BEGIN AS A SUB COMMITTEE --
CENTER NIELSEN IS HERE -- AND AS
A SUB COMMITTEE WILL ENTERTAIN
THE FIRST AUTHOR AND I BELIEVE
THAT WAS SENATOR HILL WHO WAS
HERE.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND THIS
SHOULD BE -- SCA.
THREE GOOD MORNING -- SCA THREE
AT ITS CORE IS ABOUT EQUITY AND
FAIRNESS HE PROPOSES TO MODIFY
THE PROPERTY TAX INHERITANCE
EXCLUSION LAW PROSPECTIVELY. TO
REQUIRE CHILDREN AND
GRANDCHILDREN THAT INHERITED
FROM A HOME TO ACTUALLY LIVE IN
THE HOME IN ORDER TO KEEP THEIR
PROP THIRTEEN BASE YEAR.
AND TO AVOID REASSESSMENT.
CALIFORNIA IS THE ONLY STATE IN
THE COUNTRY THAT ALLOWS PARENTS
TO LEAVE THEIR HOME TO A CHILD.
AND NOT HAVE THAT HOME
REASSESSED.
YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND
STRUGGLING FIRST TIME HOME
BUYERS ALL HAVE TO PAY PROPERTY
TAXES ON THE FULL VALUE OF THEIR
HOMES.
IT SEEMS BLATANTLY UNFAIR THAT
SOMEONE COULD INHERIT AHOME
THEY DON'T EVEN WANT TO LIVE IN
AND PAY A FRACTION OF PROPERTY
TAXES.
THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS TO ADDRESS
CA THREE IF A CHILD GRANDCHILD
INHERIT THE PROPERTY WANTS TO
KEEP THEIR PARENTS GRANDPARENTS
ASSESSED VALUE FOR PROPERTY
TAXES.
IT WOULD HAVE TO LIVE IN THE
HOME AS THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCE
WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS OF
INHERITING THE PROPERTY.
IS ADDITIONAL TWELVE MONTHS
ALLOWS THE CHILD OR GRANDCHILD
TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS AND DECIDE
IF THEY WANT TO MOVE INTO THE
HOME IF THEY DECIDE TO RENT OUT
THE HOME IT WOULD.
IT WOULD BE RECESSED TO MARKET
VALUE.
AND THE PROPERTY TAXES WOULD BE
ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY.
PROP FIFTY EIGHT WHICH PASSED IN
NINETEEN EIGHTY SIX WAS DESIGNED
TO KEEP A HOME IN THE FAMILY AND
ALLOW CHILDREN TO BENEFIT FROM
THE ASSESSED VALUE WHEN PARENTS
DIE.
AND NOT BE IMMEDIATELY FACED
WITH THE EXORBITANT PROPERTY TAX
INCREASE.
HOWEVER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD
NOT HAVE TO BEAR THE BRUNT OF
THIS EXCLUSION WHEN THOSE THAT
INHERIT PROPERTIES ARE RENTING
THEM OUT FOR INCOME AND PROFIT.
THOSE THAT BENEFIT FROM A RENTAL
HOME FROM A PROPERTY THEY
INHERITED SHOULD HAVE TO PAY
THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES LOCAL
POLICE.
FIRE LIBRARIES PARKS ETCETERA
ARE ALREADY FINANCIALLY
STRUGGLING ACROSS THE STATE.
AND SHOULDN'T SUFFER
UNNECESSARILY MORE BECAUSE OF
THIS INHERITANCE EXCLUSION LAW --
I DO HAVE WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
MISTER CHAIRMAN THANK YOU.
THANK YOU -- WITNESSES PORT.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIRMAN
COMMITTEE MEMBERS JENNIFER BAKER
WITH THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION PLEASED TO SUPPORT
THIS IMPORTANT MEASURE THAT
WOULD CLOSE THIS IMPORTANT
LOOPHOLE -- THAT WOULD ALLOW
SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO RECEIVE
ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUES
WHICH IN TURN MAKE THE
GUARANTEED -- PROP NINETY EIGHT
RESOURCES -- GO FURTHER FOUR
SCHOOLS -- CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS
ARE FUNDED FORTY FOURTH IN THE
NATION WHEN YOU FACTOR IN
INFLATION AND COST OF LIVING OUR
SCHOOLS ARE TRACK ARE STRUGGLING
THIS PROVIDES A MORE EQUITABLE
DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES THAT'S
GONNA HAVE A AND A MAJOR IMPACT
ON SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES WE
URGE YOUR SUPPORT [inaudible]
THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT
MISTER WOLF IS WAITING TO BE ON
THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE
FIREFIGHTERS WHICH WOULD
TRADITIONALLY FINDER SELLS ON
THESE ISSUES BUT A AND B. HAVE
THE CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
FIREFIGHTERS WE'RE IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE.
A PROPERTY TAX IS A VERY STABLE
FUNDING SOURCE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY
AND COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT
CALIFORNIA AND IS THE AUTHOR AND
SUPPORTER STATED I DON'T THINK
ANYONE CONTEMPLATED THAT THIS
WOULD BE A WAY THAT -- REVENUES
WILL BE DRAINED FROM SUPPORTING
THOSE VITAL SERVICES SO WE URGE
YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU.
HIGHLAND BEHALF OF THE SCHOOLS
ARE SOUNDS FINANCES SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
ABLE TO JAIL ON BEHALF OF SAN
FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT AND SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING DANIELLE CANDLE
KAISER ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA TAX REFORM
ASSOCIATION ALIGNING OUR
COMMENTS WITH OUR COLLEAGUE FROM
CALIFORNIA TAX CALIFORNIA
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION IN STRONG
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
THAT THAT WASN'T FREUDIAN WASN'T.
ALL RIGHT OTHERS IN SUPPORT.
SINGLE OTHERS IN SUPPORT OF
THOSE IN OPPOSITION YES MISTER
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS SAG MORNING AND
MISS BAM IT DID ASSUME CORRECTLY
DAVID WOLF WITH THE HOWARD
JARVIS TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION WE
ARE OPPOSED.
UNFORTUNATELY THE SCA THREE JUST
A COUPLE POINTS MEMBERS TO RAISE
WITH THIS BILL THIS MORNING
NUMBER ONE THIS IS A TAX
INCREASE.
UNQUESTIONABLY UNDENIABLY THIS
IS A TAX INCREASE OUR OPINION ON
THIS BILL MIGHT BE DIFFERENT IF
IT WAS TIED TO YOU PORTABILITY
IMPROVEMENTS OR IF IT WAS TIED
TO AN INCREASE IN THE HOMEOWNERS
EXEMPTION -- THAT MADE IT
REVENUE NEUTRAL BUT SUFFICE TO
SAY THOSE PROVISIONS ARE NOT IN
THIS BILL SO IT IS A TAX
INCREASE.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS YOU
KNOW WE ARE CONCERNED BECAUSE
PROPERTY OWNERS ALREADY PAYING
INCOME TAX ON PROPERTIES AT BAY
IT RAN OUT.
AND WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT
DOUBLE TAXATION BECAUSE
OBVIOUSLY FOR PROPERTIES THEY
RAN OUT UNDER THIS BILL ASSUMING
THE CHILD DOESN'T LIVE IN THE
HOME THERE WOULD BE A DRAMATIC
INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAXES.
