Important
Information About
Proposition 13
On March 7,
1999 voters in California will have the opportunity to decide on
many important ballot issues. Among those issues will be Proposition
13.
This act was
placed on the ballot after receiving bipartisan support in the legislature
-the Assembly approved it by a vote of 68 in favor and 11 against
while the Senate voted 30 in favor and 6 against. It was then signed
by Governor Gray Davis.
Proposition
13 would provide $1.97 billion for a safe drinking water, water
quality, flood protection, and water reliability program.
Supporters
of Proposition 13 say:
- It helps
meet safe drinking water standards to protect public health;
- It fights
pollution in lakes and rivers along our coast, protects water
quality from pesticides and agricultural drainage, improves water
treatment plants, cleans up urban streams and controls seawater
intrusion into clean water supplies;
- It provides
new water through conservation, recycling, underground storage
and better use of reservoirs;
- Flood protection
programs will protect lives and avert billions of dollars in property
damage;
- Wetlands
and other natural habitats are protected;
- It is a fiscally
responsible investment that does not raise taxes, qualifies California
for new federal funds and limits administrative costs.
Opponents
of Proposition 13 say:
- This measure
should not be confused with Proposition 13, the legendary 1978
initiative to cut property taxes;
- These programs
could have been funded out of the state's budget surplus;
- If you read
the fine print, Prop 13 looks a lot like a "pork barrel project".
Here and there a project may be worthwhile, but voters nave no
way of judging;
- This proposition
will cost taxpayers a lot of money;
- Lands acquired
with Prop 13 funds shall be from a willing seller. We hope this
is the case. But too often governments force people to sell their
land by use of eminent domain and court-ordered condemnation.
Supporters
and Opponents
The ballot
arguments in support of Proposition 13 are signed by:
Governor Gray
Davis
Allan Zaremberg
President, California Chamber of Commerce.
Leslie Friedman
Johnson
Water Program Director, The Nature Conservancy
Larry McCarthy
President, California Taxpayers' Association
Jim Costa
Chairman, Senate Agricultural and Water Resources Committee
Michael J. Machado
Chairman, Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee
Contact: Larry
Sheingold, Californians for Safe, Clean, Reliable Water, (916) 484-3725,
<http://www.Prop13.org>.
The ballot
arguments in opposition are signed by:
Gail K. Lightfoot
Past Chair, Libertarian Party of California
Thomas Tryon
Calaveras County Supervisor
Ted Brown
Insurance Adjuster/Investigator
Dennis Schumpf
Director, Tahoe City Public Utility District
Contact: Ted
Brown, Libertarian Party of California (626) 614-0630, http://www.ca.lp.org
A YES vote means:
The state could sell $1.97 billion in bonds for a safe drinking
water, water quality, flood protection, and water reliability program.
A NO vote means:
The state could not sell bonds for these purposes.
Prepared
by the Planning and Conservation League.
|
