2024 primary ElectionS Measures and Propositions Across the State of California
IADC’s mission is to engage, educate, and empower the Iranian American community to be active participants in our democratic process as such information provided below is intended to help voters make informed decisions.
We reviewed 56 measures and one statewide proposition for March 2024 primary. We have issued the following voter guide for 22 out of 57. Below the voter’s guide you will find additional information about these specifics ballot measures and general recommendations regarding the remaining measures.
March 5, 2024 is the LAST DAY to return mail-in-ballots and vote in-person. To ensure your ballot is counted
WHAT TO WATCH OUT FOR ON THE BALLOTS FOR MARCH PRIMARIES? |
||
| School Bonds | This year, similar to past election, there are also several measures across California pursuing school bonds to update the state’s waning school infrastructure. IADC strongly supports these measures. California’s school infrastructure is vastly in need of additional funding to update its infrastructure. In January 2022, the CA State Auditor’s office determined that California will need $7.4 billion in funding to meet existing and anticipated modernization funding requests and K-12 school repairs over the next five years. Many of these backlogs include critical projects such as seismic retrofit as well as safety and technological upgrades to classrooms and outdated school buildings. Given the gravity and urgency of funding need for school infrastructure in California, IADC strongly recommends Iranian Americans to vote in support of school bond measures across California.
The Proposition 98 Establishes Minimum Funding Level for Schools and Community Colleges. This minimum funding requirement is commonly called the minimum guarantee. Learn more: https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4818 |
|
| Police and Fire funding via renewing a parcel tax or enacting sales tax | This year, there are at least half-a-dozen measures across California attempting to secure continued funding for the local 9-1-1 operations. At IADC, we believe that the key to safety and justice is to decriminalize addiction and mental health, and move toward replacing systems of policing with community-based systems that uplift restorative justice and reduce recidivism. The single most accurate predictor of police violence is police encounters, unfortunately 911 response is the way most police encounters begin. As such, it is the belief of IADC that any measures that increase or continue funding for police should be objected to and revisited. We believe there are better ways to spend our taxpayers’ funds and ensure community safety, and we encourage our fellow Iranian Americans to be hyper vigilant about arbitrary measures seeking to continue status quo of excessive funding for the police, rather supporting funding for community based services. | |
| Election vs. Appointment – City Clerk | The City Clerk serves as the city’s elections official; collects and maintains all candidate campaign finance forms; coordinates, records and retains city officials’ and city staff’s statements of economic interests; and helps ensure compliance with the state’s open meeting laws. As such our concern is that appointment of such critical role may lead to favoritism or corruption and believe the person holding this position should be elected by the people. | |
Area |
Name |
IADC’s Recommendation |
Explanation |
| ALL | Proposition 1 – a two-part initiative aiming to improve access to behavioral health services. This includes funding for treatment facilities, housing support, and changes to the Mental Health Services Act.
$6.4 billion bond to build treatment facilities and housing units for the homeless. |
Yes on Proposition
The bond will pay for needed housing for people who are chronically unhoused, including veterans and people with mental or behavioral health challenges. |
In 2022, California enacted CARE Court, which creates a court-ordered program for coerced mental health treatment. In 2023, California enacted SB 43, to make it easier to conserve people. Now, California voters are asked to weigh in on Proposition 1, which combines two bills passed in 2023 that cannot take effect without voter approval.
The current/status quo doesn’t work for Californians. Solving homelessness is vital and we believe federal funds should be invested in resolving the pandemic of homelessness in order to have meaningful, lasting results. We also believe that mental health is a healthcare right for all and should be part of an overall approach to guaranteeing healthcare for all. We need solution and Proposition 1 may not be the optimal solution but considering the current state budget shortage, the situation may worsen and lead to further cuts to much needed programs. How this measure will be executed is as important, hence we do believe there needs to be accountability. Proposition 1 rewrites The Mental Health Services Act (MHSA), passed by voters in 2004 as Proposition 63. Also known as the “millionaire’s tax,” Proposition 63 has generated billions of dollars for community mental health services. Proposition 1 renames the MHSA as the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) and among its major changes (1) permits funds to be used to treat primary substance use disorder (SUD), and (2) requires 30% of funding to be spent on housing interventions with an emphasis on the chronically homeless. Although housing is a permitted use of funds today, there is no minimum requirement. It will be impossible to ADD people with SUD and ADD a 30% requirement for housing without REDUCING OTHER SERVICES. The second part of Proposition 1 authorizes the state to issue $6.38 billion in bond funding for “behavioral health treatment and residential setting” projects. We are still uncertain about what types of projects will be funded but we know locked, involuntary treatment beds are contemplated. |
| Fresno County | Fresno County, California, Measure A, Sheriff and District Attorney Election Timing Charter Amendment (March 2024) | No on Measure A
A “yes” vote supports amending the county charter to require elections for sheriff and district attorney to be held during gubernatorial, non-presidential election years. |
Gubernatorial elections generally receive less public attention. This will be an attempt to reduce public’s involvement in election of sheriff and district attorney. |
| Fresno County | Fresno County, California, Measure B, County Board of Supervisors Duty to Name Geographic Features and Places Charter Amendment (March 2024) | No on Measure B A “no” vote opposes authorizing the Fresno County Board of Supervisors to name or change the names of geographic features or places. |
The measure to add new subdivision (1) to section 12 of the Fresno County Charter to provide the Fresno County Board of Supervisors the duty and power to name or change the name of geographic features or place names within the unincorporated portions of the Counts of Fresno |
| Los Angeles County | Huntington Park, California, Measure CC, City Council Term Limits Measure (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports establishing term limits of no more than four consecutive four-year terms for members of the city council. |
IADC generally supports term limits for all positions. |
| Los Angeles County | Long Beach, California, Measure RW, Minimum Wage Increase for Hotel Workers Measure (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports increasing the minimum wage for qualifying hotel workers from $17.55 per hour to $23.00 per hour on July 2024, and then increasing annually to $29.50 per hour by July 2028. |
A “yes” vote supports increasing the minimum wage for qualifying hotel workers from $17.55 per hour to $23.00 per hour on July 2024, and then increasing annually to $29.50 per hour by July 2028.
