UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies

This report presents findings from research into the rules that govern amendments to and public oversight of local option sales tax (LOST) measures in California. While flexibility is needed to allow local transportation authorities to adapt in response to unforeseen circumstances, too much flexibility may hinder public accountability and allow for changes that fail to conform with the spirit of the project lists approved by county voters. Across all LOST measures enacted in California since 1976, I explore LOST measure provisions governing public oversight and expenditure plan amendments, and also explore the extent to which lawsuits affect LOST measure implementation and have bearing on the accountability and flexibility enjoyed by local transportation authorities. I find that many of the measures require the formation of independent Citizens Oversight Committees, whose roles vary from purely advisory (i.e., review, report, and advise authority boards) to more direct authority (e.g., veto power over proposed expenditure plan amendments). I also find that most of the measures allow for project lists and governing rules to undergo amendment during implementation, though the procedures for approving such changes and the circumstances under which such changes may take place vary across measures. In general, these findings suggest that most measures seem to achieve a relative balance between needed flexibility and public accountability, ensuring that amendments take place infrequently and that such changes tend to preserve the measure’s initial intention. Finally, I describe important findings related to lawsuits, and overview landmark legal cases with precedent for implementation of subsequent measures.