Since the November election I have been thinking a lot about the Gil Scott Heron song “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised.” Our revolution will not be on social media or through online petitions. Calls are great, but they don’t change who is in power. There is one way to change who is in power and that is through voting. Building power will come through registering people to vote, educating the voters, building coalitions behind strong candidates and measures, and getting people to the ballot box.
Historically about 10% of voters, and often times less, show up for off-cycle elections like our March 7th election. But if 20% of the city marched in the streets on January 21st maybe that can change this time around. I appreciate everyone who takes the time to read these recommendations, but I will be even happier if you share them with 10 people you know and remind them to vote on March 7th. I think our city has woken up to the full potential of apathy to destroy democracy as we know it. March 7th is an opportunity exercise some of the power we still have and make meaningful positive changes right here in our communities. We are already feeling the effects of the federal government withdrawing support for immigrants, refugees, the LGBTQ community, people of color, healthcare, welfare, and housing. We have a lot of work ahead of us to bolster our state, county, and city against these horrible policies and budget cuts. March 7th is our first opportunity to act locally.
Measure H - Hell Ya!
Full disclosure I was involved in crafting these measure. It is long overdue. Measure H will raise revenue to provides services and housing to people experiencing homelessness. It will also provide homelessness prevention to people on the verge of homelessness. The revenue will be raised through a $.025 cent sales tax. Yes, that zero is in the right place. For a $.025 cent on every dollar you spend on taxable items (these do not include food or rent) the County is estimated to raise $355 million annually that will be 100% dedicated to addressing homelessness. $.025 means that tax is 25 cents on every $100 you spend. The tax also has a 10 year sunset. Because this is a dedicated specific tax it needs 67% of voters to support it to pass. That means we need you and everyone you know to show up on the 7th to vote yes on H.
I am not going to spend time on city candidates, but these are my recommendations:
Mayor - Eric Garcetti
City Attorney - Mike Feuer
City Controller - Ron Galperin
CD1 - Joseph Bray-Ali
CD3 - Bob Blumenfield
CD5 - Paul Koretz
CD7 - Monica Rodriguez
CD9 - no recommendation
CD11 - Mike Bonin
CD13 - Mitch O’Farrell
CD15 - no recommendation
Measure M: Yes
Measure M and Measure N are competing measures on the ballot relating to marijuana regulation. Measure M was sponsored by the city. Measure N is sponsored by the marijuana industry. Measure M allows the city to repeal Prop D, which was passed in 2013 and only relates to medical marijuana. Measure M would give the city a time frame within which to develop new regulations for recreational and medical marijuana. It also imposes a 5% gross receipts tax on medical marijuana (down from an existing 6% tax) and a 10% gross receipts tax on recreational marijuana. It also creates criminal penalties for marijuana businesses that do not follow the guidelines that will be developed under the Measure.
Measure N: No
Measure N was sponsored by the marijuana industry and has been abandoned by the industry, but not in time to get it off the ballot. It is disliked because it would give a monopoly to the 135 dispensaries grandfathered in under Prop D. It would not allow new businesses to operate in the city under the new recreational marijuana era. The industry dropped the Measure and now supports the City’s measure M.
Measure P: Yes
This measure amends the city charter to allow leases of public land that is part of the Port of LA to be leased for 66 years instead of 50 years. The main proponent is San Pedro Councilman Buscaino, who is pushing this to make development of the Port of LA more attractive. It really comes down to whether you support the redevelopment of the Port of LA. I am not a big fan of commercial district as it is, so I am fine with this.
Measure S - Hell No!
This is a really complex measure with a gnarly origin. I know on first blush stopping development in the City of LA sounds good to some people, but this is an incredibly deceptive measure that could have disastrous consequences. Measure S was placed on the ballot by one man - Michael Weinstein. Michael Weinstein is an extremely controversial figure, who despite running the AIDS Healthcare Foundation is at odds with the entire LGBTQ leadership in California and the nation. Weinstein became obsessed with development in LA when he wasn’t able to stop a large development next to the headquarters of AIDS Healthcare Foundation. The reality is that he probably wasn’t successful because he has an extraordinary number of political enemies, but he is convinced that his failure was because LA city politicians are in the pocket of developers. There are a lot of problems with land use and zoning in LA. It is a good target for Weinstein because the system is broken. The challenge is we need a really nuanced solution because we are in housing crisis and Measure S is like a sledge hammer. The housing crisis is driven by a supply and demand problem. Housing production slowed dramatically in the 1990s and the population of the city continued to grow. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that what we need is housing affordable to people with low incomes and market-rate developers only build luxury housing because that is how they make the most profit. While I don’t support creating endless amounts of luxury housing, I also know stopping all housing production would only exacerbate the crisis because it would further limit supply at a time that demand will continue to grow, which will further drive up prices. Most problematic is the fact that Measure S would limit affordable housing production. The Measure has a pseudo-exemption for affordable housing, but only if the affordable housing development does not need additional height, additional density, or a zone change. Affordable housing developers unanimously oppose the measure because most affordable housing sites falls into the category of needing one of those three things. Measure S would stop a good chunk of affordable housing, it would drive up rents, and, as a result, it would increase homelessness in the city. This Measure is very dangerous. Thankfully a huge coalition of non-profit organizations have come out against the Measure. If you are on the fence about the Measure I hope that you will check out the list of opponents at www.goestoofar.com/coalition.
LAUSD
There are no great choices when it comes to LAUSD board members. United Teachers LA backs one candidate and the charter school cheerleaders back another. Both sides refuse to admit that each of the systems they back need serious work. Nothing depresses me more than school board elections. Sadly, I did not find one school board candidate I could recommend for districts 2, 4, or 6. I look for candidates who are going to do a good job of governing the school district. None of the incumbents or new candidates demonstrated a strong commend of public stewardship, which is the most important skill for school board members. Michelle King is in charge of educational instruction. I am looking for candidates who can choose strong superintendents and skillfully handle budgeting. These candidates did not demonstrate either.
Los Angeles Community College Board
I did not have time to look closely into these races, but the LA Times endorsements seem well done. They are:
Seat 2: Steven Veres
Seat 4: Ernest Moreno
Seat 6: Gabriel Buelna
You made it to the bottom of the ballot. Good work. For those of you in congressional district 34 we will be back at the polls on April 4th. See you very soon!
