2012 California Proposition 39

Referendum modifying corporate tax burdens Proposition 39 Tax Treatment For Multistate Businesses 7384416 4701562 12085978 2012 California Proposition 39 results map by county.svg County results Yes #47729E 70–80% #7D9CBB 60–70% #B6C8D9 50–60% No #BCBC83 60–70% #DEDEBD 50–60% SourceStatement of Vote http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2012-general/sov-complete.pdf California Secretary of State 3 June 2013 dead https://web.archive.org/web/20121224021529/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2012-general/sov-complete.pdf 24 December 2012 Proposition 39 is a ballot initiative in the state of California that modifies the way out-of-state corporations calculate their income tax burdens. The proposition was approved by voters in the November 6 general election, with 61.1% voting in favor of it.Statement of Vote November 6, 2012, General Election http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2012-general/sov-complete.pdf California Secretary of State 3 June 2013 dead https://web.archive.org/web/20121224021529/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2012-general/sov-complete.pdf 24 December 2012 http://www.nbcbayarea.com/blogs/prop-zero/Ballot-Initiative-Tax-Increases-Temporary-Income-Sales-Corporate-Jerry-Brown-Molly-Munger-Tom-Steyer-160114545.html The Three Numbers You'll Hear This Fall: 38 - 39 - 40 Joe Mathews June 30, 2012 NBC Bay Area September 25, 2012https://abc7.com/archive/8808824/ Prop 39 aims to cement California as green leader Nannette Miranda September 12, 2012 ABC 7 September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20130303183309/http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news%2Fstate&id=8808824 March 3, 2013 live http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2012/09/california-assembly-speaker-proposition-39-corporate-taxes.html Assembly speaker backs Proposition 39's corporate-tax revamp September 12, 2012 Los Angeles Times September 25, 2012http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2012/39_11_2012.aspx Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statue. July 18, 2012 Legislative Analyst's Office September 25, 2012 Supporters of Proposition 39 claimed that it will close a tax loophole that currently rewards out-of-state companies for taking jobs out of California and, for tax purposes, treats out-of-state companies the way California-based companies are treated. The savings generated by closing the loophole will be directed to fund public schools and create jobs in the state, especially construction jobs in the clean energy sector. http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/39-arg-rebuttals.pdf Argument in Favor of Proposition 30 2012 CA.gov September 25, 2012http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-17/california-voters-weigh-1-billion-tax-break-for-business https://web.archive.org/web/20120920084428/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-17/california-voters-weigh-1-billion-tax-break-for-business dead September 20, 2012 California Voters Weigh $1 Billion Tax Break for Business James Nash September 17, 2012 BusinessWeek September 25, 2012http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&aid=4916&ptid=9 Sacramento Bee Backs Prop 39 Steven Maviglio September 24, 2012 The California Majority Report September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20130211222912/http://camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles 2013-02-11 usurped http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/23/4843941/endorsements-proposition-39-is.html Endorsements: Proposition 39 is a tax code fix worthy of your 'yes' vote Editorial Board September 23, 2012 The Sacramento Bee September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120926022842/http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/23/4843941/endorsements-proposition-39-is.html 2012-09-26 dead Opponents argued that Proposition 39 is simply a tax increase, and it will make out-of-state companies less likely to do business in California.http://www.calwatchdog.com/2012/08/20/prop-39-and-ab-1500-a-taxing-alliance/ Prop 39 and AB 1500: A taxing alliance Katy Grimes August 20, 2012 CalWatchdog September 25, 2012 The proposition does not affect California-based companies or California residents.http://smartvoter.org/2012/11/06/ca/state/prop/39/ Proposition 39 2012 SmartVoter.org September 25, 2012 October 20, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121020113604/http://smartvoter.org/2012/11/06/ca/state/prop/39/ dead http://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/09/proposition-39-why-you-should-vote-yes-on-the-most-boring-proposition-on-the-2012-ballot/#.UFoDmY1lTWx Proposition 39 – Why You Should Vote Yes on the Most Boring Proposition on the 2012 Ballot September 6, 2012 San Diego Free Press September 25, 2012http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_21276138/mercury-news-editorial-californias-prop-39-will-help Mercury News editorial: California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here August 9, 2012 Silicon Valley Mercury News September 25, 2012http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/elections2012/propositions/whos-funding-prop-39-the-multistate-business-tax.html KCET