Skip to main content
  • Democrat

    Cottie Petrie-Norris

    Builds Power
    Builds Representation
  • Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Cottie Petrie-Norris

    Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

    Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

    Cottie Petrie-Norris

    Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

Congress

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below congressional districts on your ballot.

  • Builds Power
    Builds Progress

  • Rep. Harley Rouda has lived in California since 2007 and is a resident of Laguna Beach. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2019. According to campaign materials, Rep. Rouda is running for re-election to be a Congressional representative who is accessible and unifying, and to provide leadership that is puts country over party and service above self.

    In Congress, Rep. Rouda has authored legislation to protect vulnerable coastal communities impacted by the climate crisis, ensure fair lending to LGBTQ-owned businesses, and to hold manufacturing polluters accountable for water contamination. He currently serves as Chair of the Oversight and Reform’s Subcommittee on Environment. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Rouda worked as a lawyer and was an active supporter of Orange County charities working to address issues including domestic violence and homelessness.

    Rep. Rouda is being challenged by John Thomas Schuesler (R), Michelle Steel (R), Richard Mata (AI), Brian Burley (R), and James Brian Griffin (R). According to recent election results, it's rare that Democrats wins this seat, as Rep. Rouda did in 2018. In fact, he is the first Democrat to win since the district was created in 1992.

    Rep. Rouda’s track record of fighting for important environmental protections, his work to protect communities under attack, and his strong base in the district he managed to flip in 2018 make him the strongest choice for progressive leadership in this race.
     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05


    Rep. Harley Rouda has lived in California since 2007 and is a resident of Laguna Beach. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2019. According to campaign materials, Rep. Rouda is running for re-election to be a Congressional representative who is accessible and unifying, and to provide leadership that is puts country over party and service above self.

    In Congress, Rep. Rouda has authored legislation to protect vulnerable coastal communities impacted by the climate crisis, ensure fair lending to LGBTQ-owned businesses, and to hold manufacturing polluters accountable for water contamination. He currently serves as Chair of the Oversight and Reform’s Subcommittee on Environment. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Rouda worked as a lawyer and was an active supporter of Orange County charities working to address issues including domestic violence and homelessness.

    Rep. Rouda is being challenged by John Thomas Schuesler (R), Michelle Steel (R), Richard Mata (AI), Brian Burley (R), and James Brian Griffin (R). According to recent election results, it's rare that Democrats wins this seat, as Rep. Rouda did in 2018. In fact, he is the first Democrat to win since the district was created in 1992.

    Rep. Rouda’s track record of fighting for important environmental protections, his work to protect communities under attack, and his strong base in the district he managed to flip in 2018 make him the strongest choice for progressive leadership in this race.
     

  • Builds Power
    Builds Progress
  • Representative Mike Levin was raised in South Orange County and Los Angeles before moving away briefly for university and law school. He has returned to live in Orange County, where he currently represents District 49 in Congress.

    Rep. Levin was elected to Congress in 2018 and he has been a champion on issues of sustainability and climate change. He is a member of the Natural Resources and Veterans Affairs Committees, as well as the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. He has sponsored legislation across a broad range of progressive issues, including electoral reforms, protection of voting rights, protection against discrimination, pay equity, and environmental protections. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Levin was a bold advocate for clean energy and sustainability in Orange County, San Diego, and beyond.

    Rep. Levin is being challenged by Brian Maryott (R), a conservative businessman and mayor of San Juan Capistrano. Rep. Levin stands out as a strong progressive voice in Congress who has had significant impact in his first term. According to recent election results, this has been a tough race for Democrats to win, as Levin did in 2018. His strong progressive track record and ability to keep this flipped district make him the strongest choice in this race.
     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Mike Levin

    Representative Mike Levin was raised in South Orange County and Los Angeles before moving away briefly for university and law school. He has returned to live in Orange County, where he currently represents District 49 in Congress.

    Representative Mike Levin was raised in South Orange County and Los Angeles before moving away briefly for university and law school. He has returned to live in Orange County, where he currently represents District 49 in Congress.

