latimes--2020-11-05--George Gascón barely survived his primary. Now, he's likely to be L.A. County's district attorney.

Eight months ago , more than a few people were writing George Gascón ’ s political epitaph .
Sitting roughly 20 points behind incumbent Los Angeles County Dist .
Atty .
Jackie Lacey in the March primary for the powerful post , consultants began to question if Gascón had entered the race too late .
If he ’ d failed to broaden his appeal beyond activists .
If his campaign had underestimated Lacey ’ s support in a county where she ’ d served as the top prosecutor for the better part of a decade .
And even though Gascón @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenger , former public defender Rachel Rossi , some believed he had underperformed .
But after a summer that saw countless protests calling for criminal justice reform and a number of politicians pull their support from Lacey , Gascón is positioned to take control of the largest district attorney ’ s office in the nation and deliver an enormous victory to a movement seeking to elect progressive prosecutors across the country .
On Wednesday night , Gascón held 54 % of the vote to Lacey ’ s 46 % , leading by about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were left to be counted , many of them mail ballots , according to the L.A. County Registrar ’ s Office .
Both campaigns had refrained from declaring victory or conceding , though Lacey ’ s window to win had narrowed significantly .
Observers and experts said they believe a number of factors changed Gascón ’ s political fate .
A summer of unrest stemming from deadly police shootings worsened Lacey ’ s standing in a county where her record on that issue was often criticized .
And the increased focus on police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , giving him a massive fundraising advantage in the general election .
Progressive voters seeking to drive President Trump from the White House may have also weakened Lacey ’ s chances to claim a third term .
Meanwhile , Lacey was likely hurt by her reliance on funding from police unions and an inability to shake the perception that she was resistant to reform efforts in a deep blue county , some said .
“ There ’ s a long record of this tough-on-crime thing , that kind of partnered really nicely with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unions .
Police unions and money in L.A. , on the left , have become toxic , ” said Brian VanRiper , a political consultant who has worked on a number of Los Angeles City Council races .
The financial dynamics of the race certainly tilted in Gascón ’ s favor after the primary .
Both candidates had raked in about $ 2 million from outside committees in February .
By the end of October , Gascón ’ s outside donations topped $ 12 million while Lacey ’ s stood around $ 7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 to 1 in the general election .
Some have also suggested Gascón ’ s success was also the culmination of years of organizing against Lacey .
Demonstrators affiliated with Black Lives Matter L.A. have marched on Lacey ’ s office on a weekly basis for years , repeatedly attacking her for failing to hold police accountable in the fatal shootings of Black and Latino men .
In one of the most unnerving moments of the contentious race , Lacey ’ s husband pointed a gun at Black Lives Matter organizer Melina Abdullah @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protest outside their Granada Hills home .
The group ’ s weekly protest turned into a presumptive celebration Wednesday with familiar chants of “ Jackie Lacey Must Go ” turning into “ Jackie Lacey Will Go.
” Hundreds of people stood outside the Hall of Justice as relatives of several people shot and killed by police took the stage , flanked by signs that read “ Jackie Lacey Gone.
” Lisa Hines , whose daughter , Wakiesha Wilson , died in LAPD custody in 2016 , said she was delighted to see Lacey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face protesters ’ wrath if he didn ’ t live up to his promises to hold police accountable .
In an interview Tuesday night , Lacey said she regretted that her relationship with activists had become so toxic , and said it was something she hoped to repair if elected to a third-term .
“ I thought I was doing the right thing by saying ‘ Look , I will meet with you , but we ’ re not going to do a town hall where you ’ re screaming at me , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that there ’ s some value in just showing up even if the crowd is angry and yelling at you , ” she said .
“ So , I realize , that when this all started to go down , that I didn ’ t have those strong community relationships , particularly in the Black community.
” Meanwhile , some Gascón critics noted his lead did not represent a sweeping endorsement of his progressive policies .
“ Whoever wins , and right now it ’ s looking like it ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ takeaway is no one really had a real strong mandate on either side , ” said Eric Siddall , vice president of the union representing L.A. County deputy district attorneys .
“ It ’ s a relatively close race.
” Others who supported Lacey said Tuesday night ’ s result was one they had long feared after she failed to end the race in March .
A person involved in a pro-Lacey independent expenditure , who requested anonymity to speak about the matter candidly , said some supporters were frustrated that Lacey ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary as an all-or-nothing proposition , considering the presidential race was likely to drive progressive voter turnout in November .
“ The concern after March was you essentially had more than a majority of voters who voted for somebody other than Jackie Lacey , ” the person said .
“ When you start to see how much money was being put in by other groups , millions upon millions of dollars that no one could keep pace with , it ’ s not a surprise that Gascón won .
”

Progressive challenger George Gascón has jumped out to a lead over incumbent Jackie Lacey in the race for control of the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.
Eight months ago, more than a few people were writing George Gascón’s political epitaph.
Sitting roughly 20 points behind incumbent Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey in the March primary for the powerful post, consultants began to question if Gascón had entered the race too late. If he’d failed to broaden his appeal beyond activists. If his campaign had underestimated Lacey’s support in a county where she’d served as the top prosecutor for the better part of a decade.
And even though Gascón split the primary vote with another progressive challenger, former public defender Rachel Rossi, some believed he had underperformed.
Advertisement
But after a summer that saw countless protests calling for criminal justice reform and a number of politicians pull their support from Lacey, Gascón is positioned to take control of the largest district attorney’s office in the nation and deliver an enormous victory to a movement seeking to elect progressive prosecutors across the country.
On Wednesday night, Gascón held 54% of the vote to Lacey’s 46%, leading by about 222,000 ballots. More than 600,000 votes were left to be counted, many of them mail ballots, according to the L.A. County Registrar’s Office. Both campaigns had refrained from declaring victory or conceding, though Lacey’s window to win had narrowed significantly.
Observers and experts said they believe a number of factors changed Gascón’s political fate. A summer of unrest stemming from deadly police shootings worsened Lacey’s standing in a county where her record on that issue was often criticized. And the increased focus on police accountability energized voters and donors around Gascón, giving him a massive fundraising advantage in the general election.
Progressive voters seeking to drive President Trump from the White House may have also weakened Lacey’s chances to claim a third term. Meanwhile, Lacey was likely hurt by her reliance on funding from police unions and an inability to shake the perception that she was resistant to reform efforts in a deep blue county, some said.
“There’s a long record of this tough-on-crime thing, that kind of partnered really nicely with the endorsement and fiscal support of police unions. Police unions and money in L.A., on the left, have become toxic,” said Brian VanRiper, a political consultant who has worked on a number of Los Angeles City Council races.
Advertisement
The financial dynamics of the race certainly tilted in Gascón’s favor after the primary. Both candidates had raked in about $2 million from outside committees in February. By the end of October, Gascón’s outside donations topped $12 million while Lacey’s stood around $7 million, meaning he outraised her nearly 2 to 1 in the general election.
Some have also suggested Gascón’s success was also the culmination of years of organizing against Lacey. Demonstrators affiliated with Black Lives Matter L.A. have marched on Lacey’s office on a weekly basis for years, repeatedly attacking her for failing to hold police accountable in the fatal shootings of Black and Latino men. In one of the most unnerving moments of the contentious race, Lacey’s husband pointed a gun at Black Lives Matter organizer Melina Abdullah and two other demonstrators during a March protest outside their Granada Hills home.
The group’s weekly protest turned into a presumptive celebration Wednesday with familiar chants of “Jackie Lacey Must Go” turning into “Jackie Lacey Will Go.” Hundreds of people stood outside the Hall of Justice as relatives of several people shot and killed by police took the stage, flanked by signs that read “Jackie Lacey Gone.” Lisa Hines, whose daughter, Wakiesha Wilson, died in LAPD custody in 2016, said she was delighted to see Lacey losing but also warned Gascón he would face protesters’ wrath if he didn’t live up to his promises to hold police accountable.
In an interview Tuesday night, Lacey said she regretted that her relationship with activists had become so toxic, and said it was something she hoped to repair if elected to a third-term.
“I thought I was doing the right thing by saying ‘Look, I will meet with you, but we’re not going to do a town hall where you’re screaming at me, telling me these things.’ I now think that there’s some value in just showing up even if the crowd is angry and yelling at you,” she said. “So, I realize, that when this all started to go down, that I didn’t have those strong community relationships, particularly in the Black community.”
Meanwhile, some Gascón critics noted his lead did not represent a sweeping endorsement of his progressive policies.
“Whoever wins, and right now it’s looking like it’s not going to be her, the bigger takeaway is no one really had a real strong mandate on either side,” said Eric Siddall, vice president of the union representing L.A. County deputy district attorneys. “It’s a relatively close race.”
Others who supported Lacey said Tuesday night’s result was one they had long feared after she failed to end the race in March. A person involved in a pro-Lacey independent expenditure, who requested anonymity to speak about the matter candidly, said some supporters were frustrated that Lacey’s campaign did not treat the March primary as an all-or-nothing proposition, considering the presidential race was likely to drive progressive voter turnout in November.
“The concern after March was you essentially had more than a majority of voters who voted for somebody other than Jackie Lacey,” the person said. “When you start to see how much money was being put in by other groups, millions upon millions of dollars that no one could keep pace with, it’s not a surprise that Gascón won.”