Presents Election 2012 2012 KCET.org September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121011111849/http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/elections2012/propositions/whos-funding-prop-39-the-multistate-business-tax.html 2012-10-11 dead The nonpartisan California Legislative Analyst's Office has determined that changing the way out-of-state corporations are taxed in California will generate approximately $1 billion in revenue and create 40,000 jobs.http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2010/tax/single_payer/single_payer_052610.aspx Reconsidering the Optional Single Sales Factor Legislative Analyst's Office September 25, 2012 The primary financial backer of Proposition 39 was Thomas Steyer, who also played a lead role in designing the initiative.http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-prop39-20120927,0,7091721.story Yes on Proposition 39 Los Angeles Times September 27, 2012 September 27, 2012 California State Senator Kevin de León served as the co-chairman of the Prop 39 campaign.http://www.marketwatch.com/story/senator-kevin-de-leon-challenges-ceos-of-general-motors-kimberly-clark-and-international-paper-to-public-debate-on-proposition-39-2012-09-25 Senator Kevin de Leon Challenges CEOs of General Motors, Kimberly-Clark and International Paper to Public Debate on Proposition 39 Sep 25, 2012 MarketWatch September 25, 2012 November 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121102232339/http://www.marketwatch.com/story/senator-kevin-de-leon-challenges-ceos-of-general-motors-kimberly-clark-and-international-paper-to-public-debate-on-proposition-39-2012-09-25 dead California State Controller John Chiang appointed three members to a board created to oversee the Allocation of new funds related to the California Clean Energy Jobs Act.John Chiang Controller's Appointees to Prop. 39 Citizens Oversight Board http://www.sco.ca.gov/eo_proposition_39_oversight_board.html 2014-03-19 https://web.archive.org/web/20140204005402/http://www.sco.ca.gov/eo_proposition_39_oversight_board.html 2014-02-04 dead The three board members include: Gary Kremen, the founder of Match.Com also a clean technology engineer, entrepreneur and inventor; Erik Emblem, executive administrator and chief operating officer of the Western States Council-Sheet Metal Workers in Sacramento; and Dana Cuff, professor of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of California, Los Angeles. Background In 2009, Sacramento legislators changed corporate tax law so that out-of-state companies could choose between two methods for calculating their California income tax."Oakland Tribune editorial: California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here" (August 13, 2012). Oakland Tribune. Companies could choose either the "three-factor" or "single-sales factor" method. The three-factor method bases half of a company's tax bill on in-state sales and the other half on in-state property and employees.http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/39-title-summ-analysis.pdf TAX TREATMENT FOR MULTISTATE BUSINESSES. CLEAN ENERGY AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY FUNDING. INITIATIVE STATUTE. 2012 CA.gov September 25, 2012http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/07/prop-39-backers-suggest-state-end-contracts-with-tax-foes.html Prop. 39 backers suggest California end contracts with tax foes July 31, 2012 The Sacramento Bee September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121025054338/http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/07/prop-39-backers-suggest-state-end-contracts-with-tax-foes.html 2012-10-25 dead A company with ample sales but no physical presence in the state significantly reduces its tax burden when choosing the three-factor method. The change was part of a balanced budget deal between Arnold Schwarzenegger and state Republicans. California is the only state that allows out-of-state companies to choose how their income tax is calculated.http://itepnet.org/pdf/pb11ssf.pdf Corporate Income Tax Apportionment and the "Single Sales Factor" August 2012 Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy September 25, 2012 Supporters of Proposition 39 include San Francisco-based philanthropist and businessman Thomas Steyer, who founded Farallon Capital, a hedge fund, and One Pacific Bank, a community bank. Steyer, a signer of The Giving Pledge,https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna38556042 40 billionaires pledge to give away half of wealth 2012 MSNBC September 25, 2012 live https://web.archive.org/web/20121104012340/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38556042/ns/us_news-giving/ November 4, 2012 has contributed $21.9 million of his own money to a campaign in favor of the initiative. In 2010, Steyer co-chaired the successful effort to beat Proposition 23, a ballot initiative to overturn California's climate change laws.http://current.com/shows/the-gavin-newsom-show/videos/up-against-big-oil-tom-steyer-on-backing-state-pro-environment-initiatives/ Up against Big Oil: Tom Steyer on backing state pro-environment initiatives August 31, 2012 Current.com September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120925205248/http://current.com/shows/the-gavin-newsom-show/videos/up-against-big-oil-tom-steyer-on-backing-state-pro-environment-initiatives/ 