    Rep. Levin was elected to Congress in 2018 and he has been a champion on issues of sustainability and climate change. He is a member of the Natural Resources and Veterans Affairs Committees, as well as the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. He has sponsored legislation across a broad range of progressive issues, including electoral reforms, protection of voting rights, protection against discrimination, pay equity, and environmental protections. Prior to his election to Congress, Rep. Levin was a bold advocate for clean energy and sustainability in Orange County, San Diego, and beyond.

    Rep. Levin is being challenged by Brian Maryott (R), a conservative businessman and mayor of San Juan Capistrano. Rep. Levin stands out as a strong progressive voice in Congress who has had significant impact in his first term. According to recent election results, this has been a tough race for Democrats to win, as Levin did in 2018. His strong progressive track record and ability to keep this flipped district make him the strongest choice in this race.
     

    Mike Levin

    Representative Mike Levin was raised in South Orange County and Los Angeles before moving away briefly for university and law school. He has returned to live in Orange County, where he currently represents District 49 in Congress.

  • Builds Power
    Builds Representation
  • Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Cottie Petrie-Norris

    Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

    Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

    Cottie Petrie-Norris

    Representative Cottie Petrie-Norris is from San Diego County and currently resides in Laguna Beach, CA. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2018. According to campaign materials, she is running to keep her seat to address quality of life issues and support her community in the State Legislature.

    In the State Assembly, she has authored bills that have been signed into law that aimed to improve access to water, elderly support services, and establish environmental protections. Rep. Petrie-Norris currently serves as Chair on the Accountability & Administrative Review Committee. Prior to her election to the State Assembly, she worked in finance and technology for startups, small companies, and Fortune 500 corporations.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris has progressive economic, education, environment, and healthcare stances. That said, she has voted against key progressive bills on increasing access to affordable housing and issues pertaining to criminal justice reform.

    Rep. Petrie-Norris is being challenged by Diane Dixon (R) and Kelly Ernbym (R). In 2020 she scored a 34 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. According to recent election results, it's challenging for Democrats to win this seat. Though we disagree with Rep. Petrie-Norris’ stance on affordable housing and reforms to our criminal justice system, her relationships with partners and strong base in a recently flipped district helps advance progressive policies and makes her a strong choice in this race.
     

  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES On Prop 13, School and College Facilities Bond

  • This proposition would provide $9 billion for desperately needed renovations to public preschools and grade schools throughout the state, and $6 billion for construction to community colleges, the Cal State system, and the UC system. This will allow the state of California to use tax revenue to pay for improvements that local communities cannot afford. 

    The funding would come from bonds the state would pay back over 35 years, totaling an estimated $26 billion, which includes $15 billion in principal and $11 billion in interest. This investment is well worth the costs. It takes money, after all, to ensure that students -- especially those in districts that can’t afford major capital improvement projects -- do not have to learn in dangerous environments. 

    The vast majority of Democrats in the state legislature support it, as does Gov. Newsom, and the only major opposition is a group called the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. This is the group famous for destroying California’s school funding system in 1978 through another proposition, ironically one that was also dubbed Prop 13. The group spends most of its time lobbying to reduce tax rates. It has never shown any interest in supporting California’s children, at least if that means wealthy individuals or giant corporations would pay their fair share in taxes.

    Critics of the measure have pointed out that the ballot measure’s language includes a provision that frees new multi-family developments around subway stops and bus stations from school impact fees. This provision will make it easier for developers to build apartment buildings within a half-mile of public transit but could also drive up the cost of new housing and take funds away from school districts across the state. Despite this provision, the measure is still supported by most education groups in the state, who believe the overall funding allocation to schools outweighs the impact of reduced funding to school districts located near transit hubs. 2020’s Prop 13 is worth the investment since it means children will soon be able to attend school in buildings that are retrofitted to withstand earthquakes and no longer have lead in their water. 

    We strongly recommend a YES vote on Prop 13.

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    This proposition would provide $9 billion for desperately needed renovations to public preschools and grade schools throughout the state, and $6 billion for construction to community colleges, the Cal State system, and the UC system. This will allow the state of California to use tax revenue to pay for improvements that local communities cannot afford. 

