October 2008

Fresno Chamber Launches Member Testimonials On November Ballot Propositions

 

Proposition 1A: High Speed Rail Bond
Fresno Chamber Position: Support
 

 

Proposition 11: Voters First Act
Fresno Chamber Position: Support
 

 

September 29, 2008

Fresno Chamber Positions On November 2008 Ballot

 

The Fresno Chamber releases its positions on issues that impact the Fresno business community appearing on the November 4, 2008 ballot.

Measure L: Fresno County Library Tax

Fresno Chamber Position: Oppose

Summary

- Measure L s a proposed ¼ cent sales tax for 16 years for library operations and facilities.
- Measure L would take affect April 1, 2009
- Under the current Measure, it is recommended that service and facility improvements be addressed first, while the construction of new libraries will take longer due to the collection of the tax revenue, but will still be in the Master Plan.

Ballot Language

The current ballot language includes the importance of adding books, providing separate homework areas for children/youth, work with neighborhood schools to increase after school and job search programs, improve, upgrade and repair urban/rural Fresno County branch libraries.

Pros

- Libraries provide value to their communities
- By 2025 Fresno County will have grown to a population of over 1.3 million, and without improvement now many communities and individuals will go underserved.
- Library use grew 6% last year, and has grown 115% since 1999 when Measure B was originally passed.

Cons

- The current sales tax does not expire for another 4 years.
- The current tax generates $12,500,000 per year for Fresno County Libraries, this additional tax would double that amount, equaling $25,000,000 for the next 16 years.
- In light of the current economic situation, the County does not need to add another tax to the book at this time.

Proposition 1A: High Speed Rail Bond

Fresno Chamber Position: Support

Summary
 

The Bond Act will provide for the issuance of $9.95 billion of general obligation bonds, $9 billion of which will be made available in conjunction with federal and private funds for the planning and construction of a high-speed train system consistent with the Authority's adopted business plan, and $950 million of which will be available for capital projects on other passenger rail lines to provide connectivity to the high-speed train system and for capacity enhancements and safety improvements to those lines.

Pros

- The high-speed train project has advanced substantially since the enactment of the original bond provisions in 2002, which in some cases now are outdated or obsolete.
- The proposed Governor's Budget for 2008-09 seeks modifications to the Bond Act to ensure that appropriate financing is available to begin building the project.
- The changes proposed in AB 3034 have been developed in cooperation with the Administration and will facilitate the further development and effective implementation of the high-speed train project.

Cons

- In opposition, Sierra Club California expresses concerns that "the draft EIR did not consider a fair comparison of the Altamont route.
- The draft EIR did not analyze the growth inducing impact high speed rail would have on the Central Valley or identify any enforceable mitigation measures. Given the deficiencies of the environmental review process that was used to make the preliminary route choice.
- Pacheco Pass is absent.

Proposition 2: Treatment of Farm Animals

Fresno Chamber Position: Oppose

Summary
 

Beginning January 1, 2015, this measure prohibits (with certain exceptions) the confinement on a farm of pregnant pigs, calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.
Under the measure, any person who violates this law would be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and/or imprisonment in county jail for up to six months.
 

Pros
 

- Prevents cruelty to animals.
- Improves health and food safety because factories will no longer be able to put animals in tiny cages, fostering the spread of diseases that may affect people.
- Potentially protects air, water and safeguards the environment because it will help stop the spread of untreated waste on the ground and contaminating waterways.

Cons
 

- Proposition 2 is a risks banning almost all modern egg production in California.
- Proposition 2 jeopardizes food safety and public health by wiping out Californians’ access to locally grown fresh eggs
- Harms consumers by driving up prices at grocery stores and restaurants and creates a dependency on eggs shipped from other states and Mexico.

Proposition 3: Children's Hospital Bond Act

Fresno Chamber Position: Support

 

Summary
 

This measure authorizes the state to sell $980 million in general obligation bonds for capital improvement projects at children’s hospitals.
The measure specifically identifies five University of California children’s hospitals as eligible bond fund recipients (receiving 20% of the bond monies)
 

- Mattel Children’s Hospital at University of California, Los Angeles
- University Children’s Hospital at University of California, Irvine
- University of California, Davis Children’s Hospital
- University of California, San Diego Children’s Hospital
- University of California, San Francisco Children’s Hospital
 

There are additional children’s hospitals that are likely to meet other eligibility criteria specified in the measure, which are based on hospitals’ performance in the 2001 02 fiscal year. These criteria include providing at least 160 licensed beds for infants and children (receiving 80% of the bond monies):
 

- Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego
- Children’s Hospital Los Angeles
- Children’s Hospital and Research Center at Oakland
- Children’s Hospital of Orange County
- Loma Linda University Children’s Hospital
- Lucile Salter Packard Children’s Hospital
- Miller’s Children’s Hospital, Long Beach
- Children’s Hospital Central California
 

The money raised from the bond sales could be used for the construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing, equipping, financing, or refinancing of children’s hospitals in the state. The monies provided could not exceed the total cost of a project, and funded projects would have to be completed “within a reasonable period of time.”
 

