Secretary of State      Elections      My Vote Counts      Feedback

Make Your Voice Heard California Statewide November 2, 2004 General Election
HomePropositionsCandidate StatementsVoter Informationblank
  propositions
 
Ballot Measure Summary
   
 
Proposition 1A
   
 
Proposition 59
   
 
Proposition 60
   
 
Proposition 60A
   
 
Proposition 61
   
 
Proposition 62
   
 
Proposition 63
   
 
Proposition 64
   
 
Proposition 65
   
 
Proposition 66
   
 
Proposition 67
   
 
Proposition 68
   
 
Proposition 69
   
 
Proposition 70
   
 
Proposition 71
   
 
Proposition 72
   
 
Bond Overview
   
  Title and Summary | Analysis | Text of Proposed Laws

ARGUMENTS AND REBUTTALS

Proposition 1A

Protection of Local Government Revenues.

ARGUMENT in Favor of
Proposition 1A

PROPOSITION 1A-A HISTORIC AGREEMENT TO PROTECT LOCAL TAXPAYERS AND VITAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES.

Proposition 1A is a historic bipartisan agreement among local governments, public safety leaders, the State Legislature, Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and is authored by Democratic State Senator Tom Torlakson.

Proposition 1A prevents the State from taking and using funding that local governments need to provide services like fire and paramedic response, law enforcement, health care, parks, and libraries.

These individuals and groups urge a YES vote:

  • Governor Schwarzenegger
  • State Controller Steve Westly
  • California Professional Firefighters
  • California Fire Chiefs Association
  • California Police Chiefs Association
  • California State Sheriffs' Association
  • California Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems
  • League of California Cities
  • California Special Districts Association
  • California State Association of Counties

PROPOSITION 1A IS NEEDED TO STOP THE STATE FROM TAKING LOCAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING.

For more than a dozen years, the State has been taking local tax dollars that local governments use to provide essential services-more than $40 billion in the last 12 years. Even in years with state budget surpluses, the State has taken billions of local tax dollars.

These State raids result in fewer firefighters, fewer law enforcement officers, longer waits in emergency rooms-or higher local taxes and fees.

PROPOSITION 1A PROTECTS PUBLIC SAFETY, EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE, AND OTHER LOCAL SERVICES.

Local governments spend a vast majority of their budgets providing critical services, including:

  • Fire protection
  • Paramedic response
  • Law enforcement
  • Emergency medical
  • Health care
  • Parks and libraries

Cities and counties also revitalize downtowns and create jobs and affordable housing using redevelopment agency funding. Redevelopment agency tax increment revenues are already protected by the State Constitution and do not need to be further protected by Proposition 1A.

PROPOSITION 1A PROTECTS LOCAL TAXPAYERS AND WON'T RAISE TAXES.

Proposition 1A will not raise taxes. It simply ensures that existing local tax dollars continue to be dedicated to local services. It also helps ensure local governments aren't forced to raise taxes or fees to make up for revenue raided by the State.

PROPOSITION 1A PROVIDES FLEXIBILITY IN A STATE BUDGET EMERGENCY-AND WON'T TAKE FUNDING FROM SCHOOLS OR OTHER STATE PROGRAMS.

Proposition 1A protects only existing levels of local funding. It does not reduce funding for schools or other state programs. And, 1A was carefully written to allow flexibility. It allows the State to borrow local government revenues- only in the event of a fiscal emergency-if funds are needed to support schools or other state programs.

PROPOSITION 1A IS A BETTER APPROACH THAT REPLACES THE NEED FOR PROPOSITION 65.

Proposition 65 was put on the ballot earlier this year before this historic agreement was reached. Proposition 1A is a better, more flexible approach to protect local services and tax dollars. That's why ALL of the official proponents of 65 are now ENDORSING PROPOSITION 1A AND OPPOSING PROPOSITION 65.

Join Governor Schwarzenegger, Senator Torlakson, firefighters, police officers, sheriffs, paramedics, health care leaders, taxpayers, business and labor leaders.

PROTECT LOCAL TAXPAYERS AND PUBLIC SAFETY. Vote YES on PROPOSITION 1A. Vote NO on PROPOSITION 65.

GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER

CHIEF MICHAEL WARREN, President
California Fire Chiefs Association

SHERIFF ROBERT T. DOYLE, President California State Sheriffs' Association

REBUTTAL to Argument in Favor of Proposition 1A

Proposition 1A was cooked up at the last minute as part of a bad budget deal.

