-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2012 STATEWIDE: No on Calif. Prop. 30: Sales Tax Hike
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Election - November 6, 2012
State of California
State of California
Proposition 30:
Temporary Taxes to Fund Education. Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding.
"Should the California Constitution be amended to (a) temporarily increase sales and personal income tax rates; (b) guarantee certain revenue transfers to local governments; and (c) eliminate state funding of certain mandates to local governments?"
SVTA recommends a NO vote
against Prop. 30.
- Increases personal income tax on annual earnings over $250,000 for seven years.
- Increases sales and use tax by ¼ cent for four years.
- Allocates temporary tax revenues 89% to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.
- Bars use of funds for administrative costs, but provides local school governing boards discretion to decide, in open meetings and subject to annual audit, how funds are to be spent.
- Guarantees funding for public safety services realigned from state to local governments.
Fiscal Impact from the Legislative Analyst's Office
- Additional state tax revenues of about $6 billion annually from 2012-13 through 2016-17. Smaller amounts of additional revenue would be available in 2011-12, 2017-18, and 2018-19.
- These additional revenues would be available to fund programs in the state budget. Spending reductions of about $6 billion in 2012-13, mainly to education programs, would not take effect.
- A YES vote on this measure means:
- The state would increase personal income taxes on high-income taxpayers for seven years and sales taxes for four years. The new tax revenues would be available to fund programs in the state budget.
- A NO vote on this measure means:
- The state would not increase personal income taxes or sales taxes. State spending reductions, primarily to education programs, would take effect in 2012-13.
- Full Text
- Impartial Analysis from the Legislative Analyst's Office
| Arguments for Proposition 30 |
Arguments Against Proposition 30 |
|
A Message from the League of Women Voters of California and California Teachers and Law Enforcement Professionals Fellow Californians, After years of cuts, California’s public schools, universities, and public safety services are at the breaking point. In the last four years alone, our schools have been hit with $20 billion in cuts, over 30,000 fewer teachers, and class sizes that are among the largest in the country. Our children deserve better. It’s time to take a stand and get California back on track. Proposition 30, the Schools & Local Public Safety Protection Act, is supported by Governor Jerry Brown, the League of Women Voters and a statewide coalition of leaders from education, law enforcement and business. There is broad support for Prop. 30 because it’s the only initiative that will protect school and safety funding and help address the state’s chronic budget mess:
To protect schools and safety, Prop. 30 temporarily increases personal income taxes on the highest earnersundefinedcouples with incomes over $500,000 a yearundefinedand establishes the sales tax at a rate lower than it was last year. Prop. 30’s taxes are temporary, balanced and necessary to protect schools and safety:
Join with the League of Women Voters and California teachers and public safety professionals. Vote YES on Proposition 30. Take a stand for schools and public safety. To learn more, visit YesOnProp30.com.
|
|
| Rebuttal to Argument for Prop. 30 |
Rebuttal to Argument against Prop. 30 |
|
Supporters of Prop. 30 say we either have to approve a huge tax hike or schools get cut. We all want excellent schools in California, but raising taxes isn’t the only way to accomplish this. The politicians would rather raise taxes instead of streamlining thousands of state funded programs, massive bureaucracy and waste. Look at what they just did: politicians authorized nearly $5 billion in California bonds for the “bullet train to nowhere,” costing taxpayers $380 million per year. Let’s use those dollars for schools! Instead, the politicians give us a false choiceundefinedraise sales taxes by $1 billion per year and raise income taxes on small business OR cut schools. PROP. 30 IS NOT WHAT IT SEEMS: It doesn’t guarantee even one new dollar of funding for classrooms. No on Prop. 30: It allows the politicians to take money currently earmarked for education and spend it on other programs. We’ll never know where the money really goes. No on Prop. 30: It gives the Sacramento politicians a blank check without requiring budget, pension or education reform. No on Prop. 30: It hurts small businesses and kills jobs. No on Prop. 30: It’s just more money for the Sacramento politicians to keep on spending. Don’t be mislead, Prop. 30 is not what it seems. It is just an excuse for Sacramento politicians to take more of your money, while hurting the economy and doing nothing to help education. Californians are too smart to be fooled: Vote No on Prop 30!
|
After years of cuts, it’s time to draw a line to protect schools and local public safety. Prop. 30’s TOUGH FISCAL CONTROLS insure money is spent ONLY on schools and public safety:
Our kids deserve better than the most crowded classrooms in the country. Prop. 30 asks the very wealthy to pay their FAIR SHARE to keep classrooms open and cops on the street.
Teachers, law enforcement, business leaders and Governor Jerry Brown all support Proposition 30 because it’s the only measure that will put California on the road to recovery. Learn more at http://www.YesOnProp30.com.
|
- Contact AGAINST Proposition 30:
- No on 30--Californians for Reforms and Jobs, Not Taxes
925 University Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95825
(866) 955-5508
info@StopProp30.com
http://www.StopProp30.com -
Paid for by the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association PAC.