2012-09-25 dead The League of Conservative Voters has contributed $25,000 to the campaign, while the Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers PAC has added $5,000. Similar laws have been passed in New Jersey, Illinois, and Texas.http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20120614a.html The New Jersey Comeback June 14, 2012 State of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie September 25, 2012 New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie called closing the loophole an important part of the New Jersey comeback. Assembly Bill 1500 John A. Pérez, a state representative from Los Angeles, introduced Assembly Bill 1500 in 2012. The legislation seeks to remove the three-factor method from the state tax code. As of August 31, 2012, AB 1500 had failed to gain the necessary support to move forward. The extra tax revenue generated by AB 1500 would have reduced tuition costs for state university students by up to two-thirds for families making less than $150,000 per year. A number of large out-of-state companies opposed the bill.http://cajobsnottaxes.com/opposition-letter-to-ab-1500/ Opposition Letter to AB 1500 April 13, 2012 cajobsnottaxes.com September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121102180638/http://cajobsnottaxes.com/opposition-letter-to-ab-1500/ 2012-11-02 dead The measure Proposition 39 removes the ability for out-of-state corporations to choose how to calculate their California tax burden. If passed, all companies doing business in the state would use the single-sales factor method, which only uses sales to calculate income tax. Proposition 39 also contains instructions on how the extra tax revenue —approximately $1 billion each year—will be spent. For the first five years, half of the new tax revenue would be spent on clean energy projects. The other half would go to the state's general fund. After five years, all extra monies would go to the general fund. Supporters of the measure mention four companies in particular that have been particularly advantaged by the current law. These are Chrysler Group, General Motors, International Paper, and Kimberly-Clark. In September 2012, however, Procter & Gamble and Chrysler both announced they wouldn't oppose Proposition 39.http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/19/4835809/chrysler-states-it-will-not-oppose.html#storylink=cpy Chrysler States it Will Not Oppose Proposition 39 September 19, 2012 The Sacramento Bee September 25, 2012 October 2025 medicmedichttp://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2012/08/california-taxes-proctor-gamble.html Procter & Gamble stands aside as corporate tax battle heats up August 3, 2012 Los Angeles Times September 25, 2012 In 2011, Genentech executive Andrea Jackson explained that her company located a new facility in Oregon to take advantage of the three-factor method. She said that California tax law encouraged the company to move facilities out of the state. A recent study by the independent research firm Beacon Economics claims that Proposition 39 could limit liability incentives for out-of-state businesses.https://beaconecon.com/index.php?option=com_easyblog&view=entry&id=26&Itemid=50 The Worst of Both Worlds: Understanding Why Prop 39 Is The Right Way To Go September 29, 2012 Beacon Economics October 2, 2012 Analysis Positive effects According to independent analyses, passage of Proposition 39 would add $1 billion to state revenue. It would also remove the advantage of building new facilities or hiring employees out-of-state. Supporters say that the measure would create up to 40,000 new jobs. Environmental and health groups claim that the extra money for clean energy projects would lead to safer schools and improved public health. The editorial board of The Sacramento Bee said that Proposition 39 represented "how direct democracy should work." Negative effects Opponents of Proposition 39 argue that companies will do less business with California because of higher taxes. They claim that the some form of the three-factor method has been in the tax code since 1966. Others fear that the proposition will add more bureaucracy and complexity to an already bloated tax law. They also point to California's unfriendly business tax climate: The state ranks 48th, according to the Tax Foundation. Endorsements As of September 2012, the Los Angeles Times, the Sacramento Bee, the San Jose Mercury News,http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_21276138/mercury-news-editorial-californias-prop-39-will-help Mercury News editorial: California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here August 9, 2012 Mercury News September 25, 2012 the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce,http://www.sfchamber.com/newspolicy/news/pressreleases/pr_2012_09_20.php San Francisco Chamber of Commerce Announces Ballot Positions for November Presidential Election Gwen Oldham 2012 San Francisco Chamber of Commerce September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20130122100947/http://www.sfchamber.com/newspolicy/news/pressreleases/pr_2012_09_20.php January 22, 2013 dead California State Assembly Speaker John Perez,http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/capitolnotebook/article/Tax-measure-gets-Speaker-Perez-s-support-3867096.php