|
By Andrew Martinez Cabrera Editor-in-Chief On Nov. 5, Lamorinda residents will be voting in their general municipal elections as local governments prepare for their races, with candidates seeking town council positions as first-time council members or current holders seeking re-election. Lafayette’s city council has three seats open for a four-year term and one seat available for a two-year term. Seeking re-election for Lafayette city council are current council members Carl Anduri, John McCormick and Mayor Gina Dawson, alongside newcomer Lauren McCabe Herpich, a small business owner and substitute teacher. Running for the two-year terms are financial analyst Mario DiPrisco and public financial specialist Jim Cervantes. Central topics for all six candidates include financial stability/transparency, reducing fire risk/ public safety and housing. Candidates like McCormick aim to “[Champion Lafayette’s] business community” through promotion and the possibility of revitalization. Similarly, Herpich proposes building new community spaces like parks to challenge the continued urbanization of Lafayette while still generating revenue for the city. McCormick, regarding fire risk, proposes increased collaboration with the Contra Costa Fire Protection District (Con Fire) to assess evacuation routes and encourage community removals of flammable brushes around resident’s properties. Candidate Carl Anduri wishes to expand efforts to combat wildfires, including an increase in resources and meeting future Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) standards while being a high-risk fire zone. On housing, Mayor Dawson promises to focus on building more inclusive and affordable housing made possible by the community-inputted Housing Element, a blueprint for how housing can be developed in the city. The hope for Dawson is that increased housing will also lead to economic growth. DiPrisco’s plans for housing differ, wanting to lower housing construction costs by speeding up the review planning process with the aid of AI. DiPrisco also proposes a “voluntary and temporary fee” to hire a temporary contractor to accelerate plan review. Also on the ballot for Lafayette residents alongside the city council candidates is Measure H, a 0.5% sales tax by the city of Lafayette to continue to fund and maintain the current level of city services. Currently, Lafayette is experiencing a financial deficit, with services such as pavement management costing the city $1 million a year. Additionally. “the cost of general liability, property, and employment insurance has increased 144% over the last five years,” according to a FAQ about Measure H on Lafayette’s official website. Measure H would be in effect for seven years, estimated to generate “approximately $2.4 million each year in locally controlled funds that benefit Lafayette,” according to Lafayette’s official website. A 50% vote is needed for Measure H to be implemented. If passed, Measure H would funnel directly into Lafayette’s General Fund, which supports street maintenance, public safety resources, services for senior citizens, park services and continued community partner support between Lafayette’s Chamber of Commerce and local school districts. Current city council members, such as Mayor Gina Dawson, support Measure H. Political newcomer and candidate Lauren McCabe Herpich, is against the proposed sales tax. In Orinda, only two seats for a four-year term are available for the city council, as opposed to Lafayette’s three seats. Running are Mayor Darlene K. Gee, Oakland legislative recorder Candace T. Evans and Orinda Union School District Board President Cara R. Hoxie. Mayor Gee’s focuses include long-term sustainable infrastructure, wildfire prevention and fiscal responsibility. Gee, a licensed California civil engineer, aims for the infrastructure plan to rely on residential input, working to “find balance between local vision and numerous state and regional mandates.” Evans, self-described as a “Political Enthusiast, Equity Advocate, and Business Woman,” is Orinda’s first woman of color ever appointed to a commission seat in Orinda. Evans claims that she will bring a new perspective to Orinda, focusing on the “expansion of fire prevention and public works projects,” economic growth such as revitalizing Orinda’s downtown and “enhancing senior programs,” among other issues. Like Herpich, Hoxie’s main priority is education, whose experience includes improving the conditions of Orinda schools like the implementation of wellness centers and a phonics program (teaching language acquisition with an emphasis on sounds) in an elementary school. Hoxie, having worked with Orinda’s city council in the past to address fire safety, promises to provide “sound leadership… so that Orinda can continue to thrive while being a welcoming community for all families.” Moraga’s situation is different in that there are three vacant seats for the city council and only three candidates applied for the city council’s nomination process, meaning that all three will be elected for their respective seats. The candidates are Lisa Maglio, Brian Dolan and Graham Thiel. According to the Lamorinda Weekly, “With a vote of 4-0…, the council appointed the three candidates to the Moraga Town Council and canceled the Nov. 5 local election.” Maglio’s focuses include the implementation of Moraga’s Housing Element, including affordable housing, as well as economic development in their commercial centers. Dolan, Moraga’s interim town director and retired city planner/manager, hopes to “[maintain] fiscal responsibility… fire safety, infrastructure maintenance…” and retain Moraga’s open space. Graham Thiel, Moraga’s Planning Commissioner, hopes to economically develop Moraga Center and Rheem Valley and, like Dolan, continue to preserve Moraga’s natural beauty.