latimes--2020-11-05--This Gen Z gig worker ran for office. Now he's California's youngest legislator

Four years ago , Alex Lee was student body president at UC Davis .
On Tuesday , he overwhelmingly won a seat in the California Assembly , becoming the youngest state legislator to assume office in more than 80 years .
The Generation Z Democrat from San Jose is 25 years old , lives with his mom and , up until recently , was working part time for an app-based delivery service to make ends meet during his campaign .
When he is sworn into office , he will also be the first California legislator to have come out as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been an obstacle during his campaign , Lee said .
Instead , he leaned into all the things that set him apart from other lawmakers .
“ All of this combined will make me an effective advocate , ” Lee said Wednesday .
“ This isn ’ t abstract for me .
I don ’ t have to try to understand what it ’ s like for people who struggle to pay their bills or with housing insecurity , that ’ s something I live with.
” Lee easily defeated Republican Bob Brunton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ San Jose , Santa Clara and Fremont .
While the seat has been solidly Democratic , voters with no party preference make up 33 % to Republicans ’ 15 % .
Assembly District 25 was previously held by Democrat Kansen Chu , who left to run for Santa Clara County supervisor .
In the March primary , Lee split the vote with seven other Democrats , allowing Brunton to finish on top .
While it was was Lee ’ s first campaign , he wasn ’ t new to politics .
He worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Low ( D-Campbell ) before quitting to run his campaign .
He previously worked in the state Capitol office of Sen. Henry Stern ( D-Canoga Park ) , who was first elected when he was in his mid-30s .
Stern said he could see right away that Lee had ambition .
“ Even as an aide for an untested senator like me , Alex had the kind of impatience for progress that makes an unlikely win like his possible , ” Stern said .
“ Knock on every door .
Work for every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who you are.
” Lee said his his politics align with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , who endorsed the young Democrat ’ s bid for the Assembly .
Lee said he plans to keep his campaign pledge of not accepting corporate or special interest money while in office .
“ One of my first bills will be to eliminate or limit special interest and corporate money in state elections , ” Lee said .
“ It ’ s polluting our democracy.
” While riding the excitement of his win , Lee said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of good news .
He opposed Proposition 22 , the $ 200-million campaign led by Uber and Lyft seeking an exemption from California labor law limiting the use of independent contractors .
The measure , which became the costliest in state history , passed on Tuesday .
“ Proposition 22 has shown us how dangerous it is to allow multibillion dollar corporations to buy out sections of the law , ” Lee said .
He said his opinions on Proposition 22 were solidified while working for an app-based delivery company he declined to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , it was risky and low-wage work .
“ In my community , I can only afford to live at home with my family , ” Lee said .
“ Like a lot of people , they have to live with their parents because that ’ s the only financially feasible option .
That ’ s why housing affordability is important to me.
” His win adds another voice to the Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus and the California Legislative LGTBQ Caucus .
“ We ’ re thrilled by Alex ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a critical voice for bisexual Californians in Sacramento , ” said Rick Chavez Zbur , executive director of Equality California .
Lee will join a Democrat-dominated Legislature , where fellow lawmakers are , on average , twice his age .
There has been only one California state lawmaker younger than Lee in the past century : Democrat Maurice Atkinson , who was 23 when he was elected to the Assembly in 1939 , said Alex Vassar , communications manager at the California State Library .
Lee said he ’ s not worried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take him less seriously .
“ There will always be detractors , ” he said .
“ I will prove them wrong .
”

Alex Lee, a Democrat from San Jose, became the youngest state lawmaker to be elected in 80 years. The 25-year-old is also the first California legislator to have come out as bisexual.
Four years ago, Alex Lee was student body president at UC Davis. On Tuesday, he overwhelmingly won a seat in the California Assembly, becoming the youngest state legislator to assume office in more than 80 years.
The Generation Z Democrat from San Jose is 25 years old, lives with his mom and, up until recently, was working part time for an app-based delivery service to make ends meet during his campaign. When he is sworn into office, he will also be the first California legislator to have come out as bisexual.
For the record: An earlier version of this story said that there has been only one California state lawmaker younger than Lee in the past century, Democrat Maurice Atkinson in 1939. There have been five California state lawmakers younger than Lee in the past century, with the most recent being Atkinson in 1938.
Those facts could have easily been an obstacle during his campaign, Lee said. Instead, he leaned into all the things that set him apart from other lawmakers.
Advertisement
“All of this combined will make me an effective advocate,” Lee said Wednesday. “This isn’t abstract for me. I don’t have to try to understand what it’s like for people who struggle to pay their bills or with housing insecurity, that’s something I live with.”
Lee easily defeated Republican Bob Brunton for the Bay Area district that encompasses San Jose, Santa Clara and Fremont. While the seat has been solidly Democratic, voters with no party preference make up 33% to Republicans’ 15%. Assembly District 25 was previously held by Democrat Kansen Chu, who left to run for Santa Clara County supervisor.
In the March primary, Lee split the vote with seven other Democrats, allowing Brunton to finish on top. Though it was was Lee’s first campaign, he wasn’t new to politics. He worked in the district office of Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell) before quitting to run his campaign. He previously worked in the state Capitol office of Sen. Henry Stern (D-Canoga Park), who was first elected when he was in his mid-30s.
Stern said he could see right away that Lee had ambition.
“Even as an aide for an untested senator like me, Alex had the kind of impatience for progress that makes an unlikely win like his possible,” Stern said. “Knock on every door. Work for every vote. And never shy away from who you are.”
Pokemon Go to the Polls pic.twitter.com/nF4PwkcapB — Alex Lee for State Assembly (@VoteAlexLee2020) November 2, 2020
Lee said his his politics align with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who endorsed the young Democrat’s bid for the Assembly. Lee said he plans to keep his campaign pledge of not accepting corporate or special interest money while in office.
Advertisement
“One of my first bills will be to eliminate or limit special interest and corporate money in state elections,” Lee said. “It’s polluting our democracy.”
While riding the excitement of his win, Lee said the election didn’t bring a wave of good news. He opposed Proposition 22, the $200-million campaign led by Uber and Lyft seeking an exemption from California labor law limiting the use of independent contractors. The measure, which became the costliest in state history, passed on Tuesday.
“Proposition 22 has shown us how dangerous it is to allow multibillion-dollar corporations to buy out sections of the law,” Lee said.
He said his opinions on Proposition 22 were solidified while working for an app-based delivery company he declined to name. During the pandemic, he said, it was risky and low-wage work.
“In my community, I can only afford to live at home with my family,” Lee said. “Like a lot of people, they have to live with their parents because that’s the only financially feasible option. That’s why housing affordability is important to me.”
His win adds another voice to the Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus and the California Legislative LGTBQ Caucus.
“We’re thrilled by Alex’s historic election and know he’ll be a critical voice for bisexual Californians in Sacramento,” said Rick Chavez Zbur, executive director of Equality California.
Lee will join a Democrat-dominated Legislature, where fellow lawmakers are, on average, twice his age.
There have been only five California state lawmakers younger than Lee in the past century. The most recent was Democrat Maurice Atkinson, who was 23 when he was elected to the Assembly in 1938, said Alex Vassar, communications manager at the California State Library.
Lee said he’s not worried about whether his age will mean people take him less seriously.
“There will always be detractors,” he said. “I will prove them wrong.”


latimes--2020-11-05--News Analysis: With ballot initiatives, Californians cling to a system controlled by powerful groups

