Part 3: Where the DTLF Stands on Our Los Angeles County and City Measures

Well, I've said it before, and I'll say it again, we here at the DTLF always encourage you to make your own decisions, but just make sure you research those decisions. That said, I'm here to let you know how the DTLF will be voting on the local measures on tomorrow's ballot. Hopefully it's not too preachy, and the following will help, not bully, you in making your own choices.

MEASURE R: TRAFFIC RELIEF. RAIL EXTENSIONS. REDUCE FOREIGN OIL.
Measure R is proposing a half a cent sales tax increase that would send money MTA's way for some much needed projects.

Yes on R. Why? Well, the argument against R is this: people are worried that Measure R will not help outlying communities of Los Angeles where more people actually use MTA and more buses are needed. They claim that R is nothing more than an ego satisfying project for Mayor Villaraigosa, that will only put money up for a "subway to the sea." This is a very worthy argument, if, in fact it was true, however, it's not.

Measure R does support the idea of extending the Purple Line which currently ends at Wilshire and Western to Westwood (not the sea). I see no problem in that, it's stupid to end only two stops from the Red Line in the first place; however, Measure R doesn't just support Purple Line extension, it provides funds for extending the Green Line to LAX (yes please!) and the South Bay Corridor, extends the Exposition Boulevard Light Rail Transit from Culver City to Santa Monica (that's the line to the sea – not a subway), extends the 24 mile Gold Line Foothill Extension to Claremont, develops a West Santa Ana branch transportation corridor, and a rapid transit option through the I-405/Sepulveda Pass. Hardly just a "subway to the sea." Yes, I agree with Measure R opponents, and my fellow bus riders, there are quite a few communities left out, but the positives are heavily outweighing the negatives in this situation. They are improving the system in general. Let's take what we can get while we can.

Beyond the above plans, money will also be used to put more clean-air buses on lines where they're needed, repair pot-holes and bridges, create 200,000 new jobs, synchronize traffic lights to help alleviate traffic, and all this costs the price of half a tank of gas per person per year (estimated people would pay only about $25 a year). Not to mention, these funds will help ensure that fares will stay low for seniors and students. I'm sorry, but to me, it's a no-brainer, just because your community may be getting overlooked, doesn't make this a bad plan.

Traffic is pollution, and pollution is a problem of enormous proportions in the Southland right now. It's extremely important to focus on getting away from our roads, out of our cars, and onto the rails – the sooner the better. Los Angeles has made so many horribly fucked up decisions in our past regarding our rail system, and those decisions have had a momentously negative impact on our communities and how they are connected. It's time we bring our city up to par with every other metropolis in the world by getting our rail system together. Yes, it is going to be a difficult battle because we are so far behind so late in the game; however, the longer we wait the worse it's going to get. We need 2/3 of this vote for it to pass, so please, please, please vote yes on Measure R. This is so important for the future of our city, please don't let neighborhood to neighborhood bickering influence your vote on this. More rail transit, more buses, more jobs, for the meager $25 a year is worth it no matter what part of the city it focuses on, it effects us all.

Just look at what our Metro system could look like (full PDF here):



MEASURE J: LOCAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE CLASSROOM REPAIR, PUBLIC SAFETY, NURSING and JOB TRAINING MEASURE.
Measure J proposes issuing $3.5 billion in bonds at legal interest rates to improve conditions on local community college campus'. There's very few opponents of this measure. Our community colleges are in need of some help with recent buget cuts, and this measure will provide that needed help. It's got applauded oversight along with specific plans for carrying out the improvements. Yes on Measure J.


MEASURE Q: SAFE, HEALTHY NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS MEASURE
In essence, Measure Q wants to bring the older schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District up to par with the new ones by approving a $7 billion bond. A great idea. Beyond the benifits this measure will bring to the kids in our communities, it doesn't raise taxes, earmarks $450 million for independent charter schools (to get them on par with regular schools) and will provide an estimated 850,000 in new jobs which will stimulate our local economy. Thumbs up from this guy.

On the other hand, unlike Measure J, critics cite the vagueness of this plan. Opponents are saying it lacks specifics on how the money would be spent. Those opposed are also quick to point out that LA has already alotted $6 million in unused bond money from previous measures.

I'm of the opinion that we should be putting more money into schools than anything else. So what if the plan for getting this ball rolling is a bit vague, we'll have to trust that our elected officials will work something out and get the money going to the right places. That's what we voted them into office for in the first place, right? And if they don't get the job done, we vote them out.

