News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California
Join a presentation at the Moraga Library on Tuesday, June 25 from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. for an eye-opening discussion of the impact of misinformation and disinformation on elections. Learn how to spot fake news, fact-check sources and navigate the complexities of today’s media landscape to become a more informed voter and citizen.
The presentation by the League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley will be in the library, 1500 St Mary’s Road in Moraga.
For more information contact programs@lwvdv.org.
By Allen D. Payton
In response to a lawsuit by Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state legislature, the California Supreme Court justices unanimously ruled, today, Thursday, June 20, 2024, the measure known as the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act amounts to an illegal constitutional revision and removed it from the November election ballot. However, proponents vowed to continue to explore their legal options and efforts to minimize
According to Ballotpedia, “The initiative would have amended the California Constitution to define all state and local levies, charges, and fees as taxes. The initiative would have also required new or increased taxes to be passed by a two-thirds legislative vote in each chamber and approved by a simple majority of voters. It would also have increased the vote requirement for local taxes proposed by local government or citizens to a two-thirds vote of the local electorate. The increased vote requirements for new or higher taxes would have not applied to citizen-initiated state ballot measures. As of 2024, state tax increases require approval by a two-thirds vote in each chamber or a simple majority vote at a statewide election
In addition, a ‘yes’ vote on the measure would have supported “amending the state constitution to define all state and local levies, charges, and fees as taxes and to require new state taxes proposed by the state legislature to be enacted via a two-thirds legislative vote and voter approval and new local taxes to be enacted via a two-thirds vote of the electorate.”
However, according to the Associated Press, “The biggest impact…would have been that the measure threatened to retroactively reverse most tax increases approved since Jan. 1, 2022. Local governments warned they would have lost billions of dollars in revenue that had previously approved by voters. And it would have threatened recent statewide tax increases.”
Proponents
Proponents of the measure, Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability, self-described as “a bipartisan coalition of homeowners, taxpayers and businesses committed to ensuring California remains affordable for families and accountable to its voters,” led the campaign in support of the initiative. The campaign explained the initiative, saying, “The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act will give voters the right to vote on all future state taxes and holds politicians accountable for new fees and other increased costs paid by working families and all Californians. The measure increases accountability by requiring politicians to spend new or higher tax revenue on its intended purpose. It will provide much-needed relief to families, farmers, and business owners, helping them to combat the growing cost-of-living crisis facing all Californians.”
Supporters included the California Business Roundtable, California NAIOP Commercial Real Estate Development Association, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. The campaign had received $17.8 million in contributions.
According to the NAIOP, the measure would have given “voters the right to vote on all future state taxes and holds politicians accountable for new fees and other increased costs paid by working families and all Californians.” It would have increased “accountability by requiring politicians to spend new or higher tax revenue on its intended purpose. It will provide much-needed relief to families, farmers, and business owners, helping them to combat the growing cost-of-living crisis facing all Californians. The Act doesn’t cut any current state or local government funding. It simply gives voters the right to vote on all future tax increases and stops working families from paying billions more in “hidden taxes” imposed by unelected bureaucrats. They are currently gathering signatures and will need $70 million in fundraising efforts to pass the ballot measure in November of 2022.”
View materials on the proposed ballot measure.
Supporters Respond, Will Seek Legal Options, Continue Efforts
In response to the court’s ruling, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (TPA) campaign issued the following statement from Rob Lapsley, president of the California Business Roundtable, Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (HJTA) and Matthew Hargrove, president and CEO of the California Business Properties Association:
“Today’s ruling is the greatest threat to democracy California has faced in recent memory. Governor Newsom has effectively erased the voice of 1.43 million voters who signed the petition to qualify the Taxpayer Protection Act for the November ballot. Most importantly, the governor has cynically terminated Californians’ rights to engage in direct democracy despite his many claims that he is a defender of individual rights and democracy. Evidently, the governor wants to protect democracy and individual rights in other states, but not for all Californians.
We are disappointed that the California Supreme Court has put politics ahead of the Constitution, disregarding long-standing precedent that they should not intervene in an election before voters decide qualified initiatives.
Direct democracy and our initiative process are now at risk with this decision, showing California is firmly a one-party state where the governor and Legislature can politically influence courts to block ballot measures that threaten their ability to increase spending and raise taxes. Using the courts to block voters’ voices is the latest effort from the Democrats’ supermajority to remove any accountability measures that interfere with their agenda – a failed agenda that continues to drive up the cost of living with little accountability and few results.
This ruling sends a damning message to businesses in California and across the country that it is politically perilous to invest and grow jobs for the future.
In light of this ruling and the state’s large budget deficit, a huge amount of tax increases are on the way that are sure to make California’s cost of living even higher.
We will continue to explore our legal options and fight for the people’s right to hold their government accountable through direct democracy.”
