fbpx Pasadena Chamber Board of Directors’ Positions on Measures and Propositions on Nov. 6 Ballot - Hey SoCal. Change is our intention.
The Votes Are In!
2024 Readers' Choice is back, bigger and better than ever!
View Winners →
Vote for your favorite business!
2024 Readers' Choice is back, bigger and better than ever!
Start voting →
Subscribeto our newsletter to stay informed
  • Enter your phone number to be notified if you win
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Home / Neighborhood / San Gabriel Valley / Arcadia Weekly / Pasadena Chamber Board of Directors’ Positions on Measures and Propositions on Nov. 6 Ballot

Pasadena Chamber Board of Directors’ Positions on Measures and Propositions on Nov. 6 Ballot

by
share with

At successive meetings over the course of the past two months, the Board of Directors of the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce deliberated on many of the propositions that appear on the November 6th ballot. They took positions on some measures while deciding not to consider others. When it took a position, the Board had a choice to support, oppose or take no position.
The Chamber Board deliberated and voted to express its opinion on the following measures and propositions:
Los Angeles County measures
Measure J (sales tax extension for transportation): Locally, the Pasadena Chamber Board chose to support Measure J, the extension of the Los Angeles County sales tax to support local transportation projects. While supporting the measure, which would extend the half cent sales tax increase through 2069, the Board recognized that implementation of local transportation projects can be accelerated by bonding against this dedicated revenue source. The Board did express a very strong preference that the funds be spent on transit projects, such as the Gold Line extension to Claremont, rather than highway and road construction. “The Board communicated a clear desire to seek 21st century solutions to traffic congestion and goods movement issues,” said Chamber CEO Paul Little.
The Board did not consider Measure A, an advisory vote on whether to change selection of the county assessor from elected to appointed, or Measure B which would require adult film actors to wear condoms.
State Propositions
Proposition 30 (temporary tax increases to fund education and public safety): The Chamber Board of Directors took no position on Proposition 30. The Board did not want to oppose Proposition 30 because the members understand that education funding in California is at critically low levels and if Proposition 30 does not pass drastic cuts to K-14 education could occur. However, the Board is very uncomfortable with band-aid measures to temporarily prop up a state budget that fails to adequately address the fiscal needs of the state. “The Board of Directors of the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce would like to see the governor and state legislature work together to craft a comprehensive revenue and expenditure plan for California that includes an overhaul of our tax structure as well as spending limits and a structurally balanced budget that does not depend on accounting tricks and imagined revenue sources,” according to Mr. Little. “We would also like to see Governor Brown and the State Legislature work together now to deal with California’s fiscal emergency and adequately fund our public school and university system, as well as those other essential functions we rely on from our state government.”
Proposition 31( two year state budget): The Chamber Board voted to support Proposition 31 which provides for a two-year budget cycle for the State of California and also provides some opportunities for local relief from expenditures required by state legislation. The measure prevents the State Legislature from enacting anything during the interim period that costs more than $25 million unless offsetting revenues or spending cuts are identified. “Going to a two year budget cycle will give taxpayers and businesses some measure of stability as taxes, fees and costs from the state would be fixed for those two years,” Mr. Little said. “Prohibiting additional expenditures of more than $25 million will help rein in unfettered spending at the state level.”
Proposition 32 (prohibits automatic payroll deductions to support political activities): The Board could not come to a consensus on Proposition 32 and took no position. “Some Board members expressed the opinion that the measure unfairly targets labor unions, as corporations do not deduct from employee wages to support political expenditures,” according to Mr. Little. “Others felt that union, especially public employee unions, have too much influence in state government decision-making and passage of Proposition 32 would have a positive result by diminishing that influence.”
Proposition 33 (auto insurance portability of discounts): The Pasadena Chamber Board took no position on Proposition 33. While some Chamber Board members expressed the opinion that it could lower auto insurance rates for companies and individuals by allowing insurance companies to set rates based on discounts that may have been earned with a competing carrier, others were concerned that Proposition 22 was bankrolled by one individual auto insurance company owner, and may be in the best interest of that one company but not competing companies or customers.
Proposition 37 (labeling of genetically engineered foods): The Board took no position on Proposition 37 which would require labeling of some genetically engineered foods. The Board did not find that the Proposition would have a material impact on our local economy or our membership.
Proposition 38 (income tax increase to fund K-12 education): The Board took no position on Proposition 38. While education is clearly facing a funding crisis, and Proposition 38 would fund schools, the Board felt that public education would be better served by a complete overhaul of revenue and expenditures by the state. “The band-aid approach to shoring up our K-12 public education system proposed by Proposition 38 would not address the needs of the entire state and would merely push the hard work of budget and tax reform into the future,” according to Mr. Little. “Because Proposition 30 or Proposition 38 would supersede the other (if both pass, whichever passes with the highest margin is implemented) there was strong concern that only K-12 education and early childhood education is funded by Proposition 38. Concern was also raised about adding another level of bureaucracy to implement Proposition 38 and a complete lack of accountability for expenditures.”
Proposition 39 ( multi-state corporate taxes): The Board of Directors voted to oppose Proposition 39 which would require multi-state corporations doing business in California to pay taxes on the business done in California. (Currently, corporations have the opportunity to choose whether to pay California taxes or taxes in another state where they are doing business.) “While the increased revenue anticipated would be welcome by the state government, the Chamber Board felt this is not an appropriate time to make California even less friendly to corporations that might be considering doing business here, or that already do business here and may consider moving out of state completely,” Mr. Little said.
The Chamber Board did not consider Proposition 34 (Death Penalty), Proposition 35 (Human Trafficking), Proposition 36 (Three Strikes Law) or Proposition 40 (Redistricting) as these would not impact Pasadena Chamber members or our local economy.
The Pasadena Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors does not endorse individual candidates for office. The Board of Directors also recognizes that opinions vary widely among Pasadena Chamber membership on the measures and propositions.
The Pasadena Chamber of Commerce and Civic Association is a professional business organization. Since the earliest days of Pasadena, the Chamber has played a major role in the development of this internationally renowned city. Since 1888, when the organization was founded as the Board of Trade, the Chamber’s primary purpose has been the enhancement of both the business climate and the quality of life in Pasadena.

More from Arcadia Weekly

Skip to content