Still Puzzled by the Bloated Ballot? Here are the Watchdog’s Picks … and the Reasons Why

While many of us have already voted by absentee ballot, here is my take on five close races and the seven ballot measures.

County Supervisor: Bobby Shriver

The most important vote on the ballot is for Supervisor in the County’s Third District as the new supervisor will be the swing vote on fiscal and labor issues. Sheila Kuehl is beholden to leadership of the County’s public unions because they have contributed millions to the independent expenditure committees that support her candidacy.

Kuehl would join with Mark Ridley-Thomas, the SEIU’s $8 million man, and Hilda Solis, another labor sycophant, in approving unaffordable increases in salaries and pensions despite the fact that the County’s $26 billion budget is barely balanced and its retirement plans are $56 billion underwater (42% funded – a time bomb).

Bobby Shriver has pledged to continue Zev Yaroslavsky’s “conservative approach” approach to balancing the budget.

The County and its 10 million residents cannot afford to follow the fiscally irresponsible policies practiced by our elected officials who occupy Los Angeles City Hall and the State Capitol.

This reminds me of the Garcetti / Greuel race for mayor where voters had concerns about each candidate, but the one owned by the union was rejected by the voters, especially in the Valley that constitutes a large portion of the Third District.

Assessor – John Morris

We need new blood in this scandal ridden office. Morris, a deputy district attorney, is not affiliated with the political establishment. His opponent, Jeffrey Prang, a “long time elected official, political aide, and government administrator,” waffled on his comments about protecting Proposition 13.

I agree with The Times’ endorsement of Morris.

Superintendent of Public Instruction – Marshal Tuck

Marshall Tuck, the reformer, is opposed by Tom Torlakson, the pro union incumbent. Tuck supports greater accountability, charter schools and the controversial Vergara decision that gives school boards more flexibility in determining tenure and in terminating poor performing teachers. Torlakson is supported by the politically powerful (read $$$$$) California Teachers Association and is appealing the Vergara decision.

I support reform of California’s dysfunctional educational system and agree with The Times’ endorsement of Marshal Tuck.

Secretary of State – Pete Peterson

I am opposed to the politically ambitious Alex Padilla for the very simple reason that Padilla has received thousands in contributions from campaign funding DWP Union Bo$$ Brian d’Arcy. By not standing up for the Ratepayers of our Department of Water and Power when he was on the City Council, Padilla contributed to the IBEW Labor Premium that costs Ratepayers over $200 million a year.

I agree with The Times’ endorsement of Peterson, a “chief elections officer who is fully committed to the difficult work of modernizing the state's election system, creating transparent political campaigns, and advocating for the needs of voters.”

Controller – Ashley Swearingen

As a member of the opposition party, the non-doctrinaire Swearingen will be an independent watchdog who is not beholden to the Sacramento and San Francisco political establishments who have no respect for our wallets. As mayor of Fresno, Swearingen worked with the public unions to avoid bankruptcy, unlike Stockton and San Bernardino.

I agree with The Times’ endorsement of Swearingen.

Proposition P - County Parks: No

As a supporter of parks and outdoor space, I was going to vote yes on this $23 parcel tax that would raise the County over $50 million a year. But after reading The Times’ opposition to this ballot measure, I am in the no camp as this blank check measure was cooked up at the last minute by the Supervisors without any public input.

The title of this measure (SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, GANG PREVENTION, YOUTH/ SENIOR RECREATION, BEACHES/ WILDLIFE PROTECTION MEASURE) is too cute by one and deserves to be rejected on this basis alone.

Proposition 1 – Water Bond: Yes

I will vote yes, but will be holding my nose because of all the environmental pork. Fortunately, there are no new taxes to support this bond. Hopefully, DWP and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California will receive their fair share of the proceeds, especially those funds earmarked for groundwater remediation.

Proposition 2 – Rainy Day Fund: Yes

Nothing is easy with the State’s finances and this overly complicated proposition is impossible for mere mortals to understand. It is two steps forward and one step backward. But overall, we are better off with Prop 2.

Proposition 45 – Health Czar: No

While many argue that the health insurance companies need increased oversight, I am suspicious of the regulators in Sacramento, especially when it involves only one elected official. Covered California is opposed. I agree with The Times’ opposition.

Proposition 46 – Malpractice Lawsuits, Drug Testing of Doctors: No.

This is a crude attempt by the trial lawyers to increase the $250,000 cap for pain and suffering to $1,000,000. The drug testing and data base provisions are a ploy to divert our attention. I agree with the Times’ opposition.

Proposition 47 – Criminal Sentences: No

The Los Angeles Police Protective League is opposed to Prop 47 because the PPL believes that a legislative solution is better than ballot box legislation. Other opponents are concerned that our local governments do not have the resources to handle the inmates who will be released. This proposition will allow small time crooks to remain at large, endangering our quality of life. I disagree with The Times’ endorsement.

Proposition 48 – Indian Gaming Compacts: No

Indian gaming is a very dirty business influenced by massive campaign contributions that are not always transparent to the public. I am opposed to “reservation shopping” and the precedent it will set. I disagree with The Time’s endorsement.

●●●

On Tuesday night, the talking heads on the news channels will be focused on the control of the Senate, the Republican control of the House of Representatives, the impact on the Obama Administration, and the many races for governor.

On the other hand, many of us will be more interested in those races closer to home that will have a significant impact on our daily lives.

And when it is all over, we will have some peace and quiet as the airwaves and our mailboxes will be free of political advertisements, at least for a couple of months. Then portions of our City will have elections for seven City Council seats, including the races to replace the termed out Tom LaBonge and Bernard Parks.

We will also have the contest for Council District 14 between former County Supervisor Gloria Molina and Jose Huizar, the incumbent who recently settled a sexual harassment lawsuit without disclosing the terms to the public, including the source of cash needed to pay his former deputy chief of staff.

We will also have all the shenanigans at City Hall to amuse us, ranging from the upcoming $165 million budget deficit, union negotiations over salary and benefits that may blow an even bigger hole in the budget, the call for a blank check, trust me sidewalk tax, and a DWP rate increase.

In any case, do not forget to vote.

(Jack Humphreville writes LA Watchdog for CityWatch. He is the President of the DWP Advocacy Committee, The Ratepayer Advocate for the Greater Wilshire Neighborhood Council, and a Neighborhood Council Budget Advocate. Humphreville is the publisher of the Recycler Classifieds -- www.recycler.com. He can be reached at: [email protected].)
-cw