South City representatives of the Classroom Teachers Association may knock on your door this fall to talk about two controversial state measures that will appear on November's ballot: Proposition 30 and 32.
"We're geared up and organizing ourselves for campaign work," said SSF CTA president Jan Speller.
Their campaign will be to support Prop 30, which would increase income taxes on individuals who earn over $250,000 annually and families with an annual income higher than $500,000. The tax would last seven years and its revenue would go toward public education and the state general fund.
Prop 30 also includes:
- Increases sales and use tax by ¼ cent for four years.
- Allocates temporary tax revenues 89% to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.
- Bars use of funds for administrative costs, but provides local school governing boards discretion to decide, in open meetings and subject to annual audit, how funds are to be spent.
- Guarantees funding for public safety services realigned from state to local governments.
South City's CTA is currently educating its 483 local members on the propositions, and will soon begin phone banking, and closer to Election Day, they will canvas.
Speller said that if Prop 30 fails, budget cuts that the South San Francisco Unified School District has experienced in recent years will only be exacerbated.
"We're in a district that's pretty lean now; there's no fat left," she said.
Prop 30 also addresses the larger state deficit and would direct revenue to the general fund; if voters reject the measure, the state budget would have to be reduced by $6 billion.
The SSFUSD Board of Trustees voted to support Prop 30 at a meeting last week.
SSF CTA opposes Prop 32, which is marketed as "YES on 32, Stop Special Interest Money Now." Speller calls this bill a "union-busting proposition and would deny our ability to do our work as union."
Attached to this article is analysis of Prop 32, prepared by the attorney general, and below are points from the text of the bill, from KCET's coverage here:
- Ban both corporate and union contributions to state and local candidates
- Ban contributions by government contractors to the politicians who control contracts awarded to them
- Ban automatic deductions by corporations, unions, and government of employees’ wages to be used for politics
Prop 32 critics say that its language is misleading, and that although it is marketed as a bill to get money out of politics, critics say it would actually serve the interests of Super PACs.
"There will be an ad war," Speller said. "The people who support Yes on 32 and No on 30 have very deep pockets. We don't have deep pockets, but I think the voters will recognize how important it is to support Prop 30."
A third state proposition that shares similar turf is 38, backed by Pasadena attorney Molly Munger.
Prop 38 would also increase income taxes to fund public education, it but would not single out individuals with higher incomes, as Prop 30 does. Also, funds generated via Prop 38 would not go in part to the state's general fund, as is the case with Prop 30.
EDITOR'S NOTE: A previous version of this story stated in the third paragraph that the SSF CTA supports Prop 32, when the association actually supports 30. Patch apologizes for this error. Also, the sentences in bold in this story were added for clarification.
Tell us in the comments if you support the SSF CTA in campaigning for Prop 30, and if you have decided which of the three propositions discussed here you will support this November.