Opponents
The measure was opposed by Governor Newsom, CA Attorney General Rob Bonta, AFSCME California, SEIU California State Council, California Special Districts Association, California State Association of Counties, and League of California Cities. Graham Knaus, executive director of the California State Association of Counties (CSAC), said, “This deceptive initiative would undermine the rights of local voters and their elected officials to make decisions on critical local services that residents rely upon. It creates major new tax loopholes at the expense of residents and will weaken our local services and communities.”
Bonta had relabeled the measure’s title to, “Limits Ability of Voters and State and Local Governments to Raise Revenues for Government Services. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.” The summary he required to be included on signature petition sheets read as follows: “For new or increased state taxes currently enacted by two-thirds vote of Legislature, also requires statewide election and majority voter approval. Limits voters’ ability to pass voter-proposed local special taxes by raising vote requirement to two-thirds. Eliminates voters’ ability to advise how to spend revenues from proposed general tax on same ballot as the proposed tax. Expands definition of ‘taxes’ to include certain regulatory fees, broadening application of tax approval requirements. Requires Legislature or local governing body set certain other fees.”
In spite of that, supporters were still able to gather the required signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot. The signature gathering occurred in 2022.
Court’s Decision
According to information about the case #S281977 entitled LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. WEBER (HILTACHK) on the state Supreme Court’s website, it “presented the following issues: (1) Does the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (TPA) constitute an impermissible attempted revision of the California Constitution by voter initiative? (2) Is this initiative measure subject to invalidation on the ground that, if adopted, it would impair essential government functions?”
The court wrote in its unanimous opinion, “we conclude that the TPA would clearly ‘accomplish such far reaching changes in the nature of our basic governmental plan as to amount to a revision’ of the (state) Constitution. The measure exceeds the scope of the power to amend the Constitution via citizen initiative.”
“It is within the people’s prerogative to make these changes, but they must be undertaken in a manner commensurate with their gravity: through the process for revision set forth in Article XVIII of the Constitution,” the decision continued.
The court concluded by “directing the (CA) Secretary of State to refrain from taking steps to place” the initiative “on the November 5, 2024 election ballot or to include the measure in the voter information guide.”
However, Section 3 of that Article clearly reads, “The electors may amend the Constitution by initiative.” Coupal of the HJTA was asked to explain what the court is referring to and what other approach or process should the proponents have followed. He did not respond prior to publication time.
See Court ruling, here.
For more information about the ballot measure and the coalition that supported it visit www.taxpayerprotection.com.
Please check back later for any updates to this report.
MARTINEZ, CA—State Assembly candidate Anamarie Avila Farias announced, Thursday, June 13, 2024, the endorsement of Contra Costa Assemblyman Tim Grayson for her campaign to represent Northern Contra Costa County in the State Legislature.
“Anamarie’s experience in our local communities, especially her service on the Martinez City Council and Contra Costa County Board of Education, has prepared her to be an effective voice for us in the Legislature,” said Assemblymember Grayson. “I’m looking forward to partnering with her as we fight for Contra Costa’s share of state resources and policies that help working families get ahead.”
“Tim Grayson’s a voice of reason and purpose in the Legislature,” said Anamarie. “I’ll bring a similar attitude to making state policies: Results over rhetoric, progress over politics.
“I really appreciate Assemblymember Grayson’s support and look forward to working with him.”
Avila Farias was the second-place finisher in the March Primary election but the top vote-getter in the field of three Democrats and faces off against the Republican candidate in November’s election. Democratic voters outnumber Republicans 52%-19% in District 15’s registration numbers. If elected, she would be the first Latina to serve Contra Costa in the State Legislature.
She has an extensive record serving her community and setting state policy. She currently serves as a Trustee of the Contra Costa County Board of Education and has consistently pushed for improved public education in Contra Costa schools. She also served on the Martinez City Council from 2012-2016.
Avila Farias is running to represent California State Assembly District 15. The district encompasses Martinez, Pleasant Hill, Concord, Clayton, Pittsburg, Bay Point, Antioch, Crockett portions of Brentwood and unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
To learn more about her campaign, visit anamarie4assembly.com.
Photos: Californians for Safer Communities
Sacramento, CA – California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber, Ph.D. announced that an initiative became eligible for the November 5, 2024, General Election ballot on June 10, 2024.
In order to become eligible for the ballot, the initiative needed 546,651 valid petition signatures, which is equal to five percent of the total votes cast for governor in the November 2022 General Election.
A measure can become eligible via random sampling of petition signatures if the sampling projects that the number of valid signatures is greater than 110 percent of the required number. The initiative needed at least 601,317 projected valid signatures to become eligible by random sampling, and it has exceeded that threshold today.
On June 27, 2024, the Secretary of State will certify the initiative as qualified for the November 5, 2024, General Election ballot, unless it is withdrawn by the proponent prior to certification pursuant to Elections Code section 9604(b).
