California Proposition 12, Water, Recreation, and Open Space Bond Measure (March 2000)

California Proposition 12
Election date March 7, 2000
Topic Bond issues and Drinking water systems
Status Approved
Type Bond issue	Origin State legislature

California Proposition 12 was on the ballot as a bond issue in California on March 7, 2000. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported authorizing the state to issue $2.1 billion in bonds for clean water, recreational projects, and preserve open space and farmland.

A "no" vote opposed authorizing the state to issue $2.1 billion in bonds for clean water, recreational projects, and preserve open space and farmland.

From 1975-2000, California voters had approved about $1.9 billion of general obligation bonds for similar purposes. In June 1999, all but about $18 million of the bonds authorized by the previous bond acts had been spent or committed.

Election results

California Proposition 12
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		4,657,600	63.11%
No		2,722,030	36.89%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 12 was as follows:

“

Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000.(The Villaraigosa-Keeley Act)

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

“

• Provides for a bond issue of two billion one hundred million dollars ($2,100,000,000) to provide funds to protect land around lakes, rivers, and streams and the coast to improve water quality and ensure clean drinking water; to protect forests and plant trees to improve air quality; to preserve open space and farmland threatened by unplanned development; to protect wildlife habitats; and to repair and improve the safety of state and neighborhood parks. • Appropriates money from state General Fund to pay off bonds.

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Fiscal impact

See also: Fiscal impact statement

The California Legislative Analyst's Office provided an estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact for Proposition 12. That estimate was:

“

State cost of about $3.6 billion over 25 years to pay off both the principal ($2.1 billion) and interest ($1.5 billion) costs on the bonds. Payments of about $144 million per year. Costs potentially in the tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments to operate property bought or improved with these bond funds.

”

Support

Official arguments

The official arguments in support of Proposition 12 were signed by Robert Stephens, chair of the National Audubon Society-California; Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, chair for Californians for Safe Parks; and Allan Zaremberg, president of the California Chamber of Commerce:

“

Yes on 12 for Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air and Coastal Protection! We have a responsibility to preserve our communities’ air and water quality, and to make our parks safe for our children and future generations. YES ON 12 WILL: Protect Our Air, Water, Rivers & Beaches from Toxic Pollution Provide Kids Safe Places to Play • Help Keep Kids Off Streets & Out of Gangs Protect our Environment & Enhance our Economy YES ON 12 IS SUPPORTED BY: National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation California Organization of Police and Sheriffs National Parks and Conservation Association Congress of California Seniors • League of Women Voters, Sierra Club California Chamber of Commerce STRICT SAFEGUARDS WILL ENSURE ALL FUNDS ARE SPENT AS PROMISED: Annual Audits Public Hearings Citizen Review YES ON 12 WILL NOT RAISE TAXES because it requires existing tax revenues to be spent efficiently and effectively. ALL CALIFORNIANS BENEFIT: 'Yes on 12 helps California communities make their parks safer for children, families and senior citizens. California’s seniors need safe neighborhood parks.' Congress of California Seniors SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS: 'Yes on 12 will help reduce crime by creating safer recreational areas to keep kids out of gangs, off drugs, and away from violence. Vote Yes on 12 to provide our children safer places to play. Join us in voting Yes on 12.' California Organization of Police and Sheriffs CLEAN WATER: 'We can help keep our water free of pollution and protect our coast, bays, beaches and rivers from toxic waste by supporting Proposition 12. This measure is vital because it protects the lands that give us clean water.' Clean Water Action CLEAN AIR: 'Yes on 12 will reduce air pollution and improve air quality by planting trees in our communities and by protecting forests, including redwood forests, that purify our air. We will all breathe easier by voting Yes on 12.' Coalition for Clean Air GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY & JOBS: 'California’s environment is crucial to our economy. Tourists visit our parks and natural areas bringing millions of dollars to state and local businesses. Our farm economy relies on healthy rivers and streams. By conserving these resources, Yes on 12 helps keep our economy strong and protects businesses and jobs.' California Chamber of Commerce A POSITIVE LEGACY FOR OUR KIDS: 'We need to leave future generations parks, natural lands, clean beaches and a better quality of life! We strongly urge a Yes on Proposition 12!' League of Women Voters of California WE ALL AGREE—YES ON 12: Yes on 12 is supported by business, children’s groups, environmentalists, labor, religious groups, law enforcement, and senior citizens. Republicans, Democrats, independents, reformers and taxpayer advocates recommend Yes on 12 (See our website at www.parks2000.org). YES ON 12—Protect our air and water from pollution, preserve our coast, rivers and beaches, and provide our children with safe places to play while providing annual public audits and strict fiscal safeguards.

”

Opposition

Official arguments

The official arguments in opposition to Proposition 12 were signed by Ray Haynes, California Senator; Brett Granlund, California Assemblyman; and Lewis K. Uhler, president, The National Tax-Limitation Committee:

“

THE NAME OF THIS BOND IS A HUGE DECEPTION— ONLY A SMALL PORTION OF THE $2,100,000,000 WILL BE SPENT ON NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS! The sponsors of this proposition would like you to believe that the bond proceeds will be used to fund neighborhood parks and playgrounds, to enhance your community and your family’s quality of life. But in fact, only a small fraction of the money has been specifically allocated for local city and county parks and playgrounds, and less than one-percent will be spent on soccer and baseball fields! So where will the rest of the money go? The government will use the vast majority of the money to buy more land for insects, rats and weeds. In short, this bond will not benefit your family. Your children will never get to set foot on the land that this bond will purchase, even though they will have to work throughout their adult lives to pay off the bond’s debt. What’s wrong with the government using this money to buy more land? First, there is no shortage of ‘‘park’’ space in California, since more than half of all the land in this state is already owned by the state and federal governments. Most of that land is in remote areas, where you and your family can’t enjoy it. Second, once government buys new land with bond funds, it will have to spend additional taxpayer dollars to manage its new property. Expect to see your taxes go up if this bond passes. Third, do you remember the raging forest fires that blanketed California with smoke last Fall? Most of the smoke came from fires on government-owned land, where dead and diseased trees were left to rot. If this bond passes, even more land will be owned and neglected by the government, and left to provide kindling for the next round of forest fire infernos. Fourth, bond measures are among the most expensive and wasteful financing schemes ever devised. According to the Secretary of State, taxpayers must pay back $1.78 for every $1 of bond proceeds, because of fees paid to lawyers and bankers and the effect of compounded interest. THIS MEANS THAT CALIFORNIA’S TAXPAYERS WILL ULTIMATELY HAVE TO SPEND $3,738,000,000 TO REPAY THIS $2,100,000,000 BOND! Fifth, Californians are already on the hook for $36,900,000,000 for bonds previously approved for other projects. California is now so far in debt that Standard & Poor’s has assigned our state the third worst credit rating of any state in the country! Sixth, the State Legislature determined that these projects were NOT sufficiently important to fund, NOT EVEN WITH THE $12,000,000,000 IN SURPLUS FUNDS THE STATE HAS REALIZED OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS. No schools, no roads, nothing for you and me—just more dirt for insects, rats and weeds. This money is literally being flushed down a rat hole. Vote NO on Proposition 12!

”

Path to the ballot

Proposition 12 was voted onto the ballot by the California State Legislature via Assembly Bill 18 of the 1999-2000 Regular Session (Chapter 461, Statutes of 1999) and Senate Bill 1147 of the 1999-2000 Regular Session (Chapter 638, Statutes of 1999).

Votes in legislature to refer to ballot
Chamber	Ayes	Noes
Assembly	61	15
Senate	31	3

See also

2000 Measures

• 2000 Measures
• Drinking water systems on the ballot
• Forestry and timber on the ballot
• Parks on the ballot
• land on the ballot
• and natural area conservation on the ballot
• Bond issues on the ballot
• 2000 legislative sessions

California

• California ballot measures
• California ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Official Voter Guide
• Full text of Proposition 12
• Official declaration of the March 7, 2000 vote
• Smart Voter on Proposition 12
• Cal Voter on Prop 12
• Top Ten contributors