California voters were first empowered to govern by ballot measure in 1911 .
But it took almost seven decades and the anti-tax crusade of a cantankerous , fist-shaking businessman to reveal the political strength of a direct democracy tool that has come to redefine the state ’ s politics ever since .
What Howard Jarvis discovered in 1978 with Proposition 13 was that the public ’ s distrust of government was a kind of electoral rocket fuel that could carry almost any payload into orbit .
It no longer took haggling with legislators in Sacramento to write a law .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ — over the last two decades — enough money to wage a nonstop blitzkrieg of TV commercials and mailbox fliers .
On Tuesday , voters waded through a dozen propositions covering a variety of complicated policy ideas .
Most were carefully crafted by powerful interest groups , often as much a solution to their problems as addressing an urgent public need .
“ What this cycle showed , maybe more than any other , is that you can pay for a law if you don ’ t like something that ’ s going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kaufman said .
“ With brute strength , you can buy yourself virtually any law you want or defeat any law you want.
” Kaufman , a campaign consultant who ’ s been involved in a number of fierce ballot measure fights on behalf of labor unions , drew two particularly tough assignments this year : mounting the opposition campaign against Proposition 22 , the app-based industry plan to write special rules for its drivers , and trying to persuade voters to ratify the Legislature ’ s end of cash bail , Proposition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came up short .
In both campaigns , money tells an important part of the story .
Proposition 22 had a bank account before it had a blueprint .
Uber and Lyft , joined later by DoorDash and others , set aside $ 90 million last summer — weeks before drafting an initiative — frustrated that state lawmakers wouldn ’ t include an exemption for their drivers in a far-reaching worker classification law , Assembly Bill 5 .
By election day , the Silicon Valley companies had championed the most expensive ballot measure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every political campaign with money wins , the large war chest for Proposition 22 helped it break through the noise in an election season in which voters were focused on the presidency and the pandemic .
The companies used a unique feature of California ’ s initiative process : its inflexibility .
“ Backing a ballot initiative is a way to lock your own special deals and detailed preferences into the state Constitution or into initiative statutes , which are super-laws that often require another vote of the people to amend them , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California journalist and a columnist for Zocalo Public Square in Los Angeles .
The rigid nature of California ’ s ballot measure system helps explain another 2020 initiative , Proposition 15 , the most ambitious effort yet to rethink Jarvis ’ vaunted Proposition 13 tax rules .
Liberal activists , bankrolled by public employee unions , wanted voters to remove commercial and industrial properties from the tax limits of the 1978 initiative .
While the final vote tally won ’ t be known for weeks , returns show Proposition 15 coming up short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opponents doled out some $ 139 million — making it the fifth most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history — and the result appears to be a continuation of the status quo , even though decades of policy experts have suggested California ’ s tax structure could use an overhaul .
In most conversations about ballot measures , the talk turns to money .
And in every election , the origins of direct democracy fade further into the background .
Championed by then-Gov .
Hiram Johnson in 1911 , the power of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for citizens to break the tight grip of the era ’ s most powerful California interest group , the Southern Pacific Railroad .
Johnson ’ s inaugural address promised that those writing laws by voting would “ prevent the misuse of the power temporarily centralized in the Legislature , ” where railroad officials held sway .
But it is the well-funded interest groups , not citizens , who control the modern-day ballot measure process .
“ It ’ s a bitter irony that the ballot initiative , a tool used all over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in California to short-circuit and cancel democracy here , ” Mathews said .
With enough money , the same battles can be waged over and over again .
A half-dozen of this year ’ s propositions saw powerful groups returning to familiar topics .
Three ballot measures — the effort to broaden a property tax break for seniors in Proposition 19 , to expand rent control under Proposition 21 and to more tightly regulate kidney dialysis clinics in Proposition 23 — were slightly amended versions of measures rejected by voters in 2018 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ criminal justice rules voters had just loosened in 2014 and 2016 , was defeated .
Only Proposition 19 appears to have won its second round with voters , after changes designed to help Californians who lose their home in a wildfire won the backing of the state ’ s firefighters union .
And Proposition 24 , a wide-ranging set of consumer privacy rules that won passage , was a reworking of a 2018 law ratified by the Legislature .
Perhaps the newest approach by moneyed interests is to think about not just writing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but blocking laws by filing a referendum .
The referendum — the power of voters to erase a law enacted by the Legislature and governor — has long been the forgotten sibling in California ’ s direct democracy family .
Only 94 referendum measures have been filed to block a state law since 1912 , compared to more than 2,000 proposed initiatives .
But if backers of a referendum gather enough voter signatures , the challenged law is put on hold until voters weigh in on election day — even if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The industry that produces plastic bags did that in 2014 , and failed to persuade voters to overturn a ban on the products in 2016 .
The bail bonds industry played the same card in 2018 , after then-Gov .
Jerry Brown signed a law banning the use of cash bail for those accused of committing a crime .
The result was Proposition 25 , a law voters scuttled in Tuesday ’ s election .
And another referendum could be on the horizon : Senate Bill 793 , a law signed in September @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sale of flavored tobacco in California , is being challenged by the tobacco industry .
Their effort , if it gathers enough voter signatures on a referendum petition by the end of this month , will suspend SB 793 until election day in November 2022 .
“ I think there ’ s going to be a lot of these in the years to come , ” said Kaufman , who oversaw the effort to preserve the law banning cash bail .
The future of big ballot measure campaigns all depends on voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the more well-funded groups will see the system as an alternative to the slower , consensus-focused process in the Legislature .
Surveys conducted by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California since 2000 have consistently found strong public support for direct democracy .
In 2013 , the institute ’ s researchers noted that 60 % of likely voters in one survey said laws enacted through the ballot are probably better than the ones that originate in Sacramento .
“ Voters get exhausted by it , but they get over it , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affairs agency worked on the campaign in support of Proposition 14 , the $ 5.5-billion stem cell research bond that had a narrow lead in early returns .
“ We just push reset and we start all over again in two years .
”

California voters were first empowered to govern by ballot measure in 1911. But it took almost seven decades and the anti-tax crusade of a cantankerous, fist-shaking businessman to reveal the political strength of a direct democracy tool that has come to redefine the state’s politics ever since.
What Howard Jarvis discovered in 1978 with Proposition 13 was that the public’s distrust of government was a kind of electoral rocket fuel that could carry almost any payload into orbit. It no longer took haggling with legislators in Sacramento to write a law. It took only a popular concept and — over the last two decades — enough money to wage a nonstop blitzkrieg of TV commercials and mailbox fliers.
On Tuesday, voters waded through a dozen propositions covering a variety of complicated policy ideas. Most were carefully crafted by powerful interest groups, often as much a solution to their problems as addressing an urgent public need.
Advertisement
“What this cycle showed, maybe more than any other, is that you can pay for a law if you don’t like something that’s going on,” Democratic political strategist Gale Kaufman said. “With brute strength, you can buy yourself virtually any law you want or defeat any law you want.”
Kaufman, a campaign consultant who’s been involved in a number of fierce ballot measure fights on behalf of labor unions, drew two particularly tough assignments this year: mounting the opposition campaign against Proposition 22, the app-based industry plan to write special rules for its drivers, and trying to persuade voters to ratify the Legislature’s end of cash bail, Proposition 25. Election returns show the efforts came up short.
In both campaigns, money tells an important part of the story.
Proposition 22 had a bank account before it had a blueprint. Uber and Lyft, joined later by DoorDash and others, set aside $90 million last summer — weeks before drafting an initiative — frustrated that state lawmakers wouldn’t include an exemption for their drivers in a far-reaching worker classification law, Assembly Bill 5.
By election day, the Silicon Valley companies had championed the most expensive ballot measure campaign in U.S. history. While not every political campaign with money wins, the large war chest for Proposition 22 helped it break through the noise in an election season in which voters were focused on the presidency and the pandemic.
The companies used a unique feature of California’s initiative process: its inflexibility.
“Backing a ballot initiative is a way to lock your own special deals and detailed preferences into the state Constitution or into initiative statutes, which are super-laws that often require another vote of the people to amend them,” said Joe Mathews, a longtime California journalist and a columnist for Zocalo Public Square in Los Angeles.
Advertisement
The rigid nature of California’s ballot measure system helps explain another 2020 initiative, Proposition 15, the most ambitious effort yet to rethink Jarvis’ vaunted Proposition 13 tax rules. Liberal activists, bankrolled by public employee unions, wanted voters to remove commercial and industrial properties from the tax limits of the 1978 initiative. While the final vote tally won’t be known for weeks, returns show Proposition 15 coming up short.
Along the way, supporters and opponents doled out some $139 million — making it the fifth most expensive ballot measure campaign in state history — and the result appears to be a continuation of the status quo, even though decades of policy experts have suggested California’s tax structure could use an overhaul.
In most conversations about ballot measures, the talk turns to money. And in every election, the origins of direct democracy fade further into the background. Championed by then-Gov. Hiram Johnson in 1911, the power of the plebiscite was seen as a way for citizens to break the tight grip of the era’s most powerful California interest group, the Southern Pacific Railroad. Johnson’s inaugural address promised that those writing laws by voting would “prevent the misuse of the power temporarily centralized in the Legislature,” where railroad officials held sway.
But it is the well-funded interest groups, not citizens, who control the modern-day ballot measure process.
“It’s a bitter irony that the ballot initiative, a tool used all over the world to advance democracy, is used in California to short-circuit and cancel democracy here,” Mathews said.
With enough money, the same battles can be waged over and over again.
A half-dozen of this year’s propositions saw powerful groups returning to familiar topics. Three ballot measures — the effort to broaden a property tax break for seniors in Proposition 19, to expand rent control under Proposition 21 and to more tightly regulate kidney dialysis clinics in Proposition 23 — were slightly amended versions of measures rejected by voters in 2018. Proposition 20, which sought to tighten criminal justice rules voters had just loosened in 2014 and 2016, was defeated.
Only Proposition 19 appears to have won its second round with voters, after changes designed to help Californians who lose their home in a wildfire won the backing of the state’s firefighters union. And Proposition 24, a wide-ranging set of consumer privacy rules that won passage, was a reworking of a 2018 law ratified by the Legislature.
Perhaps the newest approach by moneyed interests is to think about not just writing laws through the passage of an initiative, but blocking laws by filing a referendum.
The referendum — the power of voters to erase a law enacted by the Legislature and governor — has long been the forgotten sibling in California’s direct democracy family. Only 94 referendum measures have been filed to block a state law since 1912, compared to more than 2,000 proposed initiatives.
But if backers of a referendum gather enough voter signatures, the challenged law is put on hold until voters weigh in on election day — even if the next election is two years away. The industry that produces plastic bags did that in 2014, and failed to persuade voters to overturn a ban on the products in 2016.
The bail bonds industry played the same card in 2018, after then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law banning the use of cash bail for those accused of committing a crime. The result was Proposition 25, a law voters scuttled in Tuesday’s election.
And another referendum could be on the horizon: Senate Bill 793, a law signed in September by Gov. Gavin Newsom that bans the sale of flavored tobacco in California, is being challenged by the tobacco industry. Their effort, if it gathers enough voter signatures on a referendum petition by the end of this month, will suspend SB 793 until election day in November 2022.
“I think there’s going to be a lot of these in the years to come,” said Kaufman, who oversaw the effort to preserve the law banning cash bail.
The future of big ballot measure campaigns all depends on voters. The more they approve the proposals, the more well-funded groups will see the system as an alternative to the slower, consensus-focused process in the Legislature. Surveys conducted by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California since 2000 have consistently found strong public support for direct democracy.
In 2013, the institute’s researchers noted that 60% of likely voters in one survey said laws enacted through the ballot are probably better than the ones that originate in Sacramento.
“Voters get exhausted by it, but they get over it,” said Fiona Hutton, whose statewide public affairs agency worked on the campaign in support of Proposition 14, the $5.5-billion stem cell research bond that had a narrow lead in early returns. “We just push reset and we start all over again in two years.”


