Vote 2000 Home | Ballot Pamphlet Home | Campaign Finance | Secretary of State Home
32  | 33  | 34  | 35  | 36  | 37  | 38  | 39
PROPOSITION 2000 General
35 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS. USE OF PRIVATE CONTRACTORS FOR ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES.
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 35

Proposition 35’s backers use buzzwords: “gridlock,” “over-crowded schools.” BUT THEY DON’T SAY WHAT IT ACTUALLY DOES.

They say we need to give government “the choice” to contract with private engineering corporations. But that choice ALREADY EXISTS.

FACTS:

• CALIFORNIA ALREADY USES BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ENGINEERS. Just like other states, THOUSANDS OF GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS ARE ANNUALLY AWARDED to private firms of every kind. This year, Caltrans will spend $150,000,000.00 on contracts with private engineers.

• PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS ALREADY EXIST. For example, when the Northridge earthquake knocked down the Santa Monica Freeway, a partnership of Caltrans engineers and private construc-tion companies rebuilt it in record time.

So why is Proposition 35 on the ballot?

The REAL PURPOSE is to benefit engineering consultants who paid to put Proposition 35 on the ballot.

• Proposition 35 AMENDS THE CONSTITUTION TO EXEMPT JUST THIS ONE INDUSTRY from legal requirements that apply to every other business that contracts with state government.

• Proposition 35 REQUIRES A NEW SELECTION PROCESS WHICH IT DOES NOT DEFINE. How will engineering contracts be awarded? Proposition 35 doesn’t say.

Because Proposition 35 doesn’t define the process, it will cause CONFUSION, LITIGATION AND COSTLY ROAD AND SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION DELAYS while new regulations are created and challenged in court.

California Federation of Teachers says Proposition 35 will delay construction needed for class size reduction. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association says Proposition 35 will COST TAXPAYERS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

Don’t let a special interest change the Constitution for its bene-fit, not yours.

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 35!

LENNY GOLDBERG, Executive Director
California Tax Reform Association
MARY BERGAN, President
California Federation of Teachers
HOWARD OWENS, President
Consumer Federation of California
 


  Analysis by the Legislative Analyst
  Argument in Favor of Proposition 35
  Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 35
  Argument Against Proposition 35
  Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 35
 

Vote 2000 Home | Ballot Pamphlet Home | Campaign Finance | Secretary of State Home