While the proponents of the initiative, Californians for Safer Communities labeled it The Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act. But Attorney General Rob Bonta’s official title and summary of the measure is as follows: ALLOWS FELONY CHARGES AND INCREASES SENTENCES FOR CERTAIN DRUG AND THEFT CRIMES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
– Allows felony charges for possessing certain drugs, including fentanyl, and for thefts under $950—both currently chargeable only as misdemeanors—with two prior drug or two prior theft convictions, as applicable. Defendants who plead guilty to felony drug possession and complete treatment can have charges dismissed.
– Increases sentences for other specified drug and theft crimes.
– Increased prison sentences may reduce savings that currently fund mental health and drug treatment programs, K-12 schools, and crime victims; any remaining savings may be used for new felony treatment program.
Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased state criminal justice system costs potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually, primarily due to an increase in the state prison population. Some of these costs could be offset by reductions in state spending on local mental health and substance use services, truancy and dropout prevention, and victim services due to requirements in current law. Increased local criminal justice system costs potentially in the tens of millions of dollars annually, primarily due to increased court-related workload and a net increase in the number of people in county jail and under county community supervision. (23-0017A1)
According to Ballotpedia.com, the political action committee supporting the measure, Californians to Reduce Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft, has raised over $7.2 million to support the effort. Of that amount $2.5 million was contributed by Walmart, $1.0 million from Home Depot, $500,000 from Target, $300,000 each from 7-Eleven and California Correctional Peace Officers Association Truth in American Government Fund.
The Secretary of State’s tracking number for this measure is 1959 and the Attorney General’s tracking number is 23-0017A1.
The proponent of the measure is Thomas W. Hiltachk of the Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk law firm. They can be reached at (916) 442-7757. The address for the proponent is 455 Capitol Mall, Suite 600, Sacramento, CA 95814.
For more information about how an initiative qualifies for the ballot in California, visit https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify-initiative/
Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.
Conservative groups and LGBTQ+ rights supporters protest outside the Glendale Unified School District offices in Glendale, Calif., Tuesday, June 6, 2023. Several hundred people gathered in the parking lot of the district headquarters, split between those who support or oppose teaching about exposing youngsters to LGBTQ+ issues in schools. (Keith Birmingham/The Orange County Register via AP)
By Allen D. Payton
California activists seeking to empower parents over their children’s decisions to identify as transgender failed to place a trifecta of restrictions on the November ballot known by the organizers as the Protect Kids of California Act of 2024. Attorney General Rob Bonta changed the ballot title to Restricts Rights of Transgender Youth. Initiative Statute and he changed the ballot language, as well which hampered the signature gathering efforts organizers claim.
According to Students First: Protect Kids California, the initiative will: (1) repeal the California law that permits students to compete in female’s sports and students to be in females’ locker rooms and bathrooms; (2) prohibit schools from deceiving parents about their student’s gender identity crisis and stop them from secretly transitioning a child; and (3) stop sex change operations and chemical castrations on minors.
The organization started late last fall to consolidate their three separate initiatives into one, and its signature-gathering efforts supported by 400,000 voters fell short of the 546,651 verifiable signatures that had to be collected within six months to make the presidential election ballot. The goal was to collect 800,000 signatures to be safe.
Organizers posted their complaint about Bonta’s ballot language changes on the group’s Facebook page on April 2. Initiative committee Executive Team member Nicole C Pearson wrote, “Every Californian, regardless of whether they agree with the initiative, should be concerned about an attorney general who ignores the law and uses his power to sabotage ballot initiatives. We plan to hold Bonta accountable for allowing his political agenda to get in the way of doing his job.”
The post included a link to an opinion on the Orange County Register website decrying the changes which reads, “As required by California law, proponents submitted the measure to Bonta to receive a neutral official title and summary to use in petitions. Bonta then returned the measure with a new title with a negative and misleading slant: the “Restricts Rights of Transgender Youth Initiative.” And he gave it a summary that was not only completely prejudicial and designed to mislead the electorate — it also contained lies.”
Then on Tuesday, May 28 the group issued a press release announcing the setback in a post on their Facebook page which reads, “We want to thank our tens of thousands of supporters and volunteers for this truly historic effort!Together, we collected over 400,000 signatures – an unprecedented achievement for a 100% grassroots effort. You really are amazing! While it is unfortunate we did not have enough signatures to make the 2024 ballot, we will build off this momentum to continue to fight for the principles set forth in the Protect Kids of California Act.”
The press release reads, “Protect Kids California announced on Tuesday, May 28, 2024, they collected an impressive 400,000 signatures for their proposed ballot measure but fell short of the 546,651 required to be collected within a 180-day timeframe to appear on the ballot.
Tens of thousands of volunteers gathered signatures from every county in California. The largest collection areas were Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Santa Clara and Alameda Counties.
A completely grassroots effort, Protect Kids California raised close to $200,000 from over 1,200 donors. This equates to less than 50 cents per signature, a fraction of the amount standard ballot measure committees spend.
