March 7, 2017

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!

November 8, 2016

I know that everyone is ready for this election to be over and to never see Donald Trump again. The incredible length of the ballot is only making voter angst worse. Please don’t tune out or just vote up-ticket. There are some amazing down-ballot initiatives that have the potential to transform thousands of lives. These initiatives make me really hopeful for California and LA. I will keep my comments short to help you make it to the end of the ballot. Statements in bold are positions I feel especially strongly about. 

I think you all know the candidates, so I am going to focus on the propositions. I am not explaining my candidate picks. You can message me if you have questions.

President: Hillary Clinton

Senate: Kamala Harris

Assm. 51: Jimmy Gomez (running unopposed)
LA County Supervisorial District 4: Janice Hahn
LA County Supervisorial District 5: Kathryn Barger

Judge seat 11: Debra Archuleta

Judge seat 42: E. Matthew Aceves

Judge seat 84: Susan Jung Townsend
*Townsend is well qualified and endorsed by the LA Times, but defense attorneys tell me they like her opponent Perez. After lots of research I am supporting Townsend, but I think both candidates would make good judges. 

Judge seat 158: Kim Nguyen

Prop 51 - No

I am generally a fan of bonds and taxes, but this initiative is fishy. Governor Brown opposes it. Not a single Los Angeles education organization has endorsed it. The LA Times is against it. The proposition is funded by the construction industry rather than education groups. Local bonds to fund school construction make more sense than this bad mojo. 

Prop 52 - Yes

This proposition extends an existing charge on private hospitals to fund increased payments to hospitals to pay for care to low-income patients. Hospitals are afraid that the existing system will go away when the current charge expires in 2018. The Hospital Association of CA sponsored this bill because they are afraid that the fee will get extended without the funds returning to hospitals to pay for care for patients who can’t pay. This is much too wonky for a ballot initiative, but it doesn’t seem like a bad program.

Prop 53 - No

Do you like the bullet train project and other major infrastructure projects? Dean Cortopassi doesn’t. Mr. Cortopassi is a very wealthy Stockton food producer and distributer who has an issue with a water infrastructure project near his property. His answer - $4 million to put Prop 53 on the ballot. He is the only financier of the proposition. It would require that state revenue bonds of $2 million or more would need to get statewide voter approval before being issued. Right now only general obligation bonds require voter approval because revenue bonds are paid back by the end users of the infrastructure rather than tax payers (think utility customers and bullet train customers). This proposition has an incredible number of opponents and very few supporters. 

Prop 54 - No

This proposition sounds good and might not do any harm, but I am concerned because it is funded by one man - Charles Munger, Jr. Munger is active in Republican politics. Not surprisingly, this proposition is supported by the state republican party and opposed by the state democratic party and unions. That said, the dems and unions have not raised any money against it, so it can’t be too dangerous. The proposition would require that all bills, including any changes to a bill, be made public 72 hours before a vote can be taken. That sounds harmless, but it means no compromises could be made on the floor while a bill is being heard. Slowing down the legislative process can be a double-edged sword - sometimes it helps, sometimes it hurts. Either way, we shouldn’t change the current rules because one rich man wants them changed.

Prop 55 - Yes

Prop 55 is commonly called the “Prop 30 extension” because it extends an existing income tax on people earning more than $250,000 that was created through Prop 30 in 2012. Prop 30 also included a sales tax that is not extended by this proposition. If the existing income tax sunsets in 2018 (as it is currently scheduled to do) K-12 schools could lose up to $4 billion (yes, that is a "B") per year. This would be devastating to schools. All the major democrats in the state support Prop 55 and it is opposed by the Republican party and anti-tax groups. 

Prop 56 - Yes

I am a supporter of sin taxes, so I am fine with this, but I know lots of people who hate sin taxes and will not support this. According to the LA Times, California has one of the lowest tobacco taxes in the country. This proposition would increase the existing tax of $0.87 to $2.87 per pack. The increased tax revenue would fund healthcare for low-income Californians through the Medi-Cal program. 

Prop 57- Yes

This is one of my favorite initiatives on the ballot! Let’s turn back the tide of mass incarceration! Most important to me, this proposition would require that judges weigh in on whether juveniles are tried as adults. Right now it is solely up to criminal prosecutors to decide if juveniles are tried in adult court or juvenile court. This has had disastrous consequences with kids as young as 14 tried as adults and sent to adult prisons. This practice must stop and making it harder for kids to be tried as adults is an important first step. The initiative will also allow parole hearings for individuals sentenced for non-violent crimes that have received sentencing credits for good behavior.

