Second Lawsuit Filed Challenging Proposition D

The Libertarian Lass, Gayle Falkenthal The Libertarian Lass, Gayle Falkenthal Leave a Comment


This just in to Rostra: the “fiscal impact analysis” prepared for Proposition D, the City of San Diego’s half-cent sales tax initiative is being challenged under California Elections Code §9295 in a lawsuit which alleges that the required analysis provided by the City of San Diego is “not impartial, not accurate, and misleads the public.”

“It’s time the voters are told the truth about this measure,” said plaintiff April Boling, former chairperson of the City Pension Reform Committee. “They should not rely on a flawed and misleading fiscal statement to help them cast a vote on this critically important decision.”

In the lawsuit prepared by attorney Bob Ottilie, plaintiff Boling alleges:

a) “The Fiscal Impact Statement for Proposition D” is false and misleading because it is “largely speculative puffery”;
b) The so-called “savings chart” upon which the Fiscal Impact Statement is based is flawed, false and misleading;
c) The ten “conditions” tied to implementation of the sales tax are independent actions unrelated to the sales tax and are matters the San Diego City Council could have addressed before placing Proposition D on the ballot;
d) Proposition D itself has ZERO fiscal impact. However, imposition of a sales tax could result in a potential cost to taxpayers of $510 million.

Named as defendants are Elizabeth S. Maland in her official capacity as City Clerk, City of San Diego; Deborah Seiler, in her official capacity as Registrar of Voters, San Diego County; and Does 1-10. Also named as a Real Party-In-Interest are the City of San Diego and Mayor Jerry Sanders, whose office was assigned responsibility for drafting the fiscal analysis.

The filing states “As drafted, if Prop D passes, it has no impact at all. It has no cost savings. It has no fiscal impact… While there may be some savings from implementation of some of these independent actions, if all ten of them are certified as being met, then the sales tax will kick in with an estimated cost to taxpayers of $102 million annually for five years. Thus, the proposition itself never results in cost savings; it could potentially result in a $510 million cost to taxpayers.”

To read the entire filing, please click here.

Boling is a formidable opponent in this matter. She is a Certified Public Accountant and she knows how to read a financial document. Attorney Ottilie isn’t exactly a pushover and he’s done battle with the best.

No doubt City Attorney Jan Goldsmith is making phone calls cancelling his plans for the weekend as you read this.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.