“While we are disappointed we didn’t meet the threshold to qualify for the ballot, we are encouraged by the amount of support from every sector of the state. We gathered more signatures for a statewide initiative than any all-volunteer effort in the history of California.” “We had severe headwinds from the beginning. California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a false and misleading Title & Summary for our initiative. That made our fundraising efforts more difficult. While we sued the Attorney General, a Superior Court Judge denied our motion in April. We plan to appeal the Superior Court Judge’s decision, at which time we will decide how to proceed in the future. If we had a little more time or a little more money, we would have easily qualified for the ballot.”
But battles over transgender issues will continue to burn bright in courts, school districts and the Legislature. Despite a setback, initiative organizers were buoyed by the 400,000 signatures that thousands of volunteers collected. They are confident that they will attract more donations and enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot two years from now — and find more support than leaders in heavily Democratic California assume exists.
“We’re very confident that voters would pass this if it gets to the ballot box,” said Jonathan Zachreson, a Roseville City school board member, co-founder of Protect Kids California and an official proponent of the initiative. “We gathered more signatures for a statewide initiative than any all-volunteer effort in the history of California.”
“We started around the holidays which didn’t help,” he added. “It was an all-volunteer effort. It usually takes about $7 million to get something on the ballot. We raised just under $200,000 which covered our costs. But we didn’t have money to pay signature-gatherers. We had around 25,000 to 30,000 volunteers. Our efforts really took off in the past two months. In the past few weeks, we were collecting so many signatures it was hard to keep up.”
The organizers proposed language for the three-pronged initiative read:
But Bonta’s ballot language for the initiative was changed to read instead:
The second issue has sparked a firestorm within the past year.
Last week, a Democratic legislator introduced a late-session bill that would preempt mandatory parental notification. Assembly Bill 1915, by Assemblymember Chris Ward, D-San Diego, would prohibit school districts from adopting a mandatory parental notification policy and bar them from punishing teachers who defy outing policies of LGBTQ+ students.
Last year, Assemblymember Bill Essayli, R-Corona, introduced a bill that would require parental notification, but AB 1314 died in the Assembly Education Committee without getting a hearing. Committee Chair Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, reasoned the bill would “potentially provide a forum for increasingly hateful rhetoric targeting LGBTQ youth.”
Ward cited surveys of transgender and gender nonconforming youths that found most felt unsafe or unsupported at home. In one national survey, 10% reported someone at home had been violent toward them because they were transgender, and 15% had run away or were kicked out of home because they were transgender.
The California Department of Education has issued guidance that warns that parental notification policies would violate students’ privacy rights and cites a California School Boards Association model policy that urges districts to protect students’ gender preferences.
But Zachreson argues that even if children have a right to gender privacy that excludes their parents, which he denies exists, students waive it through their actions. “At school, their teachers know about it, their peers and volunteers know about it, other kids’ parents know about it — and yet the child’s own parent doesn’t know that the school is actively participating in the social transition,” he said.
In some instances, he said, schools are actively taking steps to keep name changes and other forms of gender expression secret from the parents.
“What we’re saying is, no, you can’t do that. You have to involve the parents in those decisions,” he said.
Ward responds that many teachers don’t want to be coerced to interfere with students’ privacy and gender preferences. “Teachers have a job to do,” he said. “They are not the gender police.”
A half-dozen school districts with conservative boards, including Rocklin, Temecula Valley and Chino Valley, have adopted mandatory parental notification policies. Last fall, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued Chino Valley, arguing its policy is discriminatory. A state Superior Court judge in San Bernardino agreed that it violated the federal equal protection clause and granted a preliminary injunction. The case is on appeal.
Last July, U.S. District Court judge for Eastern California threw out a parent’s lawsuit against Chico Unified for its policy prohibiting disclosure of a student’s transgender status to their parent without the student’s explicit consent. The court ruled that it was appropriate for the district to allow students to disclose their gender identity to their parents “on their own terms.” Bonta and attorney generals from 15 states filed briefs supporting Chico Unified; the case, too, is on appeal.
While some teachers vow to sue if required to out transgender students to their parents, a federal judge in Southern California sided with two teachers who sued Escondido Union School District for violating their religious beliefs by requiring them to withhold information to parents about the gender transition of children. The judge issued a preliminary injunction against the district and then ordered the return of the suspended teachers to the classroom.
No California appellate court has issued a ruling on parent notification, and it will probably take the U.S. Supreme Court for a definitive decision. Essayli pledged to take a case there.
The National Picture
Seven states, all in the deeply red Midwest and South, have laws requiring identification of transgender students to their parents, while five, including Florida and Arizona, don’t require it but encourage districts to adopt ther own version., according to the Movement Advancement Project or MAP, an independent nonprofit.
Two dozen states, including Florida, Texas, and many Southern and Midwest states ban best-practice health care, medication and surgical care for transgender youth, and six states, including Florida, make it a felony to provide surgical care for transgender care. Proponents cite the decision in March by the English public health system to prohibit youths under 16 from beginning a medical gender transition to bolster the case for tighter restrictions in the United States.