WE DO BELIEVE THIS WOULD RESULT
IN DOUBLE TAXATION AND AGAIN IF
YOU'RE DOING THAT AIRBNB TYPE
SITUATION SHOULD ALREADY BE
PAYING INCOME TAX ON THESE
PROPERTIES AND WE THINK. ONE
TAXES ENOUGH IN THIS SITUATION
SO WE'D ASK FOR AN OVER.
THANK YOU MISTER WOLF LE LET'S
ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
SO MADAM SECRETARY.
NUMBER YOUR NUMBER HERE NIELSEN.
NIELSEN HERE HERTZBERG.
LABOR LABOR HERE STERN.
CAN'T WE HAVE.
THANK YOU -- OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION.
THOUGH IT IS AN OPPOSITION ALL
RIGHT BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS [inaudible]
SELLERS -- UPI'VE I'M SORRY SIR
LEYVA.
DON'T HAVE A QUESTION I JUST
WANTED TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS
THE ABIGAIL LOOKS LIKE SHE'S
DOING SO WELL AND I'M VERY HAPPY
FOR BOTH OF YOU.
SENATOR THANK YOU SO MUCH IT'S
MY DAUGHTER SHE'S REFERRING TO
IS BORN THREE MONTHS AGO SOME --
WELL CONGRATULATIONS -- FOLLOW
HIM ON FACEBOOK YOU GET TO SEE
ALL THE UPDATES AND HOW DURABLE
SHIAS.
WHAT WILL MAYBE WILL BE
FORTUNATE THAT?
MY GUESS IS YOU'LL BE BACK HERE
AGAIN ON SOMETHING ELSE SELF --
IN ABOUT ONE MINUTE HERE.
ANOTHER MINUTE SO ON THE MOON --
I DON'T THINK YOUR DAUGHTER
APPEAR THOUGH ANOTHER MINUTE --
SO QUESTION FOR FOR CENTER HELL
WHAT DO YOU DO HAVE AN ESTIMATE
AS TO WHAT WHAT THE REVENUE
IMPACT WOULD BE.
YOU KNOW I DON'T I THOUGHT IT
WAS ABOUT A BILLION DOLLARS A
YEAR BUT I'M NOT QUITE SURE OF
THAT -- I THINK IT'S ABOUT A
BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
MISTER WOLF DO YOU HAVE AN
ESTIMATE YEAH I MEAN THAT'S ALL
THE ESTIMATES THAT I'VE SEEN ON
THIS BILL IT'S KIND OF A
BALLPARK FIGURE.
BILLION IN IN EXPLAIN AGAIN HOW
THAT HOW THAT THERE'S DOUBLE
TAXATION.
WELL AGAIN -- AS STATED FOR
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE YOU KNOW
CHILDREN HER RENTING OUT THESE
PROPERTIES THEY SHOULD ALREADY
BE PAYING INCOME TAX -- ON THE
RENTAL DOLLARS THAT THEY RECEIVE --
FROM INDIVIDUALS RENTING OUT
THEIR PROPERTIES AND YOU KNOW
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN INCREASE
IN PROPERTY TAXES HERE -- YOU
KNOW UP TO FAIR MARKET VALUE IF
THE CHILD'S NOT LIVING IN THE
HOME AND THAT COULD BE A
DRAMATIC PROPERTY TAX INCREASE
SO WE DO VIEW THAT AS DOUBLE
TAXATION.
IS IS THAT OKAY I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND SO THERE WOULD BE
DOUBLE TAXATION ON ANY INCOME
PROPERTY ROUTE THIRTY INCOME TAX
AND PROPERTY TAX SO THAT WOULD
APPLY.
TO ANY INCOME PROPERTY IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- BUT AGAIN
THE POINT IS YOU'RE ALREADY
PAYING INCOME TAX ON THE RENTAL
ITSELF AND YEAH YOU ARE PAYING
OBVIOUSLY PROPERTY TAX ON THE
HOME BUT TO THE EXTENT YOUR
PROPERTY TAX COULD.
CONCEIVABLY DOUBLE OR MORE UNDER
THE SPELL DEPENDING ON HOW LONG
YOU'VE ON THE PROPERTY -- AND
YOU'RE ALREADY PAYING INCOME TAX
ON YOUR RENTAL REVENUE YEAH LIKE.
STILL TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD
AROUND WHY THAT'S NOT TRUE OF
EVERY SINGLE INCOME PROPERTY BUT
I'LL LEAVE THAT FOR NOW -- ALL
RIGHT OTHER QUESTIONS.
NUMBER ALL RIGHT -- IS OUR
MOTION -- I'M SORRY SENATOR DO
WOULD LIKE YOU KNOW I I WOULD
MISTER CHAIRMAN THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY.
IF I COULD READ THE LOS ANGELES
TIMES THERE WAS AN ARTICLE ONE
THIS ISSUE FROM -- BECAME UP --
KIND OF A HEADLINE A YEAR OR SO
AGO WHEN IT BECAME OBVIOUS THAT
THERE WAS A PROBLEM JOHN TO PAUL
THE HEAD OF THE HOWARD JARVIS
TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION.
THE THE FOUNDED BY THE DRIVING
FORCE BEHIND PROP TIRTEEN SAID.
ON THIS ISSUE I BELIEVE THE
INHERITANCE BENEFIT CONTINUES TO
PROTECT CHILDREN FROM LOSING
THEIR FAMILY HOMES TO TAXHIKES.
BUT EVEN HE WAS SURPRISED THE
PROVISION HAVE LED TO SO MANY
ERRORS USING THE PROPERTY AS
RENTALS HIS QUOTE.
THAT WAS PROBABLY NOT IN THE
VOTERS MINDS COULD PAUL SAID.
I ISSUE RIVAL MEMBERS.
THANK YOU SENATOR.
I BELIEVE IS A MOTION.
MOVED BY CENTER LEYVA.
I'M SICK TO VIEW CALL THE ROLL
MOTION IS TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS NUMBER.
AMBER GUY NIELSEN.
NIELSEN NO HERTZBERG.
LEYVA.
LEYVA AYE STERN STERN I MEASURE
KERRY.
THANK YOU -- CENTER HELL YOU
HAVE ANOTHER MATTER I DO THE
FUTURE THANK YOU VERY MUCH THIS
IS SCA -- FIVE WOULD ALLOW
SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICTS VOTERS.
HELLO AND HERE COMES THE JOINT
AUTHOR OF THIS MEASURE SCA FIVE
WOULD ALLOW SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DISTRICT VOTERS. TO
IMPOSE EXTEND OR INCREASE A
PARTIAL TAX WITH 55% VOTER
APPROVAL RATHER THAN THE CURRENT
TWO THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT
DESPITE STATE FUNDING INCREASES.
K. THROUGH TWELVE AND HIGHER
EDUCATION OVER THE PAST SIX
YEARS MANY SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND
COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICTS ARE
STRUGGLING TO MAINTAIN QUALITY
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.
DUE TO THESE PRESSURES AN
ESTIMATED TWO THIRDS OF SCHOOL
DISTRICTS WILL HAVE DEFICITS IN
FISCAL YEAR TWENTY NINETEEN
TWENTY AN EXTRAORDINARY NUMBER.
