The two largest categories of revenue instruments were:

• General-fund city taxes requiring a majority vote. Of them, 61 of 88 passed, or 69 percent.
• School bonds requiring a 55 percent vote. They fared even better, with 90 of 112 measures passing, or 80 percent.

In addition, school parcel taxes requiring a two-thirds vote were perfect on Election Day, with all eight passing. 

With pro-spending groups making no secret of their desire to raise many different state taxes, does the success of so many local taxes auger well for them?

State and local tax campaigns are fought in different environments. The governments closer to the people have a better connection to local voters and generally are held in higher regard than governments farther away.

Local tax measures and school bonds usually don’t face well-funded opposition campaigns.

In addition, local government support for tax measures skate the line of impartiality. One example cited by the California Taxpayers Association was a 1 percentage-point sales tax in El Cerrito, Measure R.  According to CalTax:

“Typical of many cities, El Cerrito mailed a campaign-style ‘Measure R Voter Guide‘ to residents, filled with photos of smiling children and police officers, and providing one-sided ‘information’ about the tax measure. The city’s taxpayer-funded mailing referred to Measure R as the ‘El Cerrito Preservation of Citywide Services Measure.’”

Pay more

At the Capitol Weekly’s election post-mortem conference, it was often pointed out that California’s electorate is made up of two-thirds progressive voters and two-thirds fiscally conservative voters. Obviously, there is an overlap and the election campaign struggle occurs in the overlapping area.

Voters locally showed a willingness to pay more. If they get their fill contributing to local government budgets, will they draw the line with efforts to raise state revenue?

The success of the local measures will encourage those who want to raise state taxes. The battle will be drawn.

The question is: When will the California voters hit their breaking point? We may find out in the 2016 election.

By Katy Grimes

There are 230 bond, tax and fee increase proposals on the 2012 ballot in California. Gov. Jerry Brown’s Proposition 30 tax increase measure is the least of voters’ problems this election.

There are 100 school bond measures on the ballot throughout California. There are more than 30 sales tax increase initiatives, business tax increases, parcel taxes, utility taxes, and hotel taxes. There are even tax increase measures for sodas and abandoned-cars.

How many tax increases will “fix” California?

The answer is easy. None.

What’s really wrong California?

Local governments would have everyone in the state believe that they are struggling to make ends meet. But they grossly misuse the word “struggle.” The only downsizing done in local government has been to cut the lower paid employees who probably weren’t eligible for pensions anyway.

In Sacramento, the City Council is pushing hard to pass several ballot initiatives:

* Measure Q: Sacramento City Unified School District;

* Measure R: Sacramento City Unified School District;

* Measure T: Sacramento (City of) Mandates on Garden and Yard Refuse Disposal;

* Measure U: Sacramento (City of) Sales Tax Increase.

Measure Q would authorize a $346 million school bond. Measure R would authorize a $68 million school bond.

This is just what we don’t need in the corrupted Sacramento City Unified School District. The politicians who call themselves “school board members” who run Sacramento’s city schools want to borrow another $346 million to build new schools, while they still owe $556 million on past construction.

It’s business as usual in Sacramento.

Measure U would add a one-half cent sales tax on the sale of everything in Sacramento for six years.

Eye on Sacramento, a Sacramento area watchdog group, has been fighting the tax increase and trying to keep city residents informed. “City Hall wants to increase the sales tax a half cent, to 8.25 cents, the highest in the region, taking $27 million annually from the local economy for six years,” Eye on Sacramento recently wrote. “With a 460,000 population, that’s $352 annually per resident, or $1,408 for a family of four.”

“Measure U supporters argue city services are underfunded, including police and fire.  But 85 percent of the city’s general fund already goes to these departments, with much of that siphoned off in pensions,” the watchdog group reported.

Sacramento does not have many fires, but we still have stunning, new and large fire stations, and four fire fighters on every engine. The majority of the 9-1-1 calls are for medical emergencies.

Eye on Sacramento pointed out that, while city cops refuse to contribute to their own generous pensions, “CHP officers contribute 12 percent of salaries for lesser retirements. Without pension concessions from police, any extra sales tax revenues will only encourage further pension stonewalling.”

Sacramento city government is rife with corruption as well:

* A Utilities Department manager was taking kickbacks from a scrap metals dealer;

* The city council recently approved a 25 percent increase in garbage pickup rates, higher than any other city in Sacramento County. The council did this without a competitive bid process, despite the contract being worth more than $22 million;

* The Sacramento city council recently whisked through the approval of a new four-year labor contract with the local Plumbers and Pipefitters union;

* And, adding insult to injury, the council increased sewer and water rates by a huge 16 percent and 10 percent.

“Local governments and school districts across California, struggling to pay for essentials, are asking voters to approve tax and bond measures,” the Los Angeles Times recently wrote.

While the state has stripped local governments of funds, there was an unholy deal between local and state government to push through tax increase measures in cities and counties all across the state to make up the difference.

But nothing has been done about the unaffordable and escalating pension costs in cities, counties and state agencies.

Instead, schools have stopped spending in the classrooms, forcing teachers and families to provide supplies. And essential school programs have been cut.

Cities have cut back necessary services while increasing rates. In Sacramento, Measure T proposes to end the historic and necessary curbside pickup of yard and tree waste and instead force residents of the “City of Trees” to try and stuff mountains of garden waste in a 96 gallon can. The city has tried to force this change on three separate ballots, and each time voters have rejected it.

How many tax increases will “fix” what ails us?

California is a mess. Tax increases will not fix anything, but will prolong the corruption that seeps from the top down.

By Tori Richards

Los Angeles stands to receive federal transportation dollars for the first time in nearly a decade, yet local infighting could derail the project, officials say.

Allegations of influence peddling with a campaign donor tied to President Obama and lawsuits charging corruption at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority have put the brakes on the final leg of a $5 billion subway project through L.A.’s Westside.

With a new freeway lane costing more than $1 billion, the project was seen as a godsend to an area that has some of the nation’s worst traffic congestion.

The disputed route runs underneath Beverly Hills High School, with a subway stop at Constellation and Avenue of the Stars in Century City. That’s where Obama donor JMB Realty owns a slice of land.

The city of Beverly Hills and its school district sued the MTA when a presentation of their scientific study showing the route to be hazardous fell on deaf ears.

“It needs to be ready to go on our end and these lawsuits complicate things,” said Dan Rosenfeld, senior deputy to L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley Thomas. “We could lose out on this funding if it drags through the courts. Not to mention the huge legal cost. Who pays for that? It’s not fair to stick it to the taxpayers.”

Added Michael Cano, transportation deputy for LA County Supervisor Michael Antonovich:

“Federal funding matching on the subway requires you to be aggressive on the timeline. You have to demonstrate a good financial plan and operating system. Problems associated with the lawsuit and delay and it loses out on a round of federal funding. The public as a whole loses out.” 

A bill making its way through the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee appropriates funds for seven transportation projects throughout the state. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., sits on the committee.

For nearly a decade, federal transportation dollars have been awarded to New York, Dallas, Denver and other cities, largely ignoring California and its pressing need for a better rail system.

“It’s shocking how little we get,” Rosenfeld said. “California is 10 percent of the U.S.and L.A. is 40 percent of California and we get peanuts in the federal transit cafeteria compared to other cities. We should get our fair share, but zero isn’t a fair share.”

For example, New York — which already has the nation’s biggest subway system — has received $612 million for various rail projects. Other projects have included Dallas at $236 million, Salt Lake City at $180 million and Seattle at $113, according to MTA records.

“They are tunneling through rock on the east side of Manhattan, it’s not an easy project,” Rosenfeld said.

He added that their success in grabbing dollars could be because “they have very effective senators and one of them is now secretary of state.”

The last big money was in 2004, when Los Angeles received $66 million for its Goldline subway.

David vs. Goliath

The project started out innocently enough: build an extension of the subway system to the Westside, where the only current transportation options are taking the bus or driving along the gridlocked 405 Freeway.

The project would continue on from the Wilshire Center area through Beverly Hills, Century City and Westwood.

The entire project was expected to take 30 years to complete at a cost of $5 billion and the MTA was counting on the federal government to pick up half the tab.

At first, the city of Beverly Hills was highly supportive of the project and Measure R, a 2008 ballot measure that raised the Los Angeles County sales tax half a cent to support transportation projects. That money would largely be used to fund rail projects.

And initially, the final leg of the subway was supposed to have a station near a golf course, with little impact on anyone. But then the site inexplicably changed to a busy street corner where the project developer JMB Realty owns the parcel of land, charged Brian Goldberg, president of the Beverly Hills Unified School District Board of Education.

The first route would have been faster and up to $100 million cheaper, so none of this made sense to Goldberg.

Tunneling 70 feet under the high school could expose thousands of students to myriad potential disasters, such as the escape of methane gas, former oil well sites and shifting ground, Goldberg said.

“We’ve confirmed with the Department of the State Architect that there’s been no tunneling under instructional buildings anywhere in the state of California,” Goldberg said. “We don’t know if the state architect would even approve construction.”

The school district wanted to give the state that opportunity, asking the MTA board to postpone its decision on the route until further studies could be done. But the board had hired a geologist who claimed that the first proposed station site was on an earthquake fault and the new route was approved.

A second geologist hired by the school district had come up with an opposite conclusion, saying the school has had underground erosion problems. Furthermore, if the first site was home to an active earthquake fault, the city of Los Angeless houldn’t have approved plans for construction of a 39-story office building there, the Beverly Hills geologist noted.

But the MTA board of directors is comprised of elected officials, including L.A.’s mayor and the members of the Board of Supervisors. Chicago-based JMB Realty’s executives have donated at least $5,000 to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s campaign coffers dating back to 2005, MapLight Research shows.

Media reports show that JMB’s billionaire owner, Neil Bluhm, is a big Obama supporter and even threw him a 49th birthday party. Public records reveal that he has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years to the Democratic Party and its candidates.

Villaraigosa has made no secret of his ties to the Obama administration and his quest to seek higher office.

“They are heavily connected to Obama and Rahm Emanuel,” Goldberg said. “Coincidences in politics and money are few and far between. These developers are smart people and the reason why they make a lot of money is they know how to work the system.”

Goldberg said JMB Realty’s and the MTA’s insistence on that piece of property for the station “doesn’t smell right.”

Anotonovich, whose district doesn’t include the rail project, has been the only direct supporter of Beverly Hills’ position. Ridley Thomas was not present the day of the vote.

“It’s very frustrating, the city just wanted a fair chance to represent their information to the MTA board,” Cano said. “[Antonovich] felt compelled to stick up for the city of Beverly Hills because they needed a voice on the board.”

In addition, Antonovich is troubled by the appearance of impropriety with the campaign contributions.

“That should’ve been explored, the relationship between the developer and MTA,” Cano added. “It’s definitely something you worry about. We have no first-hand knowledge [of impropriety], but it’s a legitimate question to ask to make sure the public feels a decision based by the MTA board is fact and science and not political considerations.”

The Result

Following a lengthy hearing, in which Antonovich was the only vote on their side, the city of Beverly Hills and the school district each filed lawsuits, asking a judge to reverse the board’s approval of the subway extension.

The city’s lawsuit accused the MTA of holding a sham hearing purporting to seek facts from Beverly Hills’ geologists, when in actuality a decision had already been made.

But the decision of a Superior Court judge won’t resolve the matter. The losing side will certainly file an appeal and the matter could be litigated for years. The MTA and its deep pockets could bury Beverly Hills in legal motions and paperwork. Although it’s a wealthy community, the city’s municipal assets pale in comparison to the billions MTA has at its disposal.

“Unfortunately, because we’re Beverly Hills, there is a stigma that it’s a rich, entitled community,” Goldberg said. “If it was any other route in the state, the response would be very different and more allies would be coming to our side.”