10 November Ballot Measures

Ballot # Vote Title
Prop 18 NO Water Bond (*Removed from Ballot)
Prop 19 YES Marijuana
Prop 20 NO Redistricting Commission
Prop 21 YES State Parks-VLF
Prop 22 NO City, Transportation, & Redevelopment Taxes
Prop 23 NO Stop AB 32 The Climate Bill
Prop 24 YES Reverses Corporate Tax Loopholes
Prop 25 YES Simple Majority Budget
Prop 26 NO Redefine State Fees Minority Rules
Prop 27 NO Overturns Redistricting Commission
Measures S & T No on S and Yes on T MMWD Desalination Vote

Prop 18 Vote NO * (Removed from 2010 ballot to be put on 2012 instead.)

Prop 19 Vote YES on the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010. We all know that we need to stop the hypocrisy and legalize the use and production of this plant. This measure provides for local government to control and tax its commercial use. Joseph McNamara, the ex-police chief of San Jose, argues in his SF Gate editorial; “The federal Drug Enforcement Administration estimates that Mexican cartels derive more than 60 percent of their profits from marijuana. How much did the cartels make last year dealing in Budweiser, Corona or Dos Equis?… It is worth remembering that our last three presidents, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, would have been stigmatized for life and never would have become presidents if they had been in the wrong place at the wrong time and been busted for pot during their reckless youthful days. Countless other Americans weren't so lucky.”

Prop 20 Vote NO on both Propositions 20 and 27. That’s the position of the League of Women Voters that supported the creation of the new Citizens Redistricting Commission. Proposition 11 (2008) created the new CRC, which comes into existence in 2011, to draw State legislative boundaries. Prop 20 was funded by Charles Munger Jr to the tune of $3 million and written to his liking. This bill does more than just extend to the new CRC the authority to draw the Federal Congressional districts, it restricts and redefines the terms under which the new commission must operate.

Prop 21 Vote YES to keep our parks open. The State Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust Fund Act creates a new tax. The people of California rose up, collected over 750,000 signatures, and said tax us some more to keep our parks open. This measure proposes a very modest $18 Vehicle License Fee for most vehicles licensed in California. It raises this new money for a trust fund of about $500 million a year. It will offset some general fund money ($200 million) and eliminate some state park entrance fees ($50 million.) This measure will also add sorely needed new money ($250 million) to offset nearly a billion dollar backlog of maintenance and repairs.

Cars with California license plates will enter and park for free. Charges for camping and boat launching will still be collected by the state parks. Eighty-five percent of the $500 million trust fund will be set aside for park operation, maintenance and development, and fifteen percent will be used for wildlife conservation.

Prop 22 Vote NO on these restrictions on the use of taxes we are already paying. This measure is a zero sum game that pits the human needs of citizens against those of their agencies. It will prohibit the state legislators from taking taxes raised for cities services, transportation and redevelopment projects. This ballot measure severely threatens education, health and social services funding. If you are concerned about the quality of your roadways more than you are for your neighbor’s 3rd-grader having a good school year you might vote for this bill.

With this recommendation I have risked the friendship of those I have encouraged to run for city government. This measure would not be on the ballot if the State could pass a budget and raise taxes with a simple majority vote. But we have enshrined minority rule and elected a majority party unwilling to stand firm on its stated principles. The full fiscal impact on the State’s General fund would be a deficit at least $2 billion in most years and more in harder times.

Prop 23 Vote NO This measure suspends air pollution control laws (AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act) that require major polluters to report and reduce greenhouse gas emissions until unemployment drops to 5.5 percent or less for a full year. Nothing in this bill creates a single job and for its supporters to call it the ‘California Jobs Initiative’ when in fact it is a ‘Lets Use More Fuel Act’ is a true act of duplicity.

Economic forecasters are not predicting a full year of the unemployment rate at or below 5.5 percent anytime in the near or far future. Some claim that California’s natural rate of unemployment is 6 percent. According to the LA Times (July 27), “The driving force behind the initiative is the oil industry, which has contributed more than $2.3 million to getting it passed. The biggest single contributor is San Antonio-based Valero Energy ($1.05 million, according to the latest state campaign disclosures), with San Antonio-based Tesoro Corp. in second place with $525,000.” This measure plays on the vulnerability of the unemployed. It will take some hard work to defeat it.

