Brown may make June special election vote-by-mail

Governor Jerry Brown’s efforts to balance the budget have taken a new twist. According to Matier and Ross, the June special election, which would’ve had a referendum to extend current tax rates for five years, would be done by mail. The change would require a supermajority in the Legislature.

This doesn’t bode well for the chances of a ballpark initiative on that same ballot. The same kinds of resources that would normally be mobilized to bring out the vote in favor of a ballpark won’t be as effective for the mail-in vote. There’s also a danger for Brown in that mail-in vote tends to skew older and more conservative (anti-tax), and that the turnout may be poor due to people being unfamiliar with the process. The savings to the individual counties would be huge, however.

Can I hear it for a November ballpark election? Get your wallet out, Selig.

17 thoughts on “Brown may make June special election vote-by-mail

  1. Not convinced that an election will occur for Brown as there still seems to be enough resistance from the legislators that he is voting on raising taxes without having addressed how he plans to reduce expenditures—realize there are 60 days to do this to meet the deadline but not so sure that he has the mandate that he feels or publically professes to have–

  2. GoA’s,
    Brown doesn’t need a mandate. The GOP just needs to grow a spine and let the voters decide on taxes.
    Whether you’re for against taxes, it should be up to us, not a minority in the legislature.
    Speaking of taxes; since none will go towards construction of Cisco Field, a vote in SJ…well, you know the rest.

  3. Meant to say “for or against taxes.”. Damn Blackberry! Never again.

  4. Can’t MLB see that the longer they wait to make a decision regarding the A’s, the more difficult it will be to build a ballpark in San Jose or Oakland. Hmmm, maybe that’s the point of their delay.

  5. @Tony–I am not making a political statement for or against–it isnt the focus of this thread—my comment was directed towards timing–specifically the June timeframe–if it doesn’t happen at this time than more than likeley in November–my point being as others have said–you don’t want a ballpark initiative at the same time as this tax proposal is on the ballot—

  6. I’m not convinced Brown will even get his supermajority to get a mail in ballot. Let along enough support to even have an election in the first place. And even then he’d have an uphill battle to get the tax extensions approved as despite the poll number M&R list I’ve seen similar ones that skew the other way and show the overall support for an extension to be well into the negative. Frankly Moonbeam puts on a brave face, but the fact he’s now threatening any Republicans who are opposed to him shows his true desperation.

  7. fc,
    Being that Cisco Field won’t open until 2015, can you explain the reasoning behind your opinion above? Groundbreaking doesn’t have to happen for another two years.

  8. Given that every single delay in the process for Oakland is/has been supposedly fatal, shouldn’t this (along with the 25% shortfall in the land sale) be potentially damaging to SJ’s plans?

    I mean, would you end a post about a 6-month timetable pushback for Oakland with “Can I hear it for a November EIR? Get your wallet out, Selig.”?

  9. @Tony, If Cisco Field were such a slam dunk, why not start sooner rather than later? Why wait two years to break ground when you could start in 2012? My guess is that Selig just does not have the votes to approve the move, and now he faces the dilemma of what to do next. He knows SJ is the best option for the A’s, but the other owners won’t allow it. Fremont is no longer in the picture, which now only leaves Oakland. He’s agreed to help fund the EIR, but I’m sure he knows full well it will be an uphill battle to get a ballpark built in Oakland. So maybe, if he were to drag this BRC crap out long enough, Oakland will realize a ballpark is just not feasible, and Fischer/Wolff will look to move the team out of frustration.
    The point of my post was to suggest that maybe Selig was purposely dragging his feet in announcing the panel’s recommendations hoping things would resolve itself. Maybe he wants the waters muddied because it will lead to frustration on the part of Oakland and the A’s. Do I believe this to be the case? Probably not, but I can’t come up with a logical explanation as to why it’s taking so long for a decision to be made. It’s absolutely laughable and frustating at the same time.

  10. FC,
    Take a deep breath brah! Its Wolff and Co. saying Cisco Field won’t open until 2015, not me. Of course I wish Opening Day was this April, but I’m patient and can wait.
    Again, for the umpteenth time, the MLB and Bay Area universe does not revolve around the Giants. That’s what makes all this talk about the A’s leaving the Bay, Selig not having the votes, and the report being held up sound so ridiculous.
    Look, Wolff says the report is already complete AND he’s still focusing/working on San Jose…what more do you want at this point?
    FYI, a good piece over @ by Anthony Castrovince that compares parity between the NFL and MLB.
    A portion of the piece speaks volumes about the realities of the Bay Area situation:
    “…that market size matters not in the NFL and is dictatorial in MLB.” What other market out there would provide more for the A’s than the Bay Area/SJ? They’re not leaving the Bay Area fellas!

  11. @Tony, I’ll take a deep breath if you take a step back.
    First off, I commend you for your optimism. When many gave up on San Jose, you were one of the only ones that believed San Jose was still a possibility even as Wolff was unveiling his Coliseum North and Fremont designs. I joined in your optimism when Selig sent that letter to the A’s, and Fremont folded. But today, my optimism is wavering as we’re no closer to having a ballpark in San Jose then we were 3 years ago. Why do you think that’s the case?
    Surely MLB must see (as you and I do) that in terms of corporate support San Jose is the better optiion over Oakland. I probably also agree with you that there is no better market for the A’s to be in other than the Bay Area. You have a city with a population of over a million working hard to lure the A’s, and you have an owner that desperately wants to move to that city. Yet inspite of all of the above, here we sit nearly 3 years after the Fremont plan folded, and we still haven’t heard anything from MLB. Is it because San Jose’s RDA still has not secured all of the land needed for the ballpark? If that’s the only reason, then why is MLB extending a helping hand to Oakland’s RDA in agreeing to pay for their EIR? Why are they still even considering Oakland when it’s questionable whether the city can even pay for the land? Quite frankly, the only thing Oakland has going for it is that it’s not in the Giants territory.
    Help me out here Tony. Why should I believe San Jose is a lock?

  12. FC,
    OK, I’ll take a step back. Let me just end my tidbits on this thread with this: when San Jose has the entire Diridon South plot locked up, when they announce that no voter referendum will take place (because one may not technically be necessary) or have a vote and it’s succesful…if we STILL don’t hear anything from MLB, then even I will join the ranks of not believing San Jose is a “lock.” Until then, I will continue to excersize patients. That is all.

  13. @fc–did I miss something–when did MLB agree to pay for Oaklands EIR?

    • @fc–did I miss something–when did MLB agree to pay for Oaklands EIR?

      Actually, the city of Oakland is paying for the EIR (even agreeing to terminate the process, withold funding if the A’s “don’t commit” to The O!). Remember the “controversy” of IDLF calling the EIR a waste of taxpayer money?

  14. agree with Tony, the time for Bud to move is when San Jose has it locked down… BTW, are you a physical therapist (exercising patients)?

  15. Good one BC,
    I’m not the greatest speller (thank God for spell check). FYI, just finished PT for a lower lumbar strain. Good stuff!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.