In recent years several cities, including San Francisco, Boulder, and Seattle, have imposed excise taxes on sodas and other sugary drinks with much fanfare - and much resistance from soda producers. Washington, D.C. took a different approach, quietly passing an increase in the sales tax on such beverages as part of its 2020 budget.

The new tax, which took effect last week, subjects sodas and other sweetened beverages that contain less than 100 percent juice or 50 percent milk to a levy of 8 percent, two percentage points more than the city’s existing 6 percent sales tax. The $3.2 million per year in revenue the tax increase is expected to generate will be used to help pay for programs that help some residents purchase fruits and vegetables, and provide free breakfasts for children of low-income families.

“We did this primarily to fund very important nutrition programs, particularly those for poor children,” said D.C. Council member Mary Cheh (D), who inserted the measure into the city’s budget. “But in addition, we’re hoping that it may signal sufficiently to discourage purchase of soda and sugary drinks and have people choose water or something that is healthier.”

Those aims are shared by supporters of soda taxes passed elsewhere. But unlike those measures, which have generally been excise taxes imposed on beverage distributors and retailers - who are free to pass along that additional expense to consumers - D.C.’s levy is a sales tax imposed directly on purchasers of the drinks. And since it was passed via the budget process rather than as a standalone bill, it required no public hearing.

That didn’t sit well with D.C. Council member Kenyan McDuffie (D), who said the tax increase should have gone through the usual legislative process.

“I...have been a champion for improving the health and wellness of District residents,” he said when the city’s budget was passed in May. “However, raising taxes on some of the District’s most vulnerable residents is a policy decision that should be made in a more transparent manner and with input from those most impacted.”

Cheh conceded that getting a sales tax increase passed as part of the budget was easier than winning approval for a higher excise tax, something she actually tried and failed to do in 2010 because of opposition from the soda industry.

“That would have been a much bigger lift, and I wanted to do what I could now,” she said. (WAMU [WASHINGTON, D.C.])

Big property tax increases appear to be coming to some of Texas’ biggest cities and counties this fall. El Paso, Harris, Tarrant, Travis and Webb counties and the cities of Austin, Corpus Christi and El Paso are all among those pushing for increases of as much as 8 percent, the maximum amount that property tax collections can currently be raised in any given year without voter approval, a limit known as the rollback rate.

Officials in those cities and counties say they have to take that action because of the property tax reforms enacted by the state’s Legislature and Gov. Greg Abbott (R) this summer, which will drop the rollback rate to 3.5 percent next year.

“It is unfortunate that the Legislature has put local governments in Texas in this position,” said Travis County Commissioner Brigid Shea.

State Rep. Dustin Burrows (R), who helped craft the tax reforms as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, sees the local property tax proposals a little differently.

“I think a lot of cities and counties know that we are putting them on a diet and they are going on one last bender before it happens,” he said. (HOUSTON CHRONICLE, AUSTIN-AMERICAN STATESMAN)

TROUBLED NJ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AWARDS TAX BREAKS

The NEW JERSEY Economic Development Authority has released $533 million in tax breaks for 31 companies that had been on hold since the state’s incentive programs came under scrutiny this year. Several companies reportedly complained that the agency was sitting on the tax breaks due to public pressure. (NJ.COM)

CO VOTERS TO CONSIDER LEGALIZING SPORTS BETTING

COLORADO voters will consider a ballot measure in November (Proposition DD) that would legalize and impose a 10 percent tax on sports betting operations. The $16 million per year in revenue expected to be generated from such wagering would go toward an unfunded water management plan projected to cost the state $100 million per year. (COLORADO INDEPENDENT [DENVER], BALLOTPEDIA)

MI LAWMAKERS APPROVE BUDGET WITH MONEY FOR ROADS

MICHIGAN’s Republican-controlled Legislature approved a $44.7 billion state budget last week that includes $400 million in funding for the state’s dilapidated roads and bridges. But the spending measures could be partially or completely vetoed by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who previously proposed 45-cents-per-gallon fuel-tax increase lawmakers ignored, called the budget “a mess.” (ASSOCIATED PRESS)

--Compiled by KOREY CLARK

An Iowa judge upheld provisions of a recent state voting law - HF 516 (2017) - requiring voters to show identification at the polls and provide an ID number when requesting an absentee ballot.

“The evidence presented simply did not demonstrate that the burden on young voters, old voters, female voters, minority voters, poor voters and voters who are Democrats to show an approved form of identification at the polls is appreciably greater than the rest of the population,” as the Hispanic civil rights group and the Iowa State University student that challenged the law had argued, wrote District Judge Joseph Seidlin.

However, Seidlin struck down another provision of the law allowing county auditors to reject ballots with signatures that don’t appear to match those on file, partly because of the testimony of auditors at the trial.

“The county auditors who testified all stated to the effect that they do not anticipate challenging voter signatures because they do not feel they or their staffs are qualified to do so,” he wrote, adding that voters whose absentee ballots were mistakenly rejected wouldn’t be protected by the law.

Although at least 17 states considered voter ID legislation this year, the majority of the voting law measures that were introduced were aimed at expanding access rather than restricting it -- 647 bills in 45 states versus 82 measures in 28 states -- according to the Brennan Center for Justice. (ASSOCIATED PRESS, DES MOINES REGISTER)

A person or persons attempted to breach West Virginia’s mobile voting system for military and overseas voters during last year’s midterm election, state and federal officials announced last week. The attack is believed to have come from inside the United States rather than from a foreign country, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation is now investigating the incident.

U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia, Mike Stuart had a warning for anyone else contemplating such an attack.

“Don’t do it. Don’t even think about it. We’re serious about maintaining the integrity of our election system and we will prosecute those folks who violate federal law,” he said.

West Virginia uses a mobile voting app designed by the Boston-based company Voatz. According to Secretary of State Mac Warner, 144 people accessed the app to submit ballots in the 2018 election, which constituted a return rate of 97 percent. The return rate for overseas voters who requested paper ballots was only 13 percent.

Jurisdictions in eight states - Arizona, California, Colorado, Missouri, Nevada, North Dakota and Utah - are considering offering mobile voting in 2020, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. (STAMFORD ADVOCATE)