A good education is the number one biggest contributing factor for a secure future. Nothing wrong with kids getting resources they need for a good learning environment just as there's nothing wrong with a bunch of genius little kids saving the world one day. Yes on Measure Q.


PROPOSITION A: CITY OF LOS ANGELES SPECIAL GANG AND YOUTH VIOLENCE PREVENTION, AFTER-SCHOOL and JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS TAX.
Measure A is proposing a $36 a year tax increase for property owners that would in turn create after-school and job training programs designed to keep kids out of gangs. It will require 2/3 of the vote to pass.

Without a doubt gang violence is a major issue in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area. With an estimated 40,000 kids in gangs, and those numbers on the rise, LA residents have expressed serious concerns regarding how gang related issues effect their children and today's youth. Measure A proposes a number of gang prevention programs and services aimed at getting kids out of gangs and into after school programs and young adults into job training and apprenticeship programs.

Surprisingly, there are several people opposed to this bill. One issue cited by opponents is that there is not enough oversight for where the collected tax money goes. Another is that it further confuses the several programs we have in place already. And still another is that the proposed program doesn't outline any concrete solutions at all. People are looking for proof that the proposed plans will work and not just funnel tax money into the hands of government officials who will squander it.

What I really think the opposing arguments come down to, is that the word "tax" is even nastier than normal with the ugly economy in a downturn. People are apt to scrutinize what their money is going towards when they're having problems paying the bills, and they're worried that this bill is going to be money down the drain, and rightly so.

Look, despite all the backlash, the DTLF is still supporting this plan with a "Yes" vote. Let me try and convince you.

Jeff Carr, a strong supporter of Prop A, and director of Gang Reduction and Youth Development in LA, made a wonderful point (among others) in the Daily Breeze, "80% of prison inmates [are] high school dropouts. Studies have shown that after-school programs like LA's Best, LA Conservation Corps and the Boys and Girls Clubs have a proven track record of dramatically reducing dropout rates and improving academic achievement." It's a proven fact that after school programs such as these help keep kids off the street, out of gangs, and as a result out of prisons.

On the prison tip, to quote Police Chief William Bratton, "We simply cannot arrest our way out of the current situation." So true P.C.W.B. So true. The measly $3 dollars a month this plan is asking for is nothing compared to the amount of money tax payers would save by keeping these kids out of gangs and subsequently out of prison. Reportedly Los Angeles County spends over $1 million for each gang murder. That's one million dollars per murder. One million dollars per murder vs $3 bucks a month for property owners... not to mention, less gang members means less gang murders, and less gang murders is less murder.

All the nay-saying and skepticism aside, even if this plan doesn't work as intended, it is the DTLF's personal opinion that it is worth the three bucks a month to find out. Yes on A.


PROPOSITION B: UPDATE OF LOW RENT HOUSING AUTHORIZATION. Los Angeles City Prop B is asking:

"Shall existing voter-approved authorization for low rent housing be revised to remove impediments to the federal and state funding requirements not compatible with current housing needs, and authorize the development, construction or acquisition of low rent housing by public entities in the City of Los Angeles, maintaining the previously authorized voter-approved level of 3,5000 units per Council District, subject to the availability of funding and all City development requirements?"

The answer to that question is, "Yes." Without raising taxes a bit, this measure would potentially create 52,000 much needed low income housing units (according to the LA Chamber of Commerce) across the city.

It's time to change the current outmoded system we have that limits the amount of affordable housing city-wide. Every person, from every walk of life, deserves to be able to live near their job and their children deserve to live near a good school; affordable city-wide housing will help make these dreams a reality. Currently developers are locked up in bureaucratic red-tape, restricting them to only build new homes that cost more than most people can afford. This measure will allow community organizations, such as Habitat for Humanity, to build homes that families on fixed incomes can afford. Supporters cite that it levels the playing field between rich, middle-class, and lower income developers.

Any qualms people have, such as the rumor that this measure will change zoning laws, are completely unfounded. From everything I've read, all zoning restrictions outlined by their communities will remain the same. Please vote yes on Proposition B, and get people the affordable housing they desperately need.

So that's it for our local and county measures. Hoped that helped you out. Stay tuned for Part 4 of our 2008 Voting Guide where we provide you with a list of a bunch of great resouces to help you make that decision tomorrow in the polling booth a little easier.