Tax measure gets Speaker Pérez's support Marisa Lagos September 14, 2012 San Francisco Chronicle September 25, 2012 the California Labor Federation,http://www.calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/prop_39_closing_a_corporate_tax_loophole_and_bringing_jobs_back_to_californ Prop 39: Closing a Corporate Tax Loophole and Bringing Jobs Back to California 2012 California Labor Federation September 25, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121004005306/http://www.calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/prop_39_closing_a_corporate_tax_loophole_and_bringing_jobs_back_to_californ 2012-10-04 dead California State Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg,http://www.yesonprop39.com/california-state-senate-president-pro-tem-darrell-steinberg-endorses-proposition-39/ California State Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg Endorses Proposition 39 2012 Yesonprop39.com September 25, 2012 https://archive.today/20121216143031/http://www.yesonprop39.com/california-state-senate-president-pro-tem-darrell-steinberg-endorses-proposition-39/ 2012-12-16 dead and former U.S. Secretary of State to Ronald Reagan, George Shultz,http://www.chamberalliance.biz/Websites/chamberalliance/images/PropositionMatrix2012.pdf 2012 Ballot Measures September 17, 2012 Chambers of Commerce Alliance September 25, 2012 April 30, 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20140430145832/http://www.chamberalliance.biz/Websites/chamberalliance/images/PropositionMatrix2012.pdf dead had endorsed the initiative. On September 26, 2012, the California Democratic Party Chairman, John Burton, announced his endorsement of Proposition 39. Other recent endorsements of the initiative include the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, the American Lung Association, Latin Business Association, California Labor Federation, California Community College Trustees, and the California League of Conservation Voters.http://www.sandiegopolitico.com/2012/09/california-democratic-party-chairman.html California Democratic Party Chairman, John Burton, Endorses Proposition 39 September 26, 2012 San Diego Politico October 2, 2012 As of October 1, 2012, General Motors, International Paper, Kimberly Clark, Chrysler and Procter & Gamble will not oppose Proposition 39 any further.http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_21657691/political-blotter-about-110-000-californians-did-online Political Blotter: About 110,000 Californians did online voter registration in first week October 1, 2012 Mercury News October 2, 2012 The Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce, Carpinteria Valley Chamber of Commerce, the Oxnard Chamber of Commerce, and the United Chambers of Commerce all oppose Proposition 39. Editorial opinion "Yes on 39" The Bakersfield Californian is in support of the initiative, stating that, "It's time to fix a bad tax policy, created three years ago by the California Legislature, once and for all."http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/opinion/our-view/x371314221/Prop-39-evens-field-for-states-businesses Prop. 39 evens field for state's businesses September 20, 2012 The Bakersfield Californian October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121011214029/http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/opinion/our-view/x371314221/Prop-39-evens-field-for-states-businesses 2012-10-11 dead The Contra Costa Times favors Proposition 39. They write, "State lawmakers have refused to correct the mistake they made in 2009 when, in a late-night budget session, they created a tax incentive for companies to locate outside California. Voters need to fix it for them on Nov. 6 by voting for Proposition 39."http://www.montereyherald.com/opinion/ci_21313511/contra-costa-times-repeal-prop-39-return-business Contra Costa Times: Repeal Prop. 39, return business August 14, 2012 Monterey Herald October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120924040807/http://www.montereyherald.com/opinion/ci_21313511/contra-costa-times-repeal-prop-39-return-business 2012-09-24 dead The Daily Democrat (Woodland, California): "Vote yes on this initiative to end a system that lets out-of-state corporations choose their methods of taxation."http://www.dailydemocrat.com/editorial/ci_21770457/democrat-endorsements-propositions California, United States Democrat endorsements: Propositions October 14, 2012 October 16, 2012 Daily Democrat The Fresno Bee endorsed Proposition 39 on October 1, 2012. They wrote, "If it's approved, the initiative would generate $1 billion a year."http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/09/23/3001748/editorial-measure-would-fix-loophole.html EDITORIAL: Proposition 39 would close tax loophole October 1, 2012 The Fresno Bee October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121005002950/http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/09/23/3001748/editorial-measure-would-fix-loophole.html 2012-10-05 dead The Los Angeles Times has endorsed Proposition 39. In a September 27, 2012 opinion piece, they wrote that, "Proposition 39, would raise an estimated $1 billion a year, about half of which would be dedicated temporarily to making public buildings more