Pros
 

- Proposition 3 provides a fair share for the Central California Children’s Hospital
- A 66% increase in the population of young children in California is projected over the next 25 years, for Children’s Hospital Central California; that represents an increase of 875,000 kids.
- This proposition would give much needed infrastructure improvements to Children’s hospitals including the building of new inpatient facilities & outpatient clinics, expanding emergency rooms, surgical suites, and other intensive, critical, and acute care units, increasing the number of neonatal intensive care beds for infants born sick or premature, and purchase new medical technologies like MRI machines to scan for childhood cancers.

Cons

 
- This bond would add another obligation to an already grid-locked state budget.
- The estimated interest rate for the bond obligation is not guaranteed

Proposition 7: Renewable Energy

Fresno Chamber Position: Oppose

Summary
 

- Proposition 7 would require all utilities to generate 20 percent of their power from renewable energy by 2010.
- Establishes additional, higher RPS targets for electricity providers
- The measure adds two new, higher RPS targets—40 percent by 2020 and 50 percent by 2025.
- Makes RPS requirements enforceable on publicly owned utilities.
- Current law does not require publicly owned utilities to meet the same RPS that other electricity providers are required to meet
- Changes the process for defining “market price of electricity.”
- The measure shifts from PUC to the Energy Commission responsibility for determining the market price of electricity.
- The measure adds three new criteria to current-law requirements that the Energy Commission would need to consider when defining the market price of electricity
- Changes the cost cap provisions that limit electricity provider obligations under the RPS.
- The measure extends the cost cap limit to ESPs as well. The measure requires that an electricity provider acquire renewable electricity towards meeting annual RPS targets, or face monetary penalties, only as long as the cost of such electricity is no more than 10 percent above the Energy Commission-defined market price for electricity
- Expands scope of RPS enforcement.
- Revises RPS-related contracting period and obligations.
- The measure requires all electricity providers—including publicly owned utilities—to offer renewable energy procurement contracts of no less than 20 years, with certain exceptions.
- Sets a lower penalty rate in statute and removes the cap on the total penalty amount for failure to meet RPS requirements.
- Directs the use of RPS penalty revenues.
- Expands Energy Commission’s permitting authority
 

Pros
 

- Requires all California utilities to meet renewable energy production standards that will help put California on the path to energy independence.
- Replace half of the fossil fuels used for electricity generation in California with clean energy technologies such as solar, geothermal, wind, biomass, and small hydro.
- Does not raise taxes or have any fiscal impact on the state budget.
- Price impacts will be capped at less than 3% of consumers' electricity bills.

Cons
 

- Proposition 7 has a huge potential to substantially drive up energy prices in the state and its unworkable mandates.
- These market changes, combined with language that will eliminate competition from small renewable companies, will lead to price manipulation and significant increases in electric bills.
- The measure contains a “competition elimination” provision that forces smaller renewable energy companies out of California’s market, costing thousands of jobs.
- Proposition 7 mandates that utilities accept renewable power contracts which are up to 10 percent of the market rate of other energy sources. This “must-take” provision would guarantee that renewable contracts would permanently be locked in at a level of at least 10 percent above market rates.
 

Proposition 11: Voters First Act

Fresno Chamber Position: Support

Summary
 

The Voters FIRST Act proposes that after the next census, when district lines will be redrawn, instead of the legislature drawing the district lines, a 14-person redistricting commission known as the Citizens Redistricting Commission is formed. The Legislature will be responsible for coordinating with the Commission to hold hearings, provide access to redistricting data and software and ensure full public participation in the redistricting process.

Citizens Redistricting Commission

- Comprised of 14 persons: 5 democrats, 5 republicans and 4 “other.”
- The 4 “other” are defined as those who are not registered with either of the two largest political parties in California.
- In order to be eligible for the commission each applicant must be a California voter registered with the same affiliation for the past 5 years or more and must have voted in two of the last three statewide general elections.
- The 14 members are chosen using the following steps:
- The State Auditor creates a public application process.
- The State Auditor establishes an Applicant Review Panel for the purpose of screening applicants. The panel is comprised of three randomly selected qualified independent state auditors.
- The Applicant Review Panel selects 60 of the most qualified applicants (20R/20D/20 other) on the basis of relevant analytical skills, ability to be impartial, and diversity.
- The four Legislative Leaders have the option of striking up to two applicant names from the pool of 60. The pools may be reduced to 12 D/12 R/12 other.
- The State Auditor randomly draws 8 names from the remaining pool of applicants (3D/3R/2 other).
- The 8 Commissioners then review the names remaining in the pool and choose 6 Commissioners (2D/2R/2o). They will select to complement the balance of skills and diversity.

Pros

- The Voters FIRST Act identifies a neutral commission to draw the districts in California, and takes the power away from legislators who are currently protected by their boundary lines.

- The 14 person commission has an equal number of parties represented

- The process for redrawing district lines requires public comment

Cons

- The commission does not include two certified demographers and one statistician as recommended by the GAC.

- The commission does not require, only recommends the lines are drawn to include Congressional districts, also known as nesting.
 

Contact Amy Huerta, the Chamber's Government Affairs Manager for more information at (559) 495-4818 or ahuerta@fresnochamber.com