California has taken the opposite position; it is one of 15 like-minded states and the District of Columbia with shield laws to protect access to transgender health care. They include New York, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Massachusetts.
Twenty-five states have laws or regulations banning the participation of 13- to 17-year-old transgender youth in participating in sports consistent with their gender identification.
Not one solidly blue state is among those that have adopted the restrictions that Protect Kids California is calling for. But Zachreson and co-founder Erin Friday insist that contrary to the strong opposition in the Legislature, California voters would be open to their proposals. They point to favorable results in a survey of 1,000 California likely voters by the Republican-leaning, conservative pollster Spry Strategies last November.
The voters surveyed were geographically representative and reflective of party affiliation, but not demographically, The respondents were mostly white and over 60, and, in a progressive state, were divided roughly evenly among conservatives, moderates and liberals.
Two Versions of Protecting Children
Both sides in this divisive cultural issue say they’re motivated to protect children. One side says it’s protecting transgender children to live as they are, without bias and prejudice that contribute to despair and suicidal thoughts. The other side says it’s protecting kids from coercion to explore who they aren’t, from gender confusion, and exposure to values at odds with their family’s.
Zachreson and Friday wanted to title their initiative “Protect Kids of California Act of 2024.” But Bonta, whose office reviews initiatives’ titles and summaries, chose instead “Restrict Rights of Transgender Youth. Initiative Statute.” Zachreson and Friday, an attorney, appealed the decision, but a Superior Court Judge in Sacramento upheld Bonta’s wording, which he said was accurate, not misleading or prejudicial.
“The ballot title was obviously biased and the summary was intentionally meant to deceive voters and hampered our efforts to get this on the ballot this year,” Zachreson continued. “The statutory requirement is to be impartial and factual. He did the opposite. He was biased and he had descriptions that were false. Bonta claimed there were no exceptions for student safety when notifying parents. But that’s not correct. It’s already in the law.”
Zachreson is appealing again. A more objective title and summary would make a huge difference, he said, by attracting financial backing to hire signature collectors and the support and resources of the California Republican Party, which declined to endorse the initiative. That was a strategic mistake in an election year when turnout will be critical.
“The people who support the initiative are passionate about it,” he said.
Effort for November 2026 Ballot Continues
The organizers may have to start over but a lawsuit about the biased title and summary was filed asking for a change in the language, to use the signatures already gathered and to grant an extension.
“The appeal won’t be heard until after the November election,” Zachreson shared.
If a judge rules in their favor it will make it easier for the group to complete the signature gathering to qualify for the next General Election ballot which will be in November 2026.
Political observer Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at USC, UC Berkeley and Pepperdine University, agreed that the gender debate could have motivated Republicans and swing voters to go to the polls.
“There’s no question that the Attorney General’s ballot language had a devastating effect on the initiative’s supporters and it could have almost as much of an impact on Republican congressional candidates this fall,” he said.
John Fensterwald who writes about education policy and its impact in California for EdSource.org contributed to this report.
Anamarie Avila Farias (official campaign photo) and Governor Gavin Newsom during a visit to the construction site of the Antioch brackish water desalination plant in Aug. 2022. Herald file photo
MARTINEZ, CA—District 15 State Assembly candidate Anamarie Avila Farias today announced the endorsement of California Governor Gavin Newsom for her campaign to represent portions of Contra Costa County in the State Legislature.
“Anamarie’s experience and dedication to her community, to progress on the challenges facing our state, and her commitment to charting a fundamentally strong future for all Californians make her the best candidate for State Assembly,” said Governor Newsom. “I’m proud of the work she’s done as an appointee of mine on the California Housing Finance Agency and look forward to working with her when she’s elected to the Assembly in November.”
“Under Governor Newsom’s leadership, California has been in great hands,” said Anamarie. “I’m proud to have served in his administration at the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development of the City and County of San Francisco and as a Gubernatorial Appointee on the California Housing Finance Agency Board while he’s been governor.
“In the Assembly, I’ll seek to partner with him on bold policies to tackle housing, education, homelessness, and climate challenges,” she added.
Avila Farias placed second in the March Primary election behind her Republican opponent Sonia Ledo, but the top vote-getter in a field of three Democrats. Democratic voters outnumber Republicans 52%-19% in District 15’s registration numbers.
She currently serves as Area 3 Trustee on the Contra Costa County Board of Education where her focus is on quality education in Contra Costa public schools. The candidate touts her extensive record serving her community, including as a Martinez Councilwoman and in setting state policy.
Avila Farias is running to represent California State Assembly District 15. The district encompasses Martinez, Pleasant Hill, Concord, Clayton, Pittsburg, Bay Point, Antioch, Crockett most of Brentwood and unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
For more information about her campaign visit www.anamarie4assembly.com.
