Tuesday, April 25, 2017

phone
619 997 2495
fax
858 635 8931
email
Click Here
twitter
@PRProSanDiego

11702 Pickford Road
San Diego, CA 92131

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

Falcon Valley Group on FacebookFalcon Valley Group on Twitter

Subscribe to our Newsfeed

Subscribe to Falcon Valley Group's RSS Newsfeed.

Public Relations Society of America logo

Accredited in Public Relations logo

In The Newsroom

Associated Builders and Contractors San Diego
Friday, June 19, 2015
Apprentices and journeymen from the Class of 2015 are employed at businesses throughout San Diego County.
Associated Builders and Contractors San Diego
Monday, June 15, 2015
Three recipients receive on-the-job training, tools and tuition free classroom education.
Associated Builders and Contractors San Diego
Thursday, June 11, 2015
Fifty apprentices and craft trainees will receive their apprenticeship and journeymen certificates after completing a four year training program.


August 27, 2010

CONTACT:
Gayle Lynn Falkenthal, APR
                     619-997-2495 or gayle@falconvalleygroup.com

Judge’s Ruling Confirms Prop D is “a General Tax”
Refutes Police and Fire Funding Claims of Proponents by Describing Sales Tax
as “Not Earmarked” and “Untraceable”



(San Diego)
– Superior Court Judge David B. Oberholtzer today confirmed that Proposition D would impose a general tax increase with absolutely no guarantees or stipulations on how the money would be spent. The court’s determination was made in the context of a lawsuit filed by plaintiff Richard Rider, chairman of San Diego Tax Fighters, which asked the court to remove Proposition D from the ballot.

In his written ruling denying Rider’s motion to remove Prop D from the ballot, Judge Oberholtzer based his conclusion on an important finding of the court that “Proposition D seeks the approval of a half-cent sales tax increase, and nothing else.”

In handing down his decision, the Judge also emphatically stated on three separate occasions:
  • “The proceeds will go into the General Fund and are not earmarked for any purpose.”
  • “The tax before us is unquestionably a general tax for general purposes.”
  • “The tax is meant to go into the General Fund – and after that it is untraceable.”
While disappointed in the Judge’s decision to allow Prop D to remain on the ballot, Rider was pleased with the Judge’s comments regarding the use of any increased tax revenues from Prop D.

“We now have a judge’s determination that Prop D provides absolutely no guarantees that money will go to police and fire services,” Rider noted. “We urge the Mayor, city politicians, and city labor unions to refrain from falsely presenting Prop D to voters and intend to truth-test their statements throughout the campaign,” Rider commented.

The court will have another opportunity to rule on the legality of Prop D in a lawsuit filed by plaintiff April Boling, former chairwoman of the City’s Pension Reform Committee. Boling’s lawsuit alleges that Prop D’s fiscal impact analysis is inaccurate, misleading, and not impartial under California Elections Code §9295. A hearing in the Boling lawsuit is now set for Wednesday, September 8, at 8:30 a.m. in Superior Court Dept. 67.