LWVBA Advocacy

League of Women Voters^®
Bay Area Inter-League Organization

We study issues, adopt positions, and take action.

Positions. Action on Issues 2010-2012. Letters. Election Recommendations for 2010.

The League of Women Voters of the Bay Area believes that government at the regional level should be structured so that it can effectively and responsibly solve those problems that transcend political boundaries. The LWVBA, by including all nine Bay Area Counties, makes possible League Study and Action on region-wide problems and issues.
LWVBA takes action on an issue or advocates for a cause when there is an existing League position that supports the issue or speaks to the cause. LWVBA positions result from a process of thorough study focused on a regional issue. As the study progresses, a continuing discussion of pros and cons of each situation occurs. Prior to the results of the study being presented to the general membership, study committee members fashion consensus questions that are then addressed by the membership.
Additional discussion, pro and con, takes place as members (not part of the study committee) learn the scope of the study. After the members reach consensus, the board forms positions based on that consensus.
It is the consensus statement -- the statement resulting from the consensus questions -- that becomes a position. Firm action or advocacy can then be taken on the particular issue addressed by the position. Without a position, action/advocacy cannot be taken.

Positions

Our positions address Regional Government, Regional Planning, Environment, Natural Resources, Hazardous Materials Management, Social Policy, Surface Transportation, and Airport Transportation and are available in these documents:

Regional Government & Planning Position (pdf)
Environmental & Natural Resources Position (pdf)
Hazardous Materials Position (pdf)
Social Policy & Housing Position (pdf)
Air & Surface Transportation Position (pdf)

Action on Issues 2010-2012

The purpose of action is to develop support for the League's positions and to influence government decisions and their implementation. Action is both public service and public relations.
Our action and education priorities are highlighted in this document:

LWVBA Action on Issues (pdf)

Letters

Follow these links to view published correspondence:

Letter to Will Travis, BCDC, December 5, 2011 (pdf)

Letter to MTC re: One Bay Area Grant Program, November 18, 2011 (pdf)

Endorsement of TransForm's platform: Strategic Investments for a Better Bay Area, July 2011 (pdf)

Joint Policy Committee Director Ted Droettboom June 6, 2011 (pdf)

2013 RTP/SCS Projects letter to MTC, March 10, 2011 (pdf)

Margaret Gordon Civic Ventures' Purpose Prize, November 28, 2010 (pdf)

MTC Comment Letter on Draft Public Participation Plan, November 28, 2010 (pdf)

Letter to Bay Area Newspaper Editors re: Proposition 23, September 13, 2010 (pdf)

BART letter re: Oakland Airport Link, September 13, 2010 (pdf)

MTC letter re: Public Participation Plan, August 23, 2010 (pdf)

MTC Letter re: Transparency in Public Financing, July 27, 2010 (pdf)

BART letter on the Oakland Airport Connector, July 20, 2010 (pdf)

Joint Policy Committee letter re: SB 375 Target Goals, July 1, 2010 (pdf)

MTC Letter on the Regional Transportation Plan 2035, April 19,2010 (pdf)

Bay Area Toll Authority Letter re: Bridge Tolls, December 8, 2009 (pdf)

San Francisco Planning Department Letter regarding Calaveras Dam, November 18, 2009 (pdf)

MTC Letter regarding Regional Climate Action Initiatives November 2, 2009 (pdf)

Comments on MTC DRAFT 2035 Transportation Plan, March 2, 2009 (pdf)

AC Transit: Proposed Fare Increase, February 24, 2009 (pdf)

Scope of Joint Policy Committee and Future Issues, October 28, 2008 (pdf)

Support for SB375, August 26, 2008 (pdf)

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Project Comments, July 22, 2008 (pdf)

Support for AB 2558, June 19, 2008 (pdf)

MTC Recertification 2007, August 17, 2007 (pdf)

MTC Funding Proposal for Measure 1B Transit Funding, May 9, 2007 (pdf)

Support for AB 239 Housing Trust Fund, April 25, 2007 (pdf)

Dumbarton Rail Scoping Letter, November 29, 2006 (pdf)

JPC Amendments to Smart Growth, Sept.22, 2006 (pdf)

AB2444 Letter to Schwarzenegger Sept. 2, 2006 (pdf)

MTC - Regional Rail Plan Alternatives: July 26, 2006 (pdf)

