California League of Cities votes to support Proposition 76

Desert Dispatch ^ | Oct. 11, 2005 | TRACIE TROHA

[FairOpinion]

SACRAMENTO -- Delegates to the California League of Cities voted by a narrow margin to support Proposition 76, the "Live Within our Means Act" sponsored by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The 135-124 vote came Saturday during the final hours of the League's annual three-day conference in San Francisco.

Victorville Mayor Mike Rothschild, who attended the conference and lobbied other cities to support the issue, said the vote was difficult to pass because League delegates were "almost divided on staying neutral."

"There were 486 voting members. We had to work very hard to get their support, " Rothschild said. "By the last day, half the members had left by the time of the vote because they had flights to catch."

Proposition 76 would limit state spending, change some of the school funding requirements and give the governor the power to make cuts in state spending.

The League board of directors had earlier adopted a neutral position on the measure. After three days of intense discussion on the issue, however, a resolution was placed before the League conference in support of Prop. 76.

"The League bylaws provide a means for city officials who disagree with a position to make their voices heard," said League Executive Director Chris McKenzie in a written statement. "In this instance, they were able to bring their views to the membership, and the majority of the delegates voting agreed with those views."

Local city officials said Monday they were in favor of Prop. 76 because it could be good for municipal government.

Apply Valley Mayor Scott Nassif called the measure a "protection of local funds."

"If the state has to live within their means they are less likely to manipulate local funding and take local funding away," he said. "We all have to live within our means."

Last week the Victorville City Council adopted a decision to support Prop. 76 and presented it at the League conference.

Rothschild said the support from municipal governments could bring a much-needed boost to get Prop. 78 on the Nov. 8 ballot.

"The governor can only carry so many votes," Rothschild said. "City council members across this state have a far greater influence."

[FairOpinion]

I didn't see this posted. This is a big deal, because the Democrat leaders of cities were very much against it, but the conservatives ones supported it. Support by local government is a real boost for Prop. 76. Earlier article with more info:

League of Cities in tug of war over Proposition 76

"Mayors of several of California's largest cities – Democrats Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, Gavin Newsom of San Francisco and Jerry Brown of Oakland – jointly announced their opposition to Proposition 76, claiming it would slash funding for public safety and education, according to The Associated Press.

A coalition of conservative rural and suburban supervisors, taking advantage of a small turnout, voted last month to endorse the initiative. "

[Amerigomag]

This is a big deal, because the This is a big deal, because the Democrat leaders of cities were very much against it, but the conservatives ones supported it..

I think you meant to say "This is a big deal, because the Democrat leaders of cities were very much against it, but the Republican ones supported it.

At least one conservative mayor of a large rural city (Autry) quit the League over a similar issue because the Republican Party was trying to ram moderate measures down the League's throat.Take the time to review the nay votes and tell me they were all Democrats and all liberal.

The CAGOP would better spend their time lobbying the uninformed and the undecided instead of trying to con Freepers.

[Carry_Okie]

The CAGOP would better spend their time lobbying the uninformed and the undecided instead of trying to con Freepers.

The problem is that conning FReepers evidently works to a degree, else they wouldn't spend the effort. Thus, when these cheerleading threads are encountered, best we keep a list of links to source discussions in order to innoculate them against misrepresentations, personal attacks, and unsubstantiated claims (thank you backhoe).

Allow me to get this started:

calcowgirl explains 76 to FareOpinion, again
Amerigomag gives a try at the same thing
My explanation to FareOpinion of the Legislative Analyst Office's opinion on the consequences of Prop 76
My response to FareOpinion's charge that opposition to 76 is supporting Democrats (the links in the post are fixed in #29)
FareOpinion's accusation that we have not provided her proof refuted here and here with a discussion of her rhetorical methods here.
Wilson Finance Director Slams Prop 76

I'll see if I can find the Reason Foundation's warnings about this proposition.

To any lurker: In these links, you will note the following difference: FairOpinion routinely levels unsubstantiated charges, misrepresents positions, and fails to support her positions with quotes supported by links to sources. You will note the preponderance of the contrary in these responses.

[Czar]

"FairOpinion routinely levels unsubstantiated charges, misrepresents positions, and fails to support her positions with quotes supported by links to sources."

And also fails to respond to any question that cuts too close to the truth about Prop. 76 or Arnold.

I'm still waiting for an answer to my post #106 here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499665/posts

But I'm not holding my breath...