By Fuse WA
Not in City of Healdsburg? Click here to choose your customized guide.
Representative Jim Wood moved to Northern California in 1987. He is the incumbent, having served in this position since 2014. According to campaign materials he is running for re-election because he wants to continue to improve environmental protections, economic development, and health care.
In the State Assembly, Rep. Wood authored several key bills to address healthcare, the environment and immigration. His “Pay to Delay” bill prevents drug companies from delaying production of generic drugs. He voted to end transporting oil to the state from oil from offshore drilling facilities, to provide information to residents potentially impacted by pollution in their language, and to protect personal data from being used to deport Californians. He currently chairs the Assembly Health Committee. Prior to his election to Assembly District 2, he served two terms as mayor of Healdsburg.
Rep. Wood is being challenged by Charlotte Svolos (R). He has scored a lifetime 82 out of 100 on Courage Score, our annual analysis of a legislator's progressive voting records. Based on our Courage Score analysis, Rep. Wood has shown some willingness to advocate for the needs of constituents and face down corporate lobbyists and interest groups that exploit Californians. That said, his fierce opposition to Medicare-for-All, and his role in undermining the single-payer health care movement in California are of grave concern.
According to our analysis, Rep. Wood is the strongest choice for progressive leadership in office, particularly given the positions of the only other candidate on the ballot.
Last updated: 2020-02-21
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: 2020-03-02
Vote YES on Measure H, Income-Restricted Housing for Rent or Sale Ordinance
This measure, sponsored by Healdsburg Vice Mayor Leah Gold and City Council member Shaun McCaffery, modifies the city’s Growth Management Ordinance to create more ways for people to access affordable housing. Back in 2018, Measure P allowed an average of 50 units of income-restricted multi-family rental housing to be built per year. Measure H would simply allow those units to also be offered for sale, not just rental, so some of these units could be included in new for-sale developments.
In both cases, the units must be affordable to families earning below 160% of Sonoma county’s average median income. The idea is that the City Council will require these affordable units to be included in proposed developments, where they can give local residents and employees preference in buying or renting the units and require they be used as primary residences only. None of these affordable units cost taxpayers anything, nor do they use any public funds designated for affordable housing programs -- they are financed by developers and, like all units, subject to review by the city for zoning and design.
Vote YES on Measure H.
Last updated: 2020-02-26
Sign Up To Get Future Guides
Enter your name, email and zip code to be the first to receive future Voter Guides and to learn more about Courage California!