energy efficient."http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-prop39-20120927,0,7091721.story Yes on Proposition 39 September 27, 2012 Los Angeles Times October 2, 2012 The Marin Independent Journal: "This measure needs to be on the ballot because the state Legislature has refused to close a business tax loophole it approved in a late-night budget decision in 2009."http://www.marinij.com/opinion/ci_21761888/editorial-ij-endorsements-state-propositions-38-40 Editorial: IJ endorsements for state Propositions 38-40 October 13, 2012 Marin Independent Journal October 16, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121017003245/http://www.marinij.com/opinion/ci_21761888/editorial-ij-endorsements-state-propositions-38-40 October 17, 2012 dead mdy-all The Merced Sun-Star: "The initiative on the Nov. 6 ballot would close a $1 billion corporate tax loophole, one that legislators are incapable of shutting because they are beholden to outside influences."http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2012/09/27/2561994/our-view-proposition-39-shows.html Our View: Proposition 39 shows how direct democracy should work September 27, 2012 Merced Sun-Star October 16, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121009231739/http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2012/09/27/2561994/our-view-proposition-39-shows.html October 9, 2012 dead The Modesto Bee favors Proposition 39, writing, "Proposition 39 shows how direct democracy should work."http://www.modbee.com/2012/09/27/2392028/proposition-39-would-fix-big-tax.html Proposition 39 would fix big tax loopholes September 27, 2012 The Modesto Bee October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121006233733/http://www.modbee.com/2012/09/27/2392028/proposition-39-would-fix-big-tax.html 2012-10-06 dead The Oakland Tribune formally endorsed Proposition 39, writing "Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here."http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_21657691/political-blotter-about-110-000-californians-did-online Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here August 13, 2012 The Oakland Tribune October 2, 2012 The Press-Enterprise: "California has no need for a tax break that puts the state at an economic disadvantage."http://www.pe.com/opinion/editorials-headlines/20121003-election-yes-on-39.ece https://web.archive.org/web/20121008003226/http://www.pe.com/opinion/editorials-headlines/20121003-election-yes-on-39.ece dead October 8, 2012 Yes on 39 October 4, 2012 Press-Enterprise October 16, 2012 The Redding Record Searchlight has endorsed Proposition 39, writing, "[Proposition 39] ends a billion-dollar giveaway to out-of-state corporations."http://www.redding.com/news/2012/oct/01/editorial-close-senseless-tax-loophole-151-yes/ Editorial: Close senseless tax loophole — 'Yes' on Prop. 39 October 1, 2012 The Redding Record Searchlight October 2, 2012 October 6, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121006232456/http://www.redding.com/news/2012/oct/01/editorial-close-senseless-tax-loophole-151-yes/ dead The Sacramento Bee has endorsed Proposition 39. The newspaper advocated that voters approve the measure, writing, "Essentially, out-of-state corporations such as cigarette maker Altria gained the privilege to determine which of two methods of taxation allowed them to pay the least in state taxes, and they are allowed to toggle back and forth each year so as to gain the greatest benefit,... Proposition 39 shows how direct democracy should work."http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&aid=4916&ptid=9 Sacramento Bee Backs Prop 39 September 24, 2012 California Majority Report October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20130211222912/http://camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles 2013-02-11 usurped The San Diego Free Press has announced support for Proposition 39. They wrote that, "Proposition 39 would eliminate the ability of companies to choose between two methods to calculate their taxable income in California and require them to use sales only for the calculation."http://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/09/proposition-39-why-you-should-vote-yes-on-the-most-boring-proposition-on-the-2012-ballot/#.UGuiI1HO98E Proposition 39 – Why You Should Vote Yes on the Most Boring Proposition on the 2012 Ballot September 6, 2012 San Diego Free Press October 2, 2012 The San Jose Mercury News endorsed Proposition 39, writing, "State lawmakers have so far refused to correct the mistake they made in 2009 when, in a late-night budget session, they created a tax incentive for companies to locate outside California. Voters will be able to fix it for them Nov. 6 by voting yes on Proposition 39."http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_21276138/mercury-news-editorial-californias-prop-39-will-help California's Prop. 39 will help keep businesses here August 9, 2012 Mercury News October 2, 2012 The San Francisco Bay Guardian: "It's more fair, it creates the right incentives to keep jobs and equipment in the state, and it cuts a hole in the deficit."http://www.sfbg.com/2012/10/03/endorsements-2012-state-ballot-measures Endorsements 2012: State ballot measures October 3, 2012 San Francisco Bay Guardian October 16, 2012 The Santa Cruz