latimes--2020-11-05--California goes big on criminal justice reform, setting a new, uncertain path

California voters expressed a clear appetite for criminal justice reform on election night , supporting a series of ambitious changes after a summer of mass protests sparked a painful reckoning around racial injustice and debate over the role of policing .
Results throughout the state have not been finalized .
But on statewide ballot measures and in key local races , voters backed progressive candidates and policies that promised to hold police more accountable and shift taxpayer funding away from law enforcement and toward social services .
In some cases , voters leapfrogged their own elected officials in the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traction or fell short of passage during recent legislative sessions in Sacramento — where the idea of broad , statewide policing reform has loomed large but never fully materialized .
California has been a leader on easing the tough-on-crime tactics of an earlier era , but the results of Tuesday ’ s balloting opens a new front for more aggressive reforms , such as calls to reduce funding to law enforcement agencies .
Well-funded police unions and other groups , who were able stall police reform legislation in Sacramento , were less effective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety .
But it also comes in a year in which crime — particularly homicides — are rising significantly in some cities , including Los Angeles .
“ There was a time in California where the impulse was to incarcerate more people , three strikes and you are out , ” Erwin Chemerinsky , dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law , said of the election results Wednesday .
“ I don ’ t think that is the impulse in California any longer.
” In Los Angeles County — one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a longtime trendsetter in criminal justice issues — voters appeared to have ousted Dist .
Atty .
Jackie Lacey , who was accused by her critics of being too lenient on cops and too cozy with police unions , and passed a measure mandating that county officials spend more on jail diversion programs , mental health and housing .
In San Francisco , voters approved measures that will ramp up oversight of the local sheriff and undo a requirement that the city ‘ s Police Department maintain a certain size — a rule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to defunding the department more broadly .
At the state level , voters restored the right to vote to parolees , and rejected a measure that would have increased penalties for petty offenses .
Advocates said the reforms are substantial , but do not solve all the issues they see with the criminal justice system .
Still , decisions voters made this week will reshape how services are accessed by homeless people and those released from prison , and how police shootings are investigated and assessed for criminality by prosecutors .
They also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reimagining public safety and shifting responsibilities and funding away from police , a process already being contemplated in L.A. , where the Los Angeles Police Department ’ s budget was cut by $ 150 million earlier this year .
The shift — following a summer of protests over police brutality against Black and brown people — is one that police unions had spent heavily in campaign contributions to halt , and one activist groups on Wednesday claimed as a major victory after years of effort .
Activists felt particularly encouraged by the apparent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protested and rallied against for years for her refusal to prosecute police officers in a number of controversial shootings of unarmed men .
Although results were not finalized Wednesday , Lacey ’ s challenger , George Gascón , seemed poised to win , which Black Lives Matter Los Angeles ’ Baba Akili called “ a testament to the power of consistent collective action.
” The group rallied in celebration of Lacey ’ s apparent loss in downtown L.A. on Wednesday afternoon , and suggested a Gascón victory could reshape the way prosecutions are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 100,000 criminal cases each year .
“ Los Angeles County is winning and we owe it all to organizers , ” said Patrisse Cullors , co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement .
Gascón has promised to expand the use of pretrial diversion programs and alternative sentencing courts in L.A. County , methods Lacey faced criticism for not using enough , and reopen investigations into a number of past shootings by police officers .
A Gascón victory would be the biggest win yet in a nationwide push to elect more progressive prosecutors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the more significant criminal justice wins of the election , reflective of a broad desire to continue reforms .
Gascón ’ s message , and that of the reform activists , seemed to resonate with voters .
Four years ago , Los Feliz resident Willie Mack , 43 , voted for Lacey and for City Councilman David Ryu .
This year , he changed course on both candidates , voting for Gascón after learning more about Lacey ’ s record and her support from police unions , and voting for Ryu ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part because of her position that the LAPD was overfunded .
Raman , an urban planner who looked on course Wednesday to represent the city ’ s Silver Lake-to-Sherman Oaks district , had argued in favor of making the LAPD a “ much smaller , specialized armed force , ” removing officers from traffic enforcement and vehicle collision duties .
Of his vote for Gascón , Mack said there “ needs to be a line between cops and the people required to hold them accountable.
” Of his vote for Raman , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The board of the Los Angeles Police Protective League , which represents rank-and-file LAPD officers and backed Lacey , said Wednesday that it joins `` other Angelenos in praying that [ Gascón ] does not do for our city what he did to San Francisco , ” which it said was “ overrun by a mental health crisis and open-air drug markets ” when Gascón was that city ’ s top prosecutor from 2011 to 2019 .
Voters also backed the passage of Measure J , which will require L.A. County to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social services while precluding certain funding from being spent on prisons , jails or law enforcement .
Eunisses Hernandez , co-chair of the Yes on Measure J campaign , called its passage “ a true step in changing structures ” that have long prevented communities of color from being prioritized .
At the state level , voters stood firmly behind past measures to limit punishments for petty crimes and lower prison incarceration rates by rejecting Proposition 20 , a measure that would have toughened sentencing for certain crimes .
Although backers of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crime and left low-level offenders unpunished for repeat offenses , more than 60 % of voters rejected that argument — including many in conservative counties such as San Bernardino , Placer and Kern .
Jay Jordan , executive director for Californians for Safety & Justice , which championed many of the reforms Proposition 20 was aimed at repealing , said its defeat showed that Californians across the political spectrum no longer view incarceration as an answer to social problems .
“ No one agrees with criminalizing homelessness and addiction , ” Jordan said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Reform advocates did not sweep up victories on every measure they backed .
One , Proposition 25 , which would have eliminated most cash bail in the state , was rejected by voters .
Cash bail has become a national goal of criminal justice reformers , but the 2018 California bill to ban it — which Proposition 25 was a referendum on — ended up dividing advocacy groups , some of whom feared that language added to the bill during final legislative negotiations would have extended pretrial jail stays and increased racial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that voters were confused on the proposition .
Still , they feel confident that cash bail has a limited future in the state , with the state Supreme Court and federal courts set to address the issue in pending cases .
However , some cautioned that with a pandemic still unchecked , continued criminal justice reform is not guaranteed .
According to a poll this summer by UC Berkeley ’ s Institute of Governmental Studies , many Californians support police reform but also the police .
That support varies geographically in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of different races and political affiliations .
Reforms palatable in some areas of California are not popular in others .
Magnus Lofstrom , policy director for criminal justice at the Public Policy Institute of California , said past reform efforts have been fueled in large part by the desire to lower incarceration rates , and the urgency may abate as officials drive the state ’ s prison and jail populations down to levels not seen since the 1990s in an effort to halt the spread of COVID-19 .
“ Where that takes us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he said .
Times staff writers Jaclyn Cosgrove , David Zahniser and Laura Zornosa contributed to this report