MANY DISTRICTS HAVE HAD TO LAY
OFF FOR FOR LOW TEACHERS AND
CLASSIFIED STAFF AND CUT
EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
WILL COMMUNITY COLLEGES SERVE
THE MOST VULNERABLE STUDENT
POPULATIONS.
THERE PER STUDENT FUNDING LEVELS
ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN SEE
ISSUE AND UC.
PARTIAL TAXES ARE ONE OF THE FEW
WAYS THE FEW WAYS THAT LOCAL
SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT ARE ABLE TO RAISE
REVENUE.
AND SUPPLEMENT FUNDS THEY
RECEIVE FROM THE STATE BUT THEY
REMAIN INACCESSIBLE TO MOST
COMMUNITIES GIVEN THE HIGH TWO
THIRDS VOTER THRESHOLD.
IF A 55% VOTING THRESHOLD HAD
PREVIOUSLY BEEN IN PLACE
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE PARTIAL TAX
MEASURES WOULD HAVE BEEN
APPROVED MORE THAN 80%.
OF THE TWENTY SIX LOCAL SCHOOL
PARTIAL TAX MEASURES THAT FAILED
IN CALIFORNIA.
FROM TWENTY TWELVE TO TWENTY
SEVENTEEN WOULD HAVE PASSED IF A
SUPERMAJORITY VOTE 55% WERE
REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL INSTEAD OF
A TWO THIRDS VOTE THRESHOLD.
SB FIVE IS FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT
FAIRNESS EXISTING LAW HAS
ENABLED A MINORITY OF VOTERS. TO
BLOCK EFFORTS TO PROVIDE VITAL
LOCAL EDUCATION FUNDING THIS IS
CONTRARY.
COLLEAGUES THIS IS CONTRARY TO
OUR DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES WITH
RESPECT WITH RESPECT TO
REQUIRING SUPERMAJORITY VOTES.
JAMES MADISON WROTE IN THE
FEDERALIST PAPERS QUOTE.
IT WOULD BE NO LONGER THE
MAJORITY THAT WOULD RULE.
THE POWER WOULD BE TRANSFERRED
TO THE MINORITY.
SIMILARLY ALEXANDER HAMILTON
WROTE QUOTE WHAT AT FIRST SIGHT
IT MAY SEEM A REMEDY.
IS IN REALITY A POISON TO GIVE A
MINORITY A NEGATIVE UPON THE
MAJORITY IS IN ITS TENDENCY. TO
SUBJECT THE SENSE OF THE GREATER
NUMBER TO THAT OF THE LESSER.
SB FIVE RETAINS THE REQUIREMENT
FOR SUPERMAJORITY APPROVAL OF
LOCAL SCHOOL PARTIAL TAXES BUT
THE LEGISLATION CHANGES THE
SUPERMAJORITY THRESHOLD. TO A
MORE REALISTIC PERCENTAGE.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK RIVAL MEMBERS
AND I DO HAVE A WITNESS.
THANK YOU PLACENTA AROUND.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMIC BECAUSE
ON AUTHOR I. IN -- CAME TO THE
SENATE AS A FORMER MEMBER OF THE
SCHOOL BOARD IN MY HOMETOWN IN
SANTA MONICA MALIBU.
AND WE SERVE DURING A VERY
DIFFICULT TIME I WAS ELECTED IN
TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT I THINK
THE STOCK MARKET HIT ITS CRASH
AND IN OCTOBER AND I WAS ELECTED
IN NOVEMBER.
AND ARE IN MY ENTIRE TIME ON THE
SCHOOL BOARD WAS SPENT TRYING TO
SHORE UP OUR FINANCES TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT HOW TO KEEP THE
PROGRAMS ALIVE DURING A VERY
DIFFICULT TIME.
YEAH YOU KNOW THIS WE THIS IS OF
TWO THIRDS A VERY HIGH THRESHOLD
TO DIFFICULT THRESHOLD TO ME
BECAUSE FOR EVERY ONE PERSON WHO
DOESN'T WANT.
TO I REYES ARE ON TAXES YOU GOT
TO FIND TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE
WILLING TO VOTE -- TO TO TO
RAISE OUR ON TAXES -- IT SCHOOLS
ARE NOT DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT
OF CITIES IN TERMS OF REVENUE
GENERATION THEY THEY THEY YOU
KNOW THEY CAN'T.
INCREASED PARKING METER FEES ARE
TRANSIT OCCUPANCY FEES OR OR YOU
KNOW NEW TAXES ON THE CAR
DEALERSHIPS THAT EXIST IN THE IN
TOWN THEY CAN'T PUT ON THE
BALLOT GENERAL USE TAXES FOR A
**** WITH A MAJORITY VOTE --
THIS IS THE ONLY THING THAT'S AT
THE DISPOSAL OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS
TO ACTUALLY RAISE MONEY LOCALLY
THROUGH -- YOU KNOW -- THE AT
THE DAY GOES RIGHT TO THE
GENERAL FUND IN ORDER TO BUILD
NEW BUILDINGS I WILL YOU KNOW
THAT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
THAT IS A 55% VOTE FOR BONDS.
THAT WAS DONE STATEWIDE A WHILE
BACK -- BUT WHEN IT COMES TO
ACTUALLY TRY TO RAISE MONEY FOR
THE GENERAL FUND WHICH IS WHAT --
YOU NEED TO OPERATE AN
INSTITUTION LIKE A SCHOOL
DISTRICT I THE ONLY LOCAL OPTION
THAT YOU HAVE BESIDES PRIVATE
SECTOR PHILANTHROPY.
IS -- IS IS IS THIS PARCEL TAX
AND I THINK IT'S AN IMPERFECT
SYSTEM.
BUT UNTIL WE DO AN OVERHAUL OF
THE WAY WE FUND SCHOOLS -- THIS
IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF OF OF
THE OF THE MATRIX WE MADE A
MAJOR DECISION A COUPLE YEARS
AGO TO TOTALLY REVAMP THE WAY WE
FINANCE SCHOOLS.
IN THE STATE TO HAVE TO REDIRECT
FUNDING BASED ON LEVELS OF
POVERTY AND POCKETS OF POVERTY
AND CONCENTRATIONS OF POVERTY IN.
AT THE END THAT THAT THAT LED TO
SOME PRETTY DRAMATIC CHANGES TO
THE WAY WE FINANCE SCHOOLS.
BEFORE I THINK THERE WAS A
CONCERN THERE THERE'S A SERIES
OF EQUITY CONCERNS ABOUT
LOWERING THE YOU KNOW ABOUT
RELYING TOO MUCH ON PROPERTY ON
BY PERSONAL TAXES BUT WITH WITH
THIS NEW VERY STRONGLY
REDISTRIBUTIVE MODEL THAT WE
HAVE I THINK SOME OF THOSE
EQUITY CONCERNS ARE NOW -- MUCH
LESSER -- ON THE ON THE ON THE
ON THE FRONT BURNER AND AND THIS
IS AN OPPORTUNE THIS IS A WAY TO
GET MORE MONEY INTO OUR SCHOOL
SYSTEM.
AND AND IN IN THE END OF THE DAY --
IT'S REALLY ABOUT HOLDING FAITH
BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND SCHOOL
BOARD AND SCHOOL DISTRICT ANYONE
OF THESE TAXES CAN BE RESCINDED
A VOTER COULD NOT VOTERS COULD
COULD RISE UP AND AND BE A
RECEIPT AND A PARTIAL TAX IF
THEY WANT.
