The administrative error that wiped out one Los Angeles ballot measure and may force another
Fasana and fellow task force member Derek Steele argued during the meeting that their newly established 13-member task force should figure out how to proceed with the Measure J omission before getting into the nitty-gritty of implementing Measure G.
'I don't think it puts the committee members in a good position to go out talking to the public and doing public outreach when there's this cloud hanging over the thing that they might not even know about,' Fasana said. 'So that's why I came forward when I did … there should be a more public discussion of how this is going to get fixed.'
They argue it's possible to add Measure J back into the charter without needing voter approval. Then they want to see a new charter amendment on the ballot next November to rehash parts of Measure G, particularly those related to the elected executive which wiped out Measure J. Those sections incidentally were the leading reason Fasana and Steele both opposed Measure G.
'If we are going to be rehashing any conversation, I think it is to take in a reexamination of Measure G, which was rushed in the first place, which never was really community-vetted,' said Steele. 'The portion about the county CEO … maybe that part needs to go back before the public and be reexamined.'
The Los Angeles County Counsel confirmed in a statement that Measure G did in fact repeal Measure J, but also clarified that the repeal 'would have no impact' on the funding called for in Measure J because the board has adopted a budget policy 'identical to the objectives set out in Measure J.'
But that effectively leaves a voter-approved policy change up to the whims of lawmakers, as a new Board of Supervisors could simply reverse the funding decision.
Backers of Measure J were incensed by the mix-up. Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, who had been involved in the Measure J campaign in 2020, said he was 'absolutely livid' when he found out.
'I don't know who to blame here, but I do know that in some respects, what the voters voted on in November [with Measure G] did not accurately reflect what the proponents of the measure intended or what the outcome potentially is if there's no administrative fix,' Bryan said. 'That is not something that should force Measure J back to the ballot.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
a day ago
- Axios
Mayor Daniel Lurie signs $15.9 billion budget
With Mayor Daniel Lurie and the Board of Supervisors approving San Francisco's $15.9 billion budget, the city's fiscal winners and losers are coming into focus. Why it matters: The two-year plan signed by Lurie on Friday marks the clearest signal yet of San Francisco's shifting priorities under his administration: leaner city government and a stronger public safety push. To close an $800 million deficit, Lurie is cutting jobs and slashing nonprofit funding. What they're saying: "The budget that I signed today is responsible, balanced and focused on the priorities that will drive our city's recovery," Lurie said in a statement. Between the lines: Funding for law enforcement rose, with police receiving a 3% boost to $849 million, the Sheriff's Department growing by 7% to $345 million and the District Attorney's Office climbing 3% to $96 million, as reported by The Standard. About 40 city workers will be laid off and roughly 1,300 vacant positions will be eliminated — down from the 100 positions that were initially proposed. The move is expected to save as much as $300 million every year in future budgets, per the mayor's office. The Board of Supervisors also granted Lurie expanded control over Proposition C, allowing him to redirect funds originally designated for homelessness services without securing supermajority approval. Yes, but: Nonprofit grants and other contracts were cut by about $171 million, a move advocates say prioritizes policing over support for working-class families, immigrants and low-income residents — a friction point likely to resurface as Lurie's agenda moves forward. District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder, who is among the most progressive supervisors on the board, cast the lone no vote against passing the budget and did not attend the signing ceremony Thursday, citing opposition to such cuts. "We appreciate the mayor's dedication to address this budget crisis head on, but we are concerned at who these cuts target and who they spare," Anya Worley-Ziegmann, a coordinator at the People's Budget Coalition, which is made up of 150 local nonprofits and public sector unions, said in a written statement.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Alameda Supervisors allocate $170 million a year to help the homeless
The Brief The Alameda County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted to allocate $170 million annually to addressing homelessness in the county. Those funds come from Measure W, a 2020 .5% sales tax. The tax faced legal challenges that were resolved earlier this year, which allowed the funds to be disbursed. OAKLAND, Calif. - The Alameda County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted to allocate over $1.4 billion toward homeless initiatives across the county. The money, pulled from Measure W funds, will fund shelter, permanent housing, services for the unhoused and strategies to prevent homelessness. "Homelessness is one of the greatest challenges facing Alameda County. My office engages hundreds of residents and advocates who joined our call for seizing this moment to invest deeply in proven solutions to homelessness," Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Bass said in a press release. "I am proud that our collective advocacy achieved this historic investment. No one should have to live on our streets or in their vehicle, or be one unexpected expense away from being unhoused." The board directed 80% of anticipated Measure W revenues — $170 million per year — to be allocated to homelessness solutions, and the remaining 20% go toward essential county services, including some responses to recent state and federal budget shortages. Bas requested that any additional Measure W funds go toward homelessness, to which the board agreed. Those extra funds could mean up to an additional $120 million for homelessness solutions, based on previous revenue collections. Money in the making The backstory Measure W is a .5% general sales tax approved by voters in November 2020, which is projected to raise over $1.8 billion over 10 years. The county began collecting the tax, but the disbursal of those funds was held up by a legal challenge filed following the measure's passage. An anti-tax group sued over the tax, arguing that Measure W was a "special tax," which legally requires a two-thirds vote to pass. Campaign literature for the measure stated the tax revenue was specifically intended to address homelessness. Measure W passed with 50.09% of the vote. The courts ruled earlier this year that W was in fact a general tax, and that the county could use the funds for anything it wanted. Tuesday night's Board of Supervisors meeting saw heavy attendance from county residents, who filled three overflow rooms. City leaders, services providers, advocates and members of the public spoke in favor of using the money for its intended purpose. Solve the daily Crossword
Fox News
4 days ago
- Fox News
San Francisco close to taking new step to fight homelessness
San Francisco is set to crack down on homeless people living in RVs with its Board of Supervisors preparing to vote on strict new parking limits. A proposal that would enact a two-hour parking limit citywide for all RVs and oversized vehicles longer than 22 feet or higher than 7 feet -- regardless of whether they are being used as housing -- is up for final approval Tuesday. Mayor Daniel Lurie and supporters of the policy say motor homes are not suitable for long-term living and the city has a duty to both provide shelter to those in need and clean up the streets. Under an accompanying permit program, RV residents registered with the city as of May are exempt from the parking limits. In exchange, they must accept San Francisco's offer of temporary or longer-term housing and get rid of their RV when it's time to move. The city has budgeted more than half a million dollars to buy RVs from residents at $175 per foot. "We absolutely want to serve those families, those who are in crisis across San Francisco," Chief of Health & Human Services Kunal Modi told The Associated Press. "We feel the responsibility to help them get to a stable solution. And at the same time, we want to make sure that that stability is somewhere indoors and not exposed in the public roadway." The permits would last for six months. People in RVs who arrive after May will not be eligible for the permit program and must abide by the two-hour rule. The proposal, which targets at least 400 RVs, first cleared the Board of Supervisors last week with two of 11 supervisors voting "no." RV dwellers say San Francisco should open a safe parking lot where residents could empty trash and access electricity. However, city officials shuttered an RV lot in April, saying it cost about $4 million a year to service three dozen large vehicles and it failed to transition people to more stable housing, the AP reported. The mayor's new proposal comes with more money for beefed-up RV parking enforcement — but also an additional $11 million, largely for a small number of households to move to subsidized housing for a few years. Officials acknowledge that may not be sufficient to house all RV dwellers, but note that the city also has hotel vouchers and other housing subsidies.
