From: Jay
To: Lara Weisiger
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Message re Item 5Q re Prop 5
Date: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 4:17:15 PM
Dear Madam City Clerk,
Please add the message below to tonight's Correspondence file re Prop 5.
Thank you.
Jay Garfinkle
Honorable Members of the Alameda City Council and residents of Alameda,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We have all heard the arguments endorsing Prop 5.
Now, if you want to hear the rest of the story, the anti-prop 5 arguments, you can sit in on Thursday evening’s Town Hall Zoom meeting sponsored by Catalysts for Local Control, a group of primarily Bay Area residents who have taken on the task of informing us about significant issues such as taxes and manipulation by our state and regional governments. Speakers at this meeting will include Susan Shelly, a Prop 5 expert, presenting the anti-Prop 5 arguments, and Tom Rubin, an expert on bond issues including not only Prop 5 but the several other bond measures that will appear on November’s ballot
The link to register for their free Town Hall series is: https://catalystsca.org/town-hall-2024/
Let’s be informed before we vote.
Jay Garfinkle
From: Jay
To: Lara Weisiger
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Item 5Q re Prop
Date: Monday, September 16, 2024 5:15:34 PM
Attachments: It is inappropriate for the City of Alameda to endorse the passage of Prop 5 - Copy.docx Good afternoon, Madam City Clerk.
I would appreciate it if you would include the attached file when you update the correspondence re Item 5Q regarding the possible endorsement of Proposition 5.
Thank you.
Jay Garfinkle
The scheme being employed to try to slip Proposition 5 past the voters of California comes directly from of the Legislators’ Handbook for Strategic Maneuvering. First, one starts with a simple and seemingly trivial but “necessary” action if the government is to accomplish a given laudable goal(s). In the case of Prop 5 the argument is that voters must make it easier for the legislature and other governing bodies to accomplish arguably laudable goals which in the case of Prop 5 include funding construction of affordable housing and downpayment assistant programs.
While many Californians might agree with these goals, they, the goals, are actually part of the classic legislative ploy designed to sucker voters into going along with the legislators’ real goal which in the case of Prop 5 is to make it easier for them to access more of the taxpayers’ money. And to do this they simply have to convince us to amend the California Constitution so as to convert the supermajority requirement to a fifty-five percent majority requirement which here in Alameda would continue to subject us to the tyranny of the majority which is what nearly happened when the leader of our three party-line Councilmembers failed to acquire the necessary fourth vote needed to establish the required supermajority. Had she been successful, they, the three-member majority would have had a good shot at having the City issue a $150M bond, the proceeds of which would have enabled Staff to engage in infrastructure projects of their choice with only token oversight from the public.
The original language of the proposition would have eliminated the supermajority from all tax-related voting. In response to pushback from at least one powerful special interest group elimination of the supermajority requirement will now apply only to the issuance of bonds. Other tax measures will continue to require supermajority votes.
But let’s be clear, bonds are in fact tax vehicles. The difference for most of us is that while taxes usually apply to everyone, only property owners are charged with retiring bonds which is accomplished by applying the tax as an additional assessment on property tax bills.
If Prop 5 passes, it will eliminate the current supermajority requirement from all bond measures on the November ballot including those cities, counties, utility districts, and other agency ballots. Another consequence, if Prop 5 passes, is that we can be assured that sometime in the not-too-distant future, the machine controlling Sacramento will be going after Prop 13 by eliminating the supermajority requirement for any and all votes intended to raise taxes.
I believe that it is absolutely inappropriate for the members of our Alameda City Council to vote to endorse Proposition 5 which, if passed will significantly reduce our, the taxpayers, ability to control how our politicians and Staff are able to access our personal funds for their projects, projects which may or may not be in our best interest.
Jay Garfinkle