KFI Radio’s talk show hosts John and Ken will be broadcasting live tomorrow from the Ayres Hotel in Orange to kick off signature gathering for the initiative to repeal the gas tax.
You can stop by between 2:00 and 6:00 to sign the petition, and you can also hang out and watch the show.
The Ayres Hotel in Orange is located at 200 The City Drive North in the City of Orange (map below). It’s right off the 5 Freeway.
What: Signature gathering to repeal the gas tax
When: Thursday, November 30, from 2:00pm – 6:00pm
Where: Ayres Hotel, 200 The City Drive N, Orange:
By John Moorlach | Regardless of what else is done, here’s the missing piece Congress and President Trump must add to the tax reform they’re working on: public-employee pension reform. What good is it if you get $500 in tax cuts from the federal government if your state and local taxes rise $1,000 to pay for burgeoning pensions for government workers?
The key: Revoke IRS Revenue Ruling 2006-43. It prevents allowing public employees the option of reducing defined benefit pension benefits in exchange for better pay. Dumping the rule would help not only taxpayers, but the public employees themselves.
I’m the only CPA in the legislature of the largest state, so please let me explain the situation for our representatives in Washington. In 2009, the County of Orange negotiated a strategy that allowed county employees, at their choice, to move from a traditional defined benefit retirement plan to a hybrid, comprising a lower defined benefit formula, combined with an employer-matching, 401(k) plan of 2 percent of wages.
This reform also would have meant approximately a 7 percent increase in net pay for county employees electing to do so, with no added cost to taxpayers. That especially would have helped struggling young families. And it would have eased the underfunded pension crises now facing the county.
To read the entire commentary on the Voice of OC website, please click here.
By Jeff Collins, Orange County Register | An overhaul of Proposition 13, California’s landmark tax-control measure, could go before state voters next year under a plan adopted last month by the California Association of Realtors.
The trade group is launching a signature drive to put a new proposition on the November 2018 ballot that would expand tax breaks for homeowners age 55 and older or those who are disabled.
If passed, the proposition would allow senior and disabled homeowners to transfer their low, existing Prop. 13 tax assessment to a new home anywhere in the state, using the option as often as they choose and paying any price for their new home.
Realtors say the provisions would help older owners “locked in their homes” because they’re reluctant to give up low Prop. 13 tax assessments when buying a new residence. Realtors maintain at least 70 percent of seniors haven’t moved in 17 years.
“It’s to make it easier for senior homeowners who want to move but don’t want to see a big tax bill,” said CAR President Steve White, owner of two Keller Williams brokerages in north Los Angeles County.
“Many homeowners who have seen their homes appreciate over the years are discouraged from moving because they face a big property tax increase,” White added. “This will allow senior homeowners to sell their existing home and blend their current tax rate with their new home. And it will free up their homes for other buyers who haven’t been able … to get into the housing market.”
To read the entire news story, please click here.
ADDITIONAL EXCERPT: The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which originally backed Proposition 13, long has supported tax-base “portability” for seniors, said David Wolfe, the group’s legislative director.
“We’re completely in favor of the concept,” Wolfe said. “The simple fact is you’re churning up the housing market by making it easier for families to move out of their starter homes and giving millennials a chance to buy those starter homes.”
By Jon Coupal | In this season of Thanksgiving, please don’t blame battered taxpayers if they pause when asked for what are they grateful. Considering the punishment being dished out to working Californians and the middle class by the Legislature and the governor, it may take them a moment to refocus on the good.
Sacramento has approved billions of dollars in new taxes that will fall hardest on average taxpayers. The new $5.2 billion gas and car taxes will cost the typical family about $600 per year — and fuel costs will increase by billions more in coming years due to the passage of a “hidden” carbon tax. New taxes on the filing of documents could add hundreds of dollars to the cost of property transactions, including the refinancing of a home. But this is just a start.
In a state that is already a leader in income tax rates, sales taxes and gas taxes — even property taxes are higher than in many other states — the Legislature has proposed, over the last year, $373 billion in new taxes. That’s right, lawmakers are promoting tax increases that would amount to almost three times the current state budget.
To read the entire column, please click here.
Carl DeMaio was on the John and Ken Show again Monday to provide an update on the initiative to repeal the gas tax:
John and Ken will be kicking off the signature-gathering effort with a live broadcast at the Ayres Hotel in Orange next Thursday, November 30, from 2:00-6:00pm.
The hotel is located at 200 The City Drive North, Orange — right off the 5 Freeway.
In addressing the American Newspaper Publishers Association in 1961, John F. Kennedy spoke of “a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” that seeks to rule the world and whose “dissenters are silenced.”
The young president, who would be silenced by an assassin’s bullets two and a half years later, warned, “We are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.
“It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
“Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.”
That speech, and that fateful day in Dallas on November 22, 1963, that saw the 35th president of the United States cut down in broad daylight were the subject of the above “Rasmussen Minute” published on November 7 by Rasmussen Reports — a nonpartisan electronic media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion polling information.
By Adam Ashton | Gov. Jerry Brown got most of what he wanted when he carried a proposal to shore up the state’s underfunded public employee pension plans by trimming benefits for new workers.
Five years later, he’s in court making an expansive case that government agencies should be able to adjust pension benefits for current workers, too.
A new brief his office filed in a union-backed challenge to Brown’s 2012 pension reform law argues that faith in government hinges in part on responsible management of retirement plans for public workers.
“At stake was the public’s trust in the government’s prudent use of limited taxpayer funds,” the brief reads, referring to the period when he advocated for pension changes during the recession.
While the brief targets a specific provision of the pension overhaul he championed, its arguments suggest he favors broader pension changes that affect current employees.
“It was as good as anything the lawyers we use could have written,” said Dan Pellissier, president of an advocacy group that that wants to reduce California pension obligations for public employees and retirees.
The filing embraces a cluster of recent court decisions that hold public employees are entitled to reasonable pensions, but not necessarily ones that are calculated on the most favorable formulas for them.
And the filing paints unions as unreasonable in insisting that any reduction in pension benefits must be offset by additional compensation. That’s the so-called “California rule,” the legal precedent that has barred state and local governments from modifying pension benefits for existing workers they’ve offered over the past 60 years.
To read the entire column in the Sacramento Bee, please click here.