No on March Prop 13!

No on March Prop 13!
Voting has begun for the March Primary Election in California. There is one proposition on the ballot- Prop 13. No, not THAT Prop 13. This Prop 13 is a $15 billion school facilities bond, but if passed it could raise your property taxes. The CFRW OPPOSES Prop 13 on the March Primary Ballot. CLICK HERE to read our rationale in our last Capitol Update or CLICK HERE for a PDF print out. Here are some Talking Points to educate voters and to encourage them to VOTE NO on Prop 13!


No on Prop 13 Talking Points

• This is not the same Prop 13 that protects our property taxes, but this Prop 13 could RAISE your property taxes if passed. This $15 billion school facilities bond has language buried deep within the measure that allows school districts to borrow more money from the state- almost double what they can borrow currently by law. This debt increase will raise YOUR property taxes, because these types of local school bonds must be paid back by local property taxes. It shows up on your property tax bill as "Voted Indebtedness".
• This is a general obligation bond. That means that California taxpayers pay it back over 30 years. With the $27 billion in interest this bond will generate, Prop 13 will cost the taxpayers $740 million a year from the General Fund. Bond debt must be paid back before other General Fund programs get funded, meaning there is less money for law enforcement, social services, and other government funded programs.
• If passed, Prop 13 gives funding priority to school districts who use Project Labor Agreements, or PLAs. Union construction bids are often, if not always, higher and more costly than non-union bids. Yet Prop 13 would give them an edge up, which is an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars.
• The state already has $7.8 billion in unsold, unused school facilities bond monies, already allocated for the construction, upgrades, and retrofitting of California schools. Shouldn't we use that bond money first?
• California has $90 billion in bond debt. We pay back $6 billion a year to settle our debt from our General Fund. Do we really need to add to that? Have all other options or solutions been exhausted? We think not.