Proposition 2 is $10 billion of bonds, new state debt, to pay for school facilities. It is almost certain to result in higher property tax bills, because school districts must provide a “local match” of funds in order to receive money from the Prop. 2 state bonds. That will lead to districts issuing new local school bonds, which are paid for by adding new charges to property tax bills. Enrollment is declining in both K-12 district schools and community colleges and the declines are projected to continue. But Proposition 2 commits California to pay an estimated $18 billion, including interest, for school buildings that may not even be necessary. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 2.
Why we’re against it
This is the $10 billion “climate bond” that state politicians have long planned. California already has too much bond debt, over $78 billion outstanding as of January 1. Then $6.38 billion was added with Proposition 1 in March. Proposition 4 would add another $10 billion in bond debt to pay for climate “programs.” It’s reckless to use borrowed money, an estimated $18 billion with interest, to pay for “programs,” including salaries for all the groups that receive the money. Bond financing only makes sense for necessary projects that will last more than the 30 years it takes to repay the debt. The governor has already declared a budget emergency because the state spends more than it takes in. Spending even more “on the credit card” is a bad idea. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 4.
Why we’re against it
Proposition 5 is ACA 1, a direct attack on Proposition 13. It makes it easier to raise taxes by eliminating the longstanding two-thirds vote of the electorate required to pass local bonds (borrowed money that must be repaid with interest). All new bond measures for “infrastructure” (nearly everything is “infrastructure”) and for public housing projects would pass with just 55% approval instead of the current 66.7%. Local bonds are paid for with extra charges on property tax bills, adding to the tax burden on homeowners and businesses, leading to higher rents for tenants and higher consumer prices for everyone. If Proposition 5 is not stopped, property tax bills are likely to go up after every election, forever. Proposition 5 will raise the cost of living in California, which already has the highest poverty rate in the country when the cost of living is taken into account. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 5.
NO on 2
Why we're against it
Proposition 2 is $10 billion of bonds, new state debt, to pay for school facilities. It is almost certain to result in higher property tax bills, because school districts must provide a “local match” of funds in order to receive money from the Prop. 2 state bonds. That will lead to districts issuing new local school bonds, which are paid for by adding new charges to property tax bills. Enrollment is declining in both K-12 district schools and community colleges and the declines are projected to continue. But Proposition 2 commits California to pay an estimated $18 billion, including interest, for school buildings that may not even be necessary. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 2.
NO on 4
Why we’re against it
This is the $10 billion “climate bond” that state politicians have long planned. California already has too much bond debt, over $78 billion outstanding as of January 1. Then $6.38 billion was added with Proposition 1 in March. Proposition 4 would add another $10 billion in bond debt to pay for climate “programs.” It’s reckless to use borrowed money, an estimated $18 billion with interest, to pay for “programs,” including salaries for all the groups that receive the money. Bond financing only makes sense for necessary projects that will last more than the 30 years it takes to repay the debt. The governor has already declared a budget emergency because the state spends more than it takes in. Spending even more “on the credit card” is a bad idea. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 4.
No on 5
Why we’re against it
Proposition 5 is ACA 1, a direct attack on Proposition 13. It makes it easier to raise taxes by eliminating the longstanding two-thirds vote of the electorate required to pass local bonds (borrowed money that must be repaid with interest). All new bond measures for “infrastructure” (nearly everything is “infrastructure”) and for public housing projects would pass with just 55% approval instead of the current 66.7%. Local bonds are paid for with extra charges on property tax bills, adding to the tax burden on homeowners and businesses, leading to higher rents for tenants and higher consumer prices for everyone. If Proposition 5 is not stopped, property tax bills are likely to go up after every election, forever. Proposition 5 will raise the cost of living in California, which already has the highest poverty rate in the country when the cost of living is taken into account. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 5.
LOCAL MEASURES
In Los Angeles
In Folsom
In Yuba City
No on Measure A
Doubles the temporary sales tax for homelessness programs and makes the tax increase permanent.
No on Measure E
Raises property taxes by $60 per 1,000 square feet of your home for the County Fire Department.
No on Measure US
A property tax increase to pay for $9 billion in borrowing for the Los Angeles Unified School District.
No on Measure G
A sales tax increase of 1%, sponsored by “citizens.” Measure G uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called “Upland taxes” that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.
No on Measure D
Vote No on Measure D.
In Los Angeles
No on Measure A
Doubles the temporary sales tax for homelessness programs and makes the tax increase permanent.
No on Measure E
Raises property taxes by $60 per 1,000 square feet of your home for the County Fire Department.
No on Measure US
A property tax increase to pay for $9 billion in borrowing for the Los Angeles Unified School District.
No on Measure E
Raises property taxes by $60 per 1,000 square feet of your home for the County Fire Department.
No on Measure US
A property tax increase to pay for $9 billion in borrowing for the Los Angeles Unified School District.
In Folsom
No on Measure G
A sales tax increase of 1%, sponsored by “citizens.” Measure G uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called “Upland taxes” that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.
What is a project labor agreement, and why are public officials in California so fond of them? For example, take Proposition 2. This statewide measure is a $10 billion bond for construction and modernization of
Proposition 2 would put California $10 billion deeper into debt without reforming its broken system of funding school facilities. Consider that proponents of Proposition 2 say the state must borrow billions of dollars for “urgent
What’s worse than reckless spending of your tax dollars? Reckless spending of your tax dollars on a credit card. Proposition 4 would rack up another $10 billion of state debt to fund a grab bag of
A key selling point for Proposition 5 on the Nov. 5 California ballot is that it defends democracy. By lowering the constitutional threshold to pass local bond measures from two-thirds to 55 percent, residents can “protect” themselves
In August, the backers of a $20 billion Bay Area affordable housing bond abruptly yanked the measure off the November ballot after years of work on the nine-county initiative, which would have been the largest
Under California’s state constitution, local governments may incur bond indebtedness or levy taxes for a specific purpose only with the approval of two-thirds of voters. The wisdom of this standard is straightforward. First, it’s a