Prop 24 Vote YES and over turn these corporate tax loopholes. Our state legislature took an unforgivable action last year to pass a budget. It gave corporations $2 billion in tax cuts as part of the process of closing a $20 billion budget deficit. Thankfully over 800,000 Californians’ signatures were collected to overturn this tax give-away. A surprising feature of the legislated tax breaks is that it will allow for corporate refunds on taxes paid in prior years. Contrary to the current mantra California is a rich state. Our budget problems don’t stem from too much tax but from unfair taxes. Think Robin Hood.

Prop 25 Vote YES on these changes that allow for a simple majority legislative vote to pass a budget. This measure retains the two-thirds vote requirement for taxes-too bad. But late budgets alone have cost our State hundreds of millions of dollars. “’It’s time to end the budget gridlock and political gamesmanship that come with being one of only three states that requires a 2/3 vote to pass the budget,’ said California Federation of Teachers President Marty Hittelman. This will be our 23rd late budget in the last 24 years in California. Late budgets hurt our schools, our economy and the people that depend on vital services the state provides. A Majority Vote Budget is an important first step for common sense reform of the budget process.” Reported Steven Maviglio of The California Majority Report (June 16.)

Prop 26 Vote NO on this do-over on a corporate polluters relief act. In 2000 California had a similar ballot measure backed by the paint industry. They were angry over a fee charged against them to inform the public of the dangers of lead based paint. “The Tea Party movement appears to have a new member: the California Chamber of Commerce” wrote Andrew S Ross SFGate (April 15.) This measure will “…make it even harder, in some cases virtually impossible, for the cash-strapped state and localities to raise revenue.” The Chamber’s political action committee gave $1.2 million to the campaign.

The proponents of this measure claim that the legislature is redefining taxes as fees to circumvent the two-thirds rule. The reality is just the opposite. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, “This measure broadens the definition of a state or local tax to include many payments currently considered to be fees or charges. …the types of fees and charges that would become taxes under the measure are the ones that government imposes to address health, environmental, or other societal or economic concerns.”

“As long as there is a direct, legitimate connection between the fee and a benefit to the entity paying it, the fee would not be disturbed by the proposed initiative, proponents contend,” Capitol Weekly (June 13) John Howard. What the proponents have left out is that if there is a benefit to the public, like lead free children, the fee would required to be called a tax. Because of the negative effect on funding sources for our local governments some have called this the most dangerous ballot measure on the November ballot.

Prop 27 Vote NO on both Prop 27 and Prop 20. That’s the position of the League of Women Voters. Prop 27 rescinds the newly created Citizens Redistricting Commission that will draw the new redistrict boundaries of our State legislature after the 2010 census. According to the LWV this measure will “... allow politicians to draw their own districts to protect their jobs. It would take us back to the days when bizarrely shaped districts were drawn in secret, carving up neighborhoods and communities to keep incumbents safely in office. Vote no to keep the power with voters and the voter-approved independent Citizens Redistricting Commission.”

If I thought that the Democrats were doing such a great job I might vote for this bill. However, if I thought that the Republicans were to ever again get control of the State legislature I would vote against it.

Measures S Vote No on this totally unnecessary measure. If the Marin Municipal Water District really wanted to hear from its users on a desalination plant they would have put that on the ballot.

Measures T Vote Yes on this measure so that those who are paying the bill get a say on this controversial plan. The MMWD has already spent $5 million on studies and reports. How much more do they really need to spend before those paying the bill get to weigh in with their opinion? Stop this madness now. Let us vote now for a plant that Paul Helliker, the general manager, has stated in a public meeting -July 7 2010- has not been necessary for over 30 years.

I wrote these opinions for the MARIN ACTIVIST. The opinions are mine alone though others share the same.

The MARIN ACTIVIST is the newsletter created and published by the Social Justice Center of Marin. In order to get the MARIN ACTIVIST in the mail on a quarterly basis (or for sure biannually), you are urged to become a member of our SJCM organization the membership is $30 for single membership or $50 for a couple. $15 Low income. All contributions are acceptable, of course.