TO I WITH THE VOTE OF THE
POPULATION AND GET A MAJORITY
VOTE ACTUALLY -- YOU KNOW BUT
BUT BUT BUT IN THE END OF THE
DAYIF THE PEOPLE OF THE
COMMUNITY WANT TO WANT TO STEP
UP AND AND SHOW FAITH IN THEIR
SCHOOLS.
I AM AT A FEELS OTHERS
CONFIDENCE IN THE SCHOOLS THEY
OUGHT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO
THAT ME I HAVE ABILITY TO DO IT
IN A WAY THAT'S ACTUALLY
ACCESSIBLE -- 55% IS STILL A
VERY STRONG MARGIN IT'S NOT AN
EASY MARGIN TO MAKE -- BUT IT
IT'S MUCH MORE REASONABLE THAN
WHAT THE CURRENT RULES SPECIFY
AND BY THE WAY MEMBERS REMEMBER
ALL WE'RE DOING HERE IS GIVING
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY
CALIFORNIA.
THE RIGHT TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER
WE GOT A LOWERED THE THRESHOLD
OR NOT SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WE WOULD BE PUTTING ON THE
BALLOT. FOR STATEWIDE VOTE AND
THE PEOPLE COULD HAVE THE
DECISION AS TO WHETHER THEY WANT
WHAT THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE --
WITH THE CONTROLS TO DROP AT 55%
AND WITH THAT I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN ABOUT.
THANK YOU OTHERS IN SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR AT
JENNIFER BAKER WITH THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
AGAIN AND THIS IMPORTANT
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WOULD
PROVIDE A MORE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS TO THE WAY SCHOOL SEEK
COMMUNITY SUPPORT TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND PROGRAMS
TO THE CHILDREN THAT THEY SERVE.
CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS CONTINUE TO
BE FUNDED SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW
THE NATIONAL AVERAGE LEAVING
MANY SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHOUT
FOR THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT THEY
NEED TO PROVIDE OUR CHILDREN
WITH THE QUALITY PUBLIC
EDUCATION THAT THEY DESERVE.
OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE NOT
RECEIVING ADEQUATE FUNDING FROM
BOTH THE STATE AND THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT I SAW THIS MYSELF
WHEN I WAS A TRUSTEE TO THE
ENGINE THOMAS UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT SIMILARLY TO CENTER
ALLEN WHEN I WAS A TRUSTEE
DURING THE TOP DOT COM BUST.
WE WERE HAVING TO MAKE IT VERY
DIFFICULT DECISIONS -- REDUCING
THE NUMBER OF SERVICES THAT WE
NEEDED FOR CHILDREN AT THE VERY
TIME WE SAW THAT THEY ACTUALLY
NEEDED INCREASES IN THE
INVESTMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY YOU COULD -- GET THE
SUPPORT THEY NEED TO MAKE IT TO
THEIR EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS.
AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS KNOW
WHAT'S GOOD FOR THEIR KIDS IF
THEY WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY
TO DECIDE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO THEIR
SCHOOL DISTRICT THEY SHOULD HAVE
THE RIGHT TO DO SO.
SCA FIVE WOULD ALLOW SCHOOL
DISTRICTS THE TOOLS THAT THEY
NEED TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS
OUT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
CTA BELIEVE THIS MEASURES GOOD
FOR KIDS GOOD FOR SCHOOLS IN
GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY ON BEHALF OF
THE CTA IRISH OR SUPPORT.
IF YOU OTHERS IN SUPPORT GOOD
MORNING MY MONEY I CANNOT ON
BEHALF OF SAN DIEGO UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT AS HAS ALREADY
BEEN MENTIONED SCHOOL DISTRICTS
ACROSS THE STATE ARE GRAPPLING
WITH INCREASING COSTS.
AND FOR MANY DISTRICTS THE
GROWTH OF THESE COSTS AS FAR
OUTPACING THE REVENUES THAT WERE
RECEIVING ROM THE STATE.
PARCEL TAXES AS ALSO HAS ALREADY
BEEN SAID PERSONAL TAXES ARE ONE
OF THE FEW WAYS THAT SCHOOL
DISTRICTS ARE AND ABLE TO
GENERATE LOCAL REVENUES AND SCA
FIVE SIMPLY ALLOWS CALIFORNIA'S
VOTERS TO DECIDE.
WHETHER OR NOT A 55% THRESHOLD
IS APPROPRIATE SO THAT SCHOOL
DISTRICTS CAN WORK WITH OUR
LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO PASS THESE
EFFORTS WE ARE TRY VOTE.
YOU.
GOOD MORNING NANCY TRIED
ASSISTING US ON BEHALF OF THE
COALITION FOR ADEQUATE SCHOOL
HOUSING THE CALIFORNIA RETIRED
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION AND THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS ALL IN
SUPPORT [inaudible]
YOU.
GOOD MORNING MARC OUTCOME HAVE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS ALSO N. STREET
SPORT.
GOOD MORNING SURELY DAM HALF THE
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL VERSUS STATION
SUPPORT.
SERRA BOTCHES WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL
BUSINESS OFFICIALS AND SUPPORT.
GOOD MORNING HOW HIGHLAND ON
BEHALF OF THE SCHOOLS SCHOOLS
FOR SOME FINANCE TORRANCE
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FRESNO
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE
OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU MARK MCDONALD ON
BEHALF OF THE PERALTAFOOTHILL
DE ANZA AND SAN DIEGO COMMUNITY
COLLEGE DISTRICTS.
THANK THE AUTHOR FOR INCLUDING
COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICTS IN
THIS MEASURE AS WELL AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU.
BRIAN MICHAEL ANY OF THE
COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA
IN SUPPORT.
MORNING NICK RAMLI ON BEHALF OF
THE SMALL SCHOOL DISTRICTS
ASSOCIATION THE SAN BERNADINO
COUNTY DISTRICT ADVOCATES FOR
BETTER SCHOOLS AND ALSO ON
BEHALF OF THE COUNTY OFFICES OF
EDUCATION AND MONTEREY.
CONTRA COSTA SANTA CLARA AND
VENTURA COUNTIES ALL IN SUPPORT.
EVA JAIL KAPPLE ADVISERS ON
BEHALF OF SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT NORWALK Là
MARADA UST ALAMEDA COUNTY OFFICE
OF EDUCATION AND THE SCHOOL
EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT -- SEEING NONE
OPPOSITION.
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS COME MORNING
AGAIN DAVID WILL FOR THE HARRY
JARVIS TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION
OPPOSED TO U. S. C. A FIVE
MEMBERS OF ME JUST START BY
SAYING EDUCATION FUNDING ON A
PER CAPITA BASIS HAS INCREASED
BY 30% SINCE PROP THIRTEEN
PASSED IN.
NINETEEN SEVENTY EIGHT SO WE CAN
BLAME PROP THIRTEEN FOR A LOT OF
THINGS BUT WE CERTAINLY CAN'T
BLAME PROP THIRTEEN FORD
DECLINES IN EDUCATION FUNDING
IT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE -- MEMBERS
WE KNOW GOVERNMENT DOES HAVE THE
POWER TO TAX ITS CITIZENS AND
THE TRANSFER OF WEALTH FROM THE
PEOPLE WHO BURNED IT WE KNOW
THAT AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT THIS
POWER SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN
LIGHTLY.
