JOINT INFORMATIONAL HEARING OF
THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEES ON LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AND BANKING AND
TAXATION --
TODAY WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS
INITIATIVE TO EXPAND REQUIREMENT
THROUGH SUPERMAJORITY APPROVAL
TO ENACT NEW LOCAL GOVERNMENT
REVENUE MEASURES --
UP FOR SO I WANT TO THANK YOU
ALL FOR JOINING US TODAY FOR
THIS INFORMATIONAL HEARING AND
TO DISCUSS MEASURES THAT COULD
POTENTIALLY BE SENT. TO THE
VOTERS IN THE NOVEMBER GENERAL
ELECTION.
ACCORDING TO THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S TITLE AND SUMMARY THIS
INITIATIVE IF PASSEDBY THE
VOTERS WOULD EXPAND REQUIREMENTS
FOR SUPERMAJORITY APPROVAL TO
ENACT NEW LOCAL GOVERNMENT
REVENUE MEASURES.
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING
THE LIVELY DISCUSSION FROM OUR
PANELISTS AND TO GAINING A
BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE
VOTER INITIATIVE.
YOU USE ALL CERTAINLY HAVE YOUR
WORK CUT OUT FOR YOU TRUST ME.
THANK YOU FOR THE CHAIR OF
REVENUE TAX ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BURKE.
AND HER COMMITTEE STAFF AND
OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR
JOINING US TODAY.
AS FOR KRYCEK TO SEND SOME
COOLER.
GOOD AFTERNOON YOU ARE MUCH MORE
POLITE AND I AM LIVELY WAS A
VERY KIND WORDS I I WANNA THINK
YOU.
AND THE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS THE
MEMBERS AND THE SPEAKERS FOR
TAKING THE TIME TO PARTICIPATE
IN THIS VERY IMPORTANT.
A INFORMATIONAL HEARING AS WE
LISTEN TODAY THE SPEAKERS I'M
INTERESTED IN HEARING WHY FROM
THEIR PERSPECTIVE IN SIXTEEN
LIES INEFFICIENT.
BY PROTECTING THE PUBLIC FROM
HIGHER TAXES AYE I LOOK FORWARD
TO HEARING FROM ALL OF YOU AND
HAVING A AND BALANCE DEBATE.
I AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO ASK
OUR MEMBERS YOU ALL TO PLEASE
HOLD OFF ON QUESTIONS UNTIL
AFTER THE SPEAKERS HAVE
COMPLETED THEIR PRESENTATIONS.
WITHOUT LET'S START TO HEAR FROM
RYAN MILLER FROM ELLIOT OFFICE
MISTER MILLER WOULD YOU MIND
COMING FOREIGN.
THANK YOU FOR BEING THERE
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU CHAIRS MEMBERS RYAN
MILLER FROM THE LA SHOW --
SERGEANT IS --
DISTRIBUTING A HANDOUT THAT
WE'VE PRODUCED I'LL BE PROVIDING
A AN OVERVIEW OF AN INITIATIVE
THAT CHANGES THE RULES AND VOTE
THRESHOLDS FOR INCREASING TAXES
AND FEES.
I WANTED TO START WITH A BRIEF
DESCRIPTION OF OUR OFFICES ROLE
IN THE IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE
IT'S A BIT DIFFERENT FROM --
ARE TYPICAL ROLE IN REVIEWING NO
BUDGET CHANGE PROPOSALS AND AND
OTHER POLICY MATTERS --
THE VOTERS TASK OUR OFFICE WITH
PROVIDING AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS
OF EACH MEASURE THAT APPEARS ON
THE BALLOT --
AND SO WHILE IN OTHER CONTEXTS
WERE OFTEN ABLE --
TO COMMENT ON THE MERITS OF AN
IDEA -- IN
THIS --
HEARING --
WE WOULD HAVE TO DO QUESTIONS TO
THE PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS --
THE FIRST PART OF OUR ROLE IS TO
PRODUCE A AND A LETTER ALONGSIDE
THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE --
THAT PROVIDES AN ESTIMATE OF THE
FISCAL EFFECTS OF OF A MEASURE
THAT'S DISTRIBUTED WITH THE
TITLE AND SUMMARY THAT GOES.
OUT FOR SIGNATURES --
MY COMMENTS TODAY WILL LARGELY
REFLECT OUR ANALYSIS IN THAT
LETTER BECAUSE WE'RE STILL
WORKING ON THE SECOND PART OF
OUR TASK WHICH IS TO PRODUCE.
I'M IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS THAT WILL
APPEAR IN THE VOTER INFORMATION
GUIDE.
ON PAGES TWO AND THREE WE HAVE
SOME --
BASIC BACKGROUND INFORMATION
ABOUT STATE AND LOCAL FINANCES I
WANTED TO FOCUS IN PARTICULAR.
ON RULES IN VOTE THRESHOLDS --
AT THE STATE LEVEL THE STATE
CONSTITUTION REQUIRES THAT
INCREASES IN TAXES RECEIVE.
A TWO THIRDS VOTE OF EACH HOUSE
OF THE LEGISLATURE --
NOW THE LEGISLATURE CAN INCREASE
FEES -- WITH
THE MAJORITY VOTE --
VOTERS ON THE OTHER HAND --
CAN INCREASE TAXES OR FEES WITH
A SIMPLE MAJORITY OF THE
STATEWIDE ELECTORATE.
BY COMPARISON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
--
TEND TO FACE ADDITIONAL
CONSTRAINTS AND INCREASING TAXES
--
THEY REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL --
FOR INCREASING TAXES AT SOME
MEASURES REQUIRE A MAJORITY VOTE
PAUL OTHERS REQUIRE A TWO THIRDS
VOTE.
I GENERALLY SPEAKING --
TAX REVENUES OVER WHICH LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS HAVE MORE DISCRETION
IN THEIR USE --
ONLY REQUIRE A MAJORITY VOTE OF
THE ELECTORATE --
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS --
REGARDING FEES LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
HE'S WITH A WITH --
WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL.
ON PAGE FOUR WE HAVE A BRIEF
DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY
PROVISIONS OF THE MEASURE --
THIS MEASURE WOULD EXPAND THE
DEFINITION OF ATTACKS IN THE
STAKE IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION
--
SPECIFICALLY IT WOULD EXPAND THE
DEFINITION TO INCLUDE SOME TYPES
OF CHARGES THAT THE STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN CURRENTLY
IMPOSE AS FEES --
THIS WOULD MEAN THAT MORE TYPES
OF STATE LOCAL REVENUE
GENERATING MEASURES WOULD BE
SUBJECT TO HIGHER VOTE
THRESHOLDS FOR TAXES.
THE MEASURE ALSO INCREASES SOME
VOTE THRESHOLDS FOR LOCAL TAXES
--
GENERALLY ANY INCREASE IN LOCAL
TAXES WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED
BY EITHER A TWO THIRDS VOTE OF
THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY IN A
TWO THIRDS VOTE.
OF THE ELECTORATE IN THAT
JURISDICTION.
OR A TWO THIRDS VOTE OF THE
ELECTORATE IN THE CASE OF
CITIZEN INITIATIVES --
THE MEASURE REQUIRES THAT --
ALLOWABLE USES OF TAX --
REVENUES BE SPECIFIED --
IF IF A MEASURE FOR EXAMPLE --
WOULD ALLOW --
REVENUES TO BE USED FOR ANY
PURPOSE --
THE STATE OR LOCAL LIVE IMPOSING
THAT TAX WOULD HAVE TO STATE --
WHO AT THE STATE SO --
AND LASTLY ON THAT PAGE --
THE MEASURE INCREASES VOTE
THRESHOLDS FOR SOME LOCAL
GOVERNMENT FEES --
SPECIFICALLY --
TWO THIRDS VOTE IN THE CASE OF A
OF A LOCAL GOVERNING BODY IN THE
CASE OF LOCAL FEES.
OR A TWO THIRDS VOTE OF THE
ELECTORATE IN THE CUT CASE OF
LOCAL CITIZEN INITIATIVE FEES --
ALSO NOTABLY THE MEASURE WOULD
--
ALLOW.
FEES IMPOSED BY LOCAL GOVERNING
BODY TO BE SUBJECT TO CITIZEN
REFERENDA --
REGARDING THE FISCAL EFFECTS OF
THE MEASURE --
THE FISCAL AFFECTS WOULD DEPEND
ON VARIETY OF FUTURE --
DECISIONS BY THE COURTS --
BY THE LEGISLATURE LOCAL
GOVERNING BODIES BY VOTERS --
FOR EXAMPLE THE EXTENT TO WHICH
THE MEASURE WOULD EXPAND THE
DEFINITION OF TAXES AYE AND US
THE NUMBER OF MEASURES SUBJECT
HIGHER VOTE THRESHOLDS.
WOULD DEPEND A LOT ON FUTURE
COURT DECISIONS --
HOWEVER BECAUSE REVENUE MEASURES
AFFECTED BY THE VERVE RIGHT
BECAUSE THE MEASURES AFFECTED BY
THAT INITIATIVES ARE SUCH A
SMALL PART OF THE STATE BUDGET
--
WE THINK THAT THE FISCAL EFFECTS
ON THE STATE LIKELY WOULD BE
MINOR -- ON
THE OTHER HAND --
FISCAL EFFECT ON LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS WOULD ALSO DEPEND ON
FUTURE COURT DECISIONS AND AND
SIMILAR FACTORS --
WE NOTE IN THE HANDOUT HOWEVER
THAT --
ROUGHLY HALF OF THE MAJORITY
VOTE TAX MEASURES THAT HAVE BEEN
ENACTED SINCE.
TWENTY TWELVE AYE WHICH RAISED
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF I DID
NOT RECEIVE THE TWO THIRDS VOTE
OF THE ELECTORATE THAT WOULD
HAVE BEEN REQUIRED HAD THE
MEASURE BUT THERE FOR THE FUTURE
REDUCTION AND LOCAL TAX REVENUE
COULD BE SAID.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER
QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH A MOTHER ANY
QUESTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE YES
MISTER PER CUSTOMER WORK.
YES.
THE WHAT'S A FEE FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT DOES THAT INCLUDE
THINGS LIKE CHANGES IN THOUGH
WERE OUT WATER BILLS --
SEWER SEWER FEES IT CETERA WOULD
THAT INCLUDE THOSE --
SO PROPOSITION TWENTY SIX WITH
IT'S PAST AND TWENTY TEN
SPECIFICALLY EXAMS A FEW
DIFFERENT TYPES OF FEES --
BUT THERE ARE SO THERE ARE ALSO
SOME FEES THAT IT CAN BE IMPOSED
--
UNDER DIFFERENT BY THE
CONSTITUTION MY COLLEAGUE CAROL
IN CHIU CONSPIRATOR OKAY BY
CAROLINE TO ELLIOT THAT SO.
THE MEASURE --
PROPERTY RELATED FEES WHICH ARE
AFFECTED BY PROPOSITION --
TWO EIGHTEEN COULD BE READ AS
BEING EXEMPT FROM THIS MEASURES
AFFECTS [inaudible]
THERE ARE.
AT SOME PLACES HOWEVER WHERE ONE
COULD READ THE MEASURE AS TO
INCLUDE THEM I'M SO THAT MAY BE
A DECISION THAT COURTS WOULD
HAVE -- TO
TO WAY IN ON LATER ON YOU ALSO
COULD US THAT THE PROPONENTS OF
THE MEASURE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT
THEY INTENDED TO AFFECT --
BUT LOCAL FEES THAT ARE PART OF
THE PROP TREATING ARGUE BUT IT
DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THEY INTEND
WHAT MATTERS IS HOW THE COURT A
COURT ORDER TO PREDICT THAT'S
FOR AND IN FEE IF YOU REQUIRE A
TWO THIRDS VOTE. TO INCREASE
WATER BILL WATER BILLS WATER
CHARGES SEWER CHARGES.
THERE'S SOME DISTRICTS ARE GONNA
HAVE WATER AND SEWER
[inaudible]
JUST ST.
MY DISTRICT PROBABLY FINE WE
TYPICALLY GET SEVENTY OR 80%.
ACTUALLY I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT IN
SOME AREAS OF THE NORTHERN PART
OF MY DISTRICT. SEVENTY OR 80%
IS NORMAL.
THE OTHER PARTS OF MY DISTRICT
--
THEY DEAF TO GIVE UP ON HAVING
WATER AND SEWER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
I THINK AT THIS TIME WHAT WE'LL
DO IS WE'LL BRING UP THE
PROPONENTS AND HAVE THEIR
DISCUSSION SO IF YOU DON'T MIND
STICKING AROUND TO FREE OF
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND I THINK
THERE'S GOING TO BE.
QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS AFTER WE
GET THROUGH EACH ONE OF THE
PANELS.
IN SAW THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INFORMATION AT THIS POINT AND
LET'S SEE HOW THE PROPONENTS AND
LEFT -- WE
HAVE --
MISTER BELL DEVIOUS.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FROM THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO.
A MISTER ROBERT LAPSED THE
PRESIDENT IN THE CALIFORNIA
BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE.
IN MISTER HURT BENITO PARTNER
AND NIELSEN REC SUMMER.
