Proposition 15 | Vote 2000 Home | Next - Prop 16 | Secretary of State Home |
The Hertzberg-Polanco Crime Laboratories
Construction Bond Act of 1999.
Argument Against Proposition 15
 

Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.


In an orgy of spending, California legislators passed an $81 billion budget for Fiscal Year 2000. That's up from $63 billion just four years ago. There was a $4 billion budget surplus this year. That's money that should have been refunded to taxpayers. In fact, each family could have received over $330 to spend as they chose. But instead most of our legislators--Democrat and Republican alike--found ways to spend this money on new government programs.

What does this have to do with Proposition 15? Well, if the legislators had an extra $4 billion to play around with, why didn't they spend a relatively paltry $220 million of it (about 5.5% of the surplus) on the proposed forensics laboratories--and save us more election costs?

No, they couldn't do that. They had to spend it immediately. Now if voters say "yes" on Proposition 15, the forensic laboratories won't just cost $220 million. BONDS ALMOST DOUBLE THE COST OF ANY GOVERNMENT PROJECT. Taxpayers will have to pay the interest on these bonds for the next 30 years. So, at the end, we'll be out about $395 million.

So we see that this proposal would have cost a lot less if it was paid for out of the current budget. But let's ask: should California taxpayers be financing new local forensics labs and even remodeling older ones?

Forensics labs help police officers and prosecutors prove their cases with physical evidence. This includes crime scene reconstruction, DNA testing, fingerprinting, handwriting analysis, studying forged documents, and audio and videotape analysis. An internet search shows that there are numerous private companies already performing these same services. They are used by defense attorneys, or even by the government to assist public employees. For this reason, it would be much more economical to privatize these functions and send out all such work to private labs. Indeed, lab analysts currently employed by local governments would be in great demand at the private firms.

Even if we concede that California taxpayers should pay for forensics labs, it doesn't seem as if such facilities should take up enough room to warrant a separate building. The lab could be part of the local police station--or could even rent space in a privately-owned industrial park or other commercial building.

Whenever the government is involved in a building project, it costs a lot more than a private enterprise project. Governments require an expensive approval process, then require contractors to pay the prevailing union wage for construction, more than what the low bidder would pay. The losers: the taxpayers.

Send a message to legislators. There are alternatives to spending tax money on new forensics labs. There also should be some punishment for squandering a hefty budget surplus, instead of refunding it to taxpayers, or even spending it on this relatively small project. Please vote NO on Proposition 15.
GAIL K. LIGHTFOOT
Past Chair, Libertarian Party of California

THOMAS TRYON
Calaveras County Supervisor

TED BROWN
Insurance Adjuster/Investigator









Proposition 15 | Vote 2000 Home | Next - Prop 16 | Secretary of State Home |