You are receiving this email because you subscribed on the HJTA website, or you provided your address in response to direct mail. Please see the bottom of this message to unsubscribe.

CONTRIBUTE >

Tonight at 6:00pm:

The Howard Jarvis Radio Show LIVE on

790 KABC & 560 KSFO and streaming online

Join HJTA President Jon Coupal and Vice President of Communications Susan Shelley for the Howard Jarvis Radio Show tonight at 6:00 p.m. LIVE on both 790 KABC in Southern California and 560 KSFO in Northern California.

You can also listen on your computer or mobile device at KABC.com and KSFO.com. If you miss the show, the recording will be available on the home page of HJTA.org, or you can download it (and subscribe!) wherever you get your podcasts.

Susan and Jon will be taking your phone calls, live on the air. Call in to the show at 1-800-222-5222. You can also email the show with your questions or comments at [email protected].

We look forward to hearing from you!

HJTA's QUICK GUIDE TO THE STATEWIDE PROPOSITIONS:

NO on 2, 4, 5, 6, 32, 33

YES on 34, 36

HJTA takes no position on 3, 35

Why the gap in the numbers?
Propositions 2 through 6 were placed on the ballot by the Legislature and given special numbering.
Propositions 32-36 are citizens' initiatives that were given sequential numbering from prior elections, as usual.

Click here for printable version

GENERAL ELECTION - NOVEMBER 5, 2024

Statewide Propositions

No on 2

Why we're against it

Proposition 2 is $10 billion of bonds, new state debt, to pay for school facilities. It is almost certain to result in higher property tax bills, because school districts must provide a "local match" of funds in order to receive money from the Prop. 2 state bonds. That will lead to districts issuing new local school bonds, which are paid for by adding new charges to property tax bills. Enrollment is declining in both K-12 district schools and community colleges and the declines are projected to continue. But Proposition 2 commits California to pay an estimated $18 billion, including interest, for school buildings that may not even be necessary. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 2. Click here for more from the HJTA team.

Proposition 3 - HJTA takes no position on this measure

Proposition 3 removes language from the state Constitution that defines marriage as between a man and woman. It adds the language, "right to marry is a fundamental right." According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, this measure has no effect on current law in California because of U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

No on 4

Why we're against it

This is the $10 billion "climate bond" that state politicians have long planned. California already has too much bond debt, over $78 billion outstanding as of January 1. Then $6.38 billion was added with Proposition 1 in March. Proposition 4 would add another $10 billion in bond debt to pay for climate "programs." It's reckless to use borrowed money, an estimated $18 billion with interest, to pay for "programs," including salaries for all the groups that receive the money. Bond financing only makes sense for necessary projects that will last more than the 30 years it takes to repay the debt. The governor has already declared a budget emergency because the state spends more than it takes in. Spending even more "on the credit card" is a bad idea. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 4. Click here for more from the HJTA team.

No on 5

Why we're against it

Proposition 5 is ACA 1, a direct attack on Proposition 13. It makes it easier to raise taxes by eliminating the longstanding two-thirds vote of the electorate required to pass local bonds (borrowed money that must be repaid with interest). All new bond measures for "infrastructure" (nearly everything is "infrastructure") and for public housing projects would pass with just 55% approval instead of the current 66.7%. Local bonds are paid for with extra charges on property tax bills, adding to the tax burden on homeowners and businesses, leading to higher rents for tenants and higher consumer prices for everyone. If Proposition 5 is not stopped, property tax bills are likely to go up after every election, forever. Proposition 5 will raise the cost of living in California, which already has the highest poverty rate in the country when the cost of living is taken into account. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 5. Click here for more from the HJTA team.

No on 6

Why we're against it

Proposition 6 bans mandatory work requirements for state prison inmates. It doesn't seem fair to further increase the burden on taxpayers by creating the conditions to negotiate higher wages for inmates who are paying off their debt to society by serving their sentences in state prison. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 6. Click here for more from the HJTA team.

No on 32

Why we're against it

Proposition 32 would raise California's hourly minimum wage from $16 to $18 and then adjust it annually for inflation. Unfortunately, raising the hourly minimum wage has sometimes reduced weekly wages as businesses cut hours and lay off workers. The best way to raise incomes in California is to stop driving job-creating businesses out of the state or into the ground. Raising the minimum wage is counter-productive. It also increases the state's expenses by raising government labor costs. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 32.

