August 27, 2010
CONTACT: Gayle Lynn Falkenthal, APR
619-997-2495 or firstname.lastname@example.org
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.”
“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.