    The funding would come from bonds the state would pay back over 35 years, totaling an estimated $26 billion, which includes $15 billion in principal and $11 billion in interest. This investment is well worth the costs. It takes money, after all, to ensure that students -- especially those in districts that can’t afford major capital improvement projects -- do not have to learn in dangerous environments. 

    The vast majority of Democrats in the state legislature support it, as does Gov. Newsom, and the only major opposition is a group called the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. This is the group famous for destroying California’s school funding system in 1978 through another proposition, ironically one that was also dubbed Prop 13. The group spends most of its time lobbying to reduce tax rates. It has never shown any interest in supporting California’s children, at least if that means wealthy individuals or giant corporations would pay their fair share in taxes.

    Critics of the measure have pointed out that the ballot measure’s language includes a provision that frees new multi-family developments around subway stops and bus stations from school impact fees. This provision will make it easier for developers to build apartment buildings within a half-mile of public transit but could also drive up the cost of new housing and take funds away from school districts across the state. Despite this provision, the measure is still supported by most education groups in the state, who believe the overall funding allocation to schools outweighs the impact of reduced funding to school districts located near transit hubs. 2020’s Prop 13 is worth the investment since it means children will soon be able to attend school in buildings that are retrofitted to withstand earthquakes and no longer have lead in their water. 

    We strongly recommend a YES vote on Prop 13.

    This proposition would provide $9 billion for desperately needed renovations to public preschools and grade schools throughout the state, and $6 billion for construction to community colleges, the Cal State system, and the UC system. This will allow the state of California to use tax revenue to pay for improvements that local communities cannot afford. 

    The funding would come from bonds the state would pay back over 35 years, totaling an estimated $26 billion, which includes $15 billion in principal and $11 billion in interest. This investment is well worth the costs. It takes money, after all, to ensure that students -- especially those in districts that can’t afford major capital improvement projects -- do not have to learn in dangerous environments. 

    The vast majority of Democrats in the state legislature support it, as does Gov. Newsom, and the only major opposition is a group called the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. This is the group famous for destroying California’s school funding system in 1978 through another proposition, ironically one that was also dubbed Prop 13. The group spends most of its time lobbying to reduce tax rates. It has never shown any interest in supporting California’s children, at least if that means wealthy individuals or giant corporations would pay their fair share in taxes.

    Critics of the measure have pointed out that the ballot measure’s language includes a provision that frees new multi-family developments around subway stops and bus stations from school impact fees. This provision will make it easier for developers to build apartment buildings within a half-mile of public transit but could also drive up the cost of new housing and take funds away from school districts across the state. Despite this provision, the measure is still supported by most education groups in the state, who believe the overall funding allocation to schools outweighs the impact of reduced funding to school districts located near transit hubs. 2020’s Prop 13 is worth the investment since it means children will soon be able to attend school in buildings that are retrofitted to withstand earthquakes and no longer have lead in their water. 

    We strongly recommend a YES vote on Prop 13.

    CA Prop 13

    This proposition would provide $9 billion for desperately needed renovations to public preschools and grade schools throughout the state, and $6 billion for construction to community colleges, the Cal State system, and the UC system.

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below ballot measures on your ballot.

Have questions about voting in San Diego County? Find out how to vote in San Diego County.

  • VOTE YES

    Vote YES on Measure A

  • Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure B is related to the future of a specific development -- the one that inspired both of these measures -- Measure A would address the approval process for all developments in the unincorporated lands around San Diego. 

    Dubbed by advocates as the “Save Our San Diego Countryside Measure,” Measure A would require a countywide vote on any major projects granted a General Plan amendment. (The county’s General Plan covers zoning and land use was last updated in 2012. Large housing developments generally require an amendment in order to proceed.) Developers rarely fare well in these kinds of public votes, but proponents of the measure believe residents should have a greater voice in any changes that involve building in the fire-prone areas in the outskirts of the county. They also note that the county government is too easily bought off by donations from the building industry and developers. 

    The opposition, unsurprisingly, comes primarily from those very people -- the building industry and developers. Opponents claim it’s being financed by the ultra wealthy and primarily designed to save properties like the Golden Door Spa, the luxury retreat funding the opposition to Measure B, from development despite the fact that over a dozen environmental groups support the measure. They reiterate the conservative claim that Measure A would stymie new housing projects due to the expense involved in putting anything before a public vote.