No on 33

Why we're against it

Proposition 33 is a rent control measure that would lead to a reduction in the supply of rental housing. It repeals a sensible 1995 law, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which put limits on rent control laws to ensure that housing providers could make a fair return on their investment and stay in business. Repealing Costa-Hawkins would mean cities could enact radical rent control, even on single-family homes and condos, and prevent property owners from resetting the rent to the market rate after a tenant voluntarily moves out. Proposition 33 would lead to a sharp reduction in new apartment construction as lenders evaluate financial risk due to potential rent control laws. That will worsen the housing shortage in California. Voters have already rejected this proposal twice before, in 2018 and 2020. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 33.

Yes on 34

Why we're for it

Some nonprofit healthcare organizations that receive federal funds to provide health care services have abused the system to spend large amounts of money on political causes. Proposition 34 would end this practice and require that healthcare providers spend most of the money they receive from a federal prescription drug discount program on direct patient care. VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 34.

Proposition 35 - HJTA takes no position on this measure

California currently taxes managed care organizations (MCOs) such as Anthem Blue Cross and others. The MCO tax is set to expire in 2026, and we expect the Legislature to make it permanent. Proposition 35 would also make it permanent but would require the revenue from the tax to fund Medi-Cal, the government health insurance program for low-income residents, instead of being used to close gaps in the state budget. About 14 million California residents rely on the Medi-Cal program for their health care needs.

Yes on 36

Why we're for it

Proposition 36 is the "Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act," backed by law enforcement groups and retailers. It makes thoughtful changes to Proposition 47 (2014), which reduced some theft and drug felonies to misdemeanors. Proposition 36 would get tougher on third offenses and also offer drug and mental health treatment as an alternative to incarceration. It would allow judges to sentence some individuals to state prison instead of county jail. The surge of retail theft, vehicle break-ins and open drug use on California's streets has increased the burden on first responders, and on taxpayers, as well as raising insurance costs throughout the state. VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 36.

Local Measures

In Alameda County

No on Berkeley Measure EE

Imposes a $0.13 per square foot tax increase on building improvements for pedestrian infrastructure. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

No on Berkeley Measure FF

Imposes $0.17 per square foot tax increase on residential building improvements and $0.25 per square foot tax increase on other properties for road repairs. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

No on Berkeley Measure GG

Imposes a tax increase of $2.9647 per therm of natural gas consumed in buildings larger than 15,000 square feet for decarbonization programs. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

In El Dorado County

No on South Lake Tahoe Measure N

Imposes a tax on properties that are used less than 182 days per year. This measure is a vacancy tax that uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

In Kings County

No on Avenal Measure B

Imposes a vacancy tax on property unused or unoccupied commercial spaces and uninhabited residences up to $1,000 per linear foot of frontage, transit occupancy tax of 15% and progressive business license fees from .05 percent to .475 percent of gross receipts for general municipal purposes. HJTA opposes all vacancy taxes.

In Los Angeles County

No on Measure A
Doubles the temporary sales tax for homelessness programs and makes the tax increase permanent. Raises the sales tax in L.A. County by $1 billion a year to pay for the same failed programs, permanently. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

No on Measure E
Raises property taxes by $60 per 1,000 square feet of your home for the County Fire Department. The County can pay for these needs without a tax increase. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

No on LAUSD Measure US
A property tax increase to pay for $9 billion in borrowing for the Los Angeles Unified School District. Will cost an additional $25 per $100,000 of assessed value of your home, on top of the current $128 per $100,000.

In Orange County

No on Orange Measure Z
A sales tax increase from 7.75% to 8.25%. City officials are running an annual budget deficit projected to be $26 million within 5 years.

In Sacramento County

No on Folsom Measure G
A sales tax increase of 1%, sponsored by "citizens." Measure G uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

In San Diego County

No on Measure G

Imposes a 0.5 percent transactions and use tax for public transportation infrastructure. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

No on National City Measure R

Imposes a parcel tax on property owners from $75 to $1,000 depending on property type for street and park purposes. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

In Sonoma County

No on Measure I

Imposes a 0.25 percent transactions and use tax for early childhood development and health programs. This measure uses the court-created loophole that weakened the two-thirds vote requirement for special taxes. HJTA opposes all so-called "Upland taxes" that undermine the original intent of Proposition 13.

In Sutter County

No on Yuba City Measure D

A 1% sales tax increase. The city can spend the tax revenue on anything, even pensions and pay raises; there is no legal requirement to spend the money on the priorities featured in the campaign advertising.