Thom Bogue. Source: campaign
Solano County, CA – Dixon Councilman Thom Bogue, candidate for State Senate in District 3, announced his opposition to AB 3259 by Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) making it easier to raise taxes only in Solano County. According to the press release about the bill from her office, it “authorizes an increase in the sales tax limit, providing an avenue for residents to decide on potential funding for crucial infrastructure and public services.”
“I have informed Ms. Wilson that I will not support her bill and that it’s unnecessary for Solano County residents, as we’re taxed too much, already,” Bogue stated. “We don’t have a revenue problem in Solano County or Sacramento, we have a spending problem.”
In his message to the assemblywoman, the candidate wrote, “I strongly oppose AB3259 in removing limitations to sales tax increases. The potential impacts to the everyday citizen and to our economy in pushing prices further up is not what we need. This is not a government revenue issue, it is a spending issue, and our State needs to quit impoverishing people further. The only question I and many others have, is are our legislators purposely trying to destroy our State? Certainly looks like it.”
The sales tax rate in Solano County is 6.25% (including the state and county taxes). The total local sales tax rate in Solano County is 7.375%. The average cumulative sales tax rate in the county is 8.34%. That includes state, county, city, and special district taxes.
“With the economy hurting and inflation continuing to increase the cost of living, we can’t ask our residents and businesses to pay more to the government,” Bogue added.
May of Eastern Contra Costa County portion of State. Source: wedrawthelines.ca.gov
Placing first in the primary election in March, Bogue is running for the open State Senate seat in District 3 which includes the Eastern Contra Costa County cities of Brentwood and Oakley, and communities of Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, Byron and Knightsen. The election is Nov. 5. For more information about his campaign visit www.thombogue4statesenate.com.
Antioch Councilman Mike Barbanica (Source: Barbanica for Supervisor campaign) and State Senator Steve Glazer. (official photo)
ANTIOCH, CA—Local small businessman, housing expert and Antioch Councilman Mike Barbanica announced receiving the endorsement of California State Senator Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) in his race for Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in District 5. Senator Glazer, who represents Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, is recognized for his independence and problem-solving abilities.
“Mike Barbanica is a no-nonsense leader with the skills and expertise to effectively impact the issues facing us in Contra Costa County,” said Senator Glazer. “Mike shares my belief that politics is about service and progress, and I’m confident he’ll bring a sense of civility and respect for diverging opinions that we need more of in elected office.”
“Senator Glazer is an icon of principled leadership, someone who believes in prioritizing results over rhetoric and people over politics,” said Barbanica. “That approach can help us improve our homeless, housing, and crime issues, and that will be my approach on the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors.”
Barbanica and his wife, Kristine, operate a small business, Blue Line Property Group, helping families access housing. Mike is a retired Police Lieutenant and decorated officer who served for over 20 years.
Barbanica is running for the open seat in Contra Costa’s District 5, which cover the northern portions of Contra Costa, running from Hercules to Antioch, and includes Martinez and Pittsburg.
For more information visit www.mikebarbanica.com.
Source: Cabaldon for State Senate campaign
By Allen D. Payton
With almost all the remaining votes counted in the five counties included in State Senate District 3, former 22-year West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon bested three other candidates to place second in the March 5th primary election to qualify for the run-off in the general election on November 5th.
According to the unofficial election results on the California Secretary of State’s website, as of Wednesday, March 27, 2024, at 4:05 PM, he had 59,082 votes or 26.6% of the vote, trailing Dixon Councilman Thom Bogue who placed first with 61,811 votes or 27.8%.
On his Facebook page, Cabaldon wrote today, “The votes have been counted…we’ve won the primary election by a margin of nearly 13,500 votes, with voter turnout in our district significantly beating earlier projections. Having received 30% more votes than the next closest Democratic contender, I will be our party’s candidate in the November general election. I am profoundly honored, and immeasurably grateful for your support.
A special thank you to the people who knew me best, no matter what absurd smears the barrage of daily attack mailers tried to peddle. Among the Democratic candidates, we received nearly two-thirds of the vote in West Sacramento and 55% of the vote in Yolo County (winning by a large margin in all four cities). My hometown and our neighbors never wavered, and my heart is full with appreciation. Serving as mayor and successfully transforming West Sacramento was the great honor of my life, even more so now that I may be the first-ever state legislator to hail from the city.
Remarkably, though, we prevailed even without Yolo County, winning a majority of the other counties in the district, too (including the largest, Solano County). I ran to be a champion for every part of our diverse district, from its rural towns to mid-sized cities, so I was proud to be the sole candidate to place in the top three in every one of the six counties in the district. Thank you to the countless community leaders, activists, entrepreneurs, working men and women, small business owners, elected officials, and friends in Solano, Napa, Contra Costa, Sacramento, and Sonoma who gave me a chance, introduced me to thousands of people in their communities, and helped to build a movement.
Now on to the November general election!”
