There are 11 propositions on the state ballot this year. There were 12 but Proposition 9 was removed from the ballot in July by the California Supreme Court.
The purpose of this article is to walk you through them and give you my questionable opinion.
As the tie goes to the runner in baseball, so the no goes to the vote in Lunch World. When in doubt, I tend to vote no if there’s not a compelling enough case to change the law.
Without further ado …
Proposition 1: Authorizes Bonds to Fund Specified Housing Assistance Programs.
Description: Authorizes $4 billion in bonds for existing affordable housing programs.
Lunch votes: No. The argument in favor which appears in the voter information guide claims this measure does not raise taxes.
If you pile on debt, someone’s gotta pay for it eventually. If you think that someone is gonna turn out to be anyone but you, think again.
Based on disingenuousness alone, I vote against.
Proposition 2: Authorizes Bonds to Fund Existing Housing Program for Individuals With Mental Illness.
Description: This is so damn convoluted. What it proposes to do is transfer money dedicated to mental health services to fund housing development for those with mental illness who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless.
Lunch votes: No. I thought an ounce of prevention was worth a pound of cure. This proposition seems to have that backward.
The argument against is penned by members of the Contra Costa County chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, who suggest Prop. 2 should be renamed the “Bureaucrat and Developer Enrichment Act.”