AND WE WELCOME YOU REALLY HAVE A
LOT OF YOU FIFTEEN MINUTES TO BE
SPLIT BETWEEN THE THREE WILL.
THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR IS MEMBERS THANK YOU
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY HERE TODAY.
AND WE WILL.
KEEP EXACTLY WERE FIFTEEN
MINUTES SO THANK YOU SO.
WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY
THIS GAS ATTACKS FAIRNESS
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
ACT OF TWENTY TWO EIGHTEEN WHICH
IS CURRENTLY ON TRACK TO APPEAR
ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.
CALIFORNIA'S HIGH TAX DATA TO
STAY LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL WE
ALL LIVE WITH THAT.
BUT THE PUSH FOR MORE REVENUES
NOT JUST TAXES BUT ALSO FEES
CONTINUES TO GROW.
AND THAT IS ON TOP OF OUR
ECONOMIC GROWTH.
THAT HAS GIVEN US RECORD
REVENUES AND A SEVENTEEN BILLION
DOLLAR BUDGET SURPLUS.
FORTUNATELY CALIFORNIANS ARE
VERY GENEROUS.
IN SUPPORTING ADDITIONAL TAX
REVENUE TO THE STATE AND THEIR
LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
BUT THEIR SUPPORT FOR THESE TAX
INCREASES HAS ALWAYS BEEN TIED
TO A SERIES OF VOTER APPROVED
TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS INCLUDING
PROP THIRTEEN IN.
NINETEEN SEVENTY EIGHT PROP TWO
EIGHTEEN AND NINETEEN NINETY SIX
AND PROP TWENTY SIX IN.
TWO THOUSAND TEN SINCE TWO
THOUSAND TEN WITH THESE TAXPAYER
PROTECTIONS IN PLACE.
STATE TAX AND FEE REVENUE HAS
INCREASED BY SEVENTY THREE
BILLION TO PROJECTED A HUNDRED
NINETY FIVE BILLION THIS YEAR.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT TAX AND FEE
REVENUE HAS INCREASED BY FORTY
SEVEN BILLION.
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO AGAIN A
HUNDRED AND SEVENTY SEVEN
BILLION AND LOCAL REVENUE.
AND TWENTY SIXTEEN AND THAT'S
GOOD NEWS THAT IS VERY GOOD
NEWS.
BUT THE BAD NEWS IS THAT SEVERAL
COURT DECISIONS.
IF SIGNIFICANTLY WEAKENED PROPS
TO EIGHTEEN AND TWENTY SIX
LEAVING CALIFORNIA TO
VULNERABLE.
TO NEW AND HIGHER TAXES AND FEES
WITH LESS ACCOUNTABILITY.
OVERSIGHT AND CONTROL OVER HOW
THEIR MONEY IS BEING SPENT.
THE LOOPHOLES CREATED BY THESE
COURT DECISIONS ARE ALREADY
BEING EXPLOITED BY CITIES.
THE CITY SAN FRANCISCO TOOK TO
THE BALLOT A PARCEL TAX LAST
WEEK.
THAT REQUIRED JUST MAJORITY
SUPPORT.
UNDER VOTER APPROVED PROP TO
EIGHTEEN THIS SHOULD HAVE
REQUIRED A TWO THIRDS VOTE TO
PASS.
BUT THE CITY USE ONE OF THESE
LOOPHOLES TO UNDERMINE THE CLEAR
WILL OF THE VOTERS.
I REQUIRE ONLY MAJORITY SUPPORT
FOR PASSAGE.
THIS IS ONLY THE BEGINNING.
THAT IS WHY THE SAME BROAD BASED
COALITION THAT CAME TOGETHER
PASSED PROP TWENTY SIX EIGHT
YEARS AGO.
S. COME BACK TOGETHER THIS YEAR
SUPPORT THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION
ACT.
THIS MEASURE GIVES VOTERS THE
OPPORTUNITY ONCE AND FOR ALL
REAFFIRMED THEIR SUPPORT. FOR
INCREASED TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS.
WITH EVEN STRONGER
ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY
PROVISIONS.
THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT HAS
THREE KEY PROVISIONS TO RESTORE
THE PROP THE PROTECTIONS.
PROPS TO EIGHTEEN TWENTY SIX IT
REQUIRES ELECTED OFFICIALS TO
CLEARLY IDENTIFY HOW REVENUES
CAN BE SPENT.
BEFORE ANY TAX OR FEES AND ACT.
IT REQUIRES NEW REVENUE TO ONLY
BE SPENT WHERE VOTERS APPROVED
AND NOT BE DIVERTED TO OTHER
PURPOSES.
AND BY MANDATING THESE
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
PROVISIONS IT MAKES ALL NEW
LOCAL TAXES INTO SPECIAL TAXES.
WHICH ALREADY REQUIRE A TWO
THIRDS VOTE TO PASS UNDER
CURRENT LAW AND REFORM BY THIS
MEASURE.
THESE PROVISIONS ARE NOT NEW
CONCEPTS.
I HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY
CALIFORNIANS FOR DECADES.
THIS MEASURES CARE OF CAREFULLY
CRAFTED TO RESTORE VOTER
APPROVED TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS.
AND BRING MUCH NEEDED
ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY
AND HOW OUR FUTURE TAX DOLLARS
ARE SPENT.
SO TAKE FOR EXAMPLE WHAT IS
HAPPENING RIGHT HERE IN
SACRAMENTO.
MAYOR STEINBERG WANTS TO INVEST
IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HELP
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNICATE
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND
DEDICATED MORE RESOURCES TO
POLICE FIRE AND OTHER VITAL
SERVICES.
THESE ARE ALL GOALS WE CAN
SUPPORT.
THE MAYOR'S ASKING FOR PERMANENT
TAX INCREASES TO IMPLEMENT HIS
VISION OF POLICIES.
BUT WILL THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL
AND MAYOR SHARE THOSE SAME
GOALS.
COMMITTED OF ELEMENT REQUIRES
LONG TERM INVESTMENT.
BUT WITHOUT THE LEGALLY
ENFORCEABLE USE OF FUNDS.
PROVISION THAT IS INCLUDED
TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT.
AND WITH THE LOOPHOLES CREATED
BY RECENT COURT DECISIONS.
THOSE INVESTMENTS MIGHT ONLY
LAST AS LONG AS THE MAYOR'S
TENURE IN OFFICE.
ARE COMMUNITIES POLICE OR FIRE
SERVICES DOES OR DESERVE LONG
TERM FUNDING GUARANTEES.
AS I CLOSE I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON
WHAT THIS MEASURE DOES NOT DO.
IT DOES NOT AFFECT CITY'S
EXISTING REVENUE STREAMS.
NOR THE DECISION MAKING.
AUTHORITY OVER REVENUE THEY HAVE
TODAY [inaudible]
EVERYTHING STAYS THE SAME.
THIS MEASURE ONLY APPLIES TO NEW
AND HIGHER REVENUE MEASURES
PASSED AFTER JANUARY FIRST.
TWENTY EIGHTEEN BY APPLYING
INCREASED ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS.
IT DOES NOT STOP CITIES FROM
BEING ABLE TO RAISE REVENUE IN
THE FUTURE.
SENSE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN
CITIES HAVE PLACED OVER SIX
HUNDRED AND THIRTY TAX MEASURES
WHICH ALREADY REQUIRED US TWO
THIRDS VOTE.
ON THE BALLOT.
ALMOST 60% PASSED.
CLEARLY THE HIGHER THRESHOLD
HASN'T DISSUADED CITIES FROM
RAISING REVENUE THIS WAY AND
MOREOVER VOTERS HAVE A HISTORY
OF STRONG SUPPORT FOR TAX
MEASURES.
THAT PROVIDE CLEAR DIRECTION ON
HOW NEW TAX REVENUE WILL BE
SPENT.
PROP.
SIXTY NINE IT'S JUST CREATED A
LOCK BOX FOR NEW S. B. ONE
TRANSPORTATION TAX REVENUE.
PASSED LAST WEEK WITH AN
OVERWHELMING 81% SUPPORT
[inaudible]
SO. FOR THOSE WHO OPPOSED
MEASURE WE RESPECTFULLY ASK WHY.
BUT CALIFORNIANS ALREADY FACING
SOME OF THE HIGHEST COST OF
LIVING IN THE COUNTRY.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH IMPROVING
TRANSPARENCY?
AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND GIVING
RESIDENTS MORE CONTROL.
OVER HOW NEW TAX DOLLARS ARE
SPENT IN THEIR COMMUNITIES
[inaudible]
NOW.
WITH THAT I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE
MY COLLEAGUE MISTER CORONADO --
WHO'S GOING TO GO INTO GREATER
DETAIL ON THE COURT CASES.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE COCKER NETTO HERE
ON BEHALF OF THE COALITION
SUPPORTING THE TAXPAYER
PROTECTION ACT.
COLLEGES FOLLOW ONE WITTE THE
COMETS IT NOT ROB JUST PROVIDED.
A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THE WAY
OUR COURTS HAVE TREATED THESE
PROVISIONS --
AND OUR STATE CONSTITUTION AT A
BY VOTERS GOING BACK OVER.
THE LAST FORTY PLUS YEARS --
THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT IS
SIMPLY THE LATEST CHAPTER IN
THIS LONG STANDING TUG OF WAR
BETWEEN VOTERS ON THE ONE HAND
AND COURTS ON THE OTHER --
REGARDING THE NEED FOR
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
IN HOW NOT TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT
AS ROB POINTED OUT.
NOW THIS BEGAN IN NINETEEN
SEVENTY EIGHT WITH THE ADOPTION
OF PROP THIRTEEN WHICH CAP
PROPERTY TAXES.
RECORDED TWO THIRDS VOTE OF THE
LEGISLATURE FOR STATE TAXES.
AND RECORDED TWO THIRDS VOTE
ELECTRIC FOR ALL SPECIAL TAXES.
HOWEVER JUST FOUR SHORT YEARS
LATER.
VOWED SUPREME COURT IN NINETEEN
EIGHTY TWO IN THE LOS ANGELES
VERSES RICHMOND'S HAND SERVICES
COVERAGE THAT'S FOR ALL
DECISIONS INTERPRETED.
PROP THIRTEEN AYE IN THE END
NEAR WORST POSSIBLE MANNER --
NAY TREATED SEVERAL LOOPHOLES
NOW THAT ALLOW THE THE TWO
THIRDS VOTE FOR SPECIAL TAX.
A REQUIREMENT OUT TO BE
ELIMINATED AND IN MANY INSTANCES
--
IN ORDER TO PLUG THOSE
LOOPHOLES.
THE COURT ARE THE THE VOTERS ARE
FORCED TO COME BACK IN IN
NINETEEN EIGHTY SIX WITH PROP.
SIXTY TWO AND AS ROB MENTIONED
PROP TWO EIGHTEEN IN.
NINETEEN NINETY SIX IN ORDER
CLARIFY THAT THE OF THE
IMPOSITION OF TAXES FEES.
AND ASSESSMENTS OUR SUBJECT TO
SPECIFIED RULES IN THE
CONSTITUTION INCLUDING THE TWO
THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT. FOR
SPECIAL TAXES AND ALL LOCAL
DISTRICTS IN AGENCIES NO
EXCEPTIONS --
UNFORTUNATELY SHORTLY AFTER THE
ADOPTION OF PROPOSITION TWO
EIGHTEEN A PRACTICE DEVELOPED AT
THE LOCAL LEVEL WHERE.
MANY TAXES WERE PLACED ON THE
BALLOT WITH ZERO LEGAL
RESTRICTION ON HOW THE REVENUES
FROM --
THOSE TAXES COULD BE SPENT --
BUT DAY A A NON BINDING PROMISE
WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE
FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS FOR
THE MEASURE ARE POTENTIALLY --
IN A COMPANION ADVISORY MEASURE
--
STATING A PREFERENCE AND HOW THE
MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT --
WITH THE APPARENT INTENTION OF
OF CREATING THE BELIEF AMONG
VOTERS IF THERE WERE SOME LEGAL
RESTRICTION ON HOW THE ON HOW
MONIES COULD BE SPENT WHEN IN
FACT THERE'S THERE'S NO LEGAL
RESTRICTION AT ALL --
SO WHAT'S THE TAX WAS PASSED
INTO THAT SORT OF ASSUMPTION
THAT THE MONEY HAD SOME LEGAL
RESTRICTIONS ON ITS USE --
THE MONEY COULD ACTUALLY BE
DIVERTED TO ANY ANY --
LEGAL PURPOSE --
THE COURTS EVENTUALLY BLESS THIS
THIS MECHANISM EVEN THOUGH IT
WAS.
IN VIOLATION OF THE SPIRIT OF
PROP THIRTEEN PROP TWO EIGHTEEN
IN A NINETEEN NINETY EIGHT TAKES
CALLED.
COLEMAN VERSUS CITY OF SANTA
CLARA.
AT THE STATE LEVEL OF AT THE
SAME TIME --
THE NINETEEN NINETY SEVEN
DECISION FROM OUR STATE SUPREME
COURT THE SINCLAIR PAIN VERSUS
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION DECISION
--
IT ALSO CARVED OUT A LOOPHOLE
FROM FOR PROP THIRTEEN IS A TWO
THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR
TAXES AT THE STATE LEVEL.
