2020 Primary Election Ballot
Jan 21 2020
President of the United States
ROBERT ARDINI
US House of Representatives, California 14th District
CRISTOS GOODROW Occupation: Technology Executive
California State Senate, 13th District
SALLY J. LIEBER Occupation: Ret. State Assemblywoman/Enviro Advocate
California State Assembly, 22nd District
KEVIN MULLIN Occupation: California State Assemblymember
-------------------------
Prop 13. AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR FACILITY REPAIR, CONSTRUCTION, AND MODERNIZATION AT PUBLIC PRESCHOOLS, K–12 SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND UNIVERSITIES. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE.
$15B in bonds, mostly for construction projects. $11B estimated interest over 35 years.
This seems to come up every year or three. Let's look at recent history:
2016 - Prop 51. School bonds, $9B in bonds. (PASSED)
2016 - Prop 55. Tax Extension to Fund Education and Healthcare. (PASSED)
2012 - Prop 30. Increases income and sales taxes temporarily for education and public safety funding. (PASSED, part of it still ongoing to 2030)
Guess I was wrong, nothing much in the last decade, though the most recent was a big bond measure. This one is bigger at $15B. Then again $15B is not that big compared to the annual state budget.
As I read the cons they are the typical points trotted out every time:
1. leads to higher taxes
2. some money will be wasted
3. bonds end up costing much more because of interest
4. school funding can be better spent
They did add:
5. don't confuse this Prop 13 with previous Prop 13 property tax limits (which, btw, is why we have to keep borrowing money to pay for schools).
I'm voting YES.
-------------------------
San Mateo Union High School District - Measure L
SAN MATEO UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT CLASSROOM REPAIR/TECHNOLOGY MEASURE
$385M in local bonds paid via $15.55 per $100k property tax (so for me like $125 per year).
I'm all for local bonds since they're paid by corresponding increased taxes, unlike state bonds where repayment comes out of general funds which often means indirectly by increased taxes.
I'm voting YES.
ROBERT ARDINI
US House of Representatives, California 14th District
CRISTOS GOODROW Occupation: Technology Executive
California State Senate, 13th District
SALLY J. LIEBER Occupation: Ret. State Assemblywoman/Enviro Advocate
California State Assembly, 22nd District
KEVIN MULLIN Occupation: California State Assemblymember
-------------------------
Prop 13. AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR FACILITY REPAIR, CONSTRUCTION, AND MODERNIZATION AT PUBLIC PRESCHOOLS, K–12 SCHOOLS, COMMUNITY COLLEGES, AND UNIVERSITIES. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE.
$15B in bonds, mostly for construction projects. $11B estimated interest over 35 years.
This seems to come up every year or three. Let's look at recent history:
2016 - Prop 51. School bonds, $9B in bonds. (PASSED)
2016 - Prop 55. Tax Extension to Fund Education and Healthcare. (PASSED)
2012 - Prop 30. Increases income and sales taxes temporarily for education and public safety funding. (PASSED, part of it still ongoing to 2030)
Guess I was wrong, nothing much in the last decade, though the most recent was a big bond measure. This one is bigger at $15B. Then again $15B is not that big compared to the annual state budget.
As I read the cons they are the typical points trotted out every time:
1. leads to higher taxes
2. some money will be wasted
3. bonds end up costing much more because of interest
4. school funding can be better spent
They did add:
5. don't confuse this Prop 13 with previous Prop 13 property tax limits (which, btw, is why we have to keep borrowing money to pay for schools).
I'm voting YES.
-------------------------
San Mateo Union High School District - Measure L
SAN MATEO UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT CLASSROOM REPAIR/TECHNOLOGY MEASURE
$385M in local bonds paid via $15.55 per $100k property tax (so for me like $125 per year).
I'm all for local bonds since they're paid by corresponding increased taxes, unlike state bonds where repayment comes out of general funds which often means indirectly by increased taxes.
I'm voting YES.