Election Day is finally here!
Time to get the voting over with! Here’s my guide to the California Propositions!
Hit the jump to see the guide!
Proposition 1 -
Authorizes bonds to fund specified housing assistance programs
Authorizes
$4 billion in general obligation bonds for existing affordable housing programs
for low-income residents, veterans, farmworkers, manufactured and mobile homes,
infill, and transit-oriented housing. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to
repay bonds averaging about $170 million annually over the next 35 years.
VOTE
NO
“Borrow more money”. That’s what the
Prop flat out says. And it’s always something every election. On top of that,
we are amassing more debt that the State repeatedly cannot pay back.
Proposition 2 -
Authorizes bonds to fund existing housing program for individuals with mental
illness
Amends
Mental Health Services Act to fund No Place Like Home Program, which finances
housing for individuals with mental illness. Ratifies existing law establishing
the No Place Like Home Program. Fiscal Impact: Allows the state to use up to
$140 million per year of county mental health funds to repay up to $2 billion in
bonds. These bonds would fund housing for those with mental illness who are
homeless.
VOTE
NO
See my comments on Prop 1.
Proposition 3 -
Authorizes bonds to fund projects for water supply and quality, watershed,
fish, wildlife, water conveyance, and groundwater sustainability and storage
Authorizes
$8.877 billion in state general obligation bonds for various infrastructure
projects. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to repay bonds averaging $430
million per year over 40 years. Local government savings for water-related
projects, likely averaging a couple hundred million dollars annually over the
next few decades.
VOTE
NO
See my comments on Prop 2!
Proposition 4 -
Authorizes bonds funding construction at hospitals providing children's health
care
Authorizes
$1.5 billion in bonds, to be repaid from state’s General Fund, to fund grants
for construction, expansion, renovation, and equipping of qualifying children’s
hospitals. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to repay bonds averaging about
$80 million annually over the next 35 years.
VOTE
NO
See my comments on Prop 3 and every
funding prop proposal ever!
Proposition 5 -
Changes requirements for certain property owners to transfer their property tax
base to replacement property
Removes
certain transfer requirements for homeowners over 55, severely disabled
homeowners, and contaminated or disaster-destroyed property. Fiscal Impact:
Schools and local governments each would lose over $100 million in annual
property taxes early on, growing to about $1 billion per year. Similar increase
in state costs to backfill school property tax losses.
VOTE
YES
Just yes. Let it be easier for our
seasoned-citizens to transfer their property.
Proposition 6 -
Eliminates certain road repair and transportation funding, requires certain
fuel taxes and vehicle fees be approved by the electorate
Repeals
a 2017 transportation law’s taxes and fees designated for road repairs and
public transportation. Fiscal Impact: Reduced ongoing revenues of $5.1 billion
from state fuel and vehicle taxes that mainly would have paid for highway and
road maintenance and repairs, as well as transit programs.
VOTE
YES
Repeal the statewide gas tax!
Proposition 7 -
Conforms California Daylight Saving Time to Federal Law. Allows Legislature to
change Daylight Saving Time period
Gives
Legislature ability to change daylight saving time period by two-thirds vote,
if changes are consistent with federal law. Fiscal Impact: This measure has no
direct fiscal effect because changes to daylight saving time would depend on
future actions by the Legislature and potentially the federal government.
VOTE
YES/NO or NOT
This is a weird one. I hate Daylight
Savings Time and would love to keep our clocks as they are meant to be. We can give
the Legislature the opportunity to remove it, but will they? I don’t know if
they will or they won’t, but one thing’s for sure: they won’t.
Proposition 8 -
Regulates amounts outpatient kidney dialysis clinics charge for dialysis
treatment
Requires
rebates and penalties if charges exceed limit. Requires annual reporting to the
state. Prohibits clinics from refusing to treat patients based on payment
source. Fiscal Impact: Overall annual effect on state and local governments
ranging from net positive impact in the low tens of millions of dollars to net
negative impact in the tens of millions of dollars.
VOTE
NO
A Union-backed Prop. Nuff said.
Proposition 9 -
Breaking California up into three states
This prop shouldn’t appear on the
ballot. A judge removed it making it invalid.
Proposition 10 -
Expands local governments' authority to enact rent control on residential
property
Repeals
state law that currently restricts the scope of rent control policies that
cities and other local jurisdictions may impose on residential property. Fiscal
Impact: Potential net reduction in state and local revenues of tens of millions
of dollars per year in the long term. Depending on actions by local
communities, revenue losses could be less or considerably more.
VOTE
[HELL] NO!
The “make rent affordable” talk is a
lie. Rent Control has destroyed every neighborhood its been implemented on. If
there’s only one thing you vote on, this is it, and make sure its NO!
Proposition 11 -
Requires private-sector emergency ambulance employees remain on-call during
work breaks. Eliminates certain employer liability
Law
entitling hourly employees to breaks without being on-call would not apply to
private-sector ambulance employees. Fiscal Impact: Likely fiscal benefit to
local governments (in the form of lower costs and higher revenues), potentially
in the tens of millions of dollars each year.
VOTE
YES
If a private team can be there before
the public team can, why not? Current law tells them to standby while the
public sector ambulances get first dibs. Lives at stake, folks. Get there ASAP!
Proposition 12 -
Establishes new standards for confinement of specified farm animals, bans sale
of noncomplying products
Establishes
minimum requirements for confining certain farm animals. Prohibits sales of
meat and egg products from animals confined in noncomplying manner. Fiscal
Impact: Potential decrease in state income tax revenues from farm businesses,
likely not more than several million dollars annually. State costs up to $10
million annually to enforce the measure.
VOTE
NO
I
have nothing more to say other than to avoid more government intrusion.
-Andres Segovia
Twitter: @TheNewsReel
Google+ The NewsReel Info
YouTube: The NewsReel
No comments:
Post a Comment