A year ago, in Weatherford v. City of San Rafael, the Supreme Court held that an individual need not be a property tax payer to have taxpayer standing to challenge an illegal use of government funds. The court’s opinion was unanimous, but Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye wrote a separate concurring opinion (joined by Justice Goodwin Liu) urging “the Legislature to revisit [the taxpayer standing statute] and amend the statute in a manner that makes clear what kinds of taxes are sufficient to establish standing to sue a particular government entity for alleged wasteful or illegal expenditures.”
The Legislature has taken note. A bill analysis reports that Assembly Bill 2376 “responds to a 2017 court opinion in which California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye urged the Legislature to amend California’s taxpayer standing statute,” and the analysis also extensively quotes the Chief Justice’s concurrence. The bill would — according to the current Legislative Counsel’s digest — “clarify that a tax that funds the defendant local agency is sufficient to confer standing as a taxpayer, including, but not limited to, an income tax, a sales and use tax or transaction and use tax initially paid by a consumer to a retailer, a property tax paid by a tenant or lessee to a landlord or lessor pursuant to the terms of a written lease, a property tax, or a business license tax.”
The Assembly passed the bill in April and the legislation is currently pending in the Senate. The Western Center on Law and Poverty is the bill’s sponsor.
This is not the first time Supreme Court justices have prompted legislative action, either in their opinions or their public statements. Sometimes the action is approving (e.g., here and here); sometimes not (e.g., here and here).