California State Primary Endorsements
May 30, 2008
No on 98
Ending Rent Control and
Reforming Eminent Domain
Proposition 98 goes too far and ends rent control that protects APA seniors and working families, while restricting use of eminent domain.
No on 99
Pseudo Reform on Eminent Domain
APAs should be wary of eminent domain, which was used from 1948 to 1960 to devastate half of San Francisco’s Japantown. Last year, Chinese American candidates for the Millbrae City Council carefully debated using eminent domain for a private development.
No on A
$4,000 Parcel Tax for Teacher Raises
With an impending recession, the APA-majority School Board was forced by billionaire businessmen to qualify this unfair measure taxing homeowners for $4,000 over 20 years. Big businesses would pay the same rate as homeowners (APAs are more likely to own homes than most residents). While teachers deserve better, disproportionately taxing small homeowners is wrong.
Yes on B
Health Care Retirement Reform
San Francisco has a $4 billion unfunded health care liability for current and future city employee retirees. This proposition will only rein in benefits of future employees, but it’s a small start.
Yes on C
Conviction for Moral Turpitude
Closes a loophole in the City Charter affecting only members of the city retirement system.
Yes on D
Diversity on Commissions
Actually, this call to analyze appointments should go further by recommending bold actions to redress disparities. For example, the city should consider recruitment, training and consideration of more APA representation for these panels. Prop D only reinforces the need for diversity when a measure like Prop E undermines it.
No on E
Politicizing Public Utilities Commission Appointments
Voters should send a swift message to the Board of Supervisors to do their job, instead of power grabs on the SFPUC or the local Democratic Party. They should focus on preventing job losses because of the economy or cleaning up the $4 billion health pension mess (see Prop B).
No on F
Yes on G
Affordable Housing and
Development in Bayview Hunters Point
With the construction industry at a halt because of the mortgage meltdown, the city needs to jump-start development and jobs in the city’s newest APA neighborhood of Bayview Hunters Point.
Yes on H
Limits on Candidate or
Elected Official Solicitations
A balanced approach that restricts candidates and elected officials — including supervisors — from soliciting city contractors. Up to this point, the onus was all on government contractors.
Nancy Pelosi
for 8th Congressional District
In her first term, House Speaker Pelosi defended immigration family reunification policies crucial to the growth of Asian Pacific America. Pelosi’s clout has delivered $1.1 million to preserve the Angel Island legacy, another $9 million to maintain the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, and $12 million for a light-rail system that will connect Chinese, Filipino and Pacific Islander neighborhoods.
Jackie Speier
for 12th Congressional District
The new congresswoman’s district has the second-highest proportion of APAs in the continental U.S. Her clout will be felt immediately as member of the House Financial Services Committee. The longtime consumer advocate will oversee mortgage products, important for APA homebuyers.
Mark Leno
for 3rd State Senate District
This hot race is in one of the state’s largest APA districts, where 30,000 APA voters could crown the winner. Assemblyman Leno has been strong in supporting colleague Fiona Ma’s work against chronic hepatitis B, the greatest health disparity for APAs. While incumbent Carole Migden should be lauded for Betty Yee’s elevation to the California Board of Equalization, legal questions about Migden have hurt her.
Fiona Ma
for 12th Assembly District
Ma has led the campaign for increased testing and moved legislation in the state’s fight against the silent killer — chronic hepatitis B, which infects one in 10 Asian Pacific Americans. Her efforts have educated tens of thousands through baseball games, fairs and the media. The Assembly majority whip passed a law banning toxics in baby products. Recently, the CPA introduced legislation to allow school districts more flexibility in using proceeds from selling surplus properties.
Tom Ammiano
for 13th Assembly District
Ammiano’s lack of a primary opponent says it all. The longtime teacher, who taught ESL in South Vietnam, passed the city’s rainy day fund in 2003. That measure bailed out the cash-strapped school district with $19 million and helped a majority-APA school district prevent layoffs of APA teachers and staff.