There were no public hearings.

Proposition 1A protects local governments, but it hurts education by allowing the State to raid your property taxes that fund your local schools. And it puts that into the State Constitution!

Proposition 1A prevents the Legislature from lowering taxes by locking in the local sales tax rate. That goes into the State Constitution too!

Proposition 1A jeopardizes critical programs. As California's fiscal challenges continue, the State budget ax will fall even harder on funding for K-12 education, higher education, children's health care, programs for seniors, and public safety.

Proposition 1A gives local politicians a blank check without any scrutiny over how the money is spent.

We can do better. We deserve better.

Vote NO on Proposition 1A.

CAROLE MIGDEN, Chairwoman
State Board of Equalization

 

ARGUMENT Against
Proposition 1A

We should protect local taxpayers, not irresponsible spending by local governments. Vote NO on Proposition 1A.

As Chairwoman of the State Board of Equalization, I know that too many branches of government waste too much money.

Proposition 1A gives local governments a spending guarantee without any fiscal accountability or oversight. It's a blank check for spending and turns a blind eye to waste.

Did you know that the City of Stockton is emptying its cash reserves to build a downtown arena, but at the same time they're trying to raise taxes to pay for police officers and firefighters? They've got their priorities backwards.

Did you know that the City of Los Angeles raised their water rates, but at the same time they're being audited for wasting millions on unnecessary public relations contracts?

California has a responsibility to help and support local governments. We are all in this together. But NO one should be exempt from fiscal oversight and accountability. Checks and balances are essential.

Public schools in California are funded by Proposition 98. But in 1988, California's teachers included specific language to hold school districts accountable for the money they spend.

There is NO fiscal accountability provision in Proposition 1A.

Every new school bond we've placed on the ballot contains specific accountability provisions to guarantee that the money is spent the way the voters intend.

There is NO fiscal accountability provision in Proposition 1A.

Every one of California's Water, Parks, and Wildlife bonds had strict accountability provisions.

There is NO fiscal accountability provision in Proposition 1A.

California is facing serious budget challenges. There have been great sacrifices made to meet those challenges . . . cuts in children's health care, nursing home care, and college admissions.

Why should local politicians get a blank check? I say NO they shouldn't. Why should local politicians get a guarantee that sick children don't get? I say NO they shouldn't.

This NO fiscal accountability Proposition deserves a NO vote!

Please join me in voting NO on Proposition 1A.

CAROLE MIGDEN, Chairwoman
State Board of Equalization

REBUTTAL to Argument Against Proposition 1A

Contrary to misleading claims made by the opponent of 1A, THIS MEASURE INCREASES FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY.

Prop. 1A increases local budget accountability by keeping tax dollars close to home, where voters have more control.

Prop. 1A will also make the State more accountable by preventing it from taking and using local government funds-except in a fiscal emergency.

FOR YEARS, THE STATE HAS HAD A BLANK CHECK to take your local tax dollars. PROP. 1A TEARS UP THAT BLANK CHECK and requires the State to live within its means.

The opponent would have you believe the State is in a better position to manage your local tax dollars than your city or county leaders. In fact, over the past decade, cities and counties have tightened their belts, increased accountability, and prioritized spending for essential local services.

Prop. 1A does NOT increase local government funding and does not take one dime from schools, state health care services, or any other state program or service.

Prop. 1A does NOT increase taxes. The measure PROTECTS EXISTING LOCAL TAX DOLLARS-WHICH ARE USED TO PROVIDE FIREFIGHTING, LAW ENFORCEMENT, EMERGENCY ROOM CARE, PARAMEDIC RESPONSE, and other essential local services.

Prop. 1A supporters know it's time to end business as usual in Sacramento and stop the State from taking and using local government funds.

Join Governor Schwarzenegger, firefighters, law enforcement of.cers, paramedics, and taxpayer groups.

PROTECT LOCAL TAXPAYERS AND PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES. VOTE YES on 1A.

SENATOR TOM TORLAKSON, Chair
Senate Committee on Local Government

LOU PAULSON, President
California Professional Firefighters

CAM SANCHEZ, President
California Police Chiefs Association



Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.


Back to Top



 
Copyright © 2004 California Secretary of State