Get the Facts

What They're Saying

Download PDF

Measure will undermine local control and vital infrastructure projects. 

“Prop 53 irresponsibly fails to contain an exemption for natural disasters or major emergencies. It could impair our state’s ability to rebuild critical infrastructure following earthquakes, wildfires, floods or other natural or man-made disasters.” 

Lou Paulson, President CA Professional Firefighters

"Prop 53 would erode local communities’ ability to invest in critical infrastructure priorities by giving voters in faraway regions veto authority over projects they may never use and play no role in funding” 

Robbie Hunter, President California State Building and Construction Trades Council

“Prop 53 is dangerous because it would stall or stop vitally needed infrastructure projects all over the state including water reliability projects, road safety and bridge repairs, universities and college buildings and other infrastructure.” 

Allan Zaremberg, President California Chamber of Commerce

"Prop 53 gives voters in distant regions the power to block major projects in other parts of the state that many of our city residents need. This burdensome measure is bad news for local governments and citizens who deserve responsible infrastructure investment."

Chris McKenzie Executive Director, League of California Cities

“Prop 53 could threaten a wide range of water projects including storage, desalination, recycling and other vital projects to increase water supply and improve water quality.”

Tim Quinn Executive Director, Association of California Water Agencies

“Prop 53 would disrupt county governments’ ability to join together with other local governments or with the state to invest in local transportation improvement projects. It stamps on local control by requiring a statewide vote on some local projects, even if they don’t have statewide impacts. Prop 53 will increase infrastructure project costs and add bureaucratic hurdles that will delay investments in projects that improve our counties’ quality of life.”

Keith Dunn Executive Director, Self-Help Counties Coalition

“Reliable infrastructure is critical to public safety. This measure erodes local control and creates new hurdles that could block communities from upgrading critical infrastructure such as bridges, water systems and hospitals. That’s why the California State Sheriffs’ Association strongly opposes Prop 53.” 

Sheriff Donny Youngblood, President California State Sheriffs’ Association

“Proposition 53 would create a new avenue for opponents to try to block badly needed water supply projects and water infrastructure.” 

Tom Nassif, President & CEO Western Growers Association

“Why should statewide voters have to approve a major project being undertaken and funded exclusively by an individual county or a specific region of the state, such as the Bay Area?” 

East Bay Times Editorial “Reject Prop 53, requiring statewide revenue bond approval,” July 23, 2016

“Proposition 53 gives local taxpayers and residents less ability to decide what gets built in their communities.” 

Gary Toebben, President & CEO Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce

“While Prop 53 claims to be about ‘empowering voters’ to decide what infrastructure projects to fund, the exact opposite is true. The measure would erode local control by requiring statewide votes on some projects, even when they are funded by local users and ratepayers.” 

David Guy President, Northern California Water Association

“Prop. 53 will undermine the rights of local voters by requiring a statewide vote even for some local projects. This new mandate would further delay or halt vital repairs to crumbling infrastructure throughout the state.” 

John A. Coleman CEO, Bay Planning Coalition

“Association of California Cities – Orange County believes Proposition 53 undercuts the ability for local governments to fund local and regional infrastructure projects - essentially taking local control out of the hands of cities. At a time when our state is in desperate need of infrastructure repairs, Prop 53 puts local governments at an even greater disadvantage.” 

Heather Stratman Chief Executive Officer, Association of California Cities – Orange County

“This proposition would significantly delay the funding and completion of important Valley infrastructure work — including road and water projects.” 

Nathan Alonzo Government Affairs Manager, Fresno Chamber of Commerce

“If the measure becomes state law, it would constrain infrastructure financing and likely result in reduced investment over time, particularly for major water projects.” 

Fitch Ratings “Revenue Bond Loss Would Slow California's Infrastructure,” November 19, 2015

“It's a classic badly drafted proposition with the potential for massive unintended consequences, none of them good.” 

San Jose Mercury News November 2015 Editorial