Beginning next week, workers can expect to see smaller paychecks as the state government increases the amount of income taxes it withholds.

The reason is legislation passed last summer – largely unnoticed – that increases the amount of income tax withheld each pay period, though it does not change how much an employee will owe for the year.

The change amounts to a 10% increase from what was previously paid, meaning if a person owed the state $1,000 last year, the state’s Franchise Tax Board will up that to $1,100, adjusting the rate at which the money is extracted beginning Nov. 1.

For workers who make $500 each week, or $12.50 per hour, the change amounts to $1 each week, while people who earn $2,000 per week will see a difference of approximately $14.

State Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, and Assemblyman Steve Knight, R-Palmdale, both voted against the bill, but because no actual tax increases were involved, it passed on a simple majority in both the Assembly (46-33) and the Senate (22-16).

“You’re hard-pressed to not call this a tax increase when the reality is these individuals are going to live with less than they did before,” Runner said.

Because the tax rates have not changed, workers will be owed the money come April, but Runner said he is not convinced the state will repay the entire sum in a timely manner.

“There is no guarantee,” he said. “The best people can do is adjust their withholding so that it equals what they will owe.”

Runner said the bill was strongly opposed and was among others that slipped under the radar in July as lawmakers worked feverishly to meet budget requirements.

“It’s one of those issues that was on the list of items but didn’t have a direct impact at the time, and it was never listed as a tax increase,” he said. “It’s really just borrowing without asking permission, nor paying interest.”

Runner said the one-time claim attached to the bill does not make it excusable.

“My view is if the majority of legislators are willing to do this once, they will continue to do it in order to facilitate their spending habits,” he said.

State Sen. George Runner has sued Attorney General Jerry Brown to force California’s top cop to rewrite the summary on a ballot measure that would require people to show a picture ID before they could vote.

Runner, a Republican from Lancaster, charges in the lawsuit filed Oct. 14 in Sacramento Superior Court that the Democratic attorney general tried to “mislead the public” with a slanted ballot measure.

In its official “title and summary” on the Runner-sponsored initiative, Brown’s office states that the measure would place “limits” on voting and that it “prohibits citizens from voting” unless they produce the photo ID.

“I believe the attorney general’s job and responsibility is to give voters a fair explanation for an initiative that is put before them,” Runner said in an interview Tuesday. He called the attorney general’s ballot summary on his initiative “way over the top.”

A spokesman for Brown said that Runner’s lawsuit is “without merit.”

“Our lawyers believe that the title and summary they prepared accurately and properly summarizes the key points of the initiative,” attorney general spokesman Scott Gerber said in an e-mailed statement.

No hearing date has been scheduled on the suit. The case has been assigned to Judge Timothy M. Frawley.

Initiative sponsors such as Runner routinely sue the attorney general over wording on initiatives before they go out for signature gathering and even afterward when the measures are placed before voters. Runner, however, said the summary suggesting his “Vote SAFE: Secure and Fair Elections Act” limits or prohibits voting is “factually wrong.”

His suit says that a letter to the editor to the San Bernardino Sun written by Brown’s chief deputy, Jim Humes, in response to a Runner op-ed article in support of the initiative reflects a political slant on the attorney general’s part that biased the summary.

Humes’ letter says Runner failed in his op-ed piece “to acknowledge the troubled history of voting in our country,” which Humes said included “poll taxes, literacy tests and requirements that one own property in order to vote.”

The senator on Monday submitted another draft of his measure to the secretary of state’s office. He said that he expects to get an additional attorney general’s title and summary by December and that he will then begin circulating petitions again to try to place the initiative on the November 2010 ballot.

Runner’s initiative would require voters to present photo identification to obtain a ballot. Under the measure, voters could still cast provisional ballots if they didn’t have a photo ID or refused to show it. Ballots cast by mail would have to include the last four numbers of voters’ California driver’s licenses or ID cards, or the last four digits of their Social Security numbers.