AND THIS WOULD TO A SURGEON
HIDDEN TAXES --
THAT THE VOTERS FOUND THE
CORRECTED WITH THE ADOPTION OF
PROPOSITION TWENTY SIX IN.
TWO THOUSAND TEN AS ROB MENTION
NOW THAT WAS ONLY ABOUT EIGHT
YEARS AGO.
BUT THE TUG OF WAR CONTINUES
TODAY BETWEEN THE VOTERS IN THE
COURTS.
AS ROB MENTIONED OUT SYSTEM
THESE IN THE SHORT YEAR SINCE
THE ADOPTION OF PROPOSITION
TWENTY SIX WE'VE HAD NO FEWER
THAN.
THREE DECISIONS FROM OUR COURTS
THAT HAVE HAVE IN SOME WAY TO
GET UNDER MY PROPOSITION --
TWENTY SIX THE FIRST BEING THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
VERSES AIR RESOURCES BOARD CASE
WHICH CREDITED GIANT CARVE OUT
TO THE REQUIREMENTS [inaudible]
STATE LEVEL --
THE SHAMIR VERSES LOS ANGELES
COUNTY CASE WHICH CREATED A
CARVE OUT UNDER PROP TWENTY SIX
FOR CHARGES THAT THE GOVERNMENT
MANDATES BE PAID OVER TO A NON
GOVERNMENT PARTY THAT CARRIES
OUT GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS.
AND PERHAPS MOST EGREGIOUS IS
THE THE TASTY CITY OF UPLAND
CASE THAT ROB ALSO ALLUDED.
TO WHICH IMPLIED THAT
PROPOSITION TWO EIGHTEENS
REQUIREMENTS MIGHT NOT APPLY TO
LOCAL TAXES THAT ARE PLACED ON
THE BALLOT.
BY VOTER INITIATIVES --
YEAH LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE NOT
AS ROB MENTIONED --
WAITED AROUND FOR THE COURTS TO
MAKE A RULING ON THAT --
TO CLARIFY THEY HAVE GONE
FORWARD AND PLACED --
MAJORITY VOTE SPECIAL TAXES ON
THE BALLOT FOR VOTER SIGNATURES.
AND ALLOW THOSE TO BECOME LAW IN
THE DIRECTION OF ON A SIMPLE
MAJORITY VOTER APPROVAL INSTEAD
OF THE TWO THIRDS VOTE --
SO -- THE
PURPOSE OF THE TAXPAYER
PROTECTION ACT IS.
TO IS TO RESTORE AND REINFORCED
THE VOTER APPROVED PROTECTIONS
AND PROP THIRTEEN PROP TWO
EIGHTEEN AND PROP.
TWENTY SIX AND TO REVERSE THESE
COURT DECISIONS THE THAT HAVE
OCCURRED IN THE LAST EIGHT
YEARS.
I'M SO THE VOTERS HAVE THE
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
THAT THEY THAT THEY'VE BEEN
SEEKING SINCE NINETEEN SEVENTY
EIGHT WITH THE ADOPTION OF PROP
[inaudible]
THIRTEEN THANK YOU.
THANK OVER MUCH MADAM CHAIR LIKE
TO INTRODUCE IF I COULD --
I'VE MISTER JOHN BELL D. VIA IS
A CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF
SAN BERNARDINO HE'LL DISCUSS
FURTHER THE TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL.
I THINK YOU ROB BUT MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS MY NAME IS JOHN BELL D.
VIA AND I SERVICE AMBER MEDINA
CITY COUNCILMAN.
IT'S AN HONOR TO SERVE THE
COMMUNITY IN WHICH I WAS RAISED
AND BORN I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TODAY
TO OFFER MY PERSPECTIVE ON THE
FOR ON THE TAX FAIRNESS
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
ACT OF TWENTY EIGHTEEN WHICH IS
ALSO REFERRED TO AS THE
TAXPAYER.
PROTECTION.
I MEET WITH PEOPLE ON A DAILY
BASIS OUT AND ABOUT IN MY
CONSTITUENCY MY COMMUNITY WHO
TELL ME ABOUT THE MANY ECONOMIC
CHALLENGES THAT THEY FACE.
BE IT IN RUNNING THEIR BUSINESS
HAVING TO WORK LONGER HOURS TO
MAKE ENDS MEET.
THE COST OF A INCREASED GAS OR
HOW MUCH GOES TO HOW MUCH COSTS
WELL INCREASE BECAUSE IT IT IS
TO REGISTER THEIR BUSINESS
FLEET.
AS ONE OF THE HIGHEST TAXED
STATES IN THE NATION MANY
CALIFORNIA FAMILIES LIKE THOSE
IN SABATINO.
ARE ALREADY FINANCIALLY
OVERBURDENED AND STRUGGLING TO
MAKE ENDS MEET.
THAT'S WHY I WAS VERY PLEASED
ABOUT THE COUNT ABILITY IN
TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS IN THE
TAX PAYER PROVISION ACT.
IT WILL ENSURE THAT NEW TAX
REVENUES WILL BE USED FOR THE
PROGRAMS THEY ARE INTENDED TO
SUPPORT.
AND ARE NOT DIVERTED ELSEWHERE
WITHOUT THE PUBLIC'S PERMISSION.
CALIFORNIA VOTERS HAVE
CONSISTENTLY DEMANDED
ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE RIGHT TO
VOTE ON THE AMOUNTS OF TAX
INCREASES THEY ARE REQUIRED TO
PAY TO STATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
AS HIGHLIGHTED PREVIOUSLY WITH
PROPOSITION THIRTEEN PROPOSITION
TWO EIGHTEEN AND RICK MOST
RECENTLY IN TWENTY TEN WITH
PROPOSITION.
TWENTY SIX UNFORTUNATELY THESE
PROTECTIONS HAVE BEEN UNDERMINED
BY A NUMBER OF ILL ADVISED COURT
DECISIONS.
THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION THAT NOT
ONLY CLOSES THESE ON FAIR I
LEGAL LOOPHOLES AND RESTORES
VOTER APPROVED TAXPAYER
PROTECTIONS BUT IT ALSO PROVIDES
GREATER PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY.
AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
I KNOW THAT SEVERAL OF YOU.
SERVED IN A A AS A FORMER LOCAL
OIL ELECTED OFFICIAL ACROSS OUR
STATE.
I'M APPRECIATIVE FOR YOUR
SERVICE YOU ALSO HAVE THOSE SAME
CONCERNS ABOUT THE LOOK ABILITY
OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO RAISE
NECESSARY REVENUE TO SUPPORT THE
MANY DEMANDS ARE CITIES FACE.
THE ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURE WILL
MAKE ALL LOCAL TAXES SPECIAL
TAXES.
ALREADY REQUIRE TWO THIRDS VOTE
TO PASS.
THIS THRESHOLD WAS PASSED INTO
LAW BY VOTERS MORE THAN TWENTY
YEARS AGO.
HOWEVER THIS MEASURE WAS
CAREFULLY DRAFTED SO THAT IT
DOES NOT APPLY TO ANY EX
EXISTING REVENUES PASSED BEFORE
JANUARY ONE OF TWENTY EIGHTEEN
AND THE OVERWHELMING BULK OF
LOCAL.
OF FINANCES ARE COMPLETELY
UNAFFECTED.
ONLY NEW TAXES AND FEES ARE
AFFECTED.
EVEN THEN THE IMPACT IS VERY
LIMITED.
NOTHING I REPEAT NOTHING IN THIS
MEASURE WILL AFFECT ANY CITY'S
ABILITY TO USE EXISTING TAX
DOLLARS WITH THE SAME
FLEXIBILITY AND DISCRETION IT
HAS TODAY [inaudible]
IN FACT ACCORDING TO THE
CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION
IN TWENTY SIXTEEN AND TWENTY
SEVENTEEN THE BIGGEST GENERATORS
OF NEW TAXES WERE SPECIAL AND
PARCEL TAXES.
WHICH ARE UNAFFECTED BY THIS
MEASURE AS THEY ALREADY REQUIRE
A TWO THIRDS VOTE.
SINCE JANUARY ONE OF TWENTY
EIGHTEEN UP UNTIL LAST WEEK'S
ELECTION ELEVEN LOCAL REVENUE
MEASURES HAVE BEEN PASSED BY
VOTERS.
AND THEY WERE ALL APPROVED BY
GREATER THAN A TWO THIRDS VOTE.
AND WOULD THEREFORE BE
UNAFFECTED BY DESTINATION OF
RESTORING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS AND PUSHING
FOR GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY.
ON HOW NEW TAX REVENUE BILL WILL
BE SPENT ARE CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT IN KEEPING COSTS DOWN.
FOR OUR HARD WORKING
CALIFORNIANS.
LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD
NOT BE FEARFUL OF THIS
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
THAT IN FACT THE TAXPAYERS
DESERVE TO KNOW WHERE THEIR TALK
TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MANY MEMBERS THREE HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS JUST --
MISTER CROW SORRY SO --
WILL JUST HAVE TO DISAGREE AGREE
TO DISAGREE I'M NOT.
YOU'RE KIND A CONSTITUENT BUT
THAT'S THAT'S OKAY DECODERS WILL
DECIDE.
WHAT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE
QUESTION I ASKED LEDGE COUNCIL
[inaudible]
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR
INTENTION WAS --
ABOUT REQUIRING IT WHETHER OR
NOT YOU WOULD WANT TO REQUIRE A
TWO THIRDS VOTE.
FOR I ANY INCREASE IN --
CHARGES FOR WIDER ISSUE WHERE --
SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS
--
COULD YOU RESPOND.
SO I'VE I THINK IT RESPOND THAT
QUESTION --
FIRST I WOULD AGREE WITH MISTER
MILLER FROM THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST'S OFFICE THAT.
COURTS FRICKLEY --
HOW TO DECIDE THESE QUESTIONS
BECAUSE FRANKLY THEY ALWAYS END
UP DECIDING THIS QUESTION SEVEN
HOPEFULLY I LAY THAT OUT --
BUT IN TERMS OF THE THE
PROVISIONS OF THE MEASURE --
ARTICLE THIRTEEN D. CHARGES --
CHARGES A PROPERTY RELATED
CHARGES AND FEES OF THOSE ARE
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT UNDER THE
MEASURE THAT'S IT AS AS ELIOT
MENTIONED AS A SEPARATE.
PROVISION TO CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE THIRTEEN D. THAT IS
UNAFFECTED BY THIS MEASURE THIS
MEASURE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL OF
DEALS WITH ARTICLE THIRTEEN SEE
--
EVEN IN THE HYPOTHETICAL
SCENARIO WHERE THEY WOULD BE
COVERED BY ARTICLE THIRTEEN C.
OVER THIS MEASURE OUT LIVES IN
OUR NOT.
OTHERS EXISTING NOT EXEMPTIONS
FROM THE DEFINITION OF TAX FOR
SERVICES AND PRODUCTS THAT HAVE
BEEN IN THE CONSTITUTION SINCE.
TWENTY TEN OUR THAT EXCLUSION --
FROM THE DEFINITION OF TAX FOR
SERVICES AND PRODUCTS --
IS CONTINUED ON IN THIS MEASURE.
PASO ANY SERVICE LIKE WATER
SERVICE SEWER SERVICE EVEN UNDER
THE MOST EXTREME YOU KNOW --
INTERPRETATION OF THE MEASURE --
SO THERE'S REALLY NO SCENARIO
WHERE --
STUFF PROPERLY CHARGES COULD BE
COVERED BY THE MEASURE WOULD BE
TURNED INTO A TAX OKAY SO ARMED
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
AND THAT'S FINE AND I'M I'M VERY
GLAD THAT THAT'S YOUR OPINION.
I AM CONCERNED THAT OTHERS READ
IT DIFFERENTLY.
AND IF YOU COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE
OF THIS PROCESS [inaudible] TO
JUST MAKE THAT LITTLE BIT MORE
CLEAR AND I BELIEVE YOU ARE ABLE
TO DO THAT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
FIND OUT WHY THEIR QUESTIONS AND
MAKE THAT MORE CLEAR.
I'D REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
CHUCK I THINK THERE'S ALWAYS
ALWAYS QUESTIONS AND WHEN IT
COMES TO CONSTITUTIONAL
INITIATIVES AND IN THE INTENT OF
THE MAJORS NOT TO COVER ARTICLE
THIRD OKAY WELL FEES
INTERMITTENTLY YOU AGREED TO
TALK TO THE LA O. AND OTHERS WHO
HAVE THIS CONCERN AND SEE IF
THERE IS A WAY.
THAT WE CAN ABSOLUTELY.
A BE SURE THAT THAT WON'T
HAPPEN.
SO MISTER QUIRK WE WE HAVE HAD
DISCUSSIONS WE WILL FOLLOW UP
WILL HAVE MORE DISCUSSIONS SO
YES SIR OKAY THANK YOU THAT'S
ALL I CAN ASK AND WE JUST ARE
GOING TO AGREE TO DISAGREE
UNDERSTOOD AND WE VERY
APPRECIATE THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT.