It supports living wages; working at hotels is an entry work for many immigrants including Iranian Americans who deserve to get a head start. |
| Los Angeles County | Bell, California, Measure I, Sales and Use Tax Measure (March 2024) | Neutral | The measure establishes a three-quarter cent per dollar (0.75%) general sales tax, annually providing an estimated $1.5 million in revenue, until ended by voters, with funds being deposited into the City of Bell General Fund for Public Safety (Police and Fire); Youth and Seniors Recreation Programs and Services; and for general government use, |
| Los Angeles County | Glendale, California, Measure A, Charter Amendment (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports providing for the city council to establish standards and regulations relating to contracts, including contracts for construction of public improvements. |
Establish standards and regulations relating to contracts, including contracts for construction of public improvements, such as compensation paid for performance of such work. |
| Los Angeles County | Huntington Park, California, Measure PP, Study for Parking Permit Program on Public Streets Measure (March 2024) | Neutral | Measure provides Huntington Park residents access to overnight parking, reduce 9-1-1 emergencies response times by preventing parking violations that block streets and make it difficult for ambulances, fire engines, police, paramedics and other emergency personnel to navigate city streets; improve trash collection and street sweeping services, shall Huntington Park be directed to conduct a citywide study to develop, implement and enforce a parking permit program on public streets to improve residents quality of life. |
| Los Angeles County | La Cañada Flintridge, California, Measure LCF, Sales Tax Measure (March 2024) | Neutral | The measure funds City of La Cañada Flintridge services such as increasing neighborhood Sheriff patrols; preparing for and responding to wildfires/natural disasters; repaving and repairing streets/potholes; keeping public spaces safe and clean; maintaining parks and community programs for youth and seniors; and for general government use by establishing a ¾¢ sales tax providing approximately $2,625,000 annually until ended by voters; requiring audits and line item budget disclosures, with all funds used locally |
| Los Angeles County | Los Angeles, California, Measure HLA, City Mobility Plan Implementation Initiative (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports requiring the city to prioritize the completion of street improvement projects described in the previously approved City Mobility Plan and provide accessible information to the public about the progress of these projects. |
The proposed ordinance states that its purpose would be to require the City to prioritize street improvement measures described in the City’s Mobility Plan. The City’s Mobility Plan includes concept maps for a connected network of pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle routes in the City. The ordinance would apply when the City makes a qualifying improvement, including a paving project, to a segment of a City-owned street identified in the Mobility Plan’s network concept maps. Under certain circumstances, the ordinance would provide for the installation of street enhancements described in the Mobility Plan’s network as part of the improvements along that segment undertaken by the City. The ordinance also would require the City to provide publicly accessible information regarding improvement projects to enable the public to monitor and evaluate implementation of the Mobility Plan. |
| Los Angeles County | Pasadena, California, Measure R, Updating Language Charter Amendment (March 2024) | No A “no” vote opposes amending the city charter to make clerical corrections related to updating outdated language, and to update the accounting method used to calculate the existing voter approved transfer from the Power Fund to the General Fund. |
Very problematic Measure R claims to address outdated terminology and clerical errors in the City’s charter related to the Board of Education and City Council Primary elections, Rental Housing Board, and the accounting terminology used to determine annual transfer amounts from the City’s Lighting and Power Fund to the General Fund. While the measure includes changes to sections related to primary election and Rental Housing Fees and Board, the measure is primarily focused on increasing the transfer limit from the Lighting and Power Fund to the General Fund by utilizing gross income (revenues) instead of net income as a basis for its transfer calculations. Under GAAP accounting, gross income refers to the total amount earned over the course of a year before expenses. Whereas net income is the profit earned after expenses and allowable deductions. Further, the measure seeks to remove language prohibiting the transfer of funds in excess of net income. The measure also allows the City to increase charges (rates) for electric services to pay for both the expenses of the power utility and the amounts projected for transfer before any adjustments based on the net income of electric works. |
| Los Angeles County | Pasadena, California, Measure S, Limits on Contract, Settlement, and Claim Approvals Charter Amendment (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports approving amendments to set limits by ordinance for contract, settlement, and claim approvals. |
