Click here for part 1

Click here for part 2

Click here for part 3

Measure A Appointment of County Assessor — County of Los Angeles (Advisory Vote Only – Advisory Vote Only)

Do you support seeking to change the California Constitution and the Los Angeles County Charter to make the position of Los Angeles County Assessor an appointed position instead of an elected position?

No arguments were submitted for or against this measure. Thanks lawmakers!



VOTE: No. I want to vote on as much stuff as I possibly can. Fuck you guys.

VOTE: Yes. Please see Jame’s awesome comment below for the full version, but the gist is, I don’t even know what an Assessor does, so maybe it shouldn’t be a popular vote position.

Measure B Safer Sex In the Adult Film Industry Act — County of Los Angeles (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall an ordinance be adopted requiring producers of adult films to obtain a County public health permit, to require adult film performers to use condoms while engaged in sex acts, to provide proof of blood borne pathogen training course, to post permit and notices to performers, and making violations of the ordinance subject to civil fines and criminal charges?

Anyone who knows me knows that I am a major proponent of safe sex. However, I worry this is bordering on nanny-statery. But when I think it in terms of a workplace, I feel like it’s more like requiring hard-hats in a construction zone than Bloomberg’s New York soda ban.

The LA Times argues that the county doesn’t have the wherewithal to enforce a condom requirement, which would result in no benefit to the performers overall, and lots of determent to LA as industry moved to deregulated counties, taking jobs with it. To be fair, a building made by hard-hatted workers doesn’t have giant yellow hard-hats sticking out of the walls, making consumers purchase the monstrosity or move to China where hard hats are but a distant union dream.

It’s a hard decision, I think condoms should be used in porno, but that the county of Los Angeles is not the superhero that’s going to kick that off for us, and trying will just fuck things up. If you really want condom use, vote with your dollars and buy porn with condoms in it.

VOTE: No

Measure E El Camino Community College Improvement/Transfer/Job Training Measure — El Camino Community College District (School Bonds – 55% Approval Required)

To prepare students for universities/transfer/jobs, including nursing, healthcare, fire-fighting and high-tech jobs, by expanding science labs, upgrading outdated electrical systems, wiring green energy for savings, building earthquake/fire-safe classrooms equipped with up-to-date technology, improving facilities for Veterans, acquiring, constructing, repairing facilities, sites/equipment, shall El Camino Community College District issue $350,000,000 in bonds at legal rates, requiring all funds remain local, financial audits, citizen’s oversight, and NO money for pensions/administrators’ salaries?

At first glance, this seems to be a good deal: more money for junior college to ensure that the students in our community have the resources they need to transition to the UC system, or to fulfilling careers. However, opponents of the measure state that the money will only go to construction, even as the college still has construction from money from the last bond measure they took out in 2002. Yes on E hasn’t addressed this concern at all, instead talking about intangible concepts like ‘community’ and ‘jobs’ without relating it directly to how the measure would specifically help the community get jobs.

VOTE: No

Measure J Accelerating Traffic Relief, Job Creation — County of Los Angeles (Continuation of Voter-Approved Sales Tax Increase – 2/3 Approval Required)

To advance Los Angeles County’s traffic relief, economic growth/ job creation, by accelerating construction of light rail/ subway/ airport connections within five years not twenty; funding countywide freeway traffic flow/ safety /bridge improvements, pothole repair; keeping senior/ student/ disabled fares low; Shall Los Angeles County’s voter-approved one-half cent traffic relief sales tax continue, without tax rate increase, for another 30 years or until voters decide to end it, with audits/ keeping funds local?

Measure J would turn a 30 year sales tax increase of 0.5% that we enacted in 2004 into a 60 year increase. The reason we’re talking about taxes that won’t go into affect until 2039 is because having guaranteed tax revenue for 60 years instead of 30 years allows transit managers to borrow more money in order to accelerate current projects. Now, most of our current projects rely on federal money in addition to county money, so the tax doesn’t directly mean more jobs or more construction right away. However, if Washington does go along with acceleration, it means that the county can keep up. I’ve already seen the extension of the Orange line, and am looking forward to LA moving into having at least some semblance of mass transportation.



VOTE: Yes.

Measure CL School Improvement Funding — Local Classrooms Funding Authority (Special Tax – 2/3 Approval Required)

To protect academic quality in local K-12 schools; maintain math, science, English programs; provide education for students with disabilities/special needs; support computer technology and school security; prepare students for college/careers; retain excellent teachers; shall Local Classrooms Funding Authority levy a special tax of 2¢/square foot of lot for residential property, and 7.5¢/square foot for other property types; requiring citizens oversight, audits, senior exemptions, no money for administrator salaries and all funds staying local?

I couldn’t find any outside sources on this measure. The problem I have with the law is that it raises everyone’s taxes by the same amount across the board, but it distributes the income unequally across school districts. 40% goes to Centinela Valley Union High School District (“Centinela”), 16.6% to Hawthorne School District, 14.7% to Lawndale School District, 8.7% to Lennox School District, and 20% to Wiseburn School District. The proponents of the measure make no arguments as to why the distribution is like this, and with no other materials to give me any insight, I’m loathe to vote for the bill.

VOTE: No