Kevin Rector, Anita Chabria, James Queally, Benjamin Oreskes

Protesters in June called for Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey to be removed from office. Voters appeared to do just that this week, with her challenger poised to win his bid to oust her.
California voters expressed a clear appetite for criminal justice reform on election night, supporting a series of ambitious changes after a summer of mass protests sparked a painful reckoning around racial injustice and debate over the role of policing.
Results throughout the state have not been finalized. But on statewide ballot measures and in key local races, voters backed progressive candidates and policies that promised to hold police more accountable and shift taxpayer funding away from law enforcement and toward social services.
In some cases, voters leapfrogged their own elected officials in the state Legislature to enact policies that never gained traction or fell short of passage during recent legislative sessions in Sacramento — where the idea of broad, statewide policing reform has loomed large but never fully materialized.
Advertisement
California has been a leader on easing the tough-on-crime tactics of an earlier era, but the results of Tuesday’s balloting opens a new front for more aggressive reforms, such as calls to reduce funding to law enforcement agencies.
Well-funded police unions and other groups, who were able stall police reform legislation in Sacramento, were less effective convincing voters the move would endanger public safety. But it also comes in a year in which crime — particularly homicides — are rising significantly in some cities, including Los Angeles.
“There was a time in California where the impulse was to incarcerate more people, three strikes and you are out,” Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, said of the election results Wednesday. “I don’t think that is the impulse in California any longer.”
In Los Angeles County — one of the nation’s largest criminal jurisdictions and a longtime trendsetter in criminal justice issues — voters appeared to have ousted Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey, who was accused by her critics of being too lenient on cops and too cozy with police unions, and passed a measure mandating that county officials spend more on jail diversion programs, mental health and housing.
In San Francisco, voters approved measures that will ramp up oversight of the local sheriff and undo a requirement that the city‘s Police Department maintain a certain size — a rule that some had seen as a barrier to defunding the department more broadly.
At the state level, voters restored the right to vote to parolees, and rejected a measure that would have increased penalties for petty offenses.
Advertisement
Advocates said the reforms are substantial, but do not solve all the issues they see with the criminal justice system. Still, decisions voters made this week will reshape how services are accessed by homeless people and those released from prison, and how police shootings are investigated and assessed for criminality by prosecutors.
They also suggest support among the broader electorate for reimagining public safety and shifting responsibilities and funding away from police, a process already being contemplated in L.A., where the Los Angeles Police Department’s budget was cut by $150 million earlier this year.
The shift — following a summer of protests over police brutality against Black and brown people — is one that police unions had spent heavily in campaign contributions to halt, and one activist groups on Wednesday claimed as a major victory after years of effort.
Activists felt particularly encouraged by the apparent fall of Lacey, whom they have protested and rallied against for years for her refusal to prosecute police officers in a number of controversial shootings of unarmed men.
Although results were not finalized Wednesday, Lacey’s challenger, George Gascón, seemed poised to win, which Black Lives Matter Los Angeles’ Baba Akili called “a testament to the power of consistent collective action.”
The group rallied in celebration of Lacey’s apparent loss in downtown L.A. on Wednesday afternoon, and suggested a Gascón victory could reshape the way prosecutions are handled in an office that files well over 100,000 criminal cases each year.
“Los Angeles County is winning and we owe it all to organizers,” said Patrisse Cullors, co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement.
Gascón has promised to expand the use of pretrial diversion programs and alternative sentencing courts in L.A. County, methods Lacey faced criticism for not using enough, and reopen investigations into a number of past shootings by police officers.
A Gascón victory would be the biggest win yet in a nationwide push to elect more progressive prosecutors, and Chemerinsky said it was one of the more significant criminal justice wins of the election, reflective of a broad desire to continue reforms.
Gascón’s message, and that of the reform activists, seemed to resonate with voters.
Four years ago, Los Feliz resident Willie Mack, 43, voted for Lacey and for City Councilman David Ryu. This year, he changed course on both candidates, voting for Gascón after learning more about Lacey’s record and her support from police unions, and voting for Ryu’s challenger, Nithya Raman, in part because of her position that the LAPD was overfunded.
Raman, an urban planner who looked on course Wednesday to represent the city’s Silver Lake-to-Sherman Oaks district, had argued in favor of making the LAPD a “much smaller, specialized armed force,” removing officers from traffic enforcement and vehicle collision duties.
Of his vote for Gascón, Mack said there “needs to be a line between cops and the people required to hold them accountable.” Of his vote for Raman, he said, “We need fresh blood.”
The board of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents rank-and-file LAPD officers and backed Lacey, said Wednesday that it joins “other Angelenos in praying that [Gascón] does not do for our city what he did to San Francisco,” which it said was “overrun by a mental health crisis and open-air drug markets” when Gascón was that city’s top prosecutor from 2011 to 2019.
Voters also backed the passage of Measure J, which will require L.A. County to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on social services while precluding certain funding from being spent on prisons, jails or law enforcement. Eunisses Hernandez, co-chair of the Yes on Measure J campaign, called its passage “a true step in changing structures” that have long prevented communities of color from being prioritized.
At the state level, voters stood firmly behind past measures to limit punishments for petty crimes and lower prison incarceration rates by rejecting Proposition 20, a measure that would have toughened sentencing for certain crimes. Although backers of the proposition said those earlier efforts had increased crime and left low-level offenders unpunished for repeat offenses, more than 60% of voters rejected that argument — including many in conservative counties such as San Bernardino, Placer and Kern.
Jay Jordan, executive director for Californians for Safety & Justice, which championed many of the reforms Proposition 20 was aimed at repealing, said its defeat showed that Californians across the political spectrum no longer view incarceration as an answer to social problems.
“No one agrees with criminalizing homelessness and addiction,” Jordan said. “No one agrees with overincarceration.”
Reform advocates did not sweep up victories on every measure they backed. One, Proposition 25, which would have eliminated most cash bail in the state, was rejected by voters.
Cash bail has become a national goal of criminal justice reformers, but the 2018 California bill to ban it — which Proposition 25 was a referendum on — ended up dividing advocacy groups, some of whom feared that language added to the bill during final legislative negotiations would have extended pretrial jail stays and increased racial bias.
On Tuesday, some observers said that voters were confused on the proposition. Still, they feel confident that cash bail has a limited future in the state, with the state Supreme Court and federal courts set to address the issue in pending cases.
However, some cautioned that with a pandemic still unchecked, continued criminal justice reform is not guaranteed.
According to a poll this summer by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies, many Californians support police reform but also the police. That support varies geographically in the state, as well as among people of different races and political affiliations. Reforms palatable in some areas of California are not popular in others.
Magnus Lofstrom, policy director for criminal justice at the Public Policy Institute of California, said past reform efforts have been fueled in large part by the desire to lower incarceration rates, and the urgency may abate as officials drive the state’s prison and jail populations down to levels not seen since the 1990s in an effort to halt the spread of COVID-19.
“Where that takes us now is very difficult to say,” he said.
Times staff writers Jaclyn Cosgrove, David Zahniser and Laura Zornosa contributed to this report


latimes--2020-11-05--LAPD detain, cite two videographers after declaring downtown protest unlawful

Two videographers filming a Wednesday night protest in downtown Los Angeles were detained and given “ failure to disperse ” citations after police declared the gathering unlawful .
Vishal Singh , who works on Netflix documentaries and frequently attends and films local protests , and Sean Beckner-Carmitchel , an activist and videographer who also routinely attends protests , were both taken into custody near West 5th and South Hill streets downtown .
Singh said they were filming the relatively small protest — which he said was coming to an end — when the police arrived on motorcycles and declared the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fled into a hotel , while others were told by officers to sit down .
He said he and Beckner-Carmitchel were then targeted for serving as press at the event and recording the officers ’ actions .
“ They very clearly just looked for the people with the cameras who are there the most and just grabbed me , ” he said .
“ As I was livestreaming , I saw multiple officers pointing me out.
” Beckner-Carmitchel wrote on Twitter that he and other members of the press had been “ kettled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by police .
Both men were cited and then released about an hour later , Singh said .
He said he was given a court date in March .
Capt .
Stacy Spell , an LAPD spokesman , confirmed that two people had been cited and released on charges of failing to disperse .
He said one other man at the scene was arrested on suspicion of battery on a police officer .
Asked about the two people who were detained saying they were press , Spell said that he could not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LAPD officers have been dealing with large numbers of people at recent protests claiming to be members of the media .
“ We are having an ongoing challenge with individuals who are participating in disruptive activities , taking over the street and failing to disperse but subsequently claiming to be media , ” he said .
“ Literally the entire crowd claimed to be media.
” Earlier on Wednesday , the LAPD tweeted what it said was guidance for journalists at protests .
“ We ’ re committed to facilitating everyone ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote — before warning reporters that they would be subject to arrest if they were at a gathering that had been declared unlawful and they didn ’ t follow directions as to where to stand to observe .
“ We will make every effort to provide a safe space for the media to work , when feasible .
However , if members of the media leave that designated space , they are subject to all dispersal orders , ” the LAPD wrote .
Journalists have the right to cover public protests and demonstrations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ includes access to areas restricted to unauthorized people .
However , journalists in recent months have been subjected to arrests at protests in the L.A. area and elsewhere in the country .
After major protests this summer , lawmakers passed a new law that would have enhanced protections for journalists covering protests , but Gov .
Gavin Newsom vetoed the measure .
Singh said Wednesday night that he did not hear any protesters claiming to be members of the media , as Spell had suggested .
“ I know a lot of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known them to claim to be press .
They don ’ t even all get along with the press.
” In fact , Singh said , the only people at the protest to be cited for failing to disperse were the only only two people saying they were press .
“ It was just us , ” he said .