HJTA PAC ENDORSEMENTS FOR THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024 GENERAL ELECTION

Click here for the printable version.

U.S. CONGRESS

U.S. House of Representatives District 1
Doug LaMalfa

U.S. House of Representatives District 2
Chris Coulombe

U.S. House of Representatives District 3
Kevin Kiley

U.S. House of Representatives District 5
Tom McClintock

U.S. House of Representatives District 6
Christine Bish

U.S. House of Representatives District 13
John Duarte

U.S. House of Representatives District 14
Vin Kruttiventi

U.S. House of Representatives District 15
Anna Cheng Kramer

U.S. House of Representatives District 19
Jason Anderson

U.S. House of Representatives District 20
Vince Fong

U.S. House of Representatives District 22
David Valadao

U.S. House of Representatives District 23
Jay Obernolte

U.S. House of Representatives District 24
Thomas Cole

U.S. House of Representatives District 26
Michael Koslow

U.S. House of Representatives District 27
Mike Garcia

U.S. House of Representatives District 28
April Verlato

U.S. House of Representatives District 29
Benito Bernal

U.S. House of Representatives District 30
Alex Balekian

U.S. House of Representatives District 40
Young Kim

U.S. House of Representatives District 41
Ken Calvert

U.S. House of Representatives District 43
Steve Williams

U.S. House of Representatives District 45
Michelle Steel

U.S. House of Representatives District 47
Scott Baugh

U.S. House of Representatives District 48
Darrell Issa

U.S. House of Representatives District 49
Matt Gunderson

STATE SENATE

State Senate District 1
Megan Dahle

State Senate District 3
Thom Bogue

State Senate District 5
James Shoemaker

State Senate District 11
Yvette Corkrean

State Senate District 19
Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh

State Senate District 23
Suzette Martinez Valladares

State Senate District 25

Elizabeth Ahlers

State Senate District 27
Lucie Volotzky

State Senate District 37
Steven Choi

STATE ASSEMBLY

State Assembly District 1
Tenessa Audette

State Assembly District 3
James Gallagher

State Assembly District 4
Darren Ellis

State Assembly District 5
Joe Patterson

State Assembly District 7
Joshua Hoover

State Assembly District 8
George Radanovich

State Assembly District 15

Sonia Ledo

State Assembly District 22
Juan Alanis

State Assembly District 27
Joanna Garcia Rose

State Assembly District 30
Dalila Epperson

State Assembly District 33
Alexandra Macedo

State Assembly District 34
Tom Lackey

State Assembly District 36
Jeff Gonzalez

State Assembly District 37
Sari Domingues

State Assembly District 40
Patrick Gipson

State Assembly District 41

Michelle Del Rosario Martinez

State Assembly District 42
Ted Nordblum

State Assembly District 43
Victoria Garcia

State Assembly District 44
Tony Rodriquez

State Assembly District 46
Tracey Schroeder

State Assembly District 47
Greg Wallis

State Assembly District 51
Stephan Hohil

State Assembly District 55
Keith Cascio

State Assembly District 58
Leticia Castillo

State Assembly District 59
Phillip Chen

State Assembly District 60
Ron Edwards

State Assembly District 63
Bill Essayli

State Assembly District 70
Tri Ta

State Assembly District 71
Kate Sanchez

State Assembly District 72
Diane Dixon

State Assembly District 73
Scott Peotter

State Assembly District 74
Laurie Davies

State Assembly District 75
Carl DeMaio

State Assembly District 76
Kristie Bruce-Lane

State Assembly District 80
Michael Williams

COUNTY OFFICES*

Orange County Supervisor, District 1
Janet Nguyen

San Bernardino County Assessor-Recorder-Clerk
Dara Smith

*Due to the number of requests for endorsement we receive, HJTA does not generally endorse candidates for local (city and county) offices. On rare occasions, exceptions are made for candidates that have a long history of protecting Prop. 13.

Paid for by Protect Prop 13, a Project of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, No on Prop 5

Paid for by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association State PAC

Not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate

Don't forget to follow us:

Copyright (c) 2024 Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this message because you subscribed on the HJTA website, or you provided your e-mail address in response to direct mail. Please add us to your address book for future correspondence.

Our mailing address is:

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

621 South Westmoreland Avenue, Suite 200

Los Angeles, CA 90005

If you'd like to stop receiving email communications from HJTA, please UNSUBSCRIBE HERE.

** This is email id #421800 sent by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. To unsubscribe from this list, please reply to this email. **