Sentinel: "Ballot-budgeting? Yes. But as it stands, Steyer's Prop. 39 revenue would help create jobs while also cutting down on energy use and greenhouse gas emissions at public buildings -- and the revenue directed toward these causes is limited to five years. More importantly, the tax loophole is egregious and only encourages multistate companies doing business in California to create jobs outside the state."http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/opinion/ci_21693038/editorial-yes-39-close-tax-loophole-multistate-firms Editorial: Yes on 39; close tax loophole for multistate firms October 3, 2012 Santa Cruz Sentinel October 16, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121019002702/http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/opinion/ci_21693038/editorial-yes-39-close-tax-loophole-multistate-firms October 19, 2012 dead mdy-all "No on 39" The San Francisco Chronicle opposed the initiative in a September editorial, stating that, "Proposition 39, which would direct about half of the extra $1 billion in annual revenue to energy-efficient projects, corrupts a very good idea (tax reform) with a very bad one (ballot-box budgeting)."http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Editorial-No-on-Prop-39-3884285.php Editorial: No on Prop. 39 September 21, 2012 San Francisco Chronicle October 2, 2012 The San Diego Union Tribune opposed the initiative, writing, "We recommend a no vote on Proposition 39."http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/sep/30/no-on-prop-39-fix-needed-but-not-this-one/ No on Prop. 39: Fix needed, but not this one September 30, 2012 Union Tribune San Diego October 2, 2012 The Ventura County Star opposed Proposition 39, stating, "Supporters of Proposition 39 may have had good intentions, but this initiative on the Nov. 6 ballot doesn't measure up to reasonable expectations. The Star recommends a no vote."http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/sep/19/editorial-no-on-prop-39-a-275-billion-tax-grab-6/?partner=RSS Editorial: No on Prop. 39, a $2.75 billion tax grab on Nov. 6 September 19, 2012 The Ventura County Star October 2, 2012 June 23, 2013 https://web.archive.org/web/20130623102435/http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/sep/19/editorial-no-on-prop-39-a-275-billion-tax-grab-6/?partner=RSS dead The Pasadena Star-News opposed Proposition 39, writing that, "PROPOSITION 39 is a mixed bag - like so many of the initiatives that appear on California's ballots - that should be rejected."http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_21669287/our-view-no-prop-39s-ballot-box-budget Our View: No on Prop. 39's ballot-box budget September 30, 2012 Pasadena Star-News October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121004023337/http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_21669287/our-view-no-prop-39s-ballot-box-budget 2012-10-04 dead The San Bernardino Sun opposed the initiative, writing, "Of the $1 billion or so in additional tax revenue that change would produce, Proposition 39 directs half into energy efficiency and alternative energy projects for four years."http://www.sbsun.com/editorial/ci_21666647/no-more-ballot-box-budgeting-no-prop-39 No more ballot-box budgeting; no on Prop. 39 September 30, 2012 San Bernardino Sun October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121009231156/http://www.sbsun.com/editorial/ci_21666647/no-more-ballot-box-budgeting-no-prop-39 2012-10-09 dead The editorial board of the Appeal-Democrat opposed Proposition 39 in an editorial in May, writing, "Steyer said the initiative would create green jobs. But taxes kill jobs by sucking money out of the private sector. Similar green-jobs claims were made about Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. But A.B. 32 didn't prevent state unemployment from soaring well above the national rate. California's real employment problem is not a lack of green jobs, but the state's severe anti-jobs climate, to which A.B. 32 and the specter of Steyer's initiative contribute."http://www.appeal-democrat.com/articles/tax-116056-california-billion.html https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20120522132640/http://www.appeal-democrat.com/articles/tax-116056-california-billion.html dead May 22, 2012 Our View: California businesses facing new tax hikes May 10, 2012 Appeal-Democrat October 2, 2012 The Los Angeles Daily News wrote "...the measure has two big problems: One, it's yet another example of ballot-box budgeting, directing half the revenue that would be generated into niche projects instead of into the general fund; and two, it goes back on a budget deal that the Legislature made three years ago."http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_21667464/editorial-no-proposition-39 Editorial: No on Proposition 39 October 1, 2012 Los Angeles Daily News October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121004020552/http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_21667464/editorial-no-proposition-39 2012-10-04 dead The San Gabriel Valley Tribune: "California can't stand any more ballot-box budgeting that squirrels away money for a single purpose favored by an initiative's proponents - in this case a hedge-fund billionaire. Proposition 39 creates