AND SHOULD BE USED VERY
CAREFULLY.
A TWO THIRDS VOTE FOR A WILL
TAXES SIMPLY INSURERS DILIGENCE --
WALKER BEFORE TAXES ARE PROPOSED
IN VOTED ON MEMBERS TO BE CLEAR.
WE DON'T OPPOSE SPECIAL TAXES
THAT RECEIVED A TWO THIRDS VOTE
WE DON'T OBJECT TO THAT ORANGE
COUNTY.
HAS PASSED TRANSPORTATION SALES
TAXES TWICE WITH A TWO THIRDS
VOTE -- THERE HAVE BEEN A LARGE
MAJORITY OF EDUCATION PERSONAL
TAXES APPROVED IN NOVEMBER
ELECTION SINCE.
TWENTY TWELVE SO CLEARLY TAX
THRESHOLDS CAN BE HIT WITH A TWO
THIRDS VOTE WE'RE FINE WITH THAT.
MEMBERS ARE WE TAKE UMBRAGE WITH
THE OUR STATEMENTS SUPPORTERS OF
MADE THAT SOMEHOW IMMATURITY
VOTE IS THE ONLY FAIR EQUITABLE
AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO GOVERN.
IT'S BEEN STATED -- YOU KNOW THE
DISCUSSION ABOUT DEMOCRATIC
PRINCIPLES.
DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES
HISTORICALLY HAVE REQUIRED A TWO
THIRDS VOTE IN MANY MANY
CIRCUMSTANCES THERE'S A TWO
THIRDS VOTE TO OVERRIDE A
GUBERNATORIAL VETO OR TO PASS
MOST MOST VOCAL BONDS HERE IN
CALIFORNIA.
ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL IT TAKES A
TWO THIRDS VOTE TO APPROVE A
TREATY OR START A CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT OR CONVICTED IMPEACH
OFFICER ALSO REQUIRES A TWO
THIRDS VOTE.
IT TAKES A UNANIMOUS JURY VOTE
IN MOST CAPITAL CRIMINAL CASES.
SAID THERE'S WIDE PRECEDENT YOU
KNOW IN MANY DIFFERENT
GOVERNMENT INTERACTIONS -- WHERE
A MAJORITY VOTE IS NOT
SUFFICIENT AND A HIGHER
THRESHOLD IS NEEDED?
SO WHY SHOULDN'T THERE BE AYE
HIGHER TWO THIRDS VOTE THRESHOLD
FOR ONE OF GOVERNMENT'S MOST
IMPORTANT POWER. TO TAKE
PROPERTY IN THE FORM OF TAXES
FROM ITS CITIZENS -- AGAIN.
THE ARGUMENTS BEEN MADE HERE AT
THAT THE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN WITH A
TWO THIRDS VOTE AS HAS BEEN
STATED THEY DO WAY AND THEN A
MAJORITY THESE EDUCATION
PERSONAL TAXES.
LOCAL YOU DO PASSED WITH A TWO
THIRDS VOTE IN RECENT MEMORY AND
THAT TREND IS CONTINUING AND WE
EXPECTED TO CONTINUE.
ALRIGHT MR MAY FILL IN THE GAPS
HERE A LITTLE BIT ON SOME OF THE
OTHER ARGUMENTS BUT YOU KNOW
JUST TO MAKE THE POINT FINALLY
THAT PERSONAL TAXES ARE VERY
REGRESSIVE.
WHY DO YOU OWN A ONE BEDROOM
HOUSE OR A MILLION DOLLAR
MANSION YOU PAY THE EXACT SAME
AMOUNT OF PERSONAL TAXES --YOU
KNOW THEY'RE PUNITIVE THEIR
AGGRESSIVE THEIR ADDED ON TO
PROPERTY TAX BILL IS ABOVE AND
BEYOND PROP THIRTEEN FROM
PERCENT CAP -- ADDING HUNDREDS
OF DOLLARS TO BILLS YEAR MAKING
IT MORE EXPENSIVE TO AFFORD
HOMES SELL FOR ALL THESE REASONS
FOR ASK FOR AN OF A THEY GIVE US
TWELVE OTHERS IN OPPOSITION. TO
RESTORE MAY REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION
GOOD MORNING MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS.
WHILE WE APPRECIATE THE DESIRE
FOR A QUALITY EDUCATION WE HAVE
THREE PRIMARY CONCERNS WITH THIS
BILL THE FIRST CONCERN IS THIS
BILL WOULD FACILITATE TAX
INCREASES THAT THEN RESULT IN
HIGHER HOUSING COSTS FOR
CALIFORNIANS.
BOTH IN TERMS OF HOMEOWNERS THAT
THEN CAN BE.
CALIFORNIA HAS THE TENTH HIGHEST
PROPERTY TAX BURDEN IN THE
NATION AND THIS BILL BY
FACILITATING PARTIAL TAX
INCREASES WOULD MAKE THAT
PROBLEM EVEN WORSE THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
HAVE TALKED ABOUT HOW TO MAKE
CALIFORNIA HOUSING MORE
AFFORDABLE.
THIS TAKES US IN THE WRONG
DIRECTION MAKING CALIFORNIA LESS
AFFORDABLE FOR ALL.
OUR SECOND CONCERN IS THAT A
CHANGE TO THE VOTE THRESHOLD IS
NOT NECESSARY.
CURRENTLY BASED ON HISTORICAL
DATA BASED ON THE CITY FINANCES
AND THE LOADER.
SKEWS ME THE LOCAL VOTER BALLOT
MEASURE 75% OF ALL LOCAL TAXES
HAVE PASSED AND THAT'S GOING
HISTORICALLY ALL THE WAY BACK TO
THE EARLY. NINETEEN SEVENTIES
ALL THE WAY TO TWENTY EIGHTEEN
IN THE MOST RECENT LOCAL
ELECTIONS -- ALSO SCHOOLS
ALREADY HAVE A SPECIAL CARVE OUT.
FOR SPECIAL TAXES LOCAL CITIES
AND COUNTIES ARE REQUIRED. TO
PASS VOTE TO PASS WITH A TWO
THIRDS VOTE BUT CURRENTLY SCHOOL
DISTRICTS ALREADY HAVE A 55%
CARVE OUT FOR SCHOOL BONDS THE
LAW IN THE VOTE THRESHOLD IS NOT
NECESSARY AND ALSO IT PUTS LOCAL
CITIES AND COUNTIES AT A
POTENTIAL DISADVANTAGE.
LANCE.
THE LAST CONCERN THAT WE HAVE IS
ACCORDING TO THE PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE POLL.
THAT WAS CONDUCTED IN MARCH.
TWENTY EIGHTEEN THE VAST
MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIA VOTERS
SUPPORT KEEPING A TWO THIRDS
VOTE THRESHOLD.
ACROSS ALL DEMOGRAPHICS
REPUBLICANS INDEPENDENTS AND
DEMOCRATS AS WELL AS THROUGHOUT
THE STATE IN SUMMER CISCO LA AND
THE CENTRAL VALLEY VOTERS
UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORT.
KEEPING THE TO THE WORD TWO
THIRDS VOTE THRESHOLD
[inaudible]
THANK YOU.
