VOTE: YES
At this time, if a building owner reinforced masonry bearing (brick and mortar buildings) walls on their building, their property can be reassessed for property tax purposes 15 years later from the work being done with the additions and reinforcement included in the new value most likely raising the owners property taxes. This revision of the current law removes the 15 years to reassessment and requires the property be reassessed at normal times such as when the property is sold.
Prop 14 (Adding More Options in the Primary, Reducing Them in the General Election)
VOTE: NO
At this time, when you receive your ballot for the primary election, you can vote only for candidates under the political party you are affiliated with. For each political party, there is a top vote getter who moves on to the General Election but all Independents automatically move on to the General Election. So it will be in the November General Election that you have all party's number one guy to choose from along with all the Independents. I believe this method works fine since there are not many things you can pin on a candidate and what they stand for from the rhetoric they spew in advertisements and interviews. It gives voters the ability to choose first who they think best represents their own party, then it gives voters the time to investigate the best of other political parties to make their final decision in November.
Other reasons to vote NO on Prop 14:
- does not require candidates to state what political party they are affiliated with (political parties are the men behind the scene who act like the puppeteer, so it might be good to see where the strings are attached to)
- does not allow write-in candidates in the General Election (just in case every nominee is bad)
- county election officials say it could cost 30% more to hold election if enacted
- really limits the choice when it counts in the General Election
*our election process does need to be drastically changed regarding how each candidate presents what the stand for and what they intend to do if elected into office, but this Prop does nothing to help that
Prop 15 ("Fair" Elections Fund)
VOTE: NO
This prop takes $675 from a fee each lobbying firm has to pay in order to be a legitimate lobbyist and deposits it into the new "Fair" Election Fund. It is from this fund that only candidates for the Secretary of State can apply to fully pay for the candidates campaign for Secretary of State (the person who chooses who will be on the presidential ballot and makes sure lobbyist are disclosing important information). In order to qualify to get money to pay for a candidates campaign, the candidates must collect 3750 $5 contributions and they will receive $200,000. If an applicant gets 7500 $5 contributions, they will receive $1 million. If the applicant receives 15,000 $5 donations, they can receive up to $4 million dollars.
Reasons to vote NO on Prop 15:
- creates more bureaucracy and cost more money by creating a new commission who will oversee how money is spent and collect all records
- is only for candidates pursuing the Secretary of State which seems fishy to me
- can still accept money from candidates political party which often times is the source of putting awful people in office
- is allowed to give $25 "gifts" using the funds
- is only liable for attending 3 debates total in both primary and general election
- can still receive up to $75,000 from $100 donations and spend it as they wish
- it will only be a misdemeanor if the candidate misuses the money and will not even be prosecuted until 4 years later
- adds a donation option on state tax return which will cost money to do
- are able to take money from the general fund to put into this new "Fair" Election Fund
*again our election process needs changing but this does not help, the money used for this fund should instead be put in the General Fund to balance our budget
Prop 16 (The Taxpayers Right to Vote Act which we already have)
VOTE: NO
Currently, we already have the right to vote for any expansion of electricity service: "...guarantee to ratepayers and taxpayers the right to vote any time a local government seeks to use public funds, public debt, bonds or liability, or taxes or other financing to start or expand electric delivery service to a new territory or new customer, or to implement a plan to become an aggregate electricity provider." So I don't know why this is even on the ballot since we already have this right. The additions to this law actual remove rights from us.
Reasons to vote NO on Prop 16:
- we cannot vote if the expansion is "...within the existing jurisdictional boundaries of local government..." yet we are told in the next paragraph we can only vote if within its jurisdiction
- this law has a loophole that leave the voters and taxpayers out
- we cannot vote if the local government is using federal dollars. "Public funds do not include federal funds." How ridiculous is that? Federal money is still public money.
- we cannot vote if local government is looking to expand through renewable energy
*voting no means we still keep our right to vote and does not remove more rights from us
Prop 17 (Continuous Coverage Discount)
VOTE: YES
Allows insurance companies to give a discount on your auto insurance if you have had continuous coverage even if you are coming from another company.
