Fed prosecutors claim an Orange County supervisor redirected more than half-a-million cool ones to himself and his family, before he was outed. NYT reports.
SF's Dream Keeper initiative—which took over $120 million from the San Francisco Police Department and “redistributed” it in the form of grants—is found to be a hotbed for large-scale grift, according to the exceptional Voice of SF.
This November, hundreds of state and local measures seek to raise property taxes across California. HJTA’s Jon Coupal recommends homeowners look at the Voted Indebtedness category of their tax bill—yearly charges that skirt Prop 13 protections. The historic safeguard of a two-thirds voter approval requirement for these tax hikes was already repealed to 55% for school bonds. Now Prop 5 seeks to do the same, adding billions more in tax burdens for CA property owners.
What won’t they say when they don’t get their way? Housing activists wanted RM4’s $20 billion in bonds (which would cost homeowners and renters over $48 billion). After a bipartisan group of concerned citizens pointed out that the measure was misleading, BAHFA pulled it from the ballot. Activists then hurled all sorts of fantastical insults at the group, as if participation in the democratic process were some kind of extremism. Marin Post’s Bob Silvestri writes.
Certainly, the climate crisis is real and deserves a considered response. However, Proposition 4 is representative of the failed statewide financial planning characteristic of Newsom's administration, and wastes most of the money that should be made available for a valid priority, says MCC Vice Chair Gregg Dieguez in the excellent Coastside News.
Local contractor T. J. Nelsen expresses his concern that Proposition 5—lowering CA's “infrastructure” tax approval requirement to 55% from 66.6%—removes Bay Area citizens' needed protection measure against corrupt, money-hungry gov'ts. From a newsletter published by the Marin County GOP.
Of the many ways to fund a housing project, bonds are the least efficient. Yet RM4 would have saddled Bay Area homeowners with more than $48 billion in taxes to pay off housing bond debt, with little to show for it. In his breakdown of what went wrong, Marin Post’s Bob Silvestri asks if BAHFA considered intelligent housing solutions that cost much less than bonds—developer tax credits, for example, or low-risk private housing debt insurance.
What to do after blowing a $100 billion surplus? Borrow another $10 billion for the “climate,” it seems. In his commentary for CalMatters, Senator Brian Jones questions the seriousness of the State’s environmental mission, not only when it had the cash on hand, but now when it’s deeply in debt—Prop 4 asks voters to pay for pop-up tents at farmers’ markets and galleries at zoos. Is that worth taking out another high-interest loan?
The Bakersfield Californian discusses how the city has moved 600 people off their streets since 2020. This city's approach pairs removing the unsafe encampments and quickly building affordable housing.