Judge Thomas Mellon
for Superior Court Seat #12
While campaigns make a compelling case for diversity on the bench, it also should not undermine a fair, independent and competent judiciary. Judge Mellon is the only candidate ranked “qualified” by the Bar Association of San Francisco through a professionally diverse evaluation committee chaired by attorney Doris Cheng.
Please also support these important candidates throughout California:
Doris Matsui
congresswoman,
Sacramento
Mike Honda
congressman,
Santa Clara
Wilma Chan
state Senate,
Oakland
Mike Eng
assemblyman,
Monterey Park
Paul Fong
state Assembly,
Cupertino
Warren Furutani
state Assembly,
Los Angeles
Ted. W. Lieu
assemblyman,
Torrance
Mary Hayashi
assemblywoman,
Castro Valley
Carol Liu
state Senate,
Pasadena
Van Tran
assemblyman,
Orange County
Christopher Cabaldon
assemblyman,
Davis/West Sacramento
Comments
7 Responses to “California State Primary Endorsements”
Got something to say?
I can’t believe that AsianWeek is opposed to Proposition A, a sensible and necessary measure to raise critical revenue to attract and retain teachers in our hard to staff public schools. Quality teachers are the most critical resource to improving educational outcomes. To characterize a $198 parcel tax (with an exemption for seniors) as a $4,000 measure is a complete distortion. Your publication provides no analyses for this position. In fact, there’s a piece describing support for Prop A inside the issue.
Nearly 50% of San Francisco’s public school students are Asian American*–our community has as much at stake as any in ensuring that our students have the same opportunities to learn as students from better resourced school districts.
Until we can sum up the political will to repeal Proposition 13, a parcel tax is our best hope for raising critical revenue for our schools. Especially in a year when the Governor is pushing education budget cuts and the Republicans are blocking all paths to raise revenue, we must act locally to invest in our children’s future.
Yes on A.
*Source: California Dep’t of Ed., http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/DistEnr2.asp?cChoice=DistEnrEth&cYear=2007-08&cLevel=District&ctopic=Enrollment&myTimeFrame=S&TheName=San+Francisco&cSelect=3868478–SANFRANCISCOUNIFIED&submit1=Submit
What drove your decision to endorse Christopher Cabaldon over Mariko Yamada?
I am so disappointed in your lack of support for Prop A. Better school actually means that home owners will benefit from increased property value. We have a very big challenge in helping our students gain an excellent education and it requires the support and responsibility of ALL San Franciscans. As an API member of the Board of Education, homeowner, parent of children in our public schools, voter and active community member, I am very disappointed in the characterization of Prop A. Taking no position instead of a negative position against our children’s education goes against the values that we have as Asian Americans. I’m very disappointed.
On June 3rd, a primary election will also take place in Los Angeles County.
As the DAILY NEWS points out, “What’s particularly worrisome to legal experts is that the relatively low-profile races mean voters Tuesday could be mostly clueless about candidates’ qualifications for a public office that wields power over life, death, freedom and money.”
The LOS ANGELES TIMES WRITES:
“Voters aren’t showing much excitement over the June 3 election, apart from a race to replace Supervisor Yvonne B. Burke in Los Angeles County’s 2nd District. Turnout is expected to be light…It is a stealth election, providing an opportunity to a dangerous candidate with a small but dedicated following of people who make it a point to vote when others don’t bother.
That’s especially true in the races for Los Angeles Superior Court judge. Little is known to voters about judicial candidates except for their names, their three-word ballot designations …. Two years ago, voters relying on such information ousted accomplished jurist Dzintra Janavs and replaced her with Lynn Diane Olson, the owner of a bagel bakery who had not actively practiced law for a decade; political observers speculated that voters simply preferred the sound of Olson’s name.