    Developers often are irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing. Measure A would ensure that the public's voice is heard when it comes to amending the General Plan, which impacts both affordable housing and safety. It would prevent elected officials from changing the General Plan without justifying those amendments to voters in order to appease developers. While it might be well-meaning to build more housing in an attempt to address the housing crisis, if it's done in high-risk areas where families may lose their homes and potentially their lives down the line, it is misguided -- as we've seen with the countless wildfires throughout the state that have devastated various communities in fire-risk areas. 

    Vote YES on Measure A.
     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure B is related to the future of a specific development -- the one that inspired both of these measures -- Measure A would address the approval process for all developments in the unincorporated lands around San Diego. 

    Dubbed by advocates as the “Save Our San Diego Countryside Measure,” Measure A would require a countywide vote on any major projects granted a General Plan amendment. (The county’s General Plan covers zoning and land use was last updated in 2012. Large housing developments generally require an amendment in order to proceed.) Developers rarely fare well in these kinds of public votes, but proponents of the measure believe residents should have a greater voice in any changes that involve building in the fire-prone areas in the outskirts of the county. They also note that the county government is too easily bought off by donations from the building industry and developers. 

    The opposition, unsurprisingly, comes primarily from those very people -- the building industry and developers. Opponents claim it’s being financed by the ultra wealthy and primarily designed to save properties like the Golden Door Spa, the luxury retreat funding the opposition to Measure B, from development despite the fact that over a dozen environmental groups support the measure. They reiterate the conservative claim that Measure A would stymie new housing projects due to the expense involved in putting anything before a public vote.

    Developers often are irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing. Measure A would ensure that the public's voice is heard when it comes to amending the General Plan, which impacts both affordable housing and safety. It would prevent elected officials from changing the General Plan without justifying those amendments to voters in order to appease developers. While it might be well-meaning to build more housing in an attempt to address the housing crisis, if it's done in high-risk areas where families may lose their homes and potentially their lives down the line, it is misguided -- as we've seen with the countless wildfires throughout the state that have devastated various communities in fire-risk areas. 

    Vote YES on Measure A.
     

    Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure B is related to the future of a specific development -- the one that inspired both of these measures -- Measure A would address the approval process for all developments in the unincorporated lands around San Diego. 

    Dubbed by advocates as the “Save Our San Diego Countryside Measure,” Measure A would require a countywide vote on any major projects granted a General Plan amendment. (The county’s General Plan covers zoning and land use was last updated in 2012. Large housing developments generally require an amendment in order to proceed.) Developers rarely fare well in these kinds of public votes, but proponents of the measure believe residents should have a greater voice in any changes that involve building in the fire-prone areas in the outskirts of the county. They also note that the county government is too easily bought off by donations from the building industry and developers. 

    The opposition, unsurprisingly, comes primarily from those very people -- the building industry and developers. Opponents claim it’s being financed by the ultra wealthy and primarily designed to save properties like the Golden Door Spa, the luxury retreat funding the opposition to Measure B, from development despite the fact that over a dozen environmental groups support the measure. They reiterate the conservative claim that Measure A would stymie new housing projects due to the expense involved in putting anything before a public vote.

    Developers often are irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing. Measure A would ensure that the public's voice is heard when it comes to amending the General Plan, which impacts both affordable housing and safety. It would prevent elected officials from changing the General Plan without justifying those amendments to voters in order to appease developers. While it might be well-meaning to build more housing in an attempt to address the housing crisis, if it's done in high-risk areas where families may lose their homes and potentially their lives down the line, it is misguided -- as we've seen with the countless wildfires throughout the state that have devastated various communities in fire-risk areas. 

    Vote YES on Measure A.
     

    San Diego, Measure A

    Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure B is related to the future of a specific development -- the one that inspired both of these measures -- Measure A would address the approval process for all developments in the unincorporated lands around San Diego. 