YES WOULDN'T US SOME BROKE
TAKING THAT CHAIR JEALOUS THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION OF I
GUESS THE THING THAT JUMPED OUT
ON ME PREPARING FOR THIS HEARING
IS.
JUST THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT --
EIGHTY TWO BILLION AND LOCAL
CHARGES SINCE TWO THOUSAND TEN
ELECTRICS CHARGES UP FIVE POINT
SIX BILLION A 30% INCREASE WATER
CHARGES UP FOURTEEN BILLION OF
34% INCREASE.
GARBAGE RECYCLING UP SIX POINT
SIX BILLION A TWENTY SIX POINT
9% INCREASE PUBLIC TRANSIT FEES
PARKS IRAQ'S PUBLIC.
PARKING DOCUMENT FEES TRANCE TOT
TAXES --
THESE NUMBERS ARE INCREASING
SOMETIMES A HUNDRED AND 30% JUST
A IN THIS DECADE --
AND I SERVED ON CITY COUNCIL AND
SOMETIMES THESE ENTITIES DO THIS
FUND BUDGETING FUND MANAGEMENT
BUDGETING AND IT'S EASY TO HIDE
THINGS THAT.
AREN'T MEANT FOR THEIR PURPOSE
[inaudible]
AND FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE IN
ORANGE COUNTY WE HAVE A VERY
GOOD EXAMPLE --
IN TWO THOUSAND SIX WE ASKED THE
VOTERS TO APPROVE MEASURE RAM.
IT'S ABSENT SALES TAX FOR
TRANSPORTATION.
AND IT WAS REAUTHORIZED AND THAT
HE HAS WIDE SUPPORT.
BECAUSE CTA THE TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITIES DON WHAT THEY TOLD
PEOPLE THEY'RE GONNA DO THEY
SPENT THE MONEY ON ROADS AND
BRIDGES AND IT'S A VERY
SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM.
AND NOW MY TIME IN THE
LEGISLATURE I'D HAVE TO RUN.
A LEGISLATION I HAD TO RUN A
BILL FOR MEL REUSS.
BUT DISTRICTS THAT RECEIVING
BOND MONEY A BECAUSE IT WAS NO
TRANSPARENCY HOMEOWNERS CAN FIND
OUT.
WHAT THE BALANCE ON THE BOND WHY
THE PAYMENTS WERE GOING UP?
LAW SCHOOLS WOULD REPURPOSE
BONDS AND USE THEM FOR OTHER
PURPOSES AND YOU KNOW WE'VE HAD
AUDIT SPECIAL DISTRICTS NOT
BECAUSE OF A MOVING MONEY AROUND
FOR THEIR UNINTENDED PURPOSES
AND SO I THINK.
I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT ON THE
TRANSPARENCY WHAT WHAT WAS YOUR
MISSILE ACTUALLY SAID 60% A TWO
THIRDS [inaudible]
MEASURES PASS YES THERE'S A FEW
THOUSAND TEN YEAH SO CLEARLY THE
VOTERS IF YOU GIVE THEM --
SOMETHING AND EXPLAIN TO THEM
WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO THEIR
GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF IT BUT
IT MAKES ALL OF US LOOK BAD AS
GOVERNMENT.
WHEN?
THESE THINGS GET SPENT AND OTHER
PURPOSES AND IT REALLY AROSE
TRASH THE VOTER SO.
I LIKE THE APPROACH OF YOU KNOW
I'LL YOU KNOW GET ON THE BALLOT
I'LL BE PUSHING THE LEVER IN
SPORT IN --
IN NOVEMBER BUT I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO RESTORE TRUST WITH
THE TAXPAYERS.
AND MAKE MONEY GO WORK SUPPOSED
TO GO NAY IN INTENDED PURPOSES
SO THANKS AGAIN FOR BEING HERE
TODAY THANK YOU.
THE OTHER QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A FEW --
SO WHAT IS THE YOUR INTENTION IN
SPECIFYING THAT ONLY THE ACTUAL
COSTS CAN BE IMPOSED FOR CHARGER
IFFY.
AND HOWARD LOCALS GOING TO BE
ABLE TO PROVE ITS APPROVED THE
BILL THE ACTUAL COST.
BUT IT MANAGER THANK YOU --
THE THE BUT THAT THAT'S A CHANGE
IN THE LAW FOR PROP TWENTY SIX
REQUIRE REASONABLE COSTS ARE THE
STANDARD THERE WAS --
IT ONLY HAD TO BE --
THAT THE STANDARD TO DETERMINE
IF AS A RESULT BECAUSE IT HAD TO
BE A PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT
IS REASONABLE.
THAT STANDARD REALLY PROVIDED
KNOWS NO STANDARD AT ALL SORT OF
IN THE EYES OF THE BEHOLDER --
THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A
REQUIREMENT FOR GOVERNMENT TO
SHOW.
WHAT DO TO SHOW THEIR WORK --
BEFORE IT WAS A REASONABLE
STATEMENT REASONABLE COST NOW
THEY'RE DISCONNECT TO SHOW
ACTUAL COSTS --
SO THE THEY THE GOVERNMENT HAS
INFORMATION ON ON BUT THEY PUT
INTO YOU KNOW PROGRAM A
PROGRAMMATIC CHARGE --
THAT'S THAT'S A THEY'RE GONNA
HAVE TO SHOW UNDER THE
INITIATIVE.
BUT THE ACTUAL COSTS IS
DETERMINED INCORRECTLY.
I'M SORRY IF IF THE ACTUAL COSTS
IS DETERMINED INCORRECTLY WELL
THAT THAT WOULD.
DEPEND ON WHAT WOULD HAPPEN
SOUTHERN RUSSIAN --
AND THAT DEPENDS IF THERE'S A
CHALLENGE TO THE TO THE TO THE
CHARGE AND IT THEN IT COULD BE
CORRECTED.
THIS THIS IT MAKES ME NERVOUS IS
INITIATIVE AND I AND I
APPRECIATE WE'RE GOING WITH IT
BECAUSE I THINK THIS EVERYONE
HERE THAT SPONSORING THE ME
ACCOUNTABLE AND WHERE IS THE
MONEY GOING.
I WORRY ABOUT MY RURAL
COMMUNITIES AND EVERYBODY KNOWS
THAT'S MY NUMBER ONE THING WHAT
WORKS IN ONE PLACE MAY NOT WORK
IN ANOTHER.
AND I LOOK BACK ON THE DAYS WHEN
I WAS SITTINGON THE DIET SO AS
BEING A MAY HAVE A VERY SMALL
TOWN.
IS TWO THIRDS IS VERY DIFFICULT.
AND THAT WORRIES THAT WE WE HAVE
--
SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
THAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN YOU'RE
THINKING OF OUR SMART SMALLER
COMMUNITIES I MEAN YOU KNOW I I
FRET.
OVER WHAT WE COULD DO TO GET
SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE WOULD
ONE OF GOT GOTTEN DONE --
I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU
KNOW OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
IS NOT ALWAYS INCLUDED IN SOME
OF THESE THINGS SO I'M JUST A
REAL FRETFUL ON IT --
AND THE OTHER ONE WAS IS THAT --
THE MEASURE.
SAYS ELIMINATES THE DISTINCTION
BETWEEN GENERAL AND SPECIAL
TAXES.
REQUIRED TO TWO THIRDS VOTER
APPROVAL FOR ALL LOCAL TAXES
REQUIRES A SEPARATE STATEMENT.
IN A TAX ORDINANCE OF HOW FUNDS
MAY BE USED.
I USED IF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT
IF FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT THE
TAX MUST STATE.
UNRESTRICTED GENERAL REVENUE
PURPOSES THE MEASURE IS
RETROACTIVE TO JANUARY ONE SO
TAXES BALLOTED THIS YEAR TWO
THOUSAND EIGHTEEN SHOULDN'T
CLOSE THOSE WORDS SO MANY OF THE
BUT THE TAXES THAT CAME TO THIS
PASSED LAST WEEK.
DO WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK
AT THOSE AGAIN.
MUCH MADAM CHAIR US SOME OF
THOSE TAXES FOR EXAMPLE THE ONES
IN SAN FRANCISCO THAT WAS LOTT
TO REFERRED --
TO NO THE ARE ARE TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF THAT CITY FOR
UPLAND LOOPHOLE --
ENTER DISAGREE JUST ABUSE OF
PROP TWO EIGHTEEN A PROP TWENTY
SIX TODAY I I THINK --
NO VOTERS HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO
EXPECT A PARCEL TAXES OSMOND
CASE FOR LAST TWENTY TWO YEARS
WOULD BE APPROVED BY A TWO
THIRDS VOTE.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S THERE'S
BY ANY REASON THAT THEY
SHOULDN'T READ --
THE THE REASON THAT HAD TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE MEASURE IS YOU
KNOW THAT THAT THE THAT PERIOD
--
FOR AND INITIATIVE MAJOR TO
APPEAR ON THE BALLOT THIS YOU
KNOW ABOUT A YEAR --
SOAKED IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT
THAT IS NOT A RUSH ON THE BALLOT
TO TO VETO BEAT THE MEASURE TO
THE PUNCH TO ENSURE THAT THESE
PROVISIONS --
THE VOTERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO WEIGH IN ON THIS INITIATIVE
BEFORE THEY GET BOMBARDED WITH
TAXES TO TRY.
TO BEAT HIM TO THE FINISH LINE.
THE PROVISION WAS AND INSERTED
THE MEASURE THAT IS THE SAME --
THAT WAS DONE IN A PROP TWENTY
SIX IT HAD A TWELVE MONTH LOOK
BACK IMPROMPTU EIGHTEEN HAD A
TWO YEAR LOOK BACK YOU ALL TAXES
PASSING THE PRIOR TWO YEARS HAD
TO CONFORM WITH PROP TWO
EIGHTEEN TO THIS.
PRISONERS MUCH MORE MODERATE NOT
IN THAT REGARD BUT STILL DON'T
FEEL LIKE IS UNDERMINING THE
WILL OF THE VOTERS.
IT'S PAST YEAR SO MADAM CHAIR IN
TERMS OF THE CONSISTENCY OF THE
APPROACH WHEN IT COMES TO THESE
WE WE LOOK TO BE CONSISTENT.
AS AS WAS TORNADO JUST STATED.
SO IT WAS NOT WITH ANY INTENT TO
UNDERMINE THE WILL OF THE VOTERS
MOST IMPORTANT WHEN YOU LOOK AT
SAN FRANCISCO EXPECT THERE'S
GOING TO BE COURT CHALLENGES.
ON THOSE PROVISIONS --
WHICH ARE GOING TO BE A WHOLE
DIFFERENT DEBATE --
THAN WHAT WE HAVE TRIED TO
INCLUDE AS WE ACTUALLY WERE
TRYING TO BE TRANSPARENT.
WE ARE TRYING TO BE FAIR AND WE
ARE TRYING TO BE BALLOTS.
THAT WAS OUR INTENT [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
YEAH WELL NOW THAT WE'VE HAD THE
FRONT PROPONENTS I WOULD LIKE TO
WELCOME THE OPPONENTS PANEL UP
[inaudible]
BLOOM.
A I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME MAYOR
SACRAMENTO MR DEL STEINBERG.
MR DISTINCT CHARACTER.
OKAY MR DANK PARA DEPUTY
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES.
AND MISTER TERRY BRENNAN
DIRECTOR OF PENSIONS BUDGET AND
REVENUE FOR THE SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION.
AGAIN GENTLEMEN WE HAVE FIFTEEN
MINUTES TO SPLIT BETWEEN THE
THREE OF YOU THANK YOU.
MATTER HERE SURE CAN WELCOME
BLUE THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY
MUCH --
MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS THEY CAN
APPRECIATE THE OPERATOR
OPPORTUNITY HERE --
SO I'M CAROL STEINBERG ON THE
MAYOR SACRAMENTO AND SOME OF YOU
MAY KNOW HAVING THE CHANCE TO
MEET ALL OF YOU ARE USED TO BE
PRESIDENT PRO TEM OF THE SENATE
AND PROUDLY SERVED IN THE
LEGISLATURE FOR FOURTEEN YEARS
AND I UNDERSTAND.
THAT.
IT CARRIES BALANCE BETWEEN STATE
AUTHORITY LOCAL CONTROL.
AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND IN RESPECT
OF THE IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES
IN THE DEBATE WHICH PLAYED OUT
HERE -- ON
THE DAIS IN THE LAST FEW MINUTES
ABOUT WHETHER WE ARE OVERTAXED.
OR DON'T HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES
BRIBE PUBLIC SERVICES THAT
PEOPLE DEMAND.
BUT I MUST TELL YOU I'M ANGRY
ABOUT THIS INITIATIVE.
AND AND I'M ANGRY ABOUT IT
BECAUSE AS A NEW MAYOR.
WHO'S ACTUALLY TRYING TO RAISE
SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC CAPITAL TO
GROW.
MY CITY'S ECONOMY.
IN MY VIEW THIS IN IT INITIATIVE
IS BOTH DISINGENUOUS AND A GROSS
OVER REACH.
