Blog

 

California Council of Churches IMPACT has long been well known for thoughtful deliberations on non-partisan ballot measures. We arrive at these decisions to recommend or oppose measures based on our existing Legislative Principles derived from many hours of discussion and discernment among our diverse denominational members. We try to interpret secular policy through the lens of our faith values with a devotion to democracy and our Constitutions, state and federal as well.

As with the medical profession, we begin with the premise, “First, do no harm.” We then proceed from that point to find the best reactions to thorny and often confusing measures, always keeping in mind our mission statement to be a prophetic witness to the Gospel by advocating in the public policy arena for justice, equity, and fairness in the treatment of all people, in particular those most vulnerable in our society.

We have done our best to find the most helpful, least harmful recommendations. We hope these are of help to you.

IMPACT’s Ballot Guide for November 2024

Spread the Word!
We encourage members and friends to distribute these ballot guides from now until the election through “IMPACT Sundays.” 

IMPACT Sundays

IMPACT Legislative Principles

IMPACT’s Recommendation: SUPPORT

AB 247 (Chapter 81, Statutes of 2024) Muratsuchi. Education finance: school facilities: Kindergarten Through Grade 12 Schools and Local Community College Public Education Facilities Modernization, Repair, and Safety Bond Act of 2024. 

This is a $10 billion bond act to finance repairs and upgrades to California schools. K-12 schools would receive $8.5 billion while community colleges would receive $1.5 billion. Public universities were excluded since they have their own access to such funding. The money replaces parts of the General Fund that will not have to be spent in this lean budget year. The last voter approved financing was 2020, and that fund is nearly depleted. We know educational success has much to do with safe, quality facilities, and while funds have been spent, lower income areas still have too many substandard structures. There is a sliding distribution scale that is a good start to prioritizing highest need schools in poor areas.

CA Secretary of State site: Arguments for and against Prop 2: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/2/index.htm

IMPACT’s Recommendation: SUPPORT

ACA 5 (Low) Marriage equality. (Res. Ch. 125, 2023)

This is an Assembly Constitutional Amendment. It will repeal the California Constitutional Amendment passed by Proposition 8 in 2008 that declared marriage to be between only one man and one woman. Since then, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) ruled that same sex marriage between consenting adults is fully legal. It makes sense to remove a Constitutional Amendment that is in contradiction to federal law today and replace it with one that is consistent with federal law. 

California Council of Churches became a party to this 2015 outcome in a supportive amicus filed by a group CCC helped create, Faith for Equality. The Council and IMPACT stand united in their witness and advocacy for marriage equality today. 

It is clear that a revision in that status of Obergefell by today’s US Supreme Court could, under Article 6, Sec. 2 of the Constitution, invalidate the California Constitution, but in light of the threat, particularly if it is left to the states, it is important for California and for IMPACT to provide faithful and political state Constitutional support for the current law of the land and the equal justice it upholds.

CA Secretary of State site: Arguments for and against Prop 3: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/3/index.htm

IMPACT’s Recommendation: SUPPORT

SB 867 (Chapter 83, Statutes of 2024) Allen. Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024. 

This would authorize the state to incur a general obligation debt of $10 billion to deal with the impacts of climate change. It would fund programs that are long neglected including drinking and ground water resilience; wildfire and forest resilience; coastal and other flooding, drought assistance, heat mitigation, etc. 

We passed some of this in 2018 via Prop.68, but by 2020 funds were low. In 2019 the Legislature approved a $21 billion comprehensive bill, but it never got to the ballot. Governor Newsom signed a $536 million urgency bill that year, but it, too, is expended. The impacts from uncertain weather conditions prompted by climate change are never ending. This revenue is not money operating in a vacuum since these funds are combined after disasters with federal funds as well as for ongoing measures to prevent disasters.

CA Secretary of State site: Arguments for and against Prop 4: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/4/index.htm

IMPACT’s Recommendation: SUPPORT

ACA 1 (Resolution Chapter 173, Statutes of 2023) Aguiar-Curry. Local government financing: affordable housing and public infrastructure: voter approval.

ACA 10 (Resolution Chapter 134, Statutes of 2024) Aguiar-Curry. Local government financing: affordable housing and public infrastructure: voter approval.

This Assembly resolution unites two separate Assembly Constitutional Amendments to improve access to voter approval for affordable housing. They seek an adjustment to the 1978 Proposition 13 tax structure confining tax increases to 1% of the property value as assessed in any given year. In 1996 voters passed Proposition 218 that required charter cities to submit new tax requirements to the voters that would pass if and only if two-thirds of the vote favored them. This Assembly resolution would lower the threshold for infrastructure and affordable housing financing to 55%. Thus, it becomes the fiscal cousin of the Senate Proposition eliminating the approval vote of local governmental officials.

There are provisions in ACA 1 to audit the use of any money raised by the lowered threshold and prevent its use for governmental salaries or expenses so that it will be directed entirely to the stated projects. Money raised by the lower vote requirement cannot be directed to those seeking to purchase a home.

The companion measure added recently is a “clean up” bill to provide details on what the Legislature can and cannot itself permit to be revised in terms of tax voting requirements. It simply affirms through our approval standard practices already in law.

CA Secretary of State site: Arguments for and against Prop 5: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/5/index.htm

IMPACT’s Recommendation: SUPPORT

ACA 8 (Resolution Chapter 133, Statutes of 2024) Wilson. Slavery.

Slavery was abolished federally in the 13^th Amendment and in the California Constitution with the same exception for those serving time in prison. This California Constitutional Amendment seeks a redress to the state standard. It prohibits slavery or involuntary servitude under all circumstances. This is important in light of events in other states using inmates for unpaid work in both state facilities and now in private businesses with the state taking their wages. This Constitutional Amendment states that no inmate can be penalized for refusing work, and that the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation may offer credits for work voluntarily accepted. The specific forms of “credits” is not specified — be they time removed from the sentence or cash. CA does pay inmates for what work they do, including firefighting, all of it voluntary, but it’s less than $1 per hour. Cash received by inmates via family, etc. goes to their fines and obligations. That would likely be true of cash income, where credits toward reduced time would not. This appears to give both prisons and inmates some choice of remuneration. If any prison facility rejects the plan, no inmate can be penalized for refusing work. This is far from an adequate revision of all prison practices, but it appears to be a very good start.

CA Secretary of State site: Arguments for and against Prop 6: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/6/index.htm