Prop 58 - Yes

Prop 58 seeks to reverse Prop 227 from 1998 that required instruction primarily in English for English learners in California public schools. All children deserve a quality education. Prop 227 unfortunately focused on the language instruction is provided in rather than the quality of that instruction. Many dual language programs have shown that all students, regardless of native language, can thrive in these programs. Prop 58 would not expand dual language programs, but it would give school districts more flexibility to create these programs, if desired. It is highly supported by the state democratic party, but opposed by the state Republican party. 

Prop 59 - Yes

This is a tough one. I hate the Citizens United decision allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts in campaigns. I am just not sure if this proposition does any good to overturn it. The proposition would ask elected officials to use their authority to seek increased regulation on campaign spending, including proposing an amendment to the U.S. constitution. I don’t see any hope of amending the constitution, but since nothing else is working to move the dial on campaign spending I guess this is the best option we have to register our dislike at the moment. 

Prop 60 - No

I like condoms. I want adult film performers to be protected. But I do not trust Michael Weinstein, this initiative’s author, as far as I can throw him. This proposition is notoriously poorly written, which is why it has less than a handful of supporters and a long list of opponents. 

Prop 61 - No

This initiative is like bad vs. bad. Prescription drug companies have spent $89 million trying to stop this proposition, which would normally make me want to vote for it, but its main backer is, again, Michael Weinstein. Really, he needed two propositions on this ballot?! This one is, again, poorly written. Every major newspaper in the state has come out against it. The initiative seeks to tie what state-run insurance programs (i.e. Medi-Cal, state college students, prison inmates, etc.) could pay for prescription drugs to what the VA pays for the same drugs. The feds limit what the VA can pay for prescription drugs, but the VA is also a tiny healthcare system compared to the state’s Medi-Cal program. Many newspapers think that this initiative will do nothing to lower costs and could limit access to critical prescription drugs. 

Prop 62 - Yes

Whoa, finally an initiative I am excited about. There were some doozies leading up to this, but this one is straight forward - Do you want to abolish the death penalty in California? Absolutely, my vote is to abolish the death penalty. I do think that there are terrible criminals in the world, but humans make mistakes and we have made far too many with the death penalty. Germans know that humans should not be given the right to legally put people to death because there is never a guarantee that that right will not be abused. We are far too imperfect beings to be allowed a power so great. Our implicit, and sometimes explicit, bias drives us to sentence people of color and people in poverty far more often than others on trial. There are far too many examples of innocent people sentenced to death. We have clearly shown that we cannot, and should not, be allowed the sentence others to death. 

Prop 63 - Yes

This initiative imposes stricter gun control regulations in the state, including requiring that people who are ineligible to have a fire arm dispose of any existing fire arms they have. Right now you can be deemed ineligible to have a fire arm (say someone takes out a restraining order on you), but no one actually follows up to make sure you get rid of any existing guns you own. The proposition also requires gun owners to report if their fire arm is stolen. NRA take note - you are not welcome in California. 

Prop 64 - Yes

Another fun proposition! We took on mass incarceration earlier and now we are taking on the war on drugs. Prop 64 will legalize recreational use of marijuana for adults 21 and over. There are lots of reasons to support legalization - the war on drugs disproportionately put people of color in jail, increased tax revenue, decreased drug cartels and gangs, etc. There will be challenges no doubt. Four states and D.C. have already legalized marijuana and there are some downsides, like increased driving under the influence and kids accidentally overdosing on edibles. There are lots of questions about if teenagers will use pot at a higher rate if it is legalized. These are legit concerns, but they do not outweigh the horrible impacts of criminalizing marijuana use. 

Prop 65 - No

This confusing ballot measure is bizarre. It was placed on the ballot  by the plastic bag industry to try to confuse voters and make them think the ban on plastic bags is a money grab by store owners. They hope that if they can make voters think that the ban is all just a money grab that voters will vote against Prop 67, which ratifies the state’s ban on plastic bags. 

Prop 66 - No

Prop 66 was placed on the ballot to try to get voters to vote against Prop 62, the anti-death penalty measure. The backers hope that if they can make the death penalty more appealing (!) voters will not vote to abolish it. Their slogan is “Mend, Not End.” Prop 66 would speed up death penalty proceedings so that people on death row wouldn’t sit there for 30 years. They assume that voters are voting for Prop 62 because of a fiscal concern that we spend too much money on people on death row. As stated above, there are far more reasons to repeal the death penalty.