AND SO LET'S TELL IT LIKE IT IS
HERE HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED.
THAT UP A DECISION THAT WAS
REFERRED TO A COUPLE OF TIMES
CREATED SOME AMBIGUITY ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT.
I INDUSTRY SPECIFIC TAXES COULD
BE PAST.
BOB BY A MAJORITY VOTE --
BEFORE.
ABOUT A BODY OF LOCAL VOTERS.
AND SO RATHER THAN TRYING TO FIX
A SMALL PROBLEM.
WHAT THE INITIATIVE PROPONENTS
HAVE DONE HERE IS TO TRY TO
DRIVE AYE AN IDEOLOGICAL MACK
TRUCK?
THROUGH AN OPENING. TO REALLY
UPHOLD THEIR IDEOLOGICAL VIEW OF
THE WORLD AND IT'S MOST
UNFORTUNATE.
IF THE ARGUMENT IS THAT NO
INDUSTRY SPECIFIC TAX.
SHOULD BE PASSED ON A MAJORITY
VOTE.
OKAY FOR THIS IS SUPPORTED
STRONGLY BY THREE INDUSTRIES THE
BEVERAGE INDUSTRY THE ALCOHOL
INDUSTRY.
AND THE OIL INDUSTRY IF THAT'S
THE ARGUMENT.
I COULD ACTUALLY NOT ONLY
RESPECTED I MIGHT STAND BEHIND
IT ESPECIALLY IF IT WERE A
COMPROMISE.
JUXTAPOSED TO WHAT THIS IS
THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
THEY HAVE WIDENED THEIR GRAFT
GRASP TO SAY THAT EVEN IF A
LOCAL GOVERNMENT WANTS TO RAISE
A SALES TAX.
WHICH A TRIED AND TRUE WAY.
TRYING TO RAISE REVENUE FOR CITY
THAT IT NOW WILL REQUIRE A TWO
THIRDS VOTE WHAT A DAMAGING
[inaudible]
OVERREACH WHAT AN ABUSE OF
AUTHORITY ACTUALLY AND I RESPECT
THE INITIATIVE PROCESS I ALSO
DID THE INITIATIVE REFORM.
THAT WOULD GIVE THIS LEGISLATURE
THE NEXT TWENTY OR THIRTY DAYS
OR SO. TO WRITE A CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT AND SUBSTITUTE IT
POTENTIALLY FOR WHAT'S ON THE
BALLOT WITH THEIR WITH THEIR
CONCURRENCE OF THE INITIAL
BROWN'S HAVE TALKED TO THEM
NUMBER TIMES ARE NOT INTERESTED.
BECAUSE THIS IS IDEOLOGICAL.
AND I'M NOT IDEOLOGICAL NEVER
HAVE BEEN AYE BUT A STRONG.
DEMOCRAT APPEAR I WORKED WITH
REPUBLICANS AND WE DID EVERYONE
I'M REALLY UPSET ABOUT THIS.
BECAUSE THE WORST THING THAT BUT
INITIATIVE PROPONENT NO MATTER
WHAT SIDE OF THE FENCE THEY
COME%
[inaudible]
FROM.
IS TO TAKE A SPECIFIC PROBLEM.
INSTEAD OF SEEKING JUST TO SOLVE
IT. TO GO SO OVER BROAD.
THAT IT HAS REAL CONSEQUENCES
[inaudible] FOR CITIES.
WHO ARE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT
THING?
AGAIN I GOT WE PASS MEASURE YOU
IN -- TWO
THOUSAND THIRTEEN IN.
SACRAMENTO WE GOT LESS THAN TWO
THIRDS BUT WELL OVER A MAJORITY.
IT WAS IN THE MID SIXTIES.
NOW WE WANT TO GO BACK NOW ONLY
WE KNEW WHAT WE WANT TO EXPAND
IT SO THAT WE CAN INVEST
DIRECTLY IN ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT.
DO I THINK WE MIGHT GET A TWO
THIRDS YOU BETTER BELIEVE A
SPECIAL WITH THE THREAT OF THIS
THING.
THAT WE'RE GONNA TRY.
BUT IF WE DON'T.
AND WE GET 6465% WE'RE GONNA
HAVE A FIFTY MILLION DOLLAR HOLE
IN OUR BUDGET AND YOU BETTER
BELIEVE THAT'S GOING TO RESULT
IN PINK SLIPS FOR FIREFIGHTERS
AND COPS.
AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS YOU
GUYS CARE ABOUT.
ITS I JUST GONNA CALL IT LIKE IT
IS AND I GUESS MY URGING TO YOU
AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS
CONSISTENT.
NECESSARILY WITH THE OPPOSITION
CAMPAIGN BUT I'M JUST SPEAKING
FOR MYSELF.
I WOULD URGE YOU TO TAKE THE
NEXT TWENTY DAYS AND STEP IN.
AND TRY TO SCALE THIS THING BACK
IN A WAY THAT GAVE THEM THE WHEN
THEY WON WHAT DO TWO THIRDS VOTE
FOR INDUSTRY SPECIFIC TAXES AND
SAY THAT.
REGARDLESS WHETHER IT'S FOR
GENERAL PURPOSES OR FOR SPECIFIC
PURPOSES TWO THIRDS I'M NOT
SPEAKING FOR THESE GUYS.
THESE GENTLEMEN HERE AYE AYE.
NO I COULD I COULD LIVE WITH
THAT YOU TAKE THE SALES TAX AWAY
FROM US YOU TAKE THE OTHER
ABILITY TO RAISE.
GENERAL PURPOSE TAXES TO BE ABLE
TO STRENGTHEN OUR CITIES THAT'S
JUST PLAIN WRONG.
IT'S GOING TO HAVE REAL
CONSEQUENCES SO [inaudible]
I RESPECT THE IDEOLOGICAL
DIFFERENCE IN THE BUILDING
THAT'S WHAT CALIFORNIA'S FINE.
SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM.
DON'T TAKE OUT YOUR BROAD
IDEOLOGY ON THE REST OF US WHO
ARE TRYING TO BUILD MODERN
ECONOMIES.
AND INCLUSIVE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT IN OUR CITIES THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TO SWING
NEXT MET --
I'LL.
I HAVE A FRIEND THE WHERE WITH
ALL TO FOLLOW THE MAYOR --
THANK YOU MADAM MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS TERRY BRENNAN BEHALF
SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL
UNION.
WE REPRESENT.
SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND TAXPAYING
HARDWORKING PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND
OTHERS IN CALIFORNIA.
ABOUT TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND
OF THEM WORK IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SPECIAL DISTRICT CITY --
COUNTY EMPLOYEES ALL THE WAY
DOWN A MOSQUITO ABATEMENT TAT
EMPLOYEES --
ABOUT TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND
OF THEM THERE IT AND THE HOUSE
CARE INDUSTRY AND THAT'S ONE OF
THINGS THAT ONE DAY AND ON MUCH
OF THIS REVENUE IS USED IN THE
COUNTY.
AND LOCAL SERVICES.
THAT IT'S AT JEOPARDY HERE --
BASICALLY COMBATING SOME OF THE
IMPACTS.
OF THE FUNDERS OF THIS
INITIATIVE --
MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT THIS IS
NOT A TAXPAYER REVOLT. 80% THE
MONEY RUNNING THROUGH MISTER
LAPSED LEASE COMMITTEE IS COMING
FROM THE BEVERAGE INDUSTRY.
SOME OF IT'S COMING FROM THE
WINE INDUSTRY AND A FEW OTHERS
LIKE TOBACCO AND AND ALCOHOL BUT
THE BULK OF ITS COMING FROM THE
SONY INDUSTRY --
THIS IS A THINLY DISGUISED --
EFFORT BY THEM TO THWART LOCAL
EFFORTS. TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS
OF THEIR BEHAVIOR ON OUR
COMMUNITIES. TO SUGGEST THAT.
THIS IS --
IDEA I'VE BEEN SORT OF
INCREDULOUS TO SUGGEST THAT THIS
IS ABOUT TRANSPARENCY IN THERE.
FUNNELING CAMPAIGN DONATIONS
THROUGH THE BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE
AND PRETENDING LIKE IT'S A
TAXPAYER REVOLT IS SPEED COMICAL
AT BEST IF NOT JUST [inaudible]
DISINGENUOUS --
MUCH OF THE THAT TAX IS APPLIED
IN FEES REYES ARE USED TO
COMBAT.
THE ILLS OF THESE INDUSTRIES
LIKE OBESITY DIABETES POLLUTION
TOBACCO RELATED DISEASES ALL OF
THIS WILL BE MUCH HARDER.
IT RAISING COMBAT FOR THAT
REASON WHERE STRONGLY OPPOSED
[inaudible]
THINK RESTORING.
I THINK YOU ARE UNABLE CHAIR IN
MEMBERS THE COMMITTEE DID
ACCURATE ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CITY SOME ALSO STEP
IN TODAY FOR MY COLLEAGUE FROM
THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
OF COUNTIES SUZANNE AND ABLE TO
BE HERE TODAY.
BUT SAID THE LEAGUE IN C. SOCK
OR ARE STRONGLY UNITED IN OR
OPPOSITION TO IT TO THIS MEASURE
WHICH IS WE VIEWED AS A
DEVASTATING ATTACK ON THE
ABILITY OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES
DELIVER SERVICES TO TO THEIR
RESIDENTS.
A MERE STEINBERG MANY GREAT CASE
ABOUT HOW THIS MEASURE COULD
IMPACT --
THE PRIORITIES OF THE CITY OF
SACRAMENTO AND TO AS WAS TOUCHED
ON A LITTLE BIT EARLIER A
COUNTIES ARE OF COURSE ARE
CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THIS A
IMPACTS SOME OF THE SAFETY NET
SERVICES THEY DELIVER.
WHETHER IT'S HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES MENTAL HEALTH LAW
ENFORCEMENT OTHER OTHER A
CRITICAL SERVICES.
NOW WE HEARD THE PROPONENTS
EARLIER TALK ABOUT HOW THE
IMPORTANCE THE VOTERS AND I ALSO
HEARD THEM SAY DOESN'T HAVE ANY
IMPACT ON ON LOCAL REVENUES OR
CITY REVENUES.
WILL JUST LAST TUESDAY AS I
THINK THE CHAIR TOUCHED ON
VOTERS WENT TO THE POLLS IN
APPROVED TWENTY FIVE LOCAL
BALLOT MEASURES IS WORTH
MAJORITY VOTES THAT THE THAT THE
VOTERS WHEN AND THEIR IN INTO
THE APPROVED IT ALL OF THESE
MEASURES ALL OF THEM.
ARE GONNA BE UNDONE --
BY IN HIGH END HUNDREDS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A A IN TERMS
OF COMMITTEE INVESTMENTS ARE
GONNA BE UNDONE --
BY THIS MEASURES RETROACTIVE
PROVISIONS ON IN TERMS OF A LOSS
UP BEYOND ALL THE WORK THAT HAS
TO BE DONE IN TERMS OF PREPARING
AND PUTTING MEASURES ON THE
BALLOTS IN CONDUCTING ELECTIONS
AND ALL THAT.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO HUNDRED
EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS --
IN IN LOCAL VOTER APPROVED TAXES
--
THAT THAT CAN BE WIPED OUT AND
AS WE ALL KNOW THERE'S GOING TO
BE MANY MORE A MEASURES ON THE
NOVEMBER BALLOT AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL AND MANY OF THOSE WILL.
BE IMPACTED AS WELL A COUPLE OF
EXAMPLES OF IT IN SAN DIEGO
COUNTY THAT WERE TO TAXES A ONE
WAS A HOTEL TAX --
ONE POINT THREE MILLION DOLLARS
PASSED BY MID MAJORITY DIDN'T
QUITE GET TWO THIRDS BUT THAT
THAT'S UNDONE A CANNABIS TAX IS
A LOT OF INTEREST IN THIS
BUILDING AND IN CANNABIS IS
THAT.
THAT INDUSTRY ARE A TAKES HOLD
IN CALIFORNIA --
THERE WAS A CHAMPION OF COUNTY
HAVE A CANNABIS TAX WITH ABOUT
THREE POINT NINE BILLION DOLLARS
A YEAR THAT'S UNDONE IN THE CITY
OF RIALTO WHICH I THINK IS
PRETTY CLOSE TO THE CITY OF SAN
BERNIE DINO --
THEY PASSED A WITH THE 60% --
APPROVAL --
A THAT'S ABOUT FOURTEEN POINT
TWO MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR ABOUT
18% OF THE CITY'S BUDGET THAT'S
UNDONE.
SO ON IS SO EVEN IF SOME OF
THESE MEASURES THAT THAT ARE ON
BETTER ON THE BALLOT NOVEMBER
EVEN IF THEY GET A TWO THIRDS
MAJORITY.
THEY GOTTA WATCH IT BECAUSE
THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE IN THE
BALLOT MEASURE IF YOU DON'T
WRITE YOUR BALLOT MEASURE
EXACTLY AS THEY THE ATTORNEYS
HAVE DROPPED IT THE CAN BE
UNDONE EVEN IF YOU GET A TWO
THIRDS.