Two videographers were arrested for failing to disperse from a protest in downtown L.A. Wednesday night.
Two videographers filming a Wednesday night protest in downtown Los Angeles were detained and given “failure to disperse” citations after police declared the gathering unlawful.
Vishal Singh, who works on Netflix documentaries and frequently attends and films local protests, and Sean Beckner-Carmitchel, an activist and videographer who also routinely attends protests, were both taken into custody near West 5th and South Hill streets downtown.
Singh said they were filming the relatively small protest — which he said was coming to an end — when the police arrived on motorcycles and declared the gathering unlawful. Singh said some protesters fled into a hotel, while others were told by officers to sit down.
He said he and Beckner-Carmitchel were then targeted for serving as press at the event and recording the officers’ actions.
Advertisement
“They very clearly just looked for the people with the cameras who are there the most and just grabbed me,” he said. “As I was livestreaming, I saw multiple officers pointing me out.”
Beckner-Carmitchel wrote on Twitter that he and other members of the press had been “kettled,” or boxed in and surrounded, by police.
Both men were cited and then released about an hour later, Singh said. He said he was given a court date in March.
Capt. Stacy Spell, an LAPD spokesman, confirmed that two people had been cited and released on charges of failing to disperse. He said one other man at the scene was arrested on suspicion of battery on a police officer.
Asked about the two people who were detained saying they were press, Spell said that he could not comment on specific detainees, but that LAPD officers have been dealing with large numbers of people at recent protests claiming to be members of the media.
Advertisement
“We are having an ongoing challenge with individuals who are participating in disruptive activities, taking over the street and failing to disperse but subsequently claiming to be media,” he said. “Literally the entire crowd claimed to be media.”
Earlier on Wednesday, the LAPD tweeted what it said was guidance for journalists at protests.
“We’re committed to facilitating everyone’s 1st Amendment Rights,” the department wrote — before warning reporters that they would be subject to arrest if they were at a gathering that had been declared unlawful and they didn’t follow directions as to where to stand to observe.
“We will make every effort to provide a safe space for the media to work, when feasible. However, if members of the media leave that designated space, they are subject to all dispersal orders,” the LAPD wrote.
Journalists have the right to cover public protests and demonstrations under the 1st Amendment, which typically includes access to areas restricted to unauthorized people. However, journalists in recent months have been subjected to arrests at protests in the L.A. area and elsewhere in the country.
After major protests this summer, lawmakers passed a new law that would have enhanced protections for journalists covering protests, but Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed the measure.
Singh said Wednesday night that he did not hear any protesters claiming to be members of the media, as Spell had suggested.
“I know a lot of the protesters personally. I’ve never known them to claim to be press. They don’t even all get along with the press.”
In fact, Singh said, the only people at the protest to be cited for failing to disperse were the only two people saying they were press.
“It was just us,” he said.


latimes--2020-11-05--L.A. County makes history with all female Board of Supervisors

Nicknamed the “ five little kings , ” the men who ruled the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for more than a century enjoyed massive power and the perks of a coveted job they kept for decades .
Those days are over .
On Wednesday , history was made when state Sen. Holly Mitchell won the board ’ s 2nd District race by a wide margin against L.A. City Councilman Herb Wesson , who was termed out from his seat .
For the first time since the board ’ s inception more than 150 years ago , the powerful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women , each of whom comes with significant backgrounds in politics and government .
“ I can ’ t think of another example in the entire United States where you will have five women having control of ... the largest county in the entire country just in terms of people , but also the largest county budget in the entire country , ” said Ange-Marie Hancock Alfaro , a professor and chair of gender studies at USC .
Mitchell , who grew up in Los Angeles , said she couldn ’ t have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Diane Watson in her early 20s that she ’ d end up making history on the Board of Supervisors .
For years , Mitchell saw herself as a “ great No .
2 , ” never feeling confident enough to run for office , even when Supervisor Sheila Kuehl , then a state lawmaker , encouraged her to run for Watson ’ s seat when it opened .
That changed when Mitchell , then chief executive of the children and family services organization Crystal Stairs , was sitting in a health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ male lawmakers , without much thought or input from the large crowd of advocates and constituents , cut $ 1 billion from state subsidized childcare .
While venting to then-Assemblywoman Karen Bass , she had an epiphany .
“ I literally said in my mind , ‘ I guess I have to run , ’ ” Mitchell said .
The L.A. County Board of Supervisors is considered the most powerful local governmental body in the country .
It ’ s often overlooked by residents , who generally do not know who their supervisor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s $ 35-billion budget — and the largest jail system in the country and one of the largest public health infrastructures — and has significant power over how those dollars are spent .
“ Many people consider local government at the bottom of the hierarchy of power , unless you ’ re referring to a mayor of a major city , ” former U.S. Rep. Yvonne Brathwaite Burke , the first woman appointed to the board in 1979 , said in a 1988 opinion piece for The Times .
“ The truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offices in California carry the quiet power that is enjoyed by a member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.
” Former Supervisor Gloria Molina , the first Latina elected to the board , said that when she joined in 1991 , it was a challenging environment fraught with sexism and subtle racism .
Once , when she challenged a choice her fellow supervisors were making and asked for the parliamentarian rule on it , a male supervisor told the media that Molina was upset because she was “ having hot flashes.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a neighboring county had a supermajority of women on its Board of Supervisors .
“ And I used to say , ‘ Oh , how wonderful it would be if L.A. County had that same option , ’ ” she said .
Political scientists say part of what ’ s helped get more women elected is rejecting the notion to “ wait your turn , ” a long uttered statement by incumbent politicians who feel they get to decide who their successor will be and when .
“ I ’ ve never fathomed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wait until someone gives you permission to run for office , ” said Raphael Sonenshein , executive director of the Pat Brown Institute at Cal State L.A. “ By the time it happens , it could be 20 years , and you may have lost your steam , or you may not have the energy for it , or you ’ ve gotten discouraged.
” Mitchell said she has been told to wait her turn , and “ in no uncertain terms , ” in the supervisor race .
The belief among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take the seat because he had to vacate his City Council position because of term limits , she said , and she had two more years in her state Senate seat .
“ There is this notion of who has paid their dues , and my comment back has consistently been that elections aren ’ t popularity contests , ” Mitchell said .
One of the most well-known supervisors in county history is Supervisor Janice Hahn ’ s father , Kenneth Hahn , who held the 2nd District seat for 40 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shortly before her father took office and grew up seeing a much different county culture than that reflected in her own office .
Her father had an all-female administrative support staff , “ the girls in the front office , ” for whom her mother bought gifts every Christmas .
“ Even in my own family , my father probably saw my brother as the one to go into public office , and he probably assumed I would get married and raise kids , ” said Hahn , who has also served on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House of Representatives .
Hahn said she hopes the novelty of having five women on the board wears off — but she ’ d like to celebrate it for at least a bit longer .
“ We ’ ve once again broken a glass ceiling right here in Los Angeles County , ” she said .

Nicknamed the “five little kings,” the men who ruled the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for more than a century enjoyed massive power and the perks of a coveted job they kept for decades.
Those days are over.
On Wednesday, history was made when state Sen. Holly Mitchell won the board’s 2nd District race by a wide margin against L.A. City Councilman Herb Wesson, who was termed out from his seat.
For the first time since the board’s inception more than 150 years ago, the powerful Board of Supervisors will consist of all women, each of whom comes with significant backgrounds in politics and government.
Advertisement
“I can’t think of another example in the entire United States where you will have five women having control of ... the largest county in the entire country just in terms of people, but also the largest county budget in the entire country,” said Ange-Marie Hancock Alfaro, a professor and chair of gender studies at USC.
Mitchell, who grew up in Los Angeles, said she couldn’t have imagined when she started working for then-state Sen. Diane Watson in her early 20s that she’d end up making history on the Board of Supervisors.
For years, Mitchell saw herself as a “great No. 2,” never feeling confident enough to run for office, even when Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, then a state lawmaker, encouraged her to run for Watson’s seat when it opened.
That changed when Mitchell, then chief executive of the children and family services organization Crystal Stairs, was sitting in a health and human services subcommittee hearing and watched three male lawmakers, without much thought or input from the large crowd of advocates and constituents, cut $1 billion from state subsidized childcare. While venting to then-Assemblywoman Karen Bass, she had an epiphany.
“I literally said in my mind, ‘I guess I have to run,’ ” Mitchell said.
Advertisement
The L.A. County Board of Supervisors is considered the most powerful local governmental body in the country. It’s often overlooked by residents, who generally do not know who their supervisor is. The board oversees the county’s $35-billion budget — and the largest jail system in the country and one of the largest public health infrastructures — and has significant power over how those dollars are spent.
“Many people consider local government at the bottom of the hierarchy of power, unless you’re referring to a mayor of a major city,” former U.S. Rep. Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, the first woman appointed to the board in 1979, said in a 1988 opinion piece for The Times. “The truth is that few, if any, offices in California carry the quiet power that is enjoyed by a member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.”
California Outgoing L.A. County Supervisor Gloria Molina opts for new challenge As departing Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina was being honored last week for her 23 years in the office, she paused to reminisce about her rocky beginning.
Former Supervisor Gloria Molina, the first Latina elected to the board, said that when she joined in 1991, it was a challenging environment fraught with sexism and subtle racism.
Once, when she challenged a choice her fellow supervisors were making and asked for the parliamentarian rule on it, a male supervisor told the media that Molina was upset because she was “having hot flashes.”
While Molina was in office, a neighboring county had a supermajority of women on its Board of Supervisors.
“And I used to say, ‘Oh, how wonderful it would be if L.A. County had that same option,’ ” she said.
Political scientists say part of what’s helped get more women elected is rejecting the notion to “wait your turn,” a long uttered statement by incumbent politicians who feel they get to decide who their successor will be and when.
“I’ve never fathomed the notion that you’re supposed to wait until someone gives you permission to run for office,” said Raphael Sonenshein, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute at Cal State L.A. “By the time it happens, it could be 20 years, and you may have lost your steam, or you may not have the energy for it, or you’ve gotten discouraged.”
Mitchell said she has been told to wait her turn, and “in no uncertain terms,” in the supervisor race.
The belief among some was that she should allow Wesson to take the seat because he had to vacate his City Council position because of term limits, she said, and she had two more years in her state Senate seat.
“There is this notion of who has paid their dues, and my comment back has consistently been that elections aren’t popularity contests,” Mitchell said.
One of the most well-known supervisors in county history is Supervisor Janice Hahn’s father, Kenneth Hahn, who held the 2nd District seat for 40 years.
Janice Hahn said she was born shortly before her father took office and grew up seeing a much different county culture than that reflected in her own office. Her father had an all-female administrative support staff, “the girls in the front office,” for whom her mother bought gifts every Christmas.
“Even in my own family, my father probably saw my brother as the one to go into public office, and he probably assumed I would get married and raise kids,” said Hahn, who has also served on the L.A. City Council and in U.S. House of Representatives.
Hahn said she hopes the novelty of having five women on the board wears off — but she’d like to celebrate it for at least a bit longer.
“We’ve once again broken a glass ceiling right here in Los Angeles County,” she said.
Long live the queens.