However, according to the Secretary of State’s election results page for the State Senate District 3 race, Cabaldon actually received 38.4% of the vote for first place in Yolo County, 24.9% for second place in Napa County because Bogue and Democrat Rozzana Verder-Aliga tied for first place, 22.6% of the vote for second place in Solano County, 24% for second place in Sacramento County, 25.1% of the vote for second place in Contra Costa County and 21.4% for third place in the Sonoma County portion of the district.
Cabaldon with the Bidens, President Obama and Hillary Clinton. Source: Cabaldon for State Senate campaign.
Experience & Views – “A Democrat’s Democrat”
On his campaign website, Cabaldon stresses his Democrat and LGBTQ bona fides while spouting partisan rhetoric and tying himself to national leaders and issues. He says, as mayor in 2016, he answered Obama’s “clarion call”, about “the incoming federal government (i.e. Trump Administration) poised to be the largest threat to civil and human rights, democracy and elections, the safety net, and America’s role in the world…to protect the nation and its people.”
Cabaldon claims he rushed “to the Texas border with a bipartisan delegation of mayors to shine a national spotlight on the incarceration of immigrant children stolen from their families” even though that practice had begun during the Obama Administration.
A quote on the About page of his website reads, “Sometimes fighting for West Sacramento means taking the fight to Trump.”
Labeled a “progressive” by the Sacramento Bee, the former mayor claims to be “A Democrat’s Democrat” and “Promoting a Democratic Agenda Across America”. Cabaldon also shares he was elected to the Solano County Democratic Central Committee, then “appointed by the Chair of the California Democratic Party (CDP) as lead Co-Chair of the CDP’s Legislative Committee and was elected to the state central committee as an Assembly District delegate. He pitched in as a member of the state party’s AAPI, Filipino, and LGBTQ caucuses.”
According to his website, “As a co-chair of Filipinos for Hilary and a member of her National AAPI Leadership Council, Christopher crisscrossed the country, walking precincts in battleground states to turn out AAPI voters for the Democratic ticket.”
In 2020 he was elected to the Democratic National Committee and according to his Wikipedia page, as mayor, he served as Vice President of the National Conference of Democratic Mayors. Cabaldon was also inaugural chair of the national LGBTQ Mayors Alliance, and former chair of both the Asian/Pacific and LGBT caucuses of the League of California Cities.
During his time as mayor, Cabaldon also served as a member of the state’s Delta Protection Commission, he fought to stop the tunnels project. But the governor is currently pushing for a single tunnel, known as the Delta Conveyance, which will move water from the Sacramento River, north of the Delta, to southern California.
Cabaldon also stresses his experience in education. He served as Vice Chancellor of the California Community Colleges System from Sep. 1997 until March 2003.
Obama appointed him to the national board at the launch of College Promise, on which he served with the chair, current First Lady Jill Biden. The organization is a national non-profit working to make the first two or more years of college education free.
Cabaldon represents the State of California on the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education,, for which he has served as Commissioner and Chair of the Policy Research & Analysis Committee since March 2011. He also served as Chair of U.S. Conference of Mayors‘ Jobs, Education, and Workforce Committee.
Cabaldon serves on the board of directors for EdSource, which, according to its website, is a “source of education information, research and analysis” and “the pre-eminent multimedia education news organization in California.” According to his bio on the organization’s website, “As mayor of West Sacramento for two decades, he implemented universal preschool, college savings accounts, digital badges, free community college, and automatic admission to college, and served as education/workforce chair for the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Previously, Cabaldon was vice chancellor of the California Community College system, the Hazel Cramer Endowed Chair and professor of Public Policy and Administration at CSU Sacramento (from Aug. 2019 to Dec. 2020), president of EdVoice, president of the Linked Learning Alliance, and chief (Staff Director) for the California Assembly’s Higher Education Committee” (from April 1989 to Nov. 1996) to which he was appointed by “anti-war and civil rights activist” State Senator Tom Hayden.
Cabaldon also serves on the boards of education-related Project Attain, California Competes and All4Ed.
Current Work
According to his LinkedIn profile, since July 2009 the former mayor has worked as a Partner of Capitol Impact, which, according to its website, “is a leading provider of strategy design, policy development, capacity building, and philanthropy advising to the social sector…with a track record for catalyzing small initiatives to statewide movements.”
In addition, since Oct. 2021 he has held the title of “Mayor in Residence” at the Institute for the Future, a not-for-profit think tank in Palo Alto, whose “mission is to prepare the world to create better, more equitable futures by disrupting short-term thinking with visions of transformative possibilities,” known as futures studies.
Education & College Activism
Cabaldon earned a B.S. degree in Environmental Economics from U.C. Berkeley where he was student body vice president and earned a Masters degree in Public Policy Administration at Cal State Sacramento.