ARM IN THAT I KNOW THERE'S BEEN
A LOT OF TALK IN THE IN THIS
BUILDING A LAST COUPLE YEARS
ABOUT NIMBIS AND AND AND HOW
THEY CAN KIND OF FRUSTRATE
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT OTHER.
OTHER DEVELOPMENT --
WATCH WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THE
FEE PROVISIONS IN THIS MATTER --
YOU FIRST OF ALL IT THERE'S
ABOUT FOUR HOOPS AND HURDLES YOU
AFTER A GO THROUGH NOW TO ADOPT
A FEE AND AND BASICALLY WHAT
THEY'RE GOING TO MEAN IS YOU'RE
NOT COULD BE OVER COVER YOUR
FULL COST OF OF HUB DELIVERING
THE SERVICE SO YOU EITHER HAVE
TO SHIFT.
THE BURDEN ON LOCAL TAXPAYER UP
OR OR I OR CUT THE SERVICE
THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT BUT BEYOND THAT YOU HAVE
FOR AVERAGE CITY COUNCIL OR
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FIVE
MEMBERS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
FOUR FOUR OUT OF FIVE MEMBERS
ACTUALLY HAVE TO VOTE FOR THE
FEE NUMBER. ONE AND THEN TO THIS
IS WHERE THE NAVY'S COMING AND
ONLY 5% OF THE VOTERS IS A NEW
REFERENDUM PROVISION IN HERE 5%
OF THE VOTERS CONSIGNED TO SIGN
A PETITION AND BASICALLY FUND
UNDO THE MEASURE AND FORCE A
VOTE BASICALLY FREEZE THE FEE
AND FORCE A VOTE I THINK THAT
THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF OUR
DISRUPTION THAT WILL BE BECAUSE
WITH WITH THAT PROVISION.
WELL IT'S REALLY CLEAR IS THE
MERE TOUCHED ON THIS OBVIOUSLY
THIS THIS MEASURE OBVIOUSLY
FAVORS THE INTERESTS OF THE
CORPORATIONS IS WERE SPONSORED
IT.
ABOUT WE THINK IT IS A VAST AND
HARMFUL OVER REACH IT'S GONNA
DRASTICALLY UNDERMINE THE
ABILITY OF OUR CITIES COUNTIES
SPECIAL DISTRICTS WHO I WOULD
ARGUE ALREADY OR OF LEVEL OF
GOVERNMENT THAT IS EXTREMELY
ACCOUNTABLE --
TO THE PUBLIC A DELIVER --
HOST SERVICES TO OUR RESIDENTS
AND FOR THOSE REASONS ARE OF SEE
BOTH ON BEHALF OF THE CITIES OF
THE STATE AS WELL AS THE
COUNTIES BUT WE STRONGLY OPPOSES
MEASURING THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ARE THERE
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE.
THIS SUMMER LACKEY EFFORT MAYOR
STEINBERG.
VOICE IN THIS SUB DISINTERESTED
WOULD HELP ENSURE YOUR VISION.
FOR THE CITY'S PROPOSED TAX
INCREASE WILL CONTINUE AFTER YOU
LEAVE OFFICE.
OF COURSE I PLAN TO BE AROUND
FOR AWHILE --
EVER HIT.
WELL I'LL BE HONEST SO HERE'S
WHO WE WANT TO DO I MEAN THE
FIRST ALL WANNA DO A GENERAL TAX
I CANNOT BE SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW
WE WOULD SPEND THE MONEY BUT FOR
EXAMPLE I HAVE A VISION.
WHERE WE WOULD TAKE A QUARTER
SAID AGAIN SUBJECT TO TH
DISCRETION OF THE COUNCIL --
WITHOUT ANY PROMISES AHEAD OF
TIME.
WHERE WE WOULD SECURITIZED? ONE
QUARTER CENT IN CREATED CAPITAL
FUND.
A FOUR TO FIVE HUNDRED MILLION
DOLLARS TO ACTUALLY INVEST IN
JOB CREATION MY CITY WHERE
GOVERNMENT TOWN.
ARE LEAST KNOWN AS ONE BUT WERE
RAPIDLY SEEKING TO CHANGE THAT
TO DIVERSIFY OUR ECONOMY.
AND WE LACK CAPITAL.
AND I WANT PUBLIC CAPITAL SO
ACTUALLY IF I HAVE MY WAY I
WOULD TIE UP.
A BUNCH OF THE MONEY SO THAT IT
COULD BE SPENT ON THE DIRECT
SERVICES ARE THE PENSIONS ARE
THE OTHER THINGS THAT.
I KNOW YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT
BUT WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT.
OF COURSE WITH THIS TWO THIRDS
TO ACTUAL.
IN THIS ENVIRONMENT IS THAT --
WILL WE'RE GONNA GET STRONG
MAJORITY.
WE END UP WITH 6263% NOT ONLY
CAN'T I REALIZE THAT VISION OF
MORE CAPITAL.
WHICH IS A BUSINESS PROPOSITION
IN MY CITY.
BUT ALSO THEN I'M GONNA HAVE TO
CUT FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS WORTH
OF WITH THOSE BASIC SERVICES AND
SINCE MOST OF THE BUDGET OF
COURSE MY CITY AND OTHER CITIES
IS PUBLIC SAFETY.
IT'S GONNA BE POLICE AND FIRE
THAT'S WHY I'M UPSET ABOUT THIS
BECAUSE IT'S A GROSS OVER REACH
YOU COULD HAVE.
PROPONENTS COULD HAVE DEALT WITH
THE INDUSTRY SPECIFIC TAXES.
AND YOU KNOW THAT.
MY FRIEND HERE MIGHT STILL POSE
I MIGHT EVEN OPPOSE IT BY TELL
YOU THIS I WOULDN'T BE IN THIS
ROOM HERE.
I I WOULDN'T I GOT YOU KNOW IS
WHEN.
IT IS WHAT IT IS THAT'S A FIX
OKAY.
AGREE OR DISAGREE.
THIS IS NOT NECESSARY.
WHY ME GOT IMPOSED A TWO THIRDS
VOTE ON SALES TAXES FOR FOR
CITIES AND COUNTIES WHY?
THAT YOU SECURITY ILLOGICAL.
AND THAT STANDS IN THE WAY OF OF
PEOPLE WHO HAVE PRO BUSINESS
MAYORS HAVE PRO BUSINESS
AGENDAS.
WHO WANT --
TO RAISE A TAX TO HELP CREATE
CAPITAL TO BE ABLE TO DO MORE
JOB CREATION IN OUR CITY.
I UNDERSTAND THEM COMPROMISE IN
WHAT HAPPENS IN IN THE BUILDING
AND WHAT HAPPENS EVEN WITH
INITIATIVES YOU GOT A CHANCE TO
YOU KNOW.
SO I KNOW THIS IS --
HEARING IT'S REQUIRED BY LAW.
AGAIN UNDER INITIATIVE REFORM
TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN THERE'S AN
OPPORTUNITY THERE. TO WITHDRAWN
INITIATIVE LATER IN THE GAME I
KNOW THEY HAVE NO INTENT TO
DOING SO BECAUSE THEY'RE BENT ON
AN IDEOLOGICAL AGENDA I JUST NOT
HAPPY ABOUT IT.
AND YOU KNOW LUCKILY WE'VE GOT
FRIENDS AND SUPPORTERS HERE WHO
ARE GOING TO POINT OUT JUST WHAT
THESE GENTLEMEN SAID THAT.
YOU CAN'T HAVE A COUPLE OF
INDUSTRIES.
ESSENTIALLY REMOVED THE ABILITY
OF ALL CITIES THROUGHOUT THE
STATE TO DEFINE THEIR OWN
DESTINY AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S
HAPPENING HERE.
GOT A PRO BUSINESS MAYOR.
THIS THIS HINDERS ME AND LIMITS
MY ABILITY.
TO GROW MY MY CITY'S ECONOMY
[inaudible]
ASSEMBLYMEMBER BLOOM.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR --
MAYOR STEINBERG LIKE YOU THIS
JUST MAKES ME ANGRY HAS A AS A
FORMER MAYOR --
OF THE CITY THAT HAS
CONSISTENTLY TRIED TO DO THE
RIGHT THING AND WHOSE VOTERS
HAVE CONSISTENTLY VOTED --
TO I INCREASE FEES OUT WHEN
THEY'VE BEEN ASKED.
TO AND HAVE DONE IT BY
SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITIES AND AT
MADAM CHAIR YOU ASKED A QUESTION
OF THE PROPONENTS EARLIER ABOUT
DOESN'T DISTORT THE THE WILL OF
THE PEOPLE YOU BET IT DOES.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT'S
INTENDED TO DO IT WANTS TO BLOCK
THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.
AND WHAT KIND OF A DEMOCRACY DO
WE LIVE AND WHERE WE ARE TRYING
TO INSTITUTIONALIZE THAT AND
INSTITUTIONALIZE IT AT THE
INSTANCE OF A FEW CORPORATIONS
THAT WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN
OUT.
OF YOU KNOW WHY IS THE BEVERAGE
INDUSTRY SO INTERESTED IN THE
SENATE --
ISSUE AND PUT UP 80% OF THE
MONEY SO FAR THAT WE KNOW ABOUT
IF -- I
UNDERSTAND THE STATISTIC
CORRECTLY WELL THERE'S FOUR
CITIES OUT OF ALL THE CITIES IN
CALIFORNIA FOR CITIES HAVE VOTED
TO IMPLEMENT.
A FEE ON SODA.
NOW WHY HAVE THEY DONE THAT.
THEY DID THAT IN FURTHERANCE OF
WHAT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO
PROTECT THE HEALTH AND WELFARE
OF THEIR CITIZENS BUT IT'S NOT
LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL JUST AT
IT.
THIS IS A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE IN
THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT PASSED BY
SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITY TO PASS BY
TWO THIRDS NO [inaudible]
AND VATS WHY.
THE BEVERAGE COMPANIES ARE
SPENDING THAT KIND OF UNDER
GODLY AMOUNTS OF MONEY THAT
THEY'RE SPENDING IN ORDER TO
QUALIFY THIS AND THEY'LL BE
DOING THAT.
TO PUSH IT THROUGH TWO NOW LET'S
TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS IN
ONE COMMUNITY AND I I THINK MOST
EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS THAT.
I YOU KNOW A AND A PICKLE LONG
WITH THAT MAYOR STEINBERG AT WAS
A PROPONENT OF OF THE HELPING.
TO RAISE REVENUE TO COMBAT --
DE ID THIS --
THE EPIDEMIC OF DIABETES AND
HEART DISEASE THAT'S AFFECTING
OUR COMMUNITIES.
BUT IN BERKELEY THAT THAT FEES
RAISED ONE POINT FOUR MILLION
DOLLARS THAT'S BEING USED TO
ADDRESS CHILD NUTRITION AND
COMMUNITY HEALTH PROGRAMS.
NOW.
YOU KNOW WE KNOW THE TAXES AND
FEES FOR DECADES HAVE BEEN
INEFFECTIVE PUBLIC HEALTH TOOL.
OUT WE SEEN THEM WORK WITH
TOBACCO AND NOW WE'RE SEEING IT
AS A AS I JUST MENTIONED IT'S
WORKING WITH SODA BUT SINCE.
NINETEEN EIGHTY EIGHT LET'S
LET'S JUST THINK ABOUT THIS
ADULT SMOKING HAS DECLINED OVER
50% AND CALIFORNIA.
AND WE CAN CURRENT CREDIT I
DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT
ABOUT THIS AND IT'S BEEN
STUDIED.
WE CAN CREDIT A SIGNIFICANT
PORTION OF THAT IMPACT TO THE
TOBACCO TAXES THAT CALIFORNIA'S
HAVE BEEN PASSING SINCE THE
NINETEEN EIGHTIES.
AND THOSE WERE STATEWIDE MEASURE
SO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HERE BUT I'D LIKE
US ALL TO IMAGINE A SCENARIO
WHERE THOSE TAXES WOULD HAVE
REQUIRED.
A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY AND NEVER
PASSED WHERE WOULD WE BE TODAY
ON THE ISSUE OF SMOKING.
IF WE HAD NOT HAD THAT REVENUE
AND THE ABILITY TO SPEND THAT
MONEY TO ADDRESS A DIFFERENT
PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN.
SO WE'VE GOT THESE FOUR CITIES
NOW.
I AND I IN IN BERKELEY.
SUGAR SWEETENED BEVERAGE SALES
HAVE DROPPED BY 10% BUT WATER IS
GOING UP BY 16% FOLKS.
PEOPLE ARE STILL BUYING
BEVERAGES.
ANOTHER STUDY SHOWED THAT OF THE
SUGARY BEVERAGE CONSUMPTION
DECREASED BY 21% IN BERKELEY'S
LOW INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS AND LET
THAT'S A REMINDER.
THAT THE EPIDEMIC OF DIABETES
AND HEART DISEASE AFFECTS LOW
INCOME COMMUNITIES MORE THAN
ANYONE ELSE.
PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE MORE
AFFECTED BY THIS EPIDEMIC.
SO FEES A BIT AND IT A POWERFUL
TOOL JUST AS THE TOBACCO TAXES
BEEN NOT JUST FOR CHANGING
BEHAVIOR BUT FOR GENERATING.