    Dubbed by advocates as the “Save Our San Diego Countryside Measure,” Measure A would require a countywide vote on any major projects granted a General Plan amendment. (The county’s General Plan covers zoning and land use was last updated in 2012. Large housing developments generally require an amendment in order to proceed.) Developers rarely fare well in these kinds of public votes, but proponents of the measure believe residents should have a greater voice in any changes that involve building in the fire-prone areas in the outskirts of the county. They also note that the county government is too easily bought off by donations from the building industry and developers. 

    The opposition, unsurprisingly, comes primarily from those very people -- the building industry and developers. Opponents claim it’s being financed by the ultra wealthy and primarily designed to save properties like the Golden Door Spa, the luxury retreat funding the opposition to Measure B, from development despite the fact that over a dozen environmental groups support the measure. They reiterate the conservative claim that Measure A would stymie new housing projects due to the expense involved in putting anything before a public vote.

    Developers often are irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing. Measure A would ensure that the public's voice is heard when it comes to amending the General Plan, which impacts both affordable housing and safety. It would prevent elected officials from changing the General Plan without justifying those amendments to voters in order to appease developers. While it might be well-meaning to build more housing in an attempt to address the housing crisis, if it's done in high-risk areas where families may lose their homes and potentially their lives down the line, it is misguided -- as we've seen with the countless wildfires throughout the state that have devastated various communities in fire-risk areas. 

    Vote YES on Measure A.
     

  • VOTE NO

    Vote NO on Measure B

  • Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure A is designed to increase public oversight and approval over any large development project in San Diego County, Measure B reaffirms the approval of a specific large development project called Newland Sierra by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. 

    San Diego County’s Measure B would uphold the approval of Newland Sierra, a planned high density development just north of Escondido on land currently zoned as rural or semi-rural. The Newland Sierra project would build 2,135 homes on land previously zoned for 99 residences, as well as the development of about 2 million square feet of commercial space. In addition to approving the land rezoning, the San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the county’s development guidelines specifically for Newland Sierra.

    The Supervisors have failed to set in place any long-term action plans on affordable housing or climate for the county, which is how Newland Sierra was approved with no affordable housing guarantees in part of the county identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as an area of severe fire danger. 

    Proponents of Measure B argue that a legal agreement signed by the the developer of the project guarantees affordable housing be included in the project, and that the project will help alleviate the housing crisis in the area. Opponents of Measure B, have pointed out that the signed legal agreement can be changed at any time by the developer and is therefore not enforceable by the county or the public. This is a strong example of how developers are often irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing, while making sure that this housing is built in areas safe from excessive wildfire danger.

    We recommend a NO on Measure B. 

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure A is designed to increase public oversight and approval over any large development project in San Diego County, Measure B reaffirms the approval of a specific large development project called Newland Sierra by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. 

    San Diego County’s Measure B would uphold the approval of Newland Sierra, a planned high density development just north of Escondido on land currently zoned as rural or semi-rural. The Newland Sierra project would build 2,135 homes on land previously zoned for 99 residences, as well as the development of about 2 million square feet of commercial space. In addition to approving the land rezoning, the San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the county’s development guidelines specifically for Newland Sierra.

    The Supervisors have failed to set in place any long-term action plans on affordable housing or climate for the county, which is how Newland Sierra was approved with no affordable housing guarantees in part of the county identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as an area of severe fire danger. 

    Proponents of Measure B argue that a legal agreement signed by the the developer of the project guarantees affordable housing be included in the project, and that the project will help alleviate the housing crisis in the area. Opponents of Measure B, have pointed out that the signed legal agreement can be changed at any time by the developer and is therefore not enforceable by the county or the public. This is a strong example of how developers are often irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing, while making sure that this housing is built in areas safe from excessive wildfire danger.

    We recommend a NO on Measure B. 

    Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure A is designed to increase public oversight and approval over any large development project in San Diego County, Measure B reaffirms the approval of a specific large development project called Newland Sierra by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. 

    San Diego County’s Measure B would uphold the approval of Newland Sierra, a planned high density development just north of Escondido on land currently zoned as rural or semi-rural. The Newland Sierra project would build 2,135 homes on land previously zoned for 99 residences, as well as the development of about 2 million square feet of commercial space. In addition to approving the land rezoning, the San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the county’s development guidelines specifically for Newland Sierra.

