.
Prop 1D does NOT ask you to pay ANY new taxes.

It helps by taking some from taxes that are already being levied.

It temporarily takes much needed funds from an agency that has over $2 BILLION to use up before there are any potential changes required in their budgets.

Please do not throw this GREAT idea and read Prop 1D before you vote!

First 5’s are sitting on over $2 BILLION dollars, funds they can use over the next 5 years while they help the rest of California. It's a total misstatement for them to say that those monies are already committed to certain programs because with one vote their commissions can re-direct those reserves to whatever they choose to. So, who's to be trusted?

Well, IMO, it's not First 5. They are run by Commissioners who vote for budgets that direct cash to their OWN departments and organizations. There are now wild exaggerations about how 1D could affect people: just not so – reserves will be used. Perhaps such claims are why Prop 1D puts an auditor on the Commission to oversee their actions.

If that does not bother you then this should: the First 5 lobbyist has received $1 million of First 5 funds - about $200K of that went straight to her pension plan - IRS forms say so! Prop 1D stops her from taking any new First 5 funds!

Vote YES on 1D !

Here’s something else to chew on about First 5 (Prop 1D):

Although some expenditure for evaluating programs is required by the First 5 statute, over the last 7 or so years, audited financial statements reveal that First 5 commissions have spent well over $100 MILLION on evaluation. How can it cost that much?

Well, First 5 evaluation payments go mainly to private consulting firms like Harder and Company, not to children 0 to 5!

Based on audited financial statements and adding a standard 3% for inflation, an analysis shows that in 10 years, they are on course to spend over $300 MILLION on evaluation.

In 15 years, it will top $500 MILLION. In 25 years: $1 BILLION dollars+.

First 5 Commissioners are misspending funds: Proposition 10 was not meant to make the evaluators RICH!

Opponents of Prop 1F say withholding raises will not give elected officials incentive to balance the budget? Are you kidding? The incentive should be balance the budget or lose your job, it's what we elected you to do. The rest of society is seeing lost bonuses and raises, why do elected officials feel they are exempt from laws and situations that impact the very people they are elected to represent?

One of the things that got California into this mess is excessive borrowing - voters never seem to see a bond measure they don't like. Now Prop 1C represents, yet again, even more borrowing, but this time with no obligation for the state to pay back the loan. Instead, the payback relies on future gambling revenues. Something about that makes no sense.

1F is a harmless populist measure. It won't do any good, but won't do any harm. All it does is treat public employee salaries the same way private employee salaries are treated: when the company has losses, nobody gets a raise. That's fair.

Vote No on everything.

This is the kind of political BS that got us in this mess. It's time elected official started working instead of wasting money and time.

I'm voting no on all of it except 1F.