They just keep winning: Grassroots organizers saved the Bay from RM4, then helped topple Prop 5
Image generated using Dall-E
Why did Prop 5 suffer such a bruising defeat? Voters understood it bypassed Prop 13 and would reduce the threshold for local bonds from two-thirds to 55% of the electorate. Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Ass’n President Jon Coupal credits his organization’s underdog campaign to educate voters. He counts SHIFT Bay Area (né “$20 Billion Reasons”) as one of HJTA’s most effective partners in the fight against wasteful borrowing: seven of nine Bay Area counties voted "no."
Here are some observations about this welcome taxpayer victory. First, the opposition campaign, led by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association initiative committee Protect Proposition 13, No on 5, was well organized. Our effort to educate voters as to the threats posed by Prop. 5 was successful. All of our campaign’s voter contact information reminded voters that Prop. 5 would lower the two-thirds vote threshold for local bonds to 55%. The two-thirds vote requirement for local general obligation bonds was adopted in 1879 as a protection against excessive debt at the local level repaid by property owners. Perhaps more important, our campaign stressed that Prop. 5 would bypass the limits of Proposition 13. Even the most ardent tax-hike enthusiast knows, and fears, that Prop. 13 remains extremely popular.
One hurdle we faced was a misleading ballot label, which is the brief summary of the measure that voters see on their ballot when they vote. The label did not mention the current two-thirds vote requirement for passing bonds, leaving the impression that the proposed 55% threshold might represent a tougher standard than the one that currently exists.
So, it became even more important for HJTA to educate voters that the longstanding requirement for a two-thirds vote of the electorate was under threat. This was especially challenging given the vast amount of money that proponents of Proposition 5 raised in pursuit of their goal to make it easier to raise taxes.
Their haul was nearly $15 million, including $4.7 million from a PAC connected to the nonprofit foundation funded by Facebook/Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan. Why billionaires would spend their money trying to raise property taxes on ordinary homeowners is a question worth asking.
One of our most effective partners in this fight was the group “$20 Billion Reasons,” which had been formed to fight Regional Measure 4, a $20 billion bond proposal by nine Bay Area counties. Their opposition was so intense, it forced the regional authority proposing the bond to drop the effort. That allowed $20 Billion Reasons to immediately pivot to join our work opposing Prop. 5. Thanks in part to their help, Prop. 5 appears to have failed in seven of the nine Bay Area counties.
Read the whole thing here.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Related:
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.