CBIA Takes Position on Two Ballot Measures
Sept. 24, 2010
CBIA has taken an official position on two ballot measures in the November election, supporting Proposition 22 and opposing Proposition 25.
Although several initiatives were reviewed, no other positions were taken. That includes Proposition 23, which repeals AB 32. In light of the support of SB 375, it was concluded that the appropriate position on Prop. 23 be neutral.
Proposition 22, which is supported by CBIA, prohibits the State from taking funds used for transportation or local government projects and services. Proponents are Joshua Shaw, Christopher K. McKenzie and James N. Earp.
The measure prohibits the State from shifting, taking, borrowing or restricting the use of tax revenues dedicated by law to fund local government services, community redevelopment projects, or transportation projects and services. It prohibits the State from delaying the distribution of tax revenues for these purposes even when the Governor deems it necessary due to a severe state fiscal hardship.
Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Significant constraints on state authority over city, county, special district and redevelopment agency funds. As a result, higher and more stable local resources, potentially affecting billions of dollars in some years. Commensurate reductions in state resources, resulting in major decreases in state spending and/or increases in state revenues.
Proposition 25, which CBIA opposes, changes the legislative vote requirement to pass a budget from the current two-thirds to a simple majority. It also retains the two-thirds vote requirement for taxes. Proponents are James C. Harrison and Thomas A. Willis.
In addition to changing the legislative vote requirement necessary to pass the state budget from two-thirds to a simple majority, it provides that if the Legislature fails to pass a budget bill by June 15, all members of the Legislature will permanently forfeit any reimbursement for salary and expenses for every day until the day the Legislature passes a budget bill.
Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Unknown changes in the content of the state budget from lowering the legislative vote requirement for passage. Fiscal impact would depend on the composition and actions of future Legislatures. Minor reduction in state costs related to compensation of legislators in years when the budget bill is passed after June 15.
To view the full text of the 2010 ballot measures, go to the Secretary of State's website at www.sos.ca.gov.