    The Supervisors have failed to set in place any long-term action plans on affordable housing or climate for the county, which is how Newland Sierra was approved with no affordable housing guarantees in part of the county identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as an area of severe fire danger. 

    Proponents of Measure B argue that a legal agreement signed by the the developer of the project guarantees affordable housing be included in the project, and that the project will help alleviate the housing crisis in the area. Opponents of Measure B, have pointed out that the signed legal agreement can be changed at any time by the developer and is therefore not enforceable by the county or the public. This is a strong example of how developers are often irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing, while making sure that this housing is built in areas safe from excessive wildfire danger.

    We recommend a NO on Measure B. 

    San Diego, Measure B

    Both Measures A and B on the San Diego County March ballot deal with housing development in the county’s unincorporated areas. While Measure A is designed to increase public oversight and approval over any large development project in San Diego County, Measure B reaffirms the approval of a specific large development project called Newland Sierra by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. 

    San Diego County’s Measure B would uphold the approval of Newland Sierra, a planned high density development just north of Escondido on land currently zoned as rural or semi-rural. The Newland Sierra project would build 2,135 homes on land previously zoned for 99 residences, as well as the development of about 2 million square feet of commercial space. In addition to approving the land rezoning, the San Diego County’s Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the county’s development guidelines specifically for Newland Sierra.

    The Supervisors have failed to set in place any long-term action plans on affordable housing or climate for the county, which is how Newland Sierra was approved with no affordable housing guarantees in part of the county identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection as an area of severe fire danger. 

    Proponents of Measure B argue that a legal agreement signed by the the developer of the project guarantees affordable housing be included in the project, and that the project will help alleviate the housing crisis in the area. Opponents of Measure B, have pointed out that the signed legal agreement can be changed at any time by the developer and is therefore not enforceable by the county or the public. This is a strong example of how developers are often irresponsible stewards of our responsibility to build and expand affordable housing, while making sure that this housing is built in areas safe from excessive wildfire danger.

    We recommend a NO on Measure B. 

Depending on where you live, you may have one of the below school races on your ballot.

  • Dr. George McKenna is from New Orleans. His is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2014. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to the LAUSD School Board to continue to create a system of education that promotes positive change through emphasizing justice, equal opportunities, and cultivating non-violent learning spaces.

    As Vice President of the LAUSD Board of Education, Dr. McKenna has implemented reforms to that aim to boost inclusive learning environments and improve student achievement. Prior to his election to the School Board, Dr. McKenna received a PhD in Education and has worked as a teacher, principal, and superintendent where developed a reputation for his innovative education solutions that decreased violence in inner-city schools, addressed low-achievement, increased community engagement and college enrollment. He has also authored legislation that allows parents to receive time off of work so that they are able to attend students’ activities.

    Dr. McKenna is running unopposed and is the best progressive choice because of his track record of fighting for students and teachers, which he has received wide national recognition from Time magazine to The Oprah Winfrey Show, as well as a movie documenting his accomplishments and educational approaches titled “The George McKenna Story.”

    According to our analysis, Dr. McKenna is a strong choice for progressive leadership in office.

     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Dr. George J. McKenna

    Dr. George McKenna is from New Orleans. His is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2014.

    Dr. George McKenna is from New Orleans. His is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2014. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to the LAUSD School Board to continue to create a system of education that promotes positive change through emphasizing justice, equal opportunities, and cultivating non-violent learning spaces.

    As Vice President of the LAUSD Board of Education, Dr. McKenna has implemented reforms to that aim to boost inclusive learning environments and improve student achievement. Prior to his election to the School Board, Dr. McKenna received a PhD in Education and has worked as a teacher, principal, and superintendent where developed a reputation for his innovative education solutions that decreased violence in inner-city schools, addressed low-achievement, increased community engagement and college enrollment. He has also authored legislation that allows parents to receive time off of work so that they are able to attend students’ activities.