Statement to the Joint Policy Committee - Bay Area Regional Position on CEQA Reform: July 21, 2006 (pdf)

Support for Bay Area Water Forum Memorandum of Understanding: May 2006(pdf)

Memorandum of Understanding: Bay Area Water Forum: May 2006(pdf)

MTC Proposed Transit Connectivity Plan: February 2006 (pdf)

BA Regional Water System Improvement Program (RWSIP): December 2005 (pdf)

SF Public Utilites Commission: November 2005 (pdf)

Transit Oriented Development Comments: July 2005 (pdf)

MTC Transit Oriented Development - Transit Extensions: July 2005 (pdf)

Joint Policy Committee Statement: February 2005 (pdf)

Joint Policy Committee: MTC 2030 Plan: February 2005 (pdf)

Election Recommendations for 2010

LWVC Redistricting Propositions 20 and 27 for November 2010

Redistricting - Propositions 20 and 27. League Positions on other November Ballot Measures. No Recommendations. Redistricting - Propositions 20 and 27

The League is working hard to protect the redistricting reform process adopted by California voters in November 2008. Proposition 11 established a Citizens Redistricting Commission that will redraw district maps for the state legislature and Board of Equalization after each census. But there are two proposals on this November's ballot to change the new process before Californians have a chance to see it fully implemented.

Following the federal census every ten years, the Citizens Redistricting Commission is required to redraw the district boundaries for the state Legislature and the Board of Equalization. The state Legislature is required to redraw the district boundaries for members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Proposition 11 directs the State Legislature to follow the same mapping criteria and open and public hearing requirements as the Citizens Redistricting Commission.

This process is generally known as "redistricting."

Proposition 11, The Voters FIRST Act passed by the voters in November 2008, authorized the creation of California's first 14 member Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw the lines for district boundaries for the state Assembly, Senate and Board of Equalization.

How Does Redistricting Work In California?

The composition of the 14-person Citizens Redistricting Commission is required to be politically balanced-- 5 Democrats, 5 Republicans, 4 from neither of those parties.
Commissioners are chosen for their impartiality and skills, and to reflect our state's demographic and geographic diversity.
The commission is required to follow a list of prioritized mapping criteria that ensures that our Constitution, federal and state laws (especially the Voting Rights Act) are followed.
California's community, city, and county boundaries are protected.
Incumbents' residences may not be considered. District boundaries may not favor political parties or politicians.
Redistricting must be an open and public process. The commission holds hearings to receive public input.

How Is The Commission Formed?

California registered voters are invited to participate.
A panel of state auditors (1Democrat, 1Republican, 1 other) screens applicants for conflicts of interest and narrows the pool to 60 people (20 Ds, 20 Rs, 20 others) based on their skills, ability to be impartial, and diversity.
The four legislative leaders can strike up to 24 people from the pool (8Ds, 8Rs, 8 others).
Final selection of 14 commissioners:
8 commissioners are randomly picked from the remaining pool (3 Ds, 3 Rs, 2 others)
6 Commissioners (2 Ds, 2 Rs, 2others) are chosen by the first 8 commissioners in a manner that ensures an independent, qualified and diverse commission.

The final selection of commissioners will be made by the end of December 2010.

What Are The Mapping Criteria?

In ranked order, the criteria are:
1. Districts shall comply with the U.S. Constitution, including equal population requirements.
2. Districts shall comply with the federal Voting Rights Act.
3. Districts shall be geographically contiguous.
4. The geographic integrity of any city, county, or city and county, neighborhood, or community of interest shall be respected. Communities of interest shall not be defined as having a relationship with incumbents, candidates, or parties.
5. To the extent practicable, after the above criteria have been satisfied, districts shall be compact.
6. To the extent practicable, after the above criteria have been satisfied, districts shall be nested.

Incumbents' residences may not be considered; districts may not be drawn to favor politicians or parties.

What Is The Scope of the Citizens Redistricting Commission?

The commission will draw California Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization seats in the next redistricting, 2011, and after each decennial census.

The state legislature will draw congressional seats, following the same mapping criteria and hearing requirements as the commission.
Learn more on the State Auditor's Web site about the commission and the selection process.