latimes--2020-11-04--Split results in two L.A. school board races suggest a pro-charter school tilt

The titans of Los Angeles school politics — charter-school advocates and the teachers union — have fought to an expensive draw in Tuesday ’ s school board races , with a winner expected from each side and a board majority that could tilt in favor of charters .
In District 3 , which covers most of the western San Fernando Valley , union-backed incumbent Scott Schmerelson led charter-backed Marilyn Koziatek by 54 % to 46 % of votes cast Wednesday evening .
In District 7 , which stretches from South L.A. to the Harbor area , charter-backed Tanya Ortiz Franklin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a tally of 58 % to 42 % .
Although more votes remain to be counted , the margins for the leaders appear large enough to hold .
Koziatek , the closer second-place finisher , essentially conceded in a statement provided to The Times on Wednesday .
Also , voters living within L.A. Unified boundaries overwhelmingly passed Measure RR , which will provide $ 7 billion for campus repairs , modernization and technology .
These school board contests are likely to go down as the nation ’ s most expensive board elections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearing $ 17.5 million by Wednesday , with additional financial filings still to come .
The previous high-water mark was $ 17 million in 2015 , which was regarded as a national record at the time .
Supporters of charters , backed by a relatively small number of wealthy donors , vastly outspent unions — mostly the teachers union — by more than 5 to 1 in District 3 and more than 3 to 1 in District 7 .
“ This election has turned out to be a very expensive jump-ball , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communications at USC and UC Berkeley .
He added : `` $ 17 million later , and both sides end up almost exactly where they started.
” Nonetheless , at least a small presumed edge goes to charters because charter-backed Franklin will replace termed-out board President Richard Vladovic .
In the last of his three terms , Vladovic seemed more frequently allied with unions than charters .
However , the shift could be subtle with Franklin , 36 , whose career has been in traditional public schools rather than charters .
She formerly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earned a law degree and currently works as an administrator within a group of L.A. schools managed by a nonprofit , the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools .
The Partnership abides by district policies and union contracts .
“ It ’ s really about centering on kids for me , ” Franklin said Wednesday .
“ It always has been.
” The teachers union wants to limit the growth of privately managed charters — most of which are nonunion .
Critics say charters have depleted traditional schools of students and resources , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current period of declining enrollment .
Charter advocates insist their schools offer parents high-quality alternatives .
They are particularly concerned about new state and local rules that would make it easier for school districts to close existing charters and reject petitions for new ones .
Under the prior rules , districts had limited authority to prevent a new charter from opening .
Close to one in five district students attend a charter .
The campaign dynamic — charters versus unions — oversimplifies existential questions facing L.A. Unified .
Long-standing problems include serious financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to serve low-income Black and Latino students who are lagging academically and lost more ground after campuses closed on March 13 because of the coronavirus pandemic .
They have yet to reopen in Los Angeles , except for limited tutoring .
While the big funders pay for endless mailers , calls and online ads , the campaign pitch typically focuses on other things .
The campaign on behalf of Franklin emphasized her background as an educator and , in a series of harsh mailers , the lack of such a background in Castellanos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Castellanos , said the attacks unfairly dismissed Castellanos ’ role as an active district parent and a community organizer on behalf of families .
Castellanos strongly identified with the union ’ s agenda on charters and other issues .
While Schmerelson had supported Castellanos , he said he looks forward to working with Franklin .
“ I think she would be very fair and see both sides , ” he said .
Even though he ’ s an incumbent , Schmerelson ’ s victory felt like an upset — given the $ 3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that were frequently misleading .
Moreover , voters in that district had turned out the incumbent in three of the four prior elections .
A retired principal and former Spanish teacher , Schmerelson , 69 , said he received emails from people he didn ’ t know who were “ horrified by the slew of hateful ads .
I told them to call your child ’ s teacher or the school ’ s custodian and ask how they feel about me , and if I ’ m doing a good job.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low-budget campaign — which was separate from the union efforts — for making direct contact with more than 100,000 individual voters .
Because of the pandemic , these volunteers had to abandon the traditional ground game of knocking on doors .
“ We were making this up as we went , ” said teacher and volunteer field director Brent Smiley .
“ At the beginning of all this , we already felt like it was a David-versus-Goliath match .
Then they went ahead and took away our sling .
It was so strange.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ count of “ semi-official ” returns , as the county registrar terms them , tallied about 220,000 ballots in this race , compared to 37,000 in 2015 , when board races were part of low-turnout municipal elections .
A similar explosion in voting occurred in District 7 .
“ Having a lot more voters pay attention to the issue of education and how schools are operating in the city is incredibly important , ” said Gregory McGinity , the executive director of California Charter Schools Assn .
Advocates .
His group ran the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a district parent who manages community outreach at a local charter .
McGinity said that the importance of Franklin ’ s victory is bringing more of an “ outsider perspective ” to the Board of Education .

School board candidates (left to right) Tanya Ortiz Franklin, Patricia Castellanos, Scott Schmerelson, and Marilyn Koziatek. The winners were Franklin and Schmerelson.
The titans of Los Angeles school politics — charter-school advocates and the teachers union — have fought to an expensive draw in Tuesday’s school board races, with a winner expected from each side and a board majority that could tilt in favor of charters.
In District 3, which covers most of the western San Fernando Valley, union-backed incumbent Scott Schmerelson led charter-backed Marilyn Koziatek by 54% to 46% of votes cast Wednesday evening. In District 7, which stretches from South L.A. to the Harbor area, charter-backed Tanya Ortiz Franklin was in front of union-backed Patricia Castellanos by a tally of 58% to 42%.
Although more votes remain to be counted, the margins for the leaders appear large enough to hold. Koziatek, the closer second-place finisher, essentially conceded in a statement provided to The Times on Wednesday.
Also, voters living within L.A. Unified boundaries overwhelmingly passed Measure RR, which will provide $7 billion for campus repairs, modernization and technology.
Advertisement
These school board contests are likely to go down as the nation’s most expensive board elections to date, with combined reported spending nearing $17.5 million by Wednesday, with additional financial filings still to come. The previous high-water mark was $17 million in 2015, which was regarded as a national record at the time.
Supporters of charters, backed by a relatively small number of wealthy donors, vastly outspent unions — mostly the teachers union — by more than 5 to 1 in District 3 and more than 3 to 1 in District 7.
“This election has turned out to be a very expensive jump-ball,” said Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at USC and UC Berkeley. He added: “$17 million later, and both sides end up almost exactly where they started.”
Nonetheless, at least a small presumed edge goes to charters because charter-backed Franklin will replace termed-out board President Richard Vladovic. In the last of his three terms, Vladovic seemed more frequently allied with unions than charters.
However, the shift could be subtle with Franklin, 36, whose career has been in traditional public schools rather than charters. She formerly taught at a district middle school, earned a law degree and currently works as an administrator within a group of L.A. schools managed by a nonprofit, the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools. The Partnership abides by district policies and union contracts.
“It’s really about centering on kids for me,” Franklin said Wednesday. “It always has been.”
Advertisement
The teachers union wants to limit the growth of privately managed charters — most of which are nonunion. Critics say charters have depleted traditional schools of students and resources, and their growth is especially problematic during the current period of declining enrollment.
Charter advocates insist their schools offer parents high-quality alternatives. They are particularly concerned about new state and local rules that would make it easier for school districts to close existing charters and reject petitions for new ones. Under the prior rules, districts had limited authority to prevent a new charter from opening.
Close to one in five district students attend a charter.
The campaign dynamic — charters versus unions — oversimplifies existential questions facing L.A. Unified. Long-standing problems include serious financial strains and ongoing contention over how best to serve low-income Black and Latino students who are lagging academically and lost more ground after campuses closed on March 13 because of the coronavirus pandemic. They have yet to reopen in Los Angeles, except for limited tutoring.
While the big funders pay for endless mailers, calls and online ads, the campaign pitch typically focuses on other things.
The campaign on behalf of Franklin emphasized her background as an educator and, in a series of harsh mailers, the lack of such a background in Castellanos. Steve Barkan, a consultant for Castellanos, said the attacks unfairly dismissed Castellanos’ role as an active district parent and a community organizer on behalf of families.
Castellanos strongly identified with the union’s agenda on charters and other issues.
While Schmerelson had supported Castellanos, he said he looks forward to working with Franklin.
“I think she would be very fair and see both sides,” he said.
Even though he’s an incumbent, Schmerelson’s victory felt like an upset — given the $3 million in harsh attacks ads against him that were frequently misleading. Moreover, voters in that district had turned out the incumbent in three of the four prior elections.
A retired principal and former Spanish teacher, Schmerelson, 69, said he received emails from people he didn’t know who were “horrified by the slew of hateful ads. I told them to call your child’s teacher or the school’s custodian and ask how they feel about me, and if I’m doing a good job.”
He credited dedicated volunteers in his own comparatively low-budget campaign — which was separate from the union efforts — for making direct contact with more than 100,000 individual voters. Because of the pandemic, these volunteers had to abandon the traditional ground game of knocking on doors.
“We were making this up as we went,” said teacher and volunteer field director Brent Smiley. “At the beginning of all this, we already felt like it was a David-versus-Goliath match. Then they went ahead and took away our sling. It was so strange.”
By midday Wednesday, the ongoing count of “semi-official” returns, as the county registrar terms them, tallied about 220,000 ballots in this race, compared to 37,000 in 2015, when board races were part of low-turnout municipal elections. A similar explosion in voting occurred in District 7.
“Having a lot more voters pay attention to the issue of education and how schools are operating in the city is incredibly important,” said Gregory McGinity, the executive director of California Charter Schools Assn. Advocates. His group ran the independent campaign on behalf of Koziatek, a district parent who manages community outreach at a local charter.
McGinity said that the importance of Franklin’s victory is bringing more of an “outsider perspective” to the Board of Education.


