There are 10 measures this March, from marijuana taxes to library funding, and seven high-profile, sometimes-nasty races for L.A. City Council, including that of District 8, representing the USC area.

So with these elections right around the corner, ATVN has developed this complete voter’s guide to help you make educated voting decisions in March 8’s election.

Why is this year’s election important?
With Los Angeles facing a $54 million budget deficit this year and a projected $350 million deficit next year, the city needs fixes to major financial issues, and those solutions are what elected City Council members will spend much of their time determining. In addition, this spring’s ballot measures offer a little bit of everything — from creative fixes to budget problems to those that may actually break federal laws.

What exactly is L.A. voting on?
The March 8 election is a primary nominating election. This means the measures will be voted on as normal but candidates for City Council must garner at least 50 percent of the votes to win. If no candidates are able to do this, the top two finishers will be put on the ballots for the general municipal election May 17.

BALLOT MEASURES
While the candidates may steal much of the night’s attention, the 10 ballot measures have major implications on business, taxes and the economy.

Measure G - Pension Reform
SUMMARY: G would add a sixth tier to the five-tier Fire and Police pension plan. New hires would become members of Tier 6 instead of Tier 5. Tier 6 lowers the minimum pension to 40 percent, adds a 2 percent salary contribution for retiree health benefits and bases pension on the highest two-year salary average rather than the highest single year.
PROS: The plan would save the City thousands of dollars over the next decade and beyond. Police and firefighter unions are in support of what would be a small chip at salaries that are considerably higher than in the private sector.
CONS: The bill would roll back some of the financial benefits of new hires in the Police and Fire unions. Critics say the measure does not go far enough in reining in pension obligations for public employees, as it does not affect pensions of those currently in those unions, but almost all critics still support the measure as a first step to fixing the what they call exorbitant pensions.

Measure H - City Contractor Contributions
SUMMARY: H would (1) ban city contractors who offer contracts of $100,000 or more from contributing to city officials and candidates who could potentially approve their contracts. It also (2) eliminates an $8 million cap on the city’s Matching Funds Program, which helps publicly fund city political campaigns. The city would be able to withhold or reduce required annual contributions of about $3.25 million. The city, however, does not need a vote of the people to alter the Matching Funds Program guidelines, and so any democratic turnout could be overturned on a whim. So the measure is ultimately about contractor and corporate donations to candidates.
PROS: (1) It limits the ability of city contractors, generally larger companies, to donate to candidates if they plan on bidding on government contracts. Proponents say this is a moderate step toward city political campaign reform.
CONS: (1) Critics say banning city contractors from contributing doesn’t fix anything because those contractors could still donate to candidates through political action committees. In addition, it would only prohibit top company executives from donating to candidates, and would not affect those lower on the corporate ladder. Critics say this will make corporate donations virtually untraceable rather than out in the open. (2) It allows city officials to stop contributing to the Matching Funds Program fund in times of fiscal emergency, which supporters say helps first-time candidates finance a political run for office.

Measure I - DWP Ratepayer Advocate
SUMMARY: I would, in the wake of controversial rate hikes to L.A.’s monopolistic Department of Water and Power, provide funding to create an Office of Public Accountability for the purpose of providing unbiased analysis of DWP rate hikes.
PROS: The DWP’s new Office of Public Accountability would provide reports and analysis to the public about rates. It would also provide for a Ratepayer Advocate who would work with the public and speak on their behalf.
CONS: The measure provides for DWP to spend about $105 million per year in revenue, which critics say could cause water and power rates to rise. DWP transfers about $190 million per year in its profit to the City of Los Angeles, effectively a backdoor tax of 2-4 percent on all customers, which some say proves its abuse of the monopoly. Critics say this excess money should be used rather than enacting a bill that could raise rates further.

Measure J - DWP Revenue Transfers
SUMMARY: J would require DWP to submit an annual preliminary budget to the City Council for review and require DWP to notify the Council and mayor if any DWP revenue surplus transfer will be made to the City. If DWP does not make the surplus transfer, it must provide a detailed explanation to the City.
PROS: DWP transfers about $190 million in profit to the City per year, but the decision to transfer is a largely informal one. Measure J would establish procedures for making surplus transfers to the City, including aligning fiscal calendars with the City.
CONS: Critics say the measure would reinforce immoral practices by DWP, which has a water and power monopoly in most of L.A. County. DWP transfers about $190 million per year in profit to the City of Los Angeles, effectively a backdoor tax of 2-4 percent on all customers.

Measure L - Library Funding
SUMMARY: L would increase the City’s spending on libraries by about 70 percent, from about $75 million to about $125 million of the city’s estimated $4.25 billion General Fund.
PROS: Proponents say this will allow libraries to restore service hours and programs, which provides places for children to do homework after school and keeps them away from drugs and gangs. It also offers the unemployed a convenient nearby place to access the Internet and look for job.
CONS: There is no guarantee libraries will restore service hours or programs that have been discontinued. Critics say this money could instead fund pre-existing deficits within the library system, including pensions and health plans for employees, including those furloughed. Critics also say the approximate $50 million in General Fund money should go to police services that have been cut during the recession rather than to re-establish library programs.

Measure M - Marijuana Tax
SUMMARY: M would establish a tax rate of about five percent on medical marijuana dispensaries to fund City police, fire, street services, parks, libraries or other services.
PROS: Proponents say taxing marijuana dispensaries could create up to $10 million in city revenue per year that can be used for public safety or other city programs.
CONS: Federal law, which supersedes state and local laws, prohibits the growing, possession, consumption and sale of marijuana. In addition, medical marijuana dispensaries are by law nonprofit organizations whose receipts cannot be taxed in accordance with the City’s tax law, opening the city up to potentially millions of dollars in lawsuits. On the other side, users of medical marijuana would see prices rise as a result of the tax.

