Bakersfield Californian Editorial: Vote NO: Prop. 53 is not taxpayer ‘protection’

The Bakersfield Californian is opposing Proposition 53, warning it would lead to costly delays in maintaining and building bridges, highways and other vital infrastructure. "Prop. 53 is clearly not about controlling debt. It is about stopping California’s progress," the newspaper's Editorial Board writes.

The Californian says Prop 53 is a wealthy Stockton farmer’s “ploy to stop the construction of a state public works project that he opposes: the construction of water diversion tunnels through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta." But instead, Prop 53 would "inflict long-lasting harm on California’s ability to maintain and improve its vital infrastructure – including its highways, bridges, etc."

More than 200 groups have joined the bipartisan statewide coalition representing local government, public safety, water, business, labor, agriculture, educators and more opposing Prop 53. The measure will erode local control and add red tape and delays to crucial infrastructure projects, and would give voters in other areas of the state veto power over local projects.

The Californian writes that taxpayers ultimately will pay if Prop 53 is approved. "It could sidetrack much needed projects with expensive, time-consuming court and ballot-box battles. In the end, it also could make projects far more costly.

Other major newspapers opposing Prop 53 include the San Jose Mercury News and The East Bay Times.

Read the full Californian editorial here: