Skip to main content
Independent and nonpartisan. SaveYourState is a civic information resource. It is not a government website and is not affiliated with any government agency, party, or campaign.

California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Senate Bill

SB 512: District elections: initiatives.

Vetoed Official data

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed one chamber
  4. Passed both chambers
  5. Enacted
  6. Vetoed

Last official action: ·Record last updated:

Plain-language summary

SB 512 is a senate bill introduced in the California Senate on February 19, 2025. According to its official title, it concerns: District elections: initiatives. Primary sponsor: Sasha Renée Pérez (D). It lists 1 additional sponsor. Most recent recorded action (March 2, 2026): Veto sustained.

Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

Existing law prescribes the procedures by which a proposed ordinance may be submitted to the governing board of a district by an initiative measure. These procedures do not apply to specified districts, including a district formed under a law that does not provide a procedure for elections.

This bill would authorize the voters of any district that has authority to impose a transactions and use tax for transportation purposes to impose a retail transactions and use tax by an initiative measure. The bill would prohibit the initiative tax from exceeding the maximum authorized rate for a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body of the district, and the bill would require the initiative measure to contain all spending limitations and substantive accountability standards applicable to a tax imposed by an ordinance enacted by the governing body. To the extent the bill would increase the duties of county elections officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 2

NameRolePartyChamberDistrict
Sasha Renée PérezPrimary sponsorDemocraticSenate25
Steve BennettCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly38

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

  1. Veto sustained.
  2. Stricken from file.
  3. In Senate. Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
  4. Vetoed by the Governor.
  5. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.
  6. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 30. Noes 10. Page 2898.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
  7. From committee: That the Assembly amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 3. Noes 1. Page 2752.)
  8. From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on E. & C.A. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(d). (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 2570.) Re-referred to Com. on E. & C.A.
  9. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(d).
  10. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
  11. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 50. Noes 19. Page 2938.) Ordered to the Senate.
  12. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

Sources

  1. California Legislative Information — pubinfo database export
  2. Official bill page