latimes--2020-11-04--Why liberal California keeps saying no to rent control

In one of the most liberal states in the country , California voters have twice had an opportunity to expand rent control statewide amid a historic housing affordability crisis .
And both times voters have given a resounding “ no ” to the idea .
The decisive failure of Proposition 21 on Tuesday — like Proposition 10 before it in 2018 — shows that despite California ’ s reputation as a progressive bastion , voters here are far from willing to support one of the most well-known housing ideas championed by the left .
“ Ensuring tenant protections has always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in California politics , ” said Assemblyman David Chiu ( D-San Francisco ) , a rent control supporter who has been unable to push a similar plan through the state Legislature .
“ This outcome reflected that.
” Proposition 21 was opposed by nearly 60 % of voters , according to vote totals Wednesday afternoon , appearing on track to go down in defeat by a similarly large margin to the nearly 60 % of voters who were against Proposition 10 .
Supporters and opponents of rent control gave many reasons for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the measures ’ advocates , allowing the campaigns against the initiatives to hammer home with voters potential problems with rent control .
And Democratic politicians and traditionally left-leaning interest groups such as labor unions have been split on the issue .
Notably , Gov .
Gavin Newsom didn ’ t support either rent control initiative , arguing this year that Proposition 21 would hurt the supply of affordable housing and detract from already available tenant protections .
Public polling in recent years has shown that Californians back the idea of rent control and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state ’ s housing problems .
But once actual measures were placed on the ballot , support has quickly plummeted .
Californians weren ’ t actually voting on any new rent control policies in either election .
Instead , both initiatives would have done away with or changed current statewide prohibitions on most strict versions of rent control , which would have allowed cities and counties to pass their own measures later on .
Initiative supporters have said they wanted to allow local governments to tailor their renter protections , recognizing that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Los Angeles are different than those in the Central Valley and other more rural areas .
But the distinction between voters approving rent control and voters giving their city councils the ability to pass rent control allowed opponents of the initiatives to capitalize on uncertainty over what the initiatives actually did .
Initiative supporters have said that some voters told them they believed voting against the measures meant they supported rent control .
In both campaigns , total fundraising for the rent control measures topped $ 100 million , with landlord groups — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Property Trust , Equity Residential and AvalonBay Communities — outraising supporters by more than 2 to 1 .
The financial advantage allowed opponents to use a well-worn strategy for combating California initiatives , said Mark DiCamillo , polling director at UC Berkeley ’ s Institute of Governmental Studies .
“ It ’ s a formula , ” DiCamillo said .
“ You confuse , and you befuddle and you whatever .
You raise enough doubts with voters and you win.
” In Proposition 21 ’ s case , opponents cited concerns , echoed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could hurt the availability of rental housing , making the state less affordable overall .
Landlord groups also said in advertisements that the allowable rent increases written in the initiative to provide some financial benefits for landlords weren ’ t strict enough to protect tenants .
Deb Carlton , an executive vice president with the California Apartment Assn.
, a landlord group behind both opposition campaigns , said her side was able to convince Californians that the potential downsides of the two propositions were too great — even though the organization ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rent control .
This time around , the campaign also benefitted from voter fatigue since they had already weighed in against rent control two years ago , she said .
“ It was almost malpractice , quite frankly , to do it again , ” Carlton said .
Both rent control initiative campaigns were funded by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation , a Los Angeles nonprofit that poured more than $ 60 million into the losing efforts .
Michael Weinstein , the foundation ’ s president , said he knew he was always going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a more friendly electorate in a presidential election year to drive a change in the outcome from 2018 .
He also noted that bills that would allow for stricter forms of rent control in the state Legislature have struggled to even get out of committee .
“ What other choice is there ?
” Weinstein said .
“ The Legislature hasn ’ t represented renters .
The governor doesn ’ t represent renters .
The only choice we have is to continue to organize.
” The state ’ s housing affordability crisis and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to some new protections for tenants .
Last year , Newsom signed a measure that caps annual rent increases at 5 % plus inflation in most rental housing more than 15 years old , a bid to eliminate massive rent hikes that have forced people from their homes .
Although the law still allows rents to rise much faster than incomes , it is one of the strongest policies of its kind in the country .

In one of the most liberal states in the country, California voters have twice had an opportunity to expand rent control statewide amid a historic housing affordability crisis.
And both times voters have given a resounding “no” to the idea.
The decisive failure of Proposition 21 on Tuesday — like Proposition 10 before it in 2018 — shows that despite California’s reputation as a progressive bastion, voters here are far from willing to support one of the most well-known housing ideas championed by the left.
Advertisement
“Ensuring tenant protections has always been an incredibly difficult thing to achieve in California politics,” said Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco), a rent control supporter who has been unable to push a similar plan through the state Legislature. “This outcome reflected that.”
Proposition 21 was opposed by nearly 60% of voters, according to vote totals Wednesday afternoon, appearing on track to go down in defeat by a similarly large margin to the nearly 60% of voters who were against Proposition 10.
Supporters and opponents of rent control gave many reasons for the persistent losses.
Landlord groups significantly outspent the measures’ advocates, allowing the campaigns against the initiatives to hammer home with voters potential problems with rent control. And Democratic politicians and traditionally left-leaning interest groups such as labor unions have been split on the issue. Notably, Gov. Gavin Newsom didn’t support either rent control initiative, arguing this year that Proposition 21 would hurt the supply of affordable housing and detract from already available tenant protections.
Public polling in recent years has shown that Californians back the idea of rent control and prefer it over other ways to address the state’s housing problems. But once actual measures were placed on the ballot, support has quickly plummeted.
Advertisement
Californians weren’t actually voting on any new rent control policies in either election. Instead, both initiatives would have done away with or changed current statewide prohibitions on most strict versions of rent control, which would have allowed cities and counties to pass their own measures later on. Initiative supporters have said they wanted to allow local governments to tailor their renter protections, recognizing that housing challenges in the Bay Area and Los Angeles are different than those in the Central Valley and other more rural areas.
But the distinction between voters approving rent control and voters giving their city councils the ability to pass rent control allowed opponents of the initiatives to capitalize on uncertainty over what the initiatives actually did. Initiative supporters have said that some voters told them they believed voting against the measures meant they supported rent control.
In both campaigns, total fundraising for the rent control measures topped $100 million, with landlord groups — predominantly real estate investment trusts including Essex Property Trust, Equity Residential and AvalonBay Communities — outraising supporters by more than 2 to 1.
The financial advantage allowed opponents to use a well-worn strategy for combating California initiatives, said Mark DiCamillo, polling director at UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies.
“It’s a formula,” DiCamillo said. “You confuse, and you befuddle and you whatever. You raise enough doubts with voters and you win.”
In Proposition 21’s case, opponents cited concerns, echoed by academic research, that rent control could hurt the availability of rental housing, making the state less affordable overall. Landlord groups also said in advertisements that the allowable rent increases written in the initiative to provide some financial benefits for landlords weren’t strict enough to protect tenants.
Deb Carlton, an executive vice president with the California Apartment Assn., a landlord group behind both opposition campaigns, said her side was able to convince Californians that the potential downsides of the two propositions were too great — even though the organization’s private polling initially showed public support for rent control.
This time around, the campaign also benefitted from voter fatigue since they had already weighed in against rent control two years ago, she said.
“It was almost malpractice, quite frankly, to do it again,” Carlton said.
Both rent control initiative campaigns were funded by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a Los Angeles nonprofit that poured more than $60 million into the losing efforts. Michael Weinstein, the foundation’s president, said he knew he was always going to be outspent but was counting on a more friendly electorate in a presidential election year to drive a change in the outcome from 2018.
He also noted that bills that would allow for stricter forms of rent control in the state Legislature have struggled to even get out of committee.
“What other choice is there?” Weinstein said. “The Legislature hasn’t represented renters. The governor doesn’t represent renters. The only choice we have is to continue to organize.”
The state’s housing affordability crisis and the constant debate over rent controls have led to some new protections for tenants. Last year, Newsom signed a measure that caps annual rent increases at 5% plus inflation in most rental housing more than 15 years old, a bid to eliminate massive rent hikes that have forced people from their homes.
Although the law still allows rents to rise much faster than incomes, it is one of the strongest policies of its kind in the country.