the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund, another otherwise untouchable pot of money like the First 5 and mental health funds that past initiatives have given us. The purposes are good, but they should be weighed against other priorities like education and care for the indigent and elderly."http://www.sgvtribune.com/opinions/ci_21669287/our-view-no-prop-39s-ballot-box-budget Our View: No on Prop. 39's ballot-box budget September 30, 2012 San Gabriel Valley Tribune October 2, 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20121004013553/http://www.sgvtribune.com/opinions/ci_21669287/our-view-no-prop-39s-ballot-box-budget 2012-10-04 dead Legislative Implementation After Proposition 39's passage, the California Legislature enacted Senate Bill 73 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 29, Statutes of 2013) to direct the Proposition 39 funds in accordance with the measure.http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/Prop_39_Tracking_Progress.pdf California Energy Commission − Tracking Progress California Energy Commission August 1, 2016 September 29, 2016 October 2, 2016 https://web.archive.org/web/20161002142603/http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/Prop_39_Tracking_Progress.pdf dead The Legislature directed most of the measure's revenues to school districts, community colleges, county offices of education, charter schools, and state special schools to undertake energy efficiency and clean energy projects.http://seuc.senate.ca.gov/sites/seuc.senate.ca.gov/files/01-20-16_background.pdf Oversight Hearing: The California Clean Energy Jobs Act (Proposition 39): Progress to Date Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communication January 20, 2016 The Legislature directed a smaller portion of revenues to an energy conservation revolving loan fund, and energy-related workforce development for disadvantaged youth and veterans. To implement the programs, the legislation designated the California Energy Commission as the lead agency to work in consultation with the California Department of Education, California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, California Public Utilities Commission, California Workforce Development Board, the Division of the State Architect, the California Department of Industrial Relations, and the California Conservation Corps. Outcome The California Clean Energy Jobs Act Citizens Oversight Board is the entity tasked with overseeing the implementation of Proposition 39.http://www.energy.ca.gov/efficiency/proposition39/citizens_oversight_board/ The California Clean Energy Jobs Act (Proposition 39) – Citizens Oversight Board Commission California Energy www.energy.ca.gov 2016-09-29 Many have criticized the implementation of Proposition 39 for its slow start,https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article31345247.html Trust in short supply as Prop. 39 gets off to slow start Editorial Board August 17, 2015 Sacramento Bee but the California Energy Commission claims the slowness is due to a variety of reasons, including the necessary legislative and regulatory processes to get the program running, and the lack of capacity at under resourced K-12 schools to apply for funding and implement projects.http://www.energy.ca.gov/2016publications/CEC-400-2016-004/CEC-400-2016-004-CMF.pdf Proposition 39: California Clean Energy Jobs Act, K-12 Program and Energy Conservation Assistance Act 2013-2015 Progress Report California Energy Commission 2016 2016-09-29 2016-10-02 https://web.archive.org/web/20161002143505/http://www.energy.ca.gov/2016publications/CEC-400-2016-004/CEC-400-2016-004-CMF.pdf dead Over the first three years of implementation, the measure has delivered $1.178 billion in revenue, which is less than the $1.5 billion the Legislative Analyst's Office had originally projected.http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2012/39_11_2012.aspx Proposition 39: Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statue. Legislative Analyst's Office 2012 www.lao.ca.gov 2016-09-29 In 2013, the Don Vial Center on the Green Economy projected that Proposition 39 would create an estimated 3,410 direct jobs and 7,843 indirect and induced jobs annually,http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/proposition-39-jobs-and-training-for-californias-workforce/ Proposition 39: Jobs and Training for California's Workforce Center for Labor Research and Education UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education May 1, 2013 laborcenter.berkeley.edu 2016-09-29 but in 2015, the Associated Press estimated that only 1,700 jobs had been created in the first three years.http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f9777e5ea1f6484a99f19c94d0f9a5fe/ap-exclusive-california-measure-fails-create-green-jobs Lawmakers call for oversight hearings on green jobs measure Julia Horowitz August 18, 2015 Associated Press August 18, 2015 The data regarding school energy consumption reductions are not yet available, but the school projects are on a publicly searchable database.http://prop39publicsearch.energy.ca.gov/ Proposition 39 California Energy Commission prop39publicsearch.energy.ca.gov 2016-09-29 References 30em Category:2012 California ballot propositions Category:Taxation in California Category:Initiatives in the United States