Measure S aims to change the current language of the charter to increase the voter approved threshold of $75,000 for contracts and settlements that can be executed without the need for City Council approval. The change in the threshold would be determined by a currently undefined ordinance enacted by a majority vote of the City Council, rather than a voter approved measure. While It is not unreasonable for a city the size of Pasadena to seek a threshold that is greater than the current limit of $75,000, supplemental information related to the proposed threshold would have provided greater insight into the policy change. |
| Los Angeles County | Pasadena, California, Measure T, Contract Selection Charter Amendment (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports amending the city charter to include additional contract selection methods for public capital improvement and infrastructure projects. |
Measure T aims to allow the City to create alternative contract selection methods for bidding and delivering public Capital improvements. The alternative contracts defined by the measure, include but are not limited to, design-build and contractor-at-risk contracts. Engagement in such contracts are currently permissible, subject to defined criteria, under the California Construction Code for California General Law Cities. However, Charter Cities are required to seek voter approval for any changes to their city’s charter defined contract selection methods. |
| Los Angeles County | Pomona, California, Measure P, Renew Sales and Use Tax Measure (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports renewing the 0.75% sales and use tax beyond the sunset date of March 31, 2029, until ended by voters, for the purpose of maintaining city services and general government use. |
Measure provides an estimated $16.8 million annually for general government use, subject to public disclosure and oversight, be adopted? |
| Los Angeles County | Pomona, California, Measure X, Reduction of Sales and Use Tax Measure (March 2024) | No A “no” vote opposes reducing the rate of the city sales tax from 0.75% to 0.50%, and repealing the March 31, 2029 sunset date. |
Measure results in an average of$ 5.8M in reduced revenues annually for general government use until ended by voters |
| Monterey County | Soledad, California, Measure P, City Council District Elections Referendum (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports authorizing the Pajaro Valley Health Care District to issue $116,000,000 in bonds to fund Watsonville Community Hospital upgrades, renovations, and expansions and levy a property tax of $24 per $100,000 assessed value while bonds are outstanding. |
It support district voting |
| Orange County | Irvine, California, Measure D, City Council Size and Districts Amendment (March 2024) | Yes A “yes” vote supports this charter amendment to:increase the size of the Irvine City Council from five members to seven members, with the new membership including the mayor and six councilmembers, and have the six council members elected from districts, rather than at-large elections. |
In line with proper representation, the number of city council members should align with the population growth of the city and we generally support district voting |
| Orange County | Huntington Beach, California, Measure 1, Voter ID and Election Rules Amendment (March 2024) | No A “no” vote opposes this charter amendment. |
California should be expanding access to voting, not reduce it, and we have seen from experience what voter ID laws are truly about: A sinister attempt to minimize voting access for the poor and the elderly. IADC vehemently opposes this measure and calls on all voters to vote no. |
| Orange County | Huntington Beach, California, Measure 2, Flags Displayed on City Property Amendment (March 2024) | No A “no” vote opposes this charter amendment. |
is important that the city council focuses on consensus building and inclusivity and not add charter amendments that are purely politically charged. This is their direct attempt in continued offense on the rights of the LGBTQ |
| Orange County | Huntington Beach, California, Measure 3, Biennial Budget, City Council Vacancies, and Charter Language Amendment (March 2023) | No A “no” vote opposes this charter amendment. |
With comment that while we support the two year budget in general, this charter amendment is a shady attempt to infuse number of politically charged requirements. This is not the definition of true democracy. |
| San Francisco County | San Francisco, California, Proposition B, Minimum Police Staffing Amendment (March 2024) | YES A “yes” vote supports amending the city charter to make the specific changes only if voters approve a new tax or amend an existing tax to fund these requirements |
The measure is related to the following changes only if voters approve a new tax or amend an existing tax to fund these requirements:
Set minimum police officer staffing levels; Require the Police Commission to request enough money to pay for minimum police staffing levels; Authorize the San Francisco Police Department to introduce amendments to its budget; and |
| Santa Clara County | Santa Clara, California, Measure B, Appointed Chief of Police Amendment (March 2024) | YES City Charter providing that the City Clerk position be appointed by the City Manager |
It reduces the bias and influence of big money interest groups in deciding who would lead policies related to community safety and security |
| To learn more about other measures across California please visit: https://ballotpedia.org/California_2024_local_ballot_measures | |||
| Additional propositions are being considered in San Francisco. Please refer to the San Francisco Democratic Central Committee suggestions here:
https://www.sfdemocrats.org/voting/endorsements/2024/primary |
|||