going to have a galvanizing effect on Democrats.”
If passed, Hasen said he believes there will be litigation about the voter ID law’s parameters and implementation.
California lawmakers must pass Senate Bill 895 – which would authorize a $12 billion bond to be used for scientific research in California – for it to appear on the November ballot. The UC, including University president James Milliken, have sponsored and advocated for the bill.
[Related: UC sponsors state Senate bill that proposes $23 billion research bond]
The bill is headed to the state senate, where it must receive a two-thirds vote before Newsom can sign it for ballot approval.
Senate Bill 42, which would repeal a ban on political candidates receiving public funds, is set to appear on the November ballot.
Public campaign financing offers limited government funding for campaign expenses, either through matching a candidates’ donations or vouchers for residents, who can choose how they donate.
Newton said he believes public financing will help first-time candidates. While public financing could impact local races, it will not help state-wide campaigns, he added.
“Public financing is not going to really level the playing field,” Newton said.
The California Eliminate State Officer Recall Successor Elections Amendment would amend the state constitution to authorize the lieutenant governor to fill a gubernatorial vacancy caused by a recall.
Newton said this measure could discourage recall elections.
“It intuitively makes sense,” Newton said. “We’re used to the idea that the vice president succeeds the president, and even though it’s different in California – because they’re independently elected offices – there’s still a kind of common sense logic to it.”
Comments are closed.