    Dr. McKenna is running unopposed and is the best progressive choice because of his track record of fighting for students and teachers, which he has received wide national recognition from Time magazine to The Oprah Winfrey Show, as well as a movie documenting his accomplishments and educational approaches titled “The George McKenna Story.”

    According to our analysis, Dr. McKenna is a strong choice for progressive leadership in office.

     

    Dr. George J. McKenna

    Dr. George McKenna is from New Orleans. His is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2014.

  • Scott Schmerelson is a career educator with over 30 years of experience with LAUSD. He is the School Board District 3 incumbent, having served in this position since 2015. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to reduce class size, support and improve public schools, ensure classrooms and teachers have the resources they require while maintaining a responsible budget, and to make certain that schools are led by individuals who reflect the needs of the communities they serve.

    On the School Board, Schmerelson has been an outspoken supporter of teachers and their demands, as well as a leading voice to reduce class size so that students have the attention required for an effective learning environment and quality education. Prior to Schmerelson’s election to the School Board, he worked as a teacher, school counselor, assistant principal, and principal where he accomplished increasing test scores and boosting the morale of students, teachers, and parents.

    Schmerelson is running against Marilyn Koziatek and Elizabeth Bartels-Badger. Schmerelson is the best progressive choice because of his career-long dedication to improving education throughout LAUSD and his track record of fighting to make sure that children have access to the quality education they deserve.

    According to our analysis, Schmerelson is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office.

     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Scott Mark Schmerelson

    Scott Schmerelson is a career educator with over 30 years of experience with LAUSD. He is the School Board District 3 incumbent, having served in this position since 2015.

    Scott Schmerelson is a career educator with over 30 years of experience with LAUSD. He is the School Board District 3 incumbent, having served in this position since 2015. According to campaign materials, he is running for re-election to reduce class size, support and improve public schools, ensure classrooms and teachers have the resources they require while maintaining a responsible budget, and to make certain that schools are led by individuals who reflect the needs of the communities they serve.

    On the School Board, Schmerelson has been an outspoken supporter of teachers and their demands, as well as a leading voice to reduce class size so that students have the attention required for an effective learning environment and quality education. Prior to Schmerelson’s election to the School Board, he worked as a teacher, school counselor, assistant principal, and principal where he accomplished increasing test scores and boosting the morale of students, teachers, and parents.

    Schmerelson is running against Marilyn Koziatek and Elizabeth Bartels-Badger. Schmerelson is the best progressive choice because of his career-long dedication to improving education throughout LAUSD and his track record of fighting to make sure that children have access to the quality education they deserve.

    According to our analysis, Schmerelson is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office.

     

    Scott Mark Schmerelson

    Scott Schmerelson is a career educator with over 30 years of experience with LAUSD. He is the School Board District 3 incumbent, having served in this position since 2015.

  • Jackie Goldberg is from Los Angeles and has resided in Echo Park, CA, for nearly 40 years. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2019. According to campaign materials, she is running for re-election to continue to be the School Board’s progressive voice and ensure that students interests always come first.

    On the School Board, she has worked to restore integrity and leadership to her seat following the corruption chargers from the previous occupant. In addition, she’s worked to reduce class size, establish a productive and reasonable budget, bring the community together to raise students’ achievement levels, improve schools learning conditions, increase the resources available to students and teachers, as well as defend LAUSD schools from ongoing federal attacks from the current administration. Golberg has also worked as a teacher, community activist, Ethics Deputy and Children’s Services Deputy, served on the Los Angeles City Council, California State Assembly, as well as served on the LAUSD school board from 1983 to 1991. Through these positions, Golberg has created a dual language education program, authored the first citywide ordnance on a living wage, instituted protections for LA renters, increased funding for LAUSD, authored the first citywide and statewide domestic partner legislation, and is a co-founder of LACER Afterschool Program which helps nearly 4,000 students annually in the Los Angeles area.

    Goldberg is running against Chistina Martinez Duran. Goldberg is the best progressive choice because of her career-long reputation of supporting students and underserved communities throughout the Los Angeles area.

    According to our analysis, Goldberg is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office.

     

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Jackie Goldberg

    Jackie Goldberg is from Los Angeles and has resided in Echo Park, CA, for nearly 40 years. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2019.

    Jackie Goldberg is from Los Angeles and has resided in Echo Park, CA, for nearly 40 years. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2019. According to campaign materials, she is running for re-election to continue to be the School Board’s progressive voice and ensure that students interests always come first.

    On the School Board, she has worked to restore integrity and leadership to her seat following the corruption chargers from the previous occupant. In addition, she’s worked to reduce class size, establish a productive and reasonable budget, bring the community together to raise students’ achievement levels, improve schools learning conditions, increase the resources available to students and teachers, as well as defend LAUSD schools from ongoing federal attacks from the current administration. Golberg has also worked as a teacher, community activist, Ethics Deputy and Children’s Services Deputy, served on the Los Angeles City Council, California State Assembly, as well as served on the LAUSD school board from 1983 to 1991. Through these positions, Golberg has created a dual language education program, authored the first citywide ordnance on a living wage, instituted protections for LA renters, increased funding for LAUSD, authored the first citywide and statewide domestic partner legislation, and is a co-founder of LACER Afterschool Program which helps nearly 4,000 students annually in the Los Angeles area.

    Goldberg is running against Chistina Martinez Duran. Goldberg is the best progressive choice because of her career-long reputation of supporting students and underserved communities throughout the Los Angeles area.

    According to our analysis, Goldberg is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office.

     

    Jackie Goldberg

    Jackie Goldberg is from Los Angeles and has resided in Echo Park, CA, for nearly 40 years. She is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2019.

  • Patricia Castellanos is from Carson, CA, and currently resides in San Pedro, CA. According to campaign materials, she is running for School Board to bring her knowledge of building coalitions and alliances to the LAUSD to enact progressive education policies.

    Castellanos is the Workforce Deputy for L.A. County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, where she develops and implements economic policies that create job opportunities for members of her community. Prior to becoming a Workforce Deputy, she worked as the Director of Policy Training and Education for Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education, held an appointment as Port Commission by Mayor Eric Garcetti, and was Deputy Director for the L.A. Alliance for a New Economy. Furthermore, Castellanos led the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports, where she secured a historic agreement to reduce emissions, and was also a co-founder of Reclaim Our Schools L.A., where she successfully created a coalition of community members to rally support for quality public education.

    Castellanos is running against Mike Lansing, Tanya Ortiz Franklin, Silke M. Bradford, and Lydia A. Gutierrez. Castellanos is the progressive choice because of her track record of activism, service, and support to underserved and disadvantaged communities throughout the Los Angeles area. 

    According to our analysis, Castellanos is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office.

    Last updated: 2023-04-05

    Patricia Castellanos

    Patricia Castellanos is from Carson, CA, and currently resides in San Pedro, CA. According to campaign materials, she is running for School Board to bring her knowledge of building coalitions and alliances to the LAUSD to enact progressive education policies.

    Patricia Castellanos is from Carson, CA, and currently resides in San Pedro, CA. According to campaign materials, she is running for School Board to bring her knowledge of building coalitions and alliances to the LAUSD to enact progressive education policies.

    Castellanos is the Workforce Deputy for L.A. County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, where she develops and implements economic policies that create job opportunities for members of her community. Prior to becoming a Workforce Deputy, she worked as the Director of Policy Training and Education for Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education, held an appointment as Port Commission by Mayor Eric Garcetti, and was Deputy Director for the L.A. Alliance for a New Economy. Furthermore, Castellanos led the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports, where she secured a historic agreement to reduce emissions, and was also a co-founder of Reclaim Our Schools L.A., where she successfully created a coalition of community members to rally support for quality public education.

    Castellanos is running against Mike Lansing, Tanya Ortiz Franklin, Silke M. Bradford, and Lydia A. Gutierrez. Castellanos is the progressive choice because of her track record of activism, service, and support to underserved and disadvantaged communities throughout the Los Angeles area. 

    According to our analysis, Castellanos is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office.

    Patricia Castellanos

    Patricia Castellanos is from Carson, CA, and currently resides in San Pedro, CA. According to campaign materials, she is running for School Board to bring her knowledge of building coalitions and alliances to the LAUSD to enact progressive education policies.