The City’s ILLEGAL Promotion of Measure PF
The City Is Violating State Law in Its June 2026 Tax Communications
To protect the integrity of the election process,California law PROHIBITS: the use of tax-payer funded resources (the City) to make false, misleading and promotional statements about a tax measure.
The City Council has been informed formally of multiple significant violations: LETTERbut remains non-responsive.
The city of PVE has received notoriety over the Bay Boys civil rights cases and the illegal selling of Parkland. The City should not be trying to pass the largest city parcel tax in CA using deception. Residents support and deserve ethical fact-driven solutions.
1️⃣ The Ballot Description Is Misleading
California Elections Code requires that ballot titles/questions and the Impartial Analysis provide a “true and impartial statement” of a measure’s purpose and effect.[1][2]
The City Attorney provided both the ballot Title/Question and the Impartial Analysis of Measure PF ballot measures which is shown on the ballot.. Both are REQUIRED BY LAW to be accurate and unbiased, to legitimize the signatures and ballot vote. Also, Government Code § 54964 prohibits the use of public funds to support or oppose a ballot measure.[5] The City Attorney is taxpayer funded.
The City Attorney materially misrepresented the Measure PF:
The Ballot Title/Question states it is Measure PF is “extending” Measure E, however it revokes and replaces every single word while tripling the cost
The Ballot Title/Question states it is Measure PF is for 10 years, however it is for 11 years
The Impartial Analysis states that Measure PF is for $16.2 M, however, it averages $19 M over the 11 year term of the tax
In each instance, the City Attorney materially understated the cost. Measure PF is a new and significantly larger tax with a different scope.
California courts have ruled that ballot language is unlawful when it is likely to mislead voters about a measure’s character or effect.[3][4]
Describing a materially larger and broader tax as an “extension” violates the Elections Code requirement of impartial and accurate language.
INTENT:
The city’s survey (page 21) shows voter support increases when the tax is promoted to “extend” Measure E.
The City Council unanimously endorsed the Measure PF and selected this City Attorney who serves at the pleasure of Council.
2️⃣ Public Funds Are Being Used to Promote a False Financial Narrative
Government Code § 54964 prohibits the use of public funds to support or oppose a ballot measure.[5]
City-funded materials have:
Shown Measure E funding ending before 2027 (in graph of revenue in mailerand State of the City presentation)
Claimed the City is “two years from bankruptcy” (Survey page 13)
Conducted repetitive testing on Residents to measure if fear-based messaging increases voter approval (Survey page 13))
Facts:
Measure E revenues continue through the end of 2027.
City reserves extend approximately 4.5 years. (However, the city can and should should propose an ethical tax that provides fiscal stability Nov 2026)
Using public funds to distribute inaccurate financial timeline to generate fear to promote passage of a tax is illegal campaigning. That violates § 54964 and long-standing California Supreme Court precedent prohibiting publicly funded campaign advocacy.[6]
3️⃣ Committees Have Been Given Incomplete Financial Information
Recent Investment Committee discussions show:
Members believed Measure E expired earlier than it does
Premature Asset sales were discussed based on that misunderstanding.
Accurate fiscal information is essential for responsible governance and fiscal management.
When committees and the public receive incorrect financial timelines, decision-making is compromised.
Why This Matters
It is about:
Your legal right to accurate ballot information
The prohibition on publicly funded advocacy
The integrity of the election process
Protecting public trust
California law protects voters from misleading ballot language and from the use of taxpayer dollars to influence elections.
Those protections are being violated.
What Must Be Corrected
Residents are entitled to:
✔ A legally compliant ballot title and summary
✔ Accurate financial timelines
✔ Truthful disclosure of reserves
✔ Neutral, factual public communications
The City must correct its ballot language and cease disseminating misleading information.
Compliance with state law is mandatory.
Legal Citations
[1] Cal. Elections Code § 9203(a).
[2] Cal. Elections Code § 13119(c).
[3] Lungren v. Superior Court (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 435.
[4] Yes on 25 v. Superior Court (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 1445.
[5] Cal. Government Code § 54964.
[6] Stanson v. Mott (1976) 17 Cal.3d 206 (public funds may not be used for campaign advocacy).