Readers in Dublin, CA and the greater Tri-Valley have another full batch of state propositions to vote on this election season. The Around Dublin Team has created a brief summary of each of the November 2010 California propositions to help voters decide what is best for our state. The Around Dublin Team would like to thank Ballotpedia.org for providing most of the source information.

Proposition 19 is also known as the Marijuana Legislative Initiative. If passed, this initiative would allow people who are at least 21 years old to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. It would also permit local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana. Those in favor of legalizing marijuana believe that Proposition 19 will reduce racial bias in cannabis arrests, generate new tax revenue, and reduce criminal justice costs. In contrast, those opposed to Proposition 19 argue that legalizing marijuana would increase substance abuse, reduce productivity, and compromise public safety.

Proposition 23 would suspend State law that requires greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020, until California’s unemployment drops to 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive quarters. Supporters argue that Proposition 23 will save jobs since companies will have more money to invest in growing their business in California if they don’t have to spend it on environmental protection. Most of the financial support for Proposition 23 is from oil companies such as Valero and Tesoro. Opponents are concerned about the adverse impact that Proposition 23 will have on the environment and emerging clean technology economy in California, especially considering that the state’s jobless rate has dropped to 5.5 percent or below for four straight quarters exactly three times in the past 30 years. Bill Gates recently donated $700,000 to the “No on Prop 23″ committee.

Taxes

Propositions 21 would institute a new $18 auto registration fee that would be used to fund state parks.

Proposition 24 would rollback $1.3B per year corporate tax breaks that are slated to go into effect in 2010 and 2012. Supporters of the rollback argue that the $1.3B in annual tax revenue is needed to support government programs. In addition, they assert that the tax breaks will only benefit large corporations and not the majority of California businesses. Opponents of Proposition 24 feel that effectively increasing taxes would stifle job growth in California at a time when companies are already struggling and laying off employees.

Proposition 26 would require a supermajority, or two-thirds majority, vote to approve most new taxes and fees at the state and local levels. Large corporations such as Chevron and Philip Morris have provided the bulk of the financial support for Proposition 26. Opponents believe that Proposition 26 protects polluters and other corporations from having to pay for the health, environmental, and other damage they cause.

Budget

Proposition 22 would prohibit the state of California, even during a period of severe financial hardship, from delaying the distribution of tax revenues for transportation, redevelopment, or local government projects and services. Supporters for Proposition 22 include interest groups like police, fire, and transportation agencies that are hit the hardest by state raids of local funds. Opponents of Proposition 22 are made of groups that would benefit the most from state raids such as the teachers unions.

Proposition 25 would change the legislative vote requirement necessary to pass the state budget and spending bills from the current two-thirds supermajority to a simple majority. Supporters argue that this change would eliminate California budget gridlock, while opponents fear Proposition 25 would lead to unfettered tax increases from Sacramento. Proposition 25 will also suspend pay for legislators, if they are not able to pass a budget on time.

Redistricting

Proposition 20 would remove elected representatives from the process of establishing congressional districts and transfers that authority to the recently-authorized 14-member redistricting commission composed of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. In contrast, Proposition 27 would return redistricting authority to the California State Legislature. Proposition 20 and Proposition 27 each have a so-called “poison pill” provision. The “poison pill” provision means that if both propositions receive a simple majority vote, the proposition with the highest majority vote becomes law. Those in favor of Proposition 20 argue that it will eliminate gerrymandering, the process of redrawing political districts to give one group a voting advantage. Proposition 27 supporters believe that having an independent redistricting committee is bad, because the committee could not be held accountable to voters.

Voters in Dublin and the Tri-Valley will have many tough choices this election season. How will you vote on Tuesday, November 2?