Here’s how the editors of Riverside’s newspaper, The Press Enterprise came down on Riverside Measure Z:
Ultimately, though, our board decided to oppose Measure Z.
If it had been a special tax – dedicating its proceeds to particular needs such as infrastructure upkeep and improvement, and requiring a two-thirds vote for passage – we could have lined up behind Measure Z. But as it is, it transfers too much money for too long – 20 years – from taxpayers’ pockets to a City Hall that has yet to demonstrate careful stewardship of its revenue for a sustained period of time.
That is how the SF Chronicle and SF Examiner should have responded to S.F. Prop K.
Like Measure Z, SF Prop K will be adopted with a 50% vote because the money raised goes to the General Fund. Which means that a yes vote in either city would be an expression of trust in the wisdom and prudence of that city’s City Hall. Knowing that they didn’t enjoy that level of confidence, San Francisco’s politicians did Riverside one better. They threw in a sweetener. Prop J….Prop K’s companion measure….promises nice-sounding things but has no weight of law. Once they have the money San Francisco’s politicians can do what they want with it. Riverside’s politicians played it straight. San Francisco’s politicians did not.
– Gerald Cauthern, SaveMuni