Sometimes we “smart guys” are not. Just because WE understand a fundamental aspect of a political issue doesn’t mean that the VOTERS know what they are voting on. Because we are so “smart,” too often we self-appointed pundits fail to emphasize to others the fact that crucial information is being hidden from voters.

Such is the case with local bond propositions — which are ALWAYS dishonestly presented. And our failure to understand and fight this misrepresentation has helped perpetuate the California “something for nothing” con job on taxpayers.

The fact is that few voters read beyond the official “ballot question” of a bond. That summary is a single LONG sentence that supposedly impartially summarizes the matter being placed before the voters. The truth is that it’s blatant propaganda written by proponents, with zero input from the opposition. County Council mindlessly accepts such “questions” unless there’s a stunning lie contained in it — which proponents are usually clever enough to avoid.

The problem is not just the obvious propaganda aspect — it’s what is always OMITTED. EVERY such summary ALWAYS leaves out a CRUCIAL point — HOW the bonds will be paid for — WHO is paying for the bonds.  As the excellent article below by my longtime taxpayer friend Joel Fox details, the government lies through omission. And it’s systemic throughout the state.

In San Diego we have eleven such bond measure on various local ballots. It’s clear that they are “cookie cutter” summaries — using the same language, and omitting the same facts.  Here’s a link to the official ballet “question” posed by each of to our 35(!) local prop ballot questions in the county — including 11 K-12 and community college bond measures.

http://www.sdvote.com/content/dam/rov/en/election/E110816_local_props_labels.pdf

At this link, one can click on a question to go to the more detailed proposition information — including the useful ballot ARGUMENTS that too few read. But almost no one does this — or even visits this page at the Registrar of Voters website.

Let’s take one bond question as an example.Remember, they ALL read the same — it appears all were written by the same hired guns promoting such bonds:

MIRACOSTA COLLEGE JOB TRAINING, COLLEGE TRANSFER, VETERAN SUPPORT MEASURE. To upgrade classrooms and career training facilities for science, healthcare, technology, advanced manufacturing, other growing local industries, provide job training/placement to Navy/ Marines/ other veterans, improve access to affordable higher education to local students, improve disabled access, repair, construct, acquire classrooms, facilities, sites/equipment, shall MiraCosta Community College District issue $455,000,000 in bonds, at legal rates, subject to local control, requiring annual audits, and independent citizen oversight?

In the ballot book, the government then distills the question down for the REALLY low information voters to grasp:

In other words, something for nothing. This summary omits the critical point that the measure levies HIGHER PROPERTY TAXES on all homeowners and businesses. And indeed, that fact should be the OPENING clause of the ballot question — “Should we pay higher property taxes for . . . .”

But it’s not. Instead, each bond question concludes with this meaningless clause:  . . . “shall [fill in the government agency hyping the bonds] issue $XXXXXX in bonds, at [or below] legal rates, subject to local control, requiring annual audits, and independent citizen oversight?”

Sounds great! Bonds issued for good causes — apparently without a tax increase — and the government will make sure the money is well spent (yeah, that’s been working SOOOO well up to now, right?).

In addition, let’s remember that such school bonds no longer require the 2/3 majority vote — it’s now 55%. That 2/3 threshold is designed to offset the low information voter factor — to make sure that the people paying the taxes are protected from tax increases too easily passed.

As a result (including proponent campaign spending that will be AT LEAST 100 times more than the opposition can muster), most of these bonds will pass. Many beleaguered property owners will find one or more tax increases on their property tax bill starting next year.

Contrary to popular belief, California property tax bills are FAR higher than the national average. Indeed, the median California homeowner’s bill is 93% higher than the median property tax paid by homeowners in the other 49 states.

http://linkis.com/blogspot.com/Yq6cx

With 180 or more such bond measures on local California ballots this November (and given that most will pass), our property tax bills (and resulting rents) will pull even further ahead of the national average. Oh joy!

As the article below details, this misrepresentation must end. Perhaps through legislation, perhaps through lawsuits, perhaps through public pressure, perhaps through a constitutional amendment passed via the initiative process.  But regardless, this reform should be pursued.

Henceforth no legitimate taxpayer group should EVER endorse ANY such measure that does not clearly state in the summary question that the bonds will be paid with a TAX INCREASE. Indeed, if the taxpayer organization is REALLY legit, it should automatically OPPOSE any such bond proposition using this deceitful strategy — the “neutral” option should be off the table.

Sadly, this year’s massive bond increases will escape such reform. And in this state, such reform is “iffy” for future elections, as California’s dominant public employee labor unions LOVE this stealth method of raising taxes.  While the bond money doesn’t go directly for their higher salaries and their bloated, underfunded pensions, it frees up general fund money for such spending — money is fungible.

http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2016/10/are-bonds-free/

Are Bonds Free?