0 Comments
A Breakdown of the Ten Ballot Propositions By Edith Cuevas News Reporter Voters across California will be casting their vote for ten propositions this November. This year’s ballot includes a diverse array of measures that will affect legislation ranging from healthcare reform to environmental protection. Propositions are a unique opportunity for voters to directly participate in the legislative process. Let’s break down each proposition on the ballot with the help of California’s voter guide. Proposition 2: Authorizes Bonds for Public School and Community College Facilities. Legislative Statute. Authorizes $10 billion in general obligation bonds for repair, upgrade, and construction of facilities at K-12 public schools, charter schools, community colleges and career technical programs. Fiscal Impact: State cost of about $500 million annually for 35 years to repay bond. YES vote: The state could borrow $10 billion to build new or renovate existing public school and community college facilities. NO vote: The state could not borrow $10 billion to build new or renovate existing public school and community college facilities. Proposition 3: Constitutional Right to Marriage. Legislative Constitutional Amendment Amends the California Constitution to recognize the fundamental right to marry without regard to race or sex. Will remove language in the Constitution stating that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Fiscal Impact: No change for state or local governments. YES vote: Language in the California Constitution would be updated, without change of who can marry. NO vote: Language in the California Constitution would remain as is, without change of who can marry. Proposition 4: Authorizes Bonds for Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, and Protecting Communities and Natural lands from Climate Risks. Legislative Statute. Authorizes $10 billion in general obligation bonds for water, wildfire prevention, and protection of communities and lands. Fiscal impact: State cost of about $100 million annually to repay the bond. YES vote: The state could borrow $10 billion to fund activities aimed at conserving natural resources, as well as responding to the causes and effects of climate change. NO vote: The state could not borrow $10 billion to fund various activities aimed at conserving natural resources, as well as responding to the causes and effects of climate change. Proposition 5: Allows for Local Bonds for Affordable Housing and Public Infrastructure with 55% Voter Approval. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. Allows approval of local infrastructure and housing bonds for low- and middle-income Californians with 55% vote. Fiscal Impact: Increased local borrowing to fund affordable housing, supportive housing, and public infrastructure. The amount would depend on decisions by local governments and voters. Borrowing would be repaid with higher property taxes. YES vote: Certain local bonds and related property taxes could be approved with a 55% vote, lowering it from the current 66.67%. NO vote: Certain local bonds and related property taxes would continue to need approval by a two-thirds vote of the local electorate. Proposition 6: Eliminates Constitutional Provision Allowing Involuntary Servitude For Incarcerated Persons. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. Creates an amendment on the California Constitution to remove current provision that allows jails and prisons to impose involuntary servitude to punish crime. Fiscal Impact: Potential increase or decrease in state and local costs, depending on how work for people in the state prison and county jail changes. YES Vote: Involuntary servitude would not be allowed as punishment for crime. State prisons would not be allowed to discipline people in prison who refuse to work. NO Vote: Involuntary servitude would continue to be allowed as punishment for crime. Proposition 32: Raises Minimum Wage. Initiative Statute. Raises minimum wage: For employers with 26 or more employees, to $17 immediately, $18 on January 1, 2025. For employers with $25 or fewer employees, to $17 on January 17, 2025, $18 on January 1, 2026. Fiscal Impact: State or local costs would increase or decrease by up to hundreds of millions of dollars annually. YES Vote: The state minimum wage would rise to $18 by 2026. After, it could go up based on how fast prices are going up. NO Vote: The state minimum wage would likely be about $17 per hour in 2026. After, it would go up each year based on how fast prices are going up. Proposition 33: Expands Local Governments’ Authority to Enact Rent Control on Residential Property. Initiative Statute. Repeals the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, which currently prohibits local ordinances from limiting initial residential rental rates for new tenants or rent increases for existing tenants in certain residential properties. Fiscal Impact: Reduction in local property tax revenues of at least tens of millions of dollars annually due to likely expansion of rent control in some communities. YES Vote: State law would not limit the kinds of rent control laws cities and counties could have. NO Vote: State law would continue to limit the kinds of rent control laws cities and counties could have. Proposition 34: Restricts Spending of Prescription Drug Revenues by Certain Health Care Providers. Initiative Statutes. Requires certain providers to spend at least 98% of revenues from federal discount prescription drug programs on direct patient care. Authorizes the negotiation of Medi-Cal drug prices. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs, likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually, to enforce new rules on certain healthcare entities. Affected entities would pay fees to cover these costs. YES Vote: Certain healthcare entities would have to follow new rules about how they spend revenue they earn from a federal drug prescription discount program. NO Vote: These new rules would not go into effect. Proposition 35: Provides Permanent Funding for Medi-Cal Health Care Services. Initiative Statute. Makes permanent the existing tax on managed health care insurance plans, which, if approved by the federal government, provides revenues to pay for Medi-Cal health care services. Fiscal Impact: Short-term state costs between roughly $1 billion and $2 billion annually to increase funding for certain health programs. Total funding increases between $2 billion and $5 billion annually. Long-term effects are unknown. YES Vote: An existing state tax on health plans that provides funding for certain health programs would become permanent. New rules would direct how the state must use the revenue. NO Vote: An existing state tax on health plans would end in 2027, unless the Legislature continues it. New rules would not become law. Proposition 36: Allows Felony Charges and Increases Sentences for Certain Drug and Theft Crimes. Initiative Statute. Allows felony charges for possessing certain drugs and for thefts under $950, if the defendant has two prior drug or theft convictions. Fiscal Impact: State criminal justice costs increase from tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars annually. YES Vote: People convicted of certain drug or theft crimes could receive increased punishment, such as longer prison sentences. In some cases, people who possess illegal drugs would be required to complete treatment or serve up to three years in prison. NO Vote: Punishment for drug and theft crimes would remain the same. For more information, visit the California voter guide, or the Legislative Analyst’s Office for a complete breakdown of each proposition. |
StaffAndrew Martinez Cabrera '26, Archives
October 2024
Categories |
RSS Feed