Fight The Scheme to Gut Redistricting Reform

Proposition 20 Redistricting of Congressional Districts The League OPPOSES Proposition 20, which we believe is well-intentioned but premature. California is in the midst of a major reform of our redistricting process, with a new independent Citizens Redistricting Commission drawing the lines for state Senate and Assembly districts. Proposition 20 would significantly increase the commission's workload by adding Congressional redistricting and shortening the time it would have to do its work. We believe the commission should draw Congressional lines in the future, but the new process should be fully implemented before the commission's responsibilities are expanded so dramatically. In addition, a new definition in this measure could make it harder for the commission to respect California's diverse neighborhoods and communities as it draws district maps. Let's give redistricting reform a chance to work the way the voters intended before we take the next step and add Congressional redistricting.

Proposition 27 Eliminates State Commission on Redistricting. This measure would kill the major redistricting reform voters just approved in 2008 and return the authority for redistricting to the backrooms of the Legislature. Proposition 27 would allow politicians to draw their own districts to protect their jobs. It would take us back to the days when bizarrely shaped districts were drawn in secret, carving up neighborhoods and communities to keep incumbents safely in office. VOTE NO to keep the power with voters and the voter-approved independent Citizens Redistricting Commission. The League STRONGLY OPPOSES this measure.

--------------------- League Positions on other November Ballot Measures

The League of Women Voters of California has taken stands on four other ballot measures appearing on the November 2, 2010 ballot.

Proposition 23 Suspends Clean Energy and Air Pollution Standards The LWVC vigorously OPPOSES this Dirty Energy Proposition, funded by out-of-state oil companies, because it would virtually kill AB 32, the Landmark Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Proposition 23 would suspend the implementation of AB 32 until the state unemployment rate is 5.5 percent or lower for four consecutive calendar quarters. That has happened only three times in the last four decades! This dangerous proposition would get rid of clean energy standards that will cut air pollution and protect the public health. Proponents say this measure is needed to preserve jobs, but in fact it will jeopardize hundreds of thousands of clean-energy jobs. We must promote California's role as an innovator and investor in a clean-tech economy.

Tax Fairness Act (Proposition 24): Proposition 24 would repeal the corporate tax cuts that were passed in closed-door budget deals of 2008-2009. These tax breaks cost approximately $1.3 billion per year in revenue to the state and benefit only tow percent of California's businesses. There is no requirement that they actually result in the creation of private-sector jobs. Proposition 24 will make big, multi-state corporations pay their fair share and put $1.3 billion back into the treasury to help our schools. health care, and other essential services that have suffered severe budget cuts in recent years. The League SUPPORTS this measure, believing that the budget crisis cannot be solved by expenditure cuts alone, let alone expenditure cuts combined with tax cuts with no demonstrated value to the economy.

Simple Majority Vote for Budget (Proposition 25): The LWVC SUPPORTS this measure, which would change the vote required to pass a budget in the state legislature from the current two-thirds to a simple majority. This will give a majority of the legislature the ability to set the priorities for spending and should change the negotiations over the budget to give the minority less of a stranglehold on the process.

"Polluter Protection" (Proposition 26): This measure would redefine taxes, and therefore require a two-thirds vote on many more government revenue decisions, including what are currently environmental regulatory fees. The League OPPOSES this measure, because we feel that all decisions about revenue measures should be made with simple majority votes.

--------------------- No Recommendations on the other measures on the ballot

PROP 18 Water Bond Measure REMOVED FROM THE BALLOT.
On August 10, the Legislature and the Governor moved Proposition 18 from the November 2010 ballot to the November 2012 ballot.

PROP 19 Legalize and Regulate Marijuana NO POSITION
Because League positions do not cover the issues in Proposition 19, the LWVC is taking no stand on this measure.

PROP 21 $18 Vehicle License Fee for State Parks and Wildlife Programs NEUTRAL

Proposition 21 establishes a new earmarked fee. The League does not generally support earmarks but is neutral on this measure because there is little left that can be done to raise money for the state parks, which provide a valuable recreation and natural preservation resource for the state.

PROP 22 State Government Prohibited from Taking Local Funds NEUTRAL

This measure would provide some stability in funding for local government. However, it would freeze in place the current dysfunctional system of funding local governments in California. The League will remain NEUTRAL on Proposition 22.

Comments, suggestions, questions? Contact our webmaster. Last revised: February 28, 2012 14:19 PST.