In Case You Missed It: San Jose Mercury News, Bakersfield Californian Urge Yes on Proposition 22
For Immediate Release:
September 6, 2010
Contact: Kathy Fairbanks
(916) 443-0872
Sacramento, CA – The Yes on 22 campaign, Californians to Protect Local Taxpayers and Vital Services, announced today that the San Jose Mercury News and the Bakersfield Californian both urged their readers to vote Yes on Proposition 22 in editorials over the weekend. These newspapers join the growing list of newspaper editorials, police and fire representatives, local government, transit, transportation, business, labor, taxpayer and community groups supporting Proposition 22.
The complete editorials are below. Following are excerpts from each editorial.
San Jose Mercury News Editorial, “Vote yes on Prop. 22”, September 5, 2010
• Lawmakers in Sacramento have for years borrowed or outright raided billions from cities and redevelopment and transit agencies, blowing holes in local spending plans in an attempt to paper over the state's structural deficit. It's dishonest and may even be illegal, and it contradicts the will of voters.
• Proposition 22 on the Nov. 2 ballot would -- once and for all, we hope -- protect local governments and agencies from these money grabs. It would also force a more honest accounting of the state's budget picture.
• Opponents say the measure will blow a hole in the state budget. But that's like saying a bank robber should get to keep what he's stolen because he needs the money to pay his bills.
• Proposition 22 would close the loopholes and ensure that local governments and agencies can keep the funding voters want them to have.
Bakersfield Californian, “Prop. 22 will protect local tax revenue”, September 4, 2010
• If one were to sum up Proposition 22 in one word, that word would be "accountability."
• For us in the Bakersfield area, it's important to note that transit officials, redevelopment agencies and the League of California Cities are on the side of Prop. 22.
• By passing Prop. 22, voters can eliminate Sacramento's rainy-day approach to the state's municipalities and hold lawmakers accountable by forcing them to make tough but necessary choices. Vote yes.
Complete editorials follow
San Jose Mercury News, Editorial, September 5, 2010
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_15987430?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com
Mercury News editorial: Vote yes on Prop. 22
Lawmakers in Sacramento have for years borrowed or outright raided billions from cities and redevelopment and transit agencies, blowing holes in local spending plans in an attempt to paper over the state's structural deficit. It's dishonest and may even be illegal, and it contradicts the will of voters.
Proposition 22 on the Nov. 2 ballot would -- once and for all, we hope -- protect local governments and agencies from these money grabs. It would also force a more honest accounting of the state's budget picture. We recommend a yes vote on Proposition 22.
Opponents say the measure will blow a hole in the state budget. But that's like saying a bank robber should get to keep what he's stolen because he needs the money to pay his bills.
Voters have said repeatedly, through vehicles such as Proposition 42 in 2002, that they want certain tax dollars to go to local purposes, not the state general fund. Yet politicians persist in ferreting out every possible loophole, taking or borrowing about $5 billion last year alone. This costs taxpayers hundreds of millions in interest payments, since some of the money must be repaid. And it masks the true severity of the state's structural deficit with budget gimmicks.
Proposition 22 is supported by hundreds of cities, including San Jose, and dozens of fire, police and business organizations, all of whom want to protect local services.
Redevelopment agencies, the state's primary engine for economic growth, have been especially hard hit, despite the fact that their funding is constitutionally protected. This year and next, the state is taking -- stealing, really -- more than $2 billion from them, funds that might have created nearly 200,000 jobs. San Mateo is losing $5 million. In San Jose, it's $75 million. The agencies are suing to get the money back.
The redevelopment raids are doubly galling because Sacramento's dysfunction, and its failure to maintain schools and infrastructure, are huge obstacles for cities trying to attract and keep businesses. Economic development is the surest path to solvency, and yet the state is damaging the best vehicle for it.
California has also diverted billions that voters have dedicated to transportation projects; the Valley Transportation Authority alone has lost about $86 million the past three years on top of declines in sales tax revenue. This has forced service cuts and fare increases. And the state has borrowed billions in property tax revenue; Redwood City, for instance, was forced to lend $2.9 million last year.
Proposition 22's opponents, including teachers' and firefighters' unions, are essentially arguing that local funding is better used by the state for things like schools and county health services. That's a reasonable argument -- except that voters have already made the call and then overwhelmingly passed several ballot measures to provide stronger protections from money grabs.
All those previous measures had loopholes the Legislature has abused. Proposition 22 would close the loopholes and ensure that local governments and agencies can keep the funding voters want them to have.
Bakersfield Californian, Saturday, September 4, 2010
http://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/editorials/x49333191/Prop-22-will-protect-local-tax-revenue
Prop. 22 will protect local tax revenue
If one were to sum up Proposition 22 in one word, that word would be "accountability."
The objective of the November ballot initiative is to prohibit state government from seizing or "borrowing" funds used for transportation, redevelopment or other government services and projects at the local level. Simply put, it aims to keep local money local.
Over the past few years, however, Sacramento has been treating the coffers of local governments as a sort of rainy-day fund.
Lawmakers deadlock on tax increases and spending cuts that may be needed to get the state's books in order, but instead of making tough decisions, they take money from local governments: a million dollars here, a million dollars there and -- presto! -- progress toward a balanced budget.
Meanwhile, cities and counties that may have balanced their budgets in a responsible, timely manner -- and may already be running tight ships after making difficult cuts -- are left scrambling to make midyear budget adjustments in order to survive.
In 2009, the state raided some $5 billion in funds from local jurisdictions in order to balance its budget.
Opponents of Prop. 22 characterize the initiative as a power grab by California redevelopment agencies. They say it will shift funds to those agencies at the expense of public education, declaring that "tax dollars intended to build classrooms (will) now build Costcos." Not exactly accurate.
The revenue from gas taxes, property taxes, etc., that Prop. 22 addresses is already dedicated to funding police and fire protection services, road repairs, public transit, parks and libraries, and redevelopment projects that aim to improve our communities and create jobs in various industries -- construction being one of the most vital. This initiative only seeks to protect those funds for their designated uses from plunderous politicians in Sacramento.
For us in the Bakersfield area, it's important to note that transit officials, redevelopment agencies and the League of California Cities are on the side of Prop. 22. Bakersfield is in a mode where funding for transportation and urban development is presently vital. The metro area's roads need all the help they can get, and Kern County highways have embarked on a long-term construction makeover that promises to eventually transform the region from arduous to almost navigable. Local officials need to keep enough control of local transportation funding to ensure that those projects, great and small, proceed satisfactorily. Likewise with many of the local redevelopment projects that hold great promise, especially in the downtown and Baker Street corridors of this city. Sadly, Bakersfield's much-needed urban transformation has slowed considerably. Meanwhile, unemployment in the construction sector remains high. Kern County cities from Delano to Arvin tell similar stories.
By passing Prop. 22, voters can eliminate Sacramento's rainy-day approach to the state's municipalities and hold lawmakers accountable by forcing them to make tough but necessary choices. Vote yes.