KAREN MEMBERS DOMINIC TOMORROW
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
TERMS CLOSE ASSOCIATION OPPOSE
UNLESS AMENDED.
MORE WISHING THAT WE HAD BEEN
SUPPORT IF AMENDED I WOULDN'T
SUCH AS SELF CONSCIOUS BEING UP
HERE BY MYSELF IN THE BACKGROUND
BUT THE AUTHOR STATED THAT THIS
IS A MATTER OF FAIRNESS IN A
MATTER OF DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES
AND WHAT WE WOULD ASK IS. TO
MAKE THE BILL MORE FAIR MORE
DEMOCRATIC ADD A PROVISION THAT
WOULD INCLUDE CHARTER SCHOOLS --
CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE OFTEN LEFT
OUT IN LOCAL PARCEL TAX --
MEASURES AND SINCE THEY ARE
PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THE PARENTS
OF CHARTER SCHOOL STUDENTS ARE
TAX PAYING INDIVIDUALS AND
HOMEOWNERS AROUND.
THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT
COMMUNITIES IN WHICH THE SCHOOLS
EXIST IT SEEMS LIKE A MATTER OF
FAIRNESS IT WOULD BE THE INCLUDE
CHARTER SCHOOLS AS RECIPIENTS OF
THESE DOLLARS.
IN THE MEASURE IN THERE FOR THAT
IS THE AMENDMENT THAT WE WOULD
ASK FOR SO AGAIN WE ARE OPPOSED
TO LISTEN MANDATE AND WE ARE.
VERY SIMPLE REQUEST IS ENDING
INCLUDING CHARTER SCHOOLS IN
THIS MEASURE THANK YOU.
SERRA BUT WITH CAL CHAMBER IN A
POSITION AT THIS TIME THANK YOU.
OTHERS IN OPPOSITION -- ME BACK
TO COMMITTEE.
QUESTIONS [inaudible]
THIS SISTER.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR THANK YOU
CENTER HERE ON ALLEN FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD -- IT
WORST WE'RE STILL STARVING OUR
EDUCATION SYSTEM SO THAT'S
THAT'S THE BASIC PREMISE.
AND CAPITALS NOT GONNA TAKE CARE
OF IT ALL HAVE TO FOR THE
OPERATION SO I'M THERE WITH YOU.
EXCITED TO SUPPORT WHEN ASKED
ABOUT MECHANICS WISE THE THE
CHARTERS -- IF IF A LOCAL.
OKAY EVAN DISTRICT WANTS TO
ASSESS ITSELF FOR THAT COMMUNING
WITH PROCESS ITSELF IT WOULDN'T
GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND THEN
AND THEN.
BE ELIGIBLE THE OTHER.
ANY PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORIZED IN
THAT AREA I I DON'T QUITE
UNDERSTAND THAT.
SO RIGHT NOW -- SO IF YOU LOOK
AT THE E. RIGHT NOW IN LOS
ANGELES FOR EXAMPLE -- THE
DISTRICT HAS A STRUCTURED THAT
PARTIAL TAX PROPOSAL AND IN A
WAY THAT WILL.
GIVE OUT WHATEVER MONEY IS
GENERATED -- BOUGHT A PER PUPIL
BASIS AND IN A CERTAIN PORTION
OF IT WILL GO TO THE CHARTER
SCHOOLS IN THE DISTRICT.
ON THE WAY THAT THAT THAT THAT
pBOARD MADE AND THEY OBVIOUSLY
NEGOTIATED THAT WITH THE CHARTER
FOLKS AS A WAY OF TRYING TO GET
EVERYONE ON BOARD TO SUPPORT THE
MEASURE.
I'M THAT THAT'S NOT REQUIRED
UNDER THE LAW.
AND I KNOW THAT CENTER HELL AND
ENTER FOLKS ARE HAVING
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS -- BUT
BUT RIGHT NOW THE LAW SAYS THAT
IT'S UP TO THE SCHOOL BOARD TO
MAKE THAT.
JUDGMENT CALL AS TO HOW IT
STRUCTURES THE THE THE THE
EXPENDITURES AFTERWARDS AND THAT --
IT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE
LOCAL DISTRICT YEAH OF COURSE.
OFTENTIMES THE VERY OFTEN THE
DISTRICT FINDS IT.
YOU KNOW IF IN THEIR INTERESTS
TO STRIKE THAT SIR TO DEAL WITH
THE CHARTER FOLKS SO AS TO BE
ABLE TO HAVE A STRONG COALITION
OF SUPPORT.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN WITH
MEASURE E. IN LOS ANGELES BUT
RIGHT NOW UNDER THE LAW IT'S
IT'S A DECISION THAT IS NOT PART
IS JUST LOW.
EXACTLY UNDERSTOOD OKAY THANK
YOU.
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DEFINITELY
CODES SENATOR AS ADD WHATEVER
THEY THEY CHOOSE WHATEVER THEY
FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THE
COMMUNITY AND CHARTERS COULD BE
PART OF THAT.
SO DO.
I I SUPPOSE THIS IS GILDING THE
LILY SO IS PERMISSIVE BUT NOT
REQUIRED.
UNDER CURRENT LAW UNDER OKAY
UNDER THIS BILL IN THE BILL IT'S
PERMISSIVE FOR CHARTERS TO BE
LIKE COLLUDED IT'S UP TO THE
DISTRICT.
TO HIGHLIGHT THAT TO INCLUDE
THAT IN THE MEASURE THAT THEY'RE
PUTTING BEFORE THE VOTERS --
OTHER QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A OF A QUESTION -- MISTO
MAY IF IF IF YOU WILL YOU IT
WOULD SAID THAT THIS MEASURE
WOULD PUT CITIES AND COUNTIES AT
A DISADVANTAGE I'M CURIOUS AS TO
HOW THAT.
HOW THAT WORKS?
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR UNDER
CURRENT CONSTITUTIONAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY OR COUNTY.
LOCAL DISTRICT OUTSIDE OF A
SCHOOL DISTRICT TO PASS A
SPECIAL TAX THE VOTE THRESHOLD
IS TWO THIRDS. FOR SCHOOL
DISTRICT TO PASS THIS TYPE OF
TAX.
LOWERING THAT 255% MEANS THAT
WHEN IT'S ON THE SAME BALLOT.
SHOULD A TAXPAYER PICK AGAINST
ATTACKS THAT IS A TWO THIRDS
VOTE OR 55% VOTE A LOT OF TIMES
THERE'S WHAT'S CALLED TAX OF TAX
TOLERANCE VOTER TOLERANCE.
AND WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT
THERE COULD BE TAXES FOR
TRANSPORTATION THAT IS A SPECIAL
DESIGNATED TAX REQUIRING TWO
THIRDS VOTE VERSUS A SPECIAL
DESIGNATED TAX FOR SCHOOLS ONE
IS THAT. TWO THIRDS AND ONE IS A
55%.
ALL RIGHT I SEE CENTER AL LOOKS
LIKE HE WAS UP ON RIGHT AND WITH
WITH SO MUCH RESPECT I I I I I
WOULD.
ANY CITY MANAGER WORTH HIS SALT
BECAUSE OF THE WAY OUR CURRENT
STRUCTURE AT EXIT EIGHTEEN YEAH
BECAUSE THE CURRENT STRUCTURE.
I THEY WOULDN'T GO FOR SPECIAL
TAX TO GO FOR A GENERAL SALES
AND USE TAXES ONLY REQUIRES A A
50% PLUS.