It was a bad choice, but Olson was simply underqualified. This year it’s more serious. Los Angeles voters, if they don’t pay attention, could hand judicial robes to a racial separatist who called for restricting U.S. citizenship to persons “of the European race” and deporting blacks, Asians, Latinos and others who don’t meet his racial criteria.
The candidate is Bill Johnson. Under the name James O. Pace, he wrote the racial exclusion as a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution and a 1985 book supporting it. Under the name Daniel Johnson, he ran a losing race for Congress in Wyoming in 1989 with a Ku Klux Klan organizer as his campaign manager. As William Johnson, he ran a losing race for Congress in Arizona in 2006. He now may have found a race he can win, unless voters here find out who he is.”
The Los Angeles County Democratic Party, the Los Angeles County Bar, as well as the LA Times are making tremendous efforts to get the word out re Johnson’s candidacy.
But it’s frightening…the only signs I see around the city are those of Johnson’s.
I am currently also running for Superior Court Judge in Los Angeles County, and was told that I am the first Asian-American woman to seek to be elected for Superior Court Judge in Los Angeles County. At first when it was pointed out to me that my candidacy was “history making” I didn’t believe it to be true. Yet, considering the cost and what is necessary to run a successful campaign, I’m now not so surprised.
I consider myself to be a low-key person who preferred to avoid the spot light. But now I have struggled to learn how to “self-promote” and put myself out there, making several public appearances a week.
The cost, and need to fundraise is the most distasteful, and sometimes humiliating aspect of the process for me. In Los Angeles County a ballot statement costs $83,000 - and that is for English alone! I wasn’t able to afford one for this primary, and I fear that voters don’t realize that I am the only candidate with judicial experience - more than 8 years on the bench. I hear juvenile criminal / juvenile delinquency matters in East Los Angeles, and prior to that sat for three years in Compton, hearing juvenile delinquency and family law matters. In January 2005 I won juvenile court judge of the year.
Let’s hope that the voters in both Los Angeles and San Francisco bother to learn about the candidates running for vote, AND vote responsibly.
Finally, one newspaper with the courage to go against Prop A. Don’t you know that this is an unfair, regressive tax? Owners of huge mansions and building complexes aren’t paying their fair share. It’s because the small property owners- mostly Asian - don’t have the political clout, that we end up paying for society’s problems. Let’s help our schools and our children’s education, but don’t sacrifice the dream of home ownership to do it.
Kudos on No on A. who put this measure on the ballot? don’t they get it? gas is going up, rice is going up. and they want many Asian homeowners to foot a $4,000 property tax for teacher raises while people are scared of losing their jobs right now. it’s not a distortion. Its $200 per year tax multiplied by 20 years = $4000. as bill clinton once said, “it’s the economy, stupid!”
Is Prop A the answer?
San Francisco teachers are underpaid and the School District and education supporters are mounting a campaign for a parcel tax on San Francisco property owners to boost teachers’ pay in the next 20 years. I am all for improving education and giving teachers a better salary but I find this proposition troubling.
Why is there is no annual cap to the parcel tax?
The District is currently asking for $198 for each parcel of land, including one for each condominium. This tax will be applied to the thousands of new properties that will be built during the next 20 years. This appears to be an open checkbook for the School District to keep increasing the salary of the teachers without limit since the tax will be in place for 20 years. When the fact is that the School District is not expanding and the enrollment has been declining for the past 5 years why is a cap is not put in place because the salary budget should be relatively stable? In fact if enrollment continues to decline shouldn’t the tax be scaled back too?
What the proposition should do is to set an annual cap. When more new housing are built, the burden for the tax for each property owner should be reduced proportionally. Current property owners might be inclined to support this proposition if there is a cap and there is hope that the parcel tax might be reduced as more housing are built.
This is simple math and the School District has failed completely when writing this Proposition. I’ll bet in no time, the salary of San Francisco school teachers will be at the top in the Bay Area. Then other Counties will follow the parcel tax formula to adjust their own teachers’ salaries and the unfortunate tax payers everywhere will be caught up in a vicious cycle.