Prop 67 - Yes

My husband and I may differ on this one. He loves plastic bags. I support California’s ban on plastic bags. This initiative ratifies the state’s law that prohibits stores from giving out free paper or plastic bags. 

Take a breath. You made it through the state propositions. Now on to the local! 

Local Propositions

County

Measure A - Yes

Measure A replaces an existing tax that is set to expire that supports County and local cities’ parks. It would levy a $0.015 (1.5 cents) parcel tax per square foot of development. The average home owner has 1,500 square foot home and would be taxed $22.50 per year. This would generate $94 million per year to support the region’s parks.  

City of LA

Proposition HHH - Yes

Help House the Homeless! Let’s do this people! Prop HHH would allow the city to issue $1.2 billion in general obligation bonds to build 10,000 units of affordable housing including 8,000 units of permanent supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness. It is impossible to overstate how badly we need this. 10,000 units is enough to be a game changer on homelessness. The County is all in on providing the services to support these units. Yes, your property taxes will go up slightly to pay for this. The impact on property taxes will vary as it will take a while to issue all the bonds, but at its peak property owners will be assessed $18.54 for every $100,000 of assessed value on the property. The average home owner has an assessed value of $341,000 and would pay $63 at the bonds’ peak in 2027. I personally think that it is a small price to pay for saving thousands of lives. 

Measure JJJ - Yes

I will be voting yes on measure JJJ, but I don’t love it. The intent is good - require market-rate developers to include affordable housing in their developments and pay good wages to construction workers. I will be voting yes on this initiative because the city council and Mayor have been talking about inclusionary zoning (requiring affordable units in market-rate development) for over 15 years and done nothing to require that a single unit be built. The downside of this initiative is that the County Federation of Labor (who wrote it) spent much more time on the labor requirements rather than the affordable housing provisions. The LA Times is opposing it for fear that this initiative could make the affordable housing crisis worse by making it more expensive to build any housing in LA. I think there is enough profit in housing development that this initiative will be a headache for developers, but it will not squash development. 

Measure RRR - Yes

The best anyone can say about Measure RRR is that it is helpful. It will provide some incremental improvements at DWP. There are a lot of people against RRR, but their main complaint is that it does not go far enough in reforming DWP. Without any other path to get greater reform this is the best option we have right now.  

Measure SSS - No

This is another fun proposition. It would allow new airport police to enter the LAPD and LAFD pension system, but not existing airport police officers. If you are not familiar with police and fire pension systems you should know that they provide incredibly rich retirement benefits under the assumption that if you risk your life for the community you should be able to retire comfortably. But because this proposition does not apply to current airport police officers and the airport police union does not support this. I know dangerous things happen at airports sometimes, but I don’t think it is the same as being a police officer or fire fighter. If their own union doesn’t back it there does not seem to be any reason to support this.  

Special Districts

Measure CC - Yes

Measure CC is the tax initiative that I am most torn about how to vote on. I am a huge admirer of community colleges. Lives are transformed at Pasadena City College, Santa Monica College, Mission College, and many other community colleges in LA. These schools take the students with the greatest barriers and get many of them on track to successful careers and higher education. I also believe that quality facilities make a huge difference in education. This would be a no-brainer yes vote if the community college district had not already had three other bond measures approved in the last 15 years. Ultimately I decided to vote yes because this is exactly the type of infrastructure investment that makes a real difference in people’s lives. It took a bit to make my way to this decision and I do not begrudge anyone who disagrees. 

Measure M - Yes

Did you know that LA is expanding our public transit system faster than any other major city in America? We all know that there is lots of work to do to on our transportation system. Metro is not perfect, but they are doing a pretty damn good job expanding our transportation system. I did not expect to be able to take a train to the beach before I was 50. I have no qualms with paying an extra $.005 (half cent) sales tax to fund an expanded transit  system.

You made it to the end of the ballot! Or did you? If you live in another city like Santa Monica, you may be facing other initiatives. I am not familiar with all of these, but if you do happen to be in Santa Monica please vote no on LV, and yes on GS and GSH. 

Other than positions in bold, there are many of these I do not feel strongly about. If you disagree do your homework and vote your conscience. No matter what, pat yourself on the back for getting through this monster ballot!