Bonds Target Children, Vets and Housing

Three bond issues on the Nov. 6 ballot would raise a total of $755 million to benefit a broad spectrum of low- and middle-income Californians--except for a share that could also reach the pockets of those in higher brackets.

Passage of Proposition 145 would authorize the sale of $325 million in bonds to finance homes for first-time buyers and to provide housing assistance for a range of low-income groups.

Proposition 142 is a $400-million home- and farm-loan measure designed to aid military veterans.

Proposition 151 would raise $30 million to build and expand child-care centers.

Worked out in negotiations between Gov. George Deukmejian and Democratic legislative leaders during the final days of the 1990 session, Proposition 145 would provide $200 million in low-interest loans and interest-rate subsidies to 5,000 potential first-time home-buyers who meet certain requirements.

The remaining $125 million would go for a variety of programs designed to assist low-income renters, farm workers, homeless people and those living in buildings that might become unsafe during a major earthquake.

“Proposition 145 will make home ownership a reality for many families again,” Deukmejian said. “Housing prices in California have doubled in the past 10 years. Many families, even with both parents working, are unable to become homeowners.

“Only one in five California families can afford to buy a median-priced home.

This is discouraging to young families just starting out and to employers who want to bring more jobs to our state.”

Senate Republican Leader Ken Maddy of Fresno carried the enabling legislation. The housing aid measure is also supported by Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles) and the California Assn. of Realtors.

Primary opposition to the housing plan comes from Assemblyman Dan Hauser (D-Arcata), the chairman of the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development.

It is a “yuppie” ballot measure, Hauser charged, because people who earn more than $80,000 a year could qualify for low-interest home loans in some counties where home prices are very high. Eligibility is tied to median prices, so a family of three living in San Mateo or Marin counties and earning $83,000, for example, could qualify, according to the state formula.

Hauser said it would establish “a policy which benefits the wealthiest residents of our state while providing virtually no additional housing for those in greatest need.”

Proposition 142, the $400-million Cal-Vet home- and farm-loan bond issue, is aimed at helping 3,200 additional military veterans obtain loans. It would continue a state program that has been in operation for almost 70 years.

The Cal-Vet program is self-supporting because the interest and principal on the bonds are paid back with money received from monthly loan payments made by veterans.

Strongly backed by various veterans groups, the legislation to place the bond issue on the ballot cleared both houses of the Legislature without dissent.

It was carried by Sen. Don Rogers (R-Bakersfield). B. T. Collins, the state’s Vietnam War Memorial commissioner, was a leading supporter.

Rogers described the Cal-Vet program as “an appropriate expression of our appreciation for the sacrifices U.S. veterans of foreign wars make in defense of our state and nation.”

Ted Brown, chairman of the Los Angeles central committee of the Libertarian Party, opposed the measure, warning that a recession could cause many veterans to default on their Cal-Vet loans and leave taxpayers to pay off the bad debts.

Proposition 151, the $30-million bond issue to start up or expand child-care centers for the children of working parents, is the outgrowth of a bill sponsored by Sen. Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles), chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services.

The money would be used to fund low-interest loans to acquire, renovate, construct or purchase equipment for child-care centers.

A nine-member Child Care Facilities Authority would administer the loan program. Preference would be given to applicants who serve areas with significant unmet child-care needs.

“Although many parents would prefer to stay at home and care for their children,” Watson said, “economic necessity is forcing them into the labor force.

“This means that some form of child care is needed for a good part of the day. For young people in their critical formative years, the type of care they receive can affect their development and achievement later in life.”

Sen. Robert Presley (D-Riverside), chairman of the Select Committee on Children and Youth, and Sen. Becky Morgan (R-Los Altos Hills), chairwoman of the Select Committee on Infant Child Care and Development, also support Proposition 151.

Opponents include John Vernon, former chairman of the Libertarian Party, who argued that tax credits or tax deductions for working parents would be a better way of providing assistance for child-care purposes.

Deukmejian recently urged California voters to choose carefully when voting on the more than one dozen proposed bond issues that will appear on the general election ballot.

“Without fiscal restraint by the voters this fall,” he said, “we could find ourselves too deeply in debt and jeopardize the fiscal health we have worked so hard to achieve.”