Measure N - Public Funding of Campaigns
SUMMARY: N would reconcile the City’s campaign finance laws with recent Supreme Court decisions by repealing a $500 contribution limit to independent political groups in City elections. It would also impose spending restrictions on candidates running against self-financed opponents. The city attorney’s office, however, currently does not enforce the regulations N will address, so experts note that there will be no practical change to campaign finance restrictions in Los Angeles.
PROS: Campaign laws similar to the City’s have been found unconstitutional — N would fix that. Also, proponents say repealing contribution limits and limiting the donations a candidates can receive if facing a self-financed opponent is good for the democratic system and limits the influence of special interests.
CONS: Special interests would be able to donate as much money as they wanted to in order to fund a candidate in a city election. Not passing the measure, however, could result in expensive lawsuits, as the City would be in conflict with Supreme Court rulings.

Measure O - Tax on Oil Companies
SUMMARY: O would establish a tax of 1.8 percent per barrel of crude (about $1.80 if $100 barrel) on oil-producing businesses if the oil is extracted from land within the City of Los Angeles. The tax rate would adjust yearly based on changes in the consumer price index.
PROS: The tax would generate an estimated $4 million per year assuming production remains the same, at about 27 million barrels per year. Proponents say it would help offset the negative impact of oil on the environment and discourage drilling in the City.
CONS: Critics note that the measure would tax U.S. and California companies only, as foreign oil companies are exempt from the tax. In addition, the measure would increase gas prices an estimated $0.09/gallon in an economic recession.

Measure P - Creating Emergency Reserve
SUMMARY: (1) P would establish an Emergency Reserve Account which would collect 2.75 percent of the City’s General Fund annually that could be spent in emergencies determined by the mayor and City Council. The city currently holds a Reserve Fund but does not mandate a certain percentage be deposited annually. (2) It would also establish a Contingency Reserve Account which would cover budget shortfalls and unexpected expenses on year-to-year basis.
PROS: Proponents say the measure would make it harder to borrow from the Emergency Reserve Fund, thus keeping it intact for use in the event of an earthquake, terrorist attack or other unforeseen disaster. It would also ensure that the City would continue to deposit about $115 million in that account annually, adjusting yearly based on changes in the consumer price index.
CONS: It requires the City to spend about $115 million into that account, rather than the current unspecified amount that can change in times of economic struggle, adjusting yearly based on changes in the consumer price index. Critics charge that it is irresponsible to require such a substantial deposit at a time when city services and jobs are being cut due to budget constraints.

Measure Q - Civil Service Hiring Rules
SUMMARY: Q would allow city personnel managers to limit the pool of applicants tested for civil service jobs to save time and money. The City is currently required to test everyone who applies for a job in City government, but with high unemployment is often receiving hundreds of applicants for each job. 
PROS: Proponents say the measure would save the City time and money in screening potential employees by expediting the process and only interviewing a “first group” of applicants.
CONS: Critics say not screening thoroughly for the best job candidates saves money in the short term but costs more in the long run by having a less-skilled or less-efficient employee. They also note that the measure currently has no cutoff to how many people may be turned away without being tested.

CITY COUNCIL RACES
Economic recession has taken a measurable toll on Los Angeles area businesses and residents, and many more challengers are running for seats this March. A number of high-profile city council races are taking place, including that of Councilman Bernard Parks, who represents USC and the surrounding South L.A. area. The City Council is made up of 15 members on four-year terms. These members hold regular meetings and vote on major budget and operational issues.

DISTRICT 2 - San Fernando/Crescenta Valleys: N. Hollywood, Sherman Oaks, Sunland
SUMMARY: Two candidates - Current City Councilman Paul Krekorian, the first Armenian-American elected to the Council, is running for re-election in this district. In his time in the City Council, Krekorian has received mostly positive reviews from his first year in office (he won a special election in 2010 for the seat). His highlights include opposing LADWP’s rate hikes and helping write an ordinance that gives local businesses an advantage over non-local companies in government contracts.

Running against him is local businessman Augusto Bisani, who came in last in the 2010 special election Krekorian won. The 69-year-old Bisani was born and educated in Rome and immigrated to the U.S. in 1968. In his campaigning, he’s pushed for special outreach to the Latino, Thai and Filipino communities, among others.
ENDORSEMENTS: Krekorian: L.A. Times, L.A. County Democratic Party, L.A. County Federation of Labor, Sierra Club; Bisani: No major endorsements.

DISTRICT 4 - Central L.A. County: Hollywood, Koreatown, Los Feliz, Griffith Park
SUMMARY: Three candidates - Current City Councilman Tom LaBonge is running for re-election in this district. LaBonge has been on the council for a decade, and in his time as a council member, LaBonge has been one of the most popular council members. Unfortunately, his experience is also his weakness.

In debates this spring, LaBonge has been slammed by newcomers Tomas O’Grady and Stephen Box as being a political insider — having been part of the council during years when budget problems grew out of control. O’Grady is a local businessman who’s made pledges to cut his own salary by one-half if elected. O’Grady was born in Ireland and has lived in L.A. for 12 years. He’s spent much time discussing his personal finance decisions, including building his home with solar panels and the latest in energy efficient appliances.

Box, on the other hand, is more of a green candidate, a producer and bicycