Let's Talk Through The Local Initatives (San Jose, Santa Clara: transfer, construction, school district)

[artillery77]

So many of these initiatives are seemingly becoming more deceptive in their true aims, such as the State initiative to create funding for Alzheimer's, but actually most of the money raised simply goes into the State's general fund. Locally alone, we stand to raise taxes on ourselves by billions of dollars with the combined initiatives at a time when most people are worried about their financial futures.



I figured this would be a place to try and get a better understanding of the items we will vote on locally in the upcoming election:


Initiative G - This is an interesting one that looks set to capitalize on people's frustration with police conduct. It would expand a relatively unknown group's role significantly for a department know as the Independent Police Auditor to review police actions....and other technical amendments. It's scope of audit work would be greatly increased and would require giving unredacted police reporting in entirety on cases selected of the council's choosing.



- Thought - This should be voted against. Police forces need oversight, but an unrestricted scope over police work by political appointees will eventually turn into breeding grounds for witch hunts. The need to suddenly increase the number of members would mean the department makeup will be radically changed, with no telling on how appointees will be apportioned. With the right framework, the right skill level and right oversight, this could be a meaningful tool in working with the police department to find and address areas of weakness. As written and prescribed in a public vote, it is likely the very opposite will happen.



Measure H - This is a tax increase on card-room casinos, that increases in size as cardrooms grow, doubling the rate of a cardroom with revenues above $30M in revenue from those under $25M.


- Thought - Cardrooms have been hit hard by the coronavirus and have worked with the State to stay shuttered. Their finances have been hit hard already in cooperating. The timing of this is awful for them. Further, placing a significant economic advantage for cardrooms to stay small means that the main incentive to having casinos of nice luxurious places will instead be replaced by small corner card shops that attract nobody but local customers. This is essentially a money grab and should be voted against.



Initiative I - This is a relatively small initiative, that essentially taxes property to give additional funding to the San Jose-Evergreen Community School District. The expenses to be covered, however, are all ongoing and maintenance minded.



- Thought - The initiative proposition should be used when a significant change is being requested by the people. With all due respect to the community college transfer system, it has been allocated a budget and should provide the best it can within that budget. I would recommend voting no.


Initiative J - This is a much larger request, also from the San Jose - Evergreen Community School District. It is seeking $858 Million to repair its buildings and modernize its classrooms, but in reading further, much of the money will be spent for maintenance costs and expansion of faculties. Inevitably, these costs will need to roll forward yet again. We can see this as some of this bill is actually to pay for Measure X in 2016 where plans went overbudget.



- Thought, vote no as ongoing expenses must be budgeted for properly. This is not a measure worthy of being put before the voters. Worse, while it advertises itself as a capital expenditure, it actually is a budget measure with some resources being used for online teaching development. The reality is that there should be a hard look as to whether or not the district should continue to support an expansion of facilities or it should be devoting its energies and resources to less location specific expansion.



Measure S - This is a request for an additional tax to be given to the Santa Clara Valley Water District based upon property taxes. Of the measures, this one has the best plan of site driven requests for capex.



- Thought, this is a toss-up. What confuses me is why the billions in bonds that have been awarded by taxpayers in prior elections aren't being utilized to address the issues noted in the measure as well as healthy increases awarded from the PUC on the charges for water. Additionally, voters already have approved this tax for a 15 year term in 2012 set to sunset in 2028. Why weren't these issues addressed? Voters have clearly backed these improvements....multiple times. This time we should say no.


Measure T - This is the follow-up of an expiring tax for Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority. Nothing new is proposed. There are no projects listed.



- Thought - this is a tax grab. It is a good sounding department looking for money to make its continued existence easier. There's nothing more fundamentally budgetary than this request. This is not a voter initiative. This should be voted no.



Measure RR - Caltrain. This initiative is seeking $100M a year for 30 years for operating expenses and Caltrain's Business Plan 2040 Service Plan...which doesn't include any significant improvements.



Thoughts - Caltrain operates a single, expensive line that is vital. It would make more sense for a collaboration between Caltrain, BART, Muni and the VTA to create an authority that actually can focus on the region's toughest commutes. Caltrain has lost revenues. The MTA has announced it is seeking a way to eliminate 60% of onsite jobs in the region. These two drastically different approaches in governance need to be decided within the government first and then brought up as to what is needed to make it happen. Vote no on this initiative.

[davidt1]

Not a local, but I appreciate the thoughts you into the work. The people at Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association would agree with your choices, since they put some thoughts into their choices too.

[2sleepy]

I don't live in San Jose, but as far as this:

Initiative J - This is a much larger request, also from the San Jose - Evergreen Community School District. It is seeking $858 Million to repair its buildings and modernize its classrooms, but in reading further, much of the money will be spent for maintenance costs and expansion of faculties. Inevitably, these costs will need to roll forward yet again. We can see this as some of this bill is actually to pay for Measure X in 2016 where plans went overbudget.

Those are bond measures that increase your property tax. I will never vote for one again. They are pushed by the construction industries who are the ones who benefit from it. We passed one here 2 years ago and the only thing I've seen come of it is that they had a private company put the team name on all of the high school football fields. I think they remodeled one elementary school but what burns me is that if they need money they should sell the three or four unused elementary schools in the district, instead they just sit there empty...what a waste