THE KINDS OF REVENUE IT TAKES.
TO A A CREATE PROGRAMS THAT
BENEFIT.
OUR COMMUNITIES I HEARD A LOT
ABOUT ABOUT YOU KNOW
TRANSPARENCY --
AND ACCOUNTABILITY WELL WHAT
ABOUT THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF
THE INDIVIDUALS WHO WE ARE SWORN
TO PROTECT AS ELECTED OFFICIALS
[inaudible]
SO.
I I WANT TO THANK ALL THREE OF
YOU FOR MAKING YOUR
PRESENTATIONS HERE TODAY THIS IS
AN ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT ISSUE.
AND I YOU KNOW OF BE THERE WITH
YOU FIGHT IT TOOTH AND NAIL A
FOR IF IT HASN'T CHANGED AND A
OF A WHEN WE SEE IT IN THE A IN
THE UPCOMING ELECTION.
THANK YOU --
ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR BUT
GENERALLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR
PRESENTATION AND SORT OF ASKING
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ON WHAT KIND
OF PAINT A PICTURE AND THE MAYOR
STEINBERG I'M KINDA LIKE YOU
FROM THE CONSERVATIVE DISTRICT
BUT I COME UP AND I WORK WITH
EVERYBODY AND TRY TO SOLVE
PROBLEMS [inaudible]
SO -- AND I
UNDERSTAND THE MAJORITY PARTY WE
HAVE FOR ENORMOUS ITEMS TO TAKE
UP MOST OF OUR BUDGET SO WE
ALWAYS NEED TO FIND NEW REVENUE.
AND I TRIED TO DO THAT WE TRY TO
DO THAT MY FIRST YEAR I DID A AN
AMNESTY WE HAD DONE IT SINCE TWO
THOUSAND FOR THE THREE TAX
AGENCIES ARE SET NOT TWELVE
BILLION DOLLARS WHICH IS.
EASY MONEY OFF THE TABLE TO GET
IT AND TRIED TO GET IN ORDER TO
STAY BUILDINGS WORK REALTORS GET
TENANTS IN THERE ARE KNOWN
ORANGE COUNTY WE HAVE LIKE LAST.
STERN 2% OCCUPANCY RATE SO BUT
THAT'S WHAT I'VE TRIED TO DO TO
COME UP IT IN SACRAMENTO --
BUT THE OTHER THING THAT THAT
FRUSTRATES ME IS.
ISSUES COME UP LIKE THE HOUSING
CRISIS NOBODY GOES DOWN.
AND ASK THE QUESTION WHY DO WE
HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS IN THE
PART OF IT IS.
DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES LUMBER
TAXES CAP AND TRADE THAT COST
CONCRETE AND STUCCO PRICES TO GO
UP NOW P. YOU SEE PUT SOLAR
MANDATE ON NEW HOMES IT'S
ACTUALLY EXPENSIVE JUST TO BUILD
A HOUSE [inaudible]
AND I THINK PEOPLE ARE HURTING.
I MEAN WE JUST SAW AN ORANGE
COUNTY SENATOR WAS REMOVED FROM
OFFICE FOR A FOR A TAX VOTE --
ALL THESE THINGS ADD UP ADD UP
ADD UP TO THE COST OF LIVING IN
CALIFORNIA.
AND AS I MENTIONED ONE I SPOKE
TO THE SUPPORTERS JUST WHAT
JUMPED OUT AT ME IS THE AND THE
ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF REVENUE
THAT'S INCREASED THE LOCALITY
SINCE.
TWO THOUSAND TEN AND IT IN MY
OPINION.
ITS OF A LOT OF TIMES IT'S A
PRIOR IS NOT A REVENUE PROBLEM
LIKE HEARING IN SACRAMENTO
SOUGHT A REVENUE PROBLEM IT'S
BEEN A SPENDING PROBLEM SO.
I I JUST THINK CALIFORNIANS ARE
YOU NO NICKEL AND DIME TO DEATH
AND YOU KNOW.
WE GOT TO GIVE ME A BREAK AT
SOME POINT.
IF I MAY.
MAY JUST.
SO I JUST THINK THAT THEY
RESPECT YOUR POINT OF VIEW OF
COURSE AND I I THINK THERE'S A
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BEING A STATE
LEGISLATOR.
AND VOTING --
TO OPPOSE --
OR SUPPORT ANY REVENUE OR TAX
MEASURE.
VERSUS TAKING AWAY THE ABILITY
OF LOCAL [inaudible]
GOVERNMENT. TO BE AND LOCAL
VOTERS TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE
THEIR OWN FUTURES WHY CAN'T THEY
MAKE THAT DECISION.
RIGHT I THINK THAT'S REALLY IT
THERE IT COULD BECAUSE EVEN
THOUGH IDEOLOGICALLY I KNOW WE
WE MIGHT NOT EVER AGREE ON
WHETHER.
THE STATE OVERTAXED VERSES UNDER
RESOURCE THAT'S OKAY.
THAT'S WHY WE YOU KNOW HAVE THE
PARTIES AND WHY WE HAVE THE THAT
THE DEBATES THE ELECTIONS IN THE
ARGUMENTS.
BUT THERE'S A DIFFERENT
IDEOLOGICAL ISSUE THAT I I FEEL
LIKE THE PROPONENTS.
AGAIN ARE BEING A BIT
HYPOCRITICAL.
AND THAT IS IF GOVERNMENT IS TO
TALK DOWN HERE FROM THE STATE
LEVEL.
WHILE YOU TAKE AWAY THE ABILITY
OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO
DETERMINE THEIR OWN DESTINY OF
THE VOTERS ONE IT.
THEN THE VOTERS WANT IT.
IF THEY DON'T WANT IT THEY DON'T
WANT YOUR COMMUNITY MIGHT SAY
YES.
OR KNOW MY COMMUNITY MIGHT SAY
YES OR NO.
AND LOCAL CONTROL IS BEEN SUCH
AN IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE OF YOUR
PARTY AND AND YOUR PHILOSOPHY
AND IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT.
IT'S KIND OF EASILY GETS
IGNORED.
YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE VOTERS --
IN YOUR CITY AN ORANGE GET WIT
AND WHICH WOULD CITY BUT IN
ORANGE COUNTYDON'T HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT.
MY SACRAMENTO SALES TAX TO
BUILD.
MORE INCLUSIVE ECONOMY.
SO WHY WOULD YOU TAKE THAT TOOL
AWAY FROM MY VOTERS [inaudible]
THAT THAT'S THAT'S THE PART THAT
I THINK IS [inaudible]
INCONSISTENT HERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS MISTER OSAMA
REALIZING CLARIFYING COMMENT.
WHY IS IT?
WHEN YOU WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOUR
PUBLIC WANTS TO DO SOMETHING WHY
IS TWO THIRDS [inaudible]
SITTARD.
THE DOOR SHUT.
ITS NOT A DOOR SHUT BUT IT SAID
DOOR THAT IS --
AT LEAST HALFWAY CLOSE BECAUSE
U. CAN THWART THEM AT THE WILL
OF A VERY STRONG MAJORITY I'M
TELLING YOU IN TWO THOUSAND AND
THIRTEEN OUR MAJOR YOU SALES TAX
NOT IN INDUSTRY SPECIFIC TAX GOD
I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER
SIXTY TWO OR 63%.
THAT WOULD BE A FIVE QUOTE
FAILURE UNDER THIS INITIATIVE I
WOULD MAYBE WE DISAGREE BUT I
WOULD ARGUE THAT SHOULDN'T BE A
FAILURE.
THAT SHOULD BE A SIGNAL FORWARD
TO THE VOTERS WANT TO INVEST IN.
IN THEIR COMMUNITIES IN THE
VARIOUS WAYS THAT THERE MAYOR
LAYS OUT IN THE TO BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE IN MY HOPE NEXT
ELECTION.
TO SPENDING THE MONEY EXACTLY
HOW I PROMISED WHEN I WHEN I
CAMPAIGN FOR IT.
SO I DO THINK THAT SAID IT IF
IT'S NOT A DOOR SHUT.
IT'S A DOOR A BARELY AJAR.
CLINCHER FIGHT IT OUT ON DO THAT
I MEAN THERE'S ALREADY A
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
--
THE RULES THAT APPLY TO THE
STATE AND AND IT'S A REVENUE OUR
ABILITY --
IT YOU KNOW IT AS YOU KNOW IN
THIS BUILDING TO RAISE THE TAXES
TWO THIRDS OF THE BODY AND A
GOVERNOR SIGNATURE THERE ISN'T
REQUIREMENT THEIR HOUSE TO GO TO
THE BALLOT.
A IF THIS BODY PUTS A HOUSING
BOND APART BONTA SOMETHING
ON THE BALLOT IT'S A MAJORITY
VOTE OF THE STATE'S VOTERS OUT
WHEN WE GO TO THE BALLOT ALREADY
EVERY TAX EVERY SINGLE TAX A
LOCAL GOVERNMENT DOES TODAY
HOUSE TO BE APPROVED BY THE
VOTERS.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM THAT'S
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN.
AND IT IS I THINK IT'S ALREADY
BEEN TOUCHED ON WORKSTREAM
ACCOUNTABLE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
IT'S IT MAY BE A YES SIR ARE
LEGISLATORS OCCASIONALLY THAT
THAT LEAVE OFFICE OFTENTIMES IF
A LOCAL OUR ELECTED GET OUT OF
STEP WITH THEIR ELECTORATE.
THERE QUICKLY REMOVED FROM
OFFICE SO I MEAN WE'RE ALREADY
ACCOUNTABLE AND THIS HURDLE THE
TWO THIRDS IS REALLY GOING TO
DEVASTATE CITIES AND COUNTIES
GOING FORWARD AND ALSO MAKE THEM
MORE ARE COMING UP TO SACRAMENTO
LOOKING FOR A FOR RESOURCES
BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN ABILITY TO
TAKE CARE OF THEIR OWN.
NEEDS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
ASSEMBLYMAN BLOOM FORMAT ONE
QUICK COMMENT AND THAT IS SO.
I DON'T THINK THE PROPONENTS OF
THIS MEASURE WOULD ACCEPT TWO
THIRDS SIR.
A REQUIREMENT FOR THEIR MEASURE
AND THERE'S A REASON THAT THEY
WOULDN'T ACCEPT THAT IT'S
BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T PASS
[inaudible]
UP.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS ALL
THREE OF YOU AND I APPRECIATE
EVERYBODY THAT'S BEEN HERE MY
CONCERN AS YOU CAN IMAGINE IS I
THINK OF THE ENTIRE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND I THINK OF THE
RULE IN SMALLER CITIES AND I AM
I I WANT TO ALWAYS SAY.
I WOULD SAY TO MYSELF DON'T
FORGET WHERE YOU CAME FROM AND I
CAME FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
I'VE SEEN RIVER SITTING AT THE
DYESS MANY TIMES THINKING WHY
DON'T THESE HAIR BRAINED THINGS
COME UP FROM THE STATE AND NOT.
REALLY REALIZE WHAT'S HAPPENING
IN MY CITY MY VOTERS WANT TO
VOTE ON THE THINGS THAT ARE
IMPORTANT TO THEM.
SO I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF
ALL YOU OF ALL MADE TODAY --
I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS
WILL HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT IF WE'D
LIKE A PUBLIC COMMENT IN THOSE
THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME OUT EVEN
TO HEAR MEMBER.
COMMITTEE I REALLY APPRECIATE
ALL OF YOU FOR COMING TODAY AND
I THINK.
SO YOU STEP UP THE MICROPHONE
SAY YOUR NAME IN THE ORGANIZED
ORGANIZATION YOUR REPRESENT AND
LIMITED TO ONE MINUTE PER PERSON
WHEREVER YOU LIKE SITS
[inaudible]
ANYTHING [inaudible] ONE OF OKAY
HERE.
THIRTY MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS AYE
GOOD AFTERNOON DAVID WOLFE THE
HOWARD JARVIS TAXPAYERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT OF THE
TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT AND
THANKS FOR LETTING SAID HERE
TODAY --
MEMBERS BENJAMIN FRANKLIN ONCE
SAID DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND
A SHEEP DECIDING WHAT'S FOR
DINNER.
INCREASINGLY THE TAXPAYERS ARE
THE SHEEP AND THEY DESERVE TO BE
PROTECTED.
A TWO THIRDS THRESHOLD
ACCOMPLISHES THAT ESPECIALLY
PROGRESSIVE EXACTIONS LIKE SALES
TAXES THAT IMPACT PREDOMINANTLY
LOW INCOME PEOPLE.
MEMBERS I WANT TO STRESS AGAIN
THAT THIS IS NOT AN IMPOSSIBLE
CRUSH HOLD TO HIT. 70% OF
EDUCATION PARCEL PAXIL SINCE TWO
THOUSAND TWELVE HAVE INDEED
PASSED WITH A TWO THIRDS VOTE.
MEMBERS WHAT KICKED ELVIS OFF%
PROPOSITION THIRTEEN KICKED US
OFF FORTY YEARS AGO THIS MONTH.