ONE VOTE -- SO IN THIS CASE
STILL THE SCHOOLS WOULD BE
DISADVANTAGED BECAUSE LEASE
WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT A 55%
THRESHOLD AS OPPOSED TO MAJORITY --
THRESHOLD SO I I AGREE WITH YOU
WITH REGARDS TO AND HOW THE
SUBJECT OPPOSED TO IT TO A
SPECIAL TAX BUT BUT BUT THE THE
SALES AND USE TAX FOR GENERAL
FUND PURPOSES IS SUCH A OF AN
EASIER THRESHOLD THAT MANY
CITIES ARE NOW AVAILING
THEMSELVES OF THAT OPTION.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE
FAIR COMPARISON AND IN THAT
COMPARISON THE SCHOOLS WOULD
STILL BE DISADVANTAGED UNDER
THIS.
I SCA WAS C. MISTEL MAY OF THE
OF GIVE YOU THE LAST WORD OUR
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR THERE IS
QUITE A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
GENERAL TAXES AND SPECIAL TAXES
AS WE KNOW A LOT OF TIMES JUST.
EIGHT GENERAL TAX ALTHOUGH IT IS
A 50% MAJORITY VOTE -- BECAUSE
IT DOESN'T GO TO A SPECIFIC
PURPOSE VOTERS ARE LESS LIKELY
IF THEY DON'T SEE THE RESULT IN
A NEW ROAD.
AND YOU KNOW -- NEW STREET
LIGHTS OR WHATEVER.
IF THE PURPOSE IS NOTSPECIFIED
THERE'S LESS CHANCE FOR THE
VOTER TO BE INCLINED TO VOTE FOR
THAT ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE ARE
OTHER COMPETING TAXES ON THE
BALLOT.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR.
THANK YOU ALL RIGHT OFSENATORS
WOULD LIKE CLOSE DOING DO IT
TOGETHER YOU INTO YOUR CLOSE
TOGETHER.
WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT TO GET ON
WE DO A DANCE ROUTINE BY ABOUT
ARM THE I MEAN I JUST THINK THAT
THAT THE THE FACTS ARE CLEAR
THAT THIS IS ABOUT FAIRNESS IT
IS ABOUT EQUITY AND YOU KNOW
MISTER WOLF MENTIONED THAT TO
TWO TWO THIRDS VOTE ASSURES.
DILIGENT FORWARD IT REALLY DOES
IS IT IS IT IS SURE IS THAT THE
MINORITY.
pTHE MAJORITY THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR
COUNTRY'S ABOUT THAT'S NOT WHAT
OUR DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT THE
MINORITY SOULD NOT BE MAKING
THOSE DECISIONS.
AND THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE
OF OF OF OF OUR TAX SYSTEM IS
CERTAINLY A AN APPROPRIATE USE
OF THE ELECTIONS AND AND THE
NEEDIS SO GREAT TODAY.
IN OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM THIS
IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING BACK
THE FAIRNESS IT'S NECESSARY SO
THAT WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE
THE GOALS THAT WE HAVE AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK.
FOR THANK YOU SIR HELLO SIR
ALLAN WHAT HE SAID.
ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU -- I BELIEVE THERE WAS
A MOTION THAT WAS IT SENATOR
STERN MOVES -- ALL RIGHT MA'AM
SIR TO BE CULTURAL.
MOTION IS TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS NUMBER.
NUMBER GUY NIELSEN.
NIELSEN NO HERTZBERG.
LEYVA.
LEYVA AYE STERN STERN I ALL
RIGHT -- WILL LEAVE THE ROLE
OPEN SEVEN HERTZBERG WAS HERE A
MOMENT AGO SELF.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR THANK YOU
COLLEAGUES [inaudible]
SENATOR ALLEN.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS A TWO THIS IS SCA TO
RELATING -- TO RECALLS I I FIRST
WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE
STAFF FOR ALL THE HARD WORK ON
THE BILL [inaudible]
AND AT THIS THIS BILL.
BASICALLY IS MODELED AFTER A
SYSTEM.
THAT WE SEE IN ARIZONA NEVADA
NORTH DAKOTA AND WISCONSIN.
AND IT IT SIMPLIFIES OUR CURRENT
RECALL PROCESS FOR STATE
OFFICIALS AND ENSURES THAT THE
CANDIDATE WHO ACTUALLY HAS THE
MOST VOTES ON ELECTION DAY.
THE RECALL ELECTION DAY WINS THE
SEAT.
SO CALIFORNIA'S ONE NINETEEN
STATES THAT PERMIT THE RECALL
STATE OFFICIALS.
MAJORITY STATES DON'T
INTERESTINGLY -- THEY THAT THOSE
STATES RELY ENTIRELY UPON
IMPEACHMENT.
HAS -- FORM OF REMOVAL FROM
OFFICE -- THE FRAMERS -- THOUGH
HERE IN CALIFORNIA THE FRAMERS
THE RECALL.
YOU KNOW THEY WANTED THERE TO BE
THIS OPPORTUNITY FOR VOTERS TO
WEIGH IN BUT BUT IT BUT IF YOU
LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL INTENT.
AND AND THE DISCUSSIONS AND
DEBATES OVER THE FRAMING OF OUR
RECALL RULES.
I THAT THE FRAMERS DID WANTED TO
BE A TOOL THAT WAS WAS ONLY USE
UNDER EXTRAORDINARY
CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND AND IT TIGHTLY TALKED ABOUT
MALFEASANCE IN A AND CORRUPTION
AND AND AND THAT SORT OF THING.
NOW.
I THINK THERE BEEN SOME CONCERNS
RAISED RECALLS HAVE BEEN USED
BOTH AGAINST.
DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS --
SOMETIMES AROUND ONE VOTE --
THAT CAN LEAD TO ABUSES BY WELL
FINANCE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS --
ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS
THOUGH -- IS A IS ABOUT THE
MECHANICS.
AND THAT'S THE FACT THAT WE HAVE
THIS VOTER CONFUSION ASSOCIATED
WITH THIS TWO PART QUESTION
ANYBODY WHO WAS INVOLVED WITH
THE JEFF DENHAM OR THE JOSH
NEWMAN.
I RECALL CAMPAIGN OR THE OR THE
GRAY DAVIS RECALL CAMPAIGNS
REMEMBER THAT IT WAS VERY
DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN A LOT OF
VOTERS DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND
THE FACT THAT THEY WERE VOTING
TWICE.
I IN FACT IN THE RECENT RECALL
DOWN.
IN ORANGE COUNTY -- THERE WAS A
A 30% DIFFERENCE A 30% DROP IN
THOSE WHO VOTED ON QUESTION ONE
VERSUS QUESTION TOO SO 30% LESS.
OF THE VOTERS -- VOTED ON
QUESTION TWO VERSES QUESTION.
ONE NOW I AND AND THIS LEADS TO
A CRAZY SYSTEM THAT WE CURRENTLY
HAVE UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM
MEMBERS.
IT IS IT IS [inaudible]
A FREQUENT.
THAT I A MEMBER THAT THAT THAT
THAT THAT SOMEBODY ENDS UP --
WITH MORE VOTES. TO KEEP THE
INCUMBENT IN OFFICE.
THEN THE PERSON WHO.
