While Richard and I have differing views on Props 1B and 84, there are a number of issues we do agree on. For example, we both share concerns regarding the building of a new main library in downtown San Diego; the county pension system ; and Prop L – the Vista Sales Tax.

There aren’t too many of us taxpayer advocates out there, so we work together whenever possible.

Now on Prop 1B – I don’t disagree that a $10 billion high-speed rail bond is unneeded. In fact, the San Diego County Taxpayers Association opposed the measure when it was proposed in 2004 and it’s more than likely that we’d oppose the bond if it comes back.

But we’re not talking about the high-speed rail bond today, we’re debating Prop 1B; and to compare the two would be comparing apples to oranges, or mangos to papayas, as they would say in Hawaii.

As for “fair share,” in addition to nearly 7 percent in direct allocations, the region is strongly positioned to receive a significant portion of Prop 1B funds through competitive grants. Because TransNet projects are already in the design and environmental-planning stages, we’ve got a competitive advantage over other agencies in the state.

While it’s true that we’ve been short-changed in the past, Prop 1B provides a solid return on investment for the region. But don’t take my word for it. Take a look at the funding allocations yourself.

While the LAO analysis is a credible non-partisan resource for state measures, it generally does not provide an assessment of regional impact.

That’s where we step in to provide an in-depth analysis from a San Diego region perspective.

A discussion on Prop 84 will follow in my next post … Stay tuned!

– LANI LUTAR

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

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