OKAY VOTERS APPROVED OF THAT
LANDMARK CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT WITH 64% SUPPORT IT
REMAINS OVER 60% TODAY IN
POPULARITY AND I THINK THAT
SPEAKS.
JUST HOW MUCH VOTERS VALUE THE
TWO THIRDS VOTE PROTECTION.
MEMBERS IN CLOSING AND TO BE
CLEAR.
OUR JOB IS TO RESPOND TO THE
WILL OF THE TAXPAYERS.
VOTERS HAVE AMENDED THE
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION THREE
TIMES OVER THE LAST THIRTY YEARS
AS MISTER ANNATTO MENTION PROP
SIXTY TWO PROP TWO EIGHTEEN
PROP.
TWENTY SIX TO UNDENIABLY STATE
POLLING.
NUMBER ONE THAT THEY WILL
PROTECT PROPOSITION.
THIRTEEN NUMBER TWO THAT THEY
WANT TO VOTE ON TAX INCREASES
AND BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS.
AND NUMBER THREE THAT THEY WILL
RESPOND TO WHAT THEY PERCEIVE TO
BE OVERREACH BY THE JUDICIAL I
AM EACH.
AND THAT'S WHY WE SUPPORT THE
MEASURE THINKING MADAM CHAIR.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE CHRISTY VELMA A BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS HERE TO MAKE A FEW
COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THE
MEASURE --
THIS IS A BIT OF A SCAM OR A
TRICK I THIS IS A A MEASURE
SPONSORED NOT BY THE PEOPLE BUT
AS WAS MENTIONED THIS HEARING
SOME VERY WELL.
FINANCED A INDUSTRIES THAT ARE
OF FRUSTRATED BY THEIR
EXPERIENCES AT THE LOCAL BALLOT.
UP SO THOSE OF THE TAXPAYERS
THAT THIS MEASURE SEEKS TO
PROTECT AND I GUESS OFFER THEM
SOME LEVEL OF THEIR VIEW OF
FAIRNESS AND TRANSPARENCY.
BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT.
THEY NEED TO SEEK.
THE ENHANCEMENT OF THEIR BOTTOM
LINES AND IT'S NOT THEIR JOB
NECESSARILY TO BE CONCERNED
ABOUT HOW.
WHAT THEY'RE DOING IMPACTS OUR
COMMUNITIES ITS GOVERNMENTS JOB
TO GOVERN AND REGULATE AND
INTERVENE IN PROTECTION OF
CALIFORNIANS AND IN CITIES AND
COUNTIES IN DISTRICTS THAT THEIR
TAX PAYERS [inaudible]
SO.
I THINK IN WITH RESPECT TO
FIREFIGHTERS I WAS A SAY THAT
INFRASTRUCTURE ROADS EGRESS
BUILDING STANDARD SCHOOLS
HOMELESS OF HOUSING ALL OF THAT
IMPACTS THE JOB THE FIREFIGHTERS
DO.
SO THIS IMPACTS FIREFIGHTERS
WERE POST THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON SHAUN THOSE THE
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
INDEPENDENT BUSINESS
REPRESENTING OVER TWENTY
THOUSAND SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS
REPRESENTING A VERY BROAD
DIVERSE CROSS SECTION OF
INDUSTRIES IN OUR IN OUR
SUSPICIONS SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS
--
AND IF HE DOES NOT HAVE A FORMAL
POSITION ON THIS INITIATIVE
UNTIL IT --
FORMALLY IS CERTIFIED FOR THE
BALLOT BUT WE DID WANT TO
PROVIDE.
A COUPLE QUICK BULLET POINTS MY
RESEARCH OUR MEMBERS WHICH IS
REFLECTED I THINK OF MANY SMALL
BUSINESSES IN THE STATE --
WHICH ABOUT OUR MEMBERS AT THE
NATIONAL LEVEL AND IN EVERY
STATE ACROSS THE COUNTRY SO
GIVES US A GOOD --
INSIGHT AS TO SOME TRENDS AND WE
CAN COMPARE THEM TO DIFFERENT
STATES I WANNA SHARE COUPLE
QUICK POINTS --
NFIB MEMBERS IN A RECENT SURVEY
NATIONALLY RANKED STATE AND
LOCAL TAXES EITHER AS OUR NINTH
MOST SIGNIFICANT ISSUE A BURDEN
AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL BUT IN
CALIFORNIA THEY READ AS OUR
FOURTH MOST SIGNIFICANT BURDEN
OR ISSUE IT'S A SIGNIFICANT.
DEVIATION FROM THE NATIONAL
TREND ALSO IN A VERY RECENT
SURVEY JUST LAST MONTH 87% OF
OUR MEMBERS HAVE SAID THAT --
THEY FIND IT RECENT FEDERAL TAX
REFORM. 75% OF BUSINESSES THINK
THAT WILL HAVE A DIRECT POSITIVE
IMPACT ON THEIR BUSINESS THE
POINT IN THESE DATA POINTS.
IS THAT CALIFORNIA'S TAX CLIMATE
IS A SIGNIFICANT BURDEN FOR ANY
BUSINESS BUT ESPECIALLY FOR
SMALL BUSINESSES AND OUR MEMBERS
TELL US IT'S NOT JUST THE HIGH
STATE INCOME TAX RATE OR STATE
SALES TAX RATE.
OR HIGHEST GAS TAKES GAS PRICES
ADMITS WHEN YOU ADD ALL OF IN
FOR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS WHEN
YOU ADD A HALF CENT SALES TAX OR
LOCAL FEVER SPECIAL PROJECT.
IS SUFFOCATING SMALL BUSINESS
OWNER SO WE DON'T HAVE A
POSITION AT THIS POINT I'M BUT
WE DO SUPPORT AN ADDITIONAL TAX
FOR PROTECTION FOR ALL TAXPAYERS
AND SMALL BUSINESS THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
HI MY NAME IS BRIAN RAYMOND I
MAKE COUNCIL MEMBER FROM THE
CITY ABOUT WATER AND I'M IN
SUPPORT OF THE TAXPAYER
PROTECTION ACT.
TAXPAYERS DESERVE TO KNOW HOW
THE GOVERNMENT SPENDS THEIR TAX
DOLLARS AND COMING FROM A
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES SUCH
AS THAT WATER.
I'VE SEEN FIRST HAND HOW HIDDEN
TAXES AND FEES AFFECT THE YEAH
HARD WORKING RESIDENTS DATED
DAY.
AND IT'S IT'S IT'S UNACCEPTABLE
--
WE NEED [inaudible]
TO VOTE YES ON THIS AYE I HEARD
YOU GUYS WERE THIS IS WELL SO WE
CAN GET IT AT A COMMITTEE.
INTO OR OUT.
ON THE BALLOT.
I THINK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON MADAM CHAIR AND
MEMBERS JOSH WILL WILL GO WITH
THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES.
FOR THE REASONS DISCUSSED BY THE
PANEL IN OPPOSITION AS WELL AS
THOSE EXPRESSED BY MISS BALBOA
WE ARE ALSO IN OPPOSITION
THANKS.
BUT YOU MANAGER MEMBERS TROSZYN
BROWN OF THE CALIFORNIA
FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ALSO HERE
TO REITERATE THE POINTS BROUGHT
UP BY THE OPPOSITION.
ON THE PROP THIRTEEN IS OFTEN
BROUGHT UP IN THIS DISCUSSION
I'D BE REMISS IF WE DIDN'T WISH
THAT IT TOO REQUIRED A TWO
THIRDS VOTE --
AND MAYBE ARE PURE PER PEOPLE
SPENDING WOULD BE MUCH HIGHER
THAN IT IS TODAY --
WE THINK THIS WILL BE SEVERE
BURDEN ON LOCALITIES NINE WHICH
SCHOOLS OFTEN RELY ON SOME
JOINT.
OUR EFFORTS TO BRING BETTER
OUTCOMES FOR STUDENTS AND SO WE
WILL BE HERE WE ARE OFFICIALLY
IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU THANK
YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN OF THE
COMMITTEE MATTHEW MOSON WITH THE
PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE AND WE
ARE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS
MEASURE.
I THINK WE'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM
ASSEMBLYMAN BLOOM THE COMMENTS
ABOUT THE IMPACT THAT THIS
MEASURE WOULD HAVE.
IN REMOVING THE ABILITY OF LOCAL
MINISTER TO RESPOND SOME OF THE
MOST PRESSING PUBLIC HEALTH
CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE.
NOT JUST AS A STATE BUT AS A
NATION AND I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO UNDERSCORE THAT
THESE ON JUST HEALTH CHALLENGES.
THESE ARE ALSO CHALLENGES THAT
WILL UNDERMINE OUR ABILITY AS A
STATE.
AND AS COMMUNITIES TO RESPOND
AND BE ECONOMICALLY COMPETITIVE
IN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY.
SO IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL THAT
WE OPPOSE THIS MEASURE.
AND ENSURE THAT CITIES AND
COUNTIES AND THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AS A WHOLE CAN HAVE
THE TOOLS AT ITS DISPOSAL TO
RESPOND TO THESE REALLY CRITICAL
HEALTH CHALLENGES WHETHER THAT'S
POOR AIR QUALITY IMPACTING
ASTHMA.
WHETHER THAT'S A BE CITY A
DIABETES HEART DISEASE OR STROKE
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK
YOU.
HI AT TRACY SULLIVAN ON BEHALF
THE CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION
OF COUNTIES WE ARE OFFICIALLY IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS INITIATIVE
ARE SEIZE ACT BOARD OF
DIRECTORS.
TICKET OPPOSE POSITION AND OUT
OF RESPECT FOR ALL OF YOUR TIME
ALL ON MY COMMENTS WITH THE
OPPOSITION PANEL BUT A QUICKLY
JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE AND
COUNTY CONCERNS.
AND THAT AS THIS AND MEASURE
WHAT IT --
FOR THIS INITIATIVE WOULD REALLY
IMPACT ARE CRITICAL AND SAFETY
NET SERVICES THINK YOU THINK
YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS JAMIE
MARK AND I'M WITH THE AMERICAN
HEART ASSOCIATION AMERICAN
STROKE ASSOCIATION WE ARE.
STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS
MEASURE I'M ALLOWING MY COMMENTS
WITH THE OPPOSITION PANEL AS
WELL AS ASSEMBLY MEMBER PLAN
THINK YOU THINK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS DOCTOR
FLOWS ON CO FOR I AM WITH PUBLIC
HEALTH ADVOCATES WE ARE IN
STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS
MEASURE FOR THE REASONS THAT
HAVE BEEN ALREADY OUTLINED BY
THE OPPOSITION AS WELL AS
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BLOOM THANK YOU.
THINK YOU.
BEN CHAIR MY NAME'S ANTHONY
THOMAS ALONG WITH THE CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION.
MY BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS ALSO
VOTED TO OPPOSE THIS MEASURE --
UNIQUELY AS SPECIAL DISTRICTS DO
NOT BENEFIT FROM SALES TAX OR
GENERAL TAXES WE DEPEND.
STRICTLY ON SPECIAL TAXES FEES
AND CHARGES AND WE ARE OPPOSED
FOR MULTIPLE REASONS BUT IN
PARTICULAR THERE IS SOME.
CONFUSION AS TO EXACTLY HOW THIS
IMPACTS WAS FEES AND CHARGES.
ABOUT CONSERVATION PRICING TIER
PRICING WATER SEWER FIRE
SANITATION.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THE BACK AND
FORTH WALL.
MISTER QUIRK ASSEMBLYMAN QUIRK
OFFERED A VERY EXCELLENT
QUESTION AND THE PROPONENTS
TRIED TO ASSUAGE OUR FEARS.
HAVING.
NINE AN ORGANIZATION AS ESTEEMED
AS THE ALEJO SAY WHILE.
IT'S UNCLEAR I GUESS WILL GO TO
COURT DOES DOES NOT.
AYE HELP US OUT AT ALL AND WE
REMAIN OPPOSED THANK YOU THINK
YOU.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS MET HARD
WITH THE CALIFORNIA BUSINESS
PROPERTIES ASSOCIATION AT THE
SAME TIME WILL ALIGN OURSELVES
WITH THE BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE ON
WE ARE SUPPORTING THIS MEASURE
IN AND HELP BECAUSE PASSED.
WE DO NEED SOME MORE TAXPAYER
PROTECTIONS THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS AGAIN AARON
LAUREL I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF LOOK
LIKE ON DEVELOPMENT --
CITIES ARE ALREADY BURDENED
ENOUGH TO GRACE FUNDING FOR
BASIC SERVICES LET ALONE FOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
ACTIVITIES AND SO FOR THE SAME
REASONS THAT MAYOR STEINBERG AND
NOT MISTER CARRIED ARTICULATED
KHALLID IS OPPOSED TO THIS A
PROPOSITION THANK YOU.
I THINK YOU.
SEEING NO FURTHER PUBLIC
COMMENT.
AND WHEN I THINK EVERYONE FOR
PURCHASING HITTING TODAY THANK
YOU TO ASSEMBLY MEMBER CECILIA
AGUIAR-CURRY --
AND THAT WILL CONCLUDE OUR
HEARING FOR TODAY WE ARE NOW
JOINED