IS A REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE SO SO
THE THE MORE PEOPLE WHO VOTED NO
ON THE RECALL.
THEN THE PERSON WHO ACTUALLY END
UP REPLACING THE SITTING
INCUMBENT.
AFTER THE ELECTION.
YOU KNOW I'D GET.
YOU IF THEM PROBABLY ALL OF US
WOULD BE TURFED OUT OF OFFICE IF
IF IT WAS IF WE WERE RUNNING
AGAINST KIND OF A HYPOTHETICAL
PERFECT CANDIDATE BUT THE FACT
IS MEMBERS YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE
ALL HAVE TO RUN FOR OFFICE
AGAINST REAL PEOPLE.
AND VOTERS AFTER ACTION MAKE A
REAL CHOICE BETWEEN REAL PEOPLE
AND PERFECT AS WE ALL ARE.
AND THAT'S WHY YOU KNOW A
PRESIDENTIAL DISAPPROVAL
APPROVAL RATING IS IS IS A
FEMORAL AND AND NOT THAT
INSTRUCTED YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY
FIND OUT HOW DOES THAT PRESIDENT
HOW DOES THAT GOVERNOR HOW DOES
THAT LEGISLATOR ACTUALLY PAIR UP
AGAINST.
A POTENTIAL RIVAL A POTENTIAL --
AN ACTUAL POTENTIAL A CANDIDATE.
AND O THAT'S THE CRAZINESS OF
OUR CURRENT SYSTEM IS THAT WE
NOW ALLOW WE NOW HAVE A SYSTEM
WHEREBY.
WE REPLACE AN INCUMBENT WITH
SOMEBODY WHO OFTENTIMES HAS FAR
FEWER VOTES.
ON THE VERY SAME RECALL ELECTION
DAY THAN THE INCUMBENT.
WHO IS BEING TURFED OUT?
SO WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DO HERE
WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS
SHORTCOMING THIS CONFUSION IN
CALIFORNIA'S RECALL PROCESS AND
WE'RE GONNA WE WE SEEK TO FOLLOW
US A SIMPLER RECALL MODEL THAT'S
BEEN ADOPTED IN.
EASIER FOR STATES BY THE WAY
THAT ARE NOT YOU KNOW.
BEAR TRICK PURPLE YEAR OR EVEN
READ WRITE ARIZONA NEVADA NORTH
DAKOTA AND WISCONSIN.
THE IDEA IS THAT WE WOULD
ELIMINATE THE CONFUSING YES NO
RECALL QUESTION INSTEAD IF A
RECALL IS TRIGGERED BY A
SIGNATURE COLLECTION CAMPAIGN.
WE WOULD THEN WE WOULD THEN
PLACE THAT THAT WOULD TRIGGER A
RECALL AUTOMATICALLY.
IN ALL OF THE CANDIDATES BOTH
THE INCUMBENT AND ANY POTENTIAL
CHALLENGER WOULD THEN BE ON THE
BALLOT.
I AND WHOEVER GETS THE MOST
VOTES WOULD WIN THE ELECTED
OFFICE.
BY THE WAY MEMBERS ON RECALL
ELECTION DAY TWO THOUSAND AND
THREE ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER
ACTUALLY GOT MORE VOTES THAN
GRAY DAVIS -- SO SO MORE PEOPLE
VOTED TO MAKE ARNOLD
SCHWARZENEGGER GOVERNOR THEN
VOTED.
AGAINST THE RECALL OF GRAY DAVIS
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER UNDER THAT
CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD HAVE BEEN
ELECTED UNDER UNDER THE THE THE
ADDRESS YOU TO BUT WHAT WE WANT
TO DO IS MAKE SURE.
THAT IF WE ACTUALLY ARE GOING.
TO TO KICK SOMEBODY OUT.
THERE OUGHT TO BE REPLACED BY
SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS MORE
POPULAR SUPPORT.
THEN THE INCUMBENT HE'S BEING
TURFED OUT.
THAT'S A SIMPLE CONCEPT ARE IT'S
A CONCEPT THAT HAS BEEN -- IT
THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR MANY
YEARS SUCCESSFULLY IN UP IN A
AND A SLEW OF OTHER STATES
[inaudible]
AND WITHOUT I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU OF THOSE SUPPORT
[inaudible]
OPPOSITION.
QUESTIONS BY THE COMMITTEE.
NO ALL RIGHT IT'S MOVE BY CENTER
LEYVA -- NO QUESTIONS SURROUND
WAS LIKE CLOSE.
YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS THIS IS
THIS IS SIMPLY ABOUT ENSURING
THAT.
THE THAT THAT IF SOMEONE'S GOING
TO BE KICKED OUT OF OFFICE THEY
ARE THAT -- THEY OUGHT TO BE
REPLACED BY SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY
ENJOYS MORE POPULAR SUPPORT THAN
THEY DO.
ON THAT ALEXIAN DAY -- THIS WILL
MAKE OUR SYSTEM BETTER IT'S
MODELED AFTER WORKABLE SYSTEM%
AND FOR OTHER STATES AND AND I I
REALLY DO HOPE THAT YOU'LL FIND
YOUR WAY TO SUPPORT THIS TODAY.
THANK YOU CENTER ALLEN MAKES
SENSE TO ME -- MADAM SECRETARY
IF YOU WOULD CALL THE ROLL.
MOTION IS TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS UMBERG NUMBER GUY
NIELSEN.
NIELSEN NO HERTZBERG.
LEYVA LEYVA AYE STERN.
STERN I ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU MR KERRY'S -- THAT
CONCLUDES OFF [inaudible]
OUR THE CONSENT CALENDAR CONSENT
COUNTY YES -- ALL RIGHT IS THERE
MOTION SIR LEYVA MOVES.
MA'AM SECTOR IF YOU CALL THE
ROLL THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
SOME ITEMS ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR OR AB FIFTY SEVEN LOW
AB THREE THIRTY FOUR OBERNOLTE
AB NINE OH THREE LEVINE AB NINE
FORTY THREE ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS
AND REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE.
NUMBER HI NUMBER NINE NIELSEN.
NIELSEN I HERTZBERG.
LEYVA LEYVA EYES STERN STERN I
THAT REALLY DOES CONCLUDE THE
BUSINESS WILL WILL LEAVE THE
ROLE OPEN HERE FOR A FEW MOMENTS --
FOR SENATOR HERTZBERG AYE I SEE
HIS BINDER IS HERE SO HE MUST BE
IN THE ENVIRONS -- THE
COMMISSION
ITEM WHEN SCA TO
ALLEN MOTION IS TO PASS THE
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS CURRENT
LOTUS THREE EYES AND ONE NO WITH
THE CHAIR VOTING ONLINE.
HERTZBERG LINE.
ITEM TO SCA THREE HILL MOTION IS
TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS CRIME VOTES THREE
EYES AND ONE NO WITH THE CHAIR
VOTING AYE HERTZBERG
[inaudible]
I AM.
ITEM NUMBER THREE SCA FIVE HILL
MOTION IS TO PASS THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS THE CURRENT LOTUS
THREE EYES.
AND ONE KNOW WHAT THE SHARE
VOTING I HERTZBERG.
I AM.
IN ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
HERTZBERG.
HERTZBERG I THANK YOU ALL RIGHT.
GOOD WORK RETURNED THANK YOU