An activist during his college days, “at UC Berkeley, Christopher protested the university’s investments in South Africa’s apartheid regime, and as student body vice president led the statewide student lobbying campaign to pass divestment legislation by then-Assemblymember Maxine Waters. He helped enact an ethnic studies curriculum, root out anti-Asian policies and practices in admissions procedures, end the “zero club” of academic departments with no women or faculty of color, and created the state’s first Tagalog language course at a public university. Christopher led the first statewide organizing campaign for UC student employees participating in the United Farm Workers’ grape boycott.”
Election Experience
In addition to serving as mayor from 1998-2020, this is Cabaldon’s second run for state office having run unsuccessfully for State Assembly in 2008. In 2020, he served as California co-chair of Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign during the primary, and lost re-election for mayor that November.
Issues
Cabaldon lists his issues as building a stronger economy, building housing and preserving communities, addressing the homeless crisis, protecting our environment, expanding access to education and keeping communities safe, which he mentions last.
Personal Background
Also according to his Wikipedia page, in 2017, Comstock’s Magazine ran a cover story about Cabaldon entitled, Behind Closed Doors, which told the story of the death of his mother when he was a young boy and the ongoing process of coping, persevering, and finding meaning and purpose after loss.
Cabaldon is openly gay and in 2006, the Logo network featured him in an episode of the series Coming Out Stories of when he came out publicly in his annual State of the City address.
About State Senate District 3
The District includes all of Solano County, Napa County, and Solano County and portions of eastern Sonoma County, southwestern Sacramento County and far eastern Contra Costa County, including the cities of Brentwood and Oakley, and the communities of Discovery Bay, Byron, Bethel Island and Knightsen.
The seat is open as incumbent State Senator Bill Dodd is termed out and could only serve two of the four-year term according to a last-minute decision by the Secretary of State. But Dodd disagreed saying he’s only eligible for two more years in the State Assembly but chose to not run for either.
Source: Bogue for Senate campaign
By Allen D. Payton
Thom Bogue is an unassuming, common man, a small business owner, Dixon City Councilman and former mayor. But the Sacramento, California native had a very interesting, unusual and uncommon upbringing, and overcame a major challenge and tragedy as a teenager that unless he shared of it, you would never know.
Having grown up in the People’s Temple cult, and meeting and knowing it’s late, nefarious, infamous leader, Jim Jones, Bogue literally didn’t drink the Kool-Aid, unlike one of his older sisters who remained behind and died along with 900 others. Instead, he chose to escape into the jungle with his other siblings, getting shot in the leg in the process, while leaving their parents behind at the airfield runway.
They eventually met up with their parents and all, but the one sister, were able to make it to safety and return to the United States, surviving the horrors of Jonestown. Yet, in spite of the terrifying experience, Bogue did learn one good thing and that was to care about everyone else in the community. He believes it’s one of the reasons he felt led to run for and serve in public office, first locally and now for the State Senate in District 3.
Married and a father to nine children, with his father living with them, the councilman has done what he can to meet the needs of his blended family, his customers and the community. Now, Bogue wants to take his life, business and local government experience a short drive, up Interstate 80, return to Sacramento and bring some common sense back to the state’s government.
He believes in working together to solve our collective challenges such as crime, homelessness, immigration, high taxes, the budget deficit, water insecurity, over-regulation, the undermining of parental rights, unemployment and the economy, as well as the conversion to green energy.
Bogue Places First in Primary Election
With the March 5th primary election results still unofficial, but according to the California Secretary of State’s website (as of March 26th) only 1,021 ballots remain to be counted in the five counties the Senate district includes, Bogue took first place out of five candidates. He had 61,811 votes or 27.8% of the vote and will face second place finisher and former West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon, who had 59,082 votes or 26.6%, in the November 5th general election.
In a March 6th post on his campaign Facebook page, Bogue wrote, “I am very touched by those voting for me and I will do my best to not disappoint you as we go forward towards the General election in November. I told you after the Primary it would be time to start putting legislative bills together to be submitted within the 1st 120 days if elected in the General, being a person who means what I say I begin that process today and will publish for your viewing as completed. If there is more you want to have submitted let me know, as I work for you.”
About State Senate District 3
The District includes all of Solano County, Napa County, and Solano County and portions of eastern Sonoma County, southwestern Sacramento County and far eastern Contra Costa County, including the cities of Brentwood and Oakley, and the communities of Discovery Bay, Byron, Bethel Island and Knightsen.
The seat is open as incumbent State Senator Bill Dodd is termed out and could only serve two of the four-year term according to a last-minute decision by the Secretary of State. But Dodd disagreed saying he’s only eligible for two more years in the State Assembly but chose to not run for either.
Bogue believes in placing people before politics and says he will work to bring people “together to bring about real change and restore California to its rightful place as a prosperous and thriving state.”
“I am committed to bringing my experiences and dedication to serve individuals and our communities to the state level, regardless of party affiliation. It’s very simple, I represent everyone in being a people’s person,” he added.
Learn more about Bogue’s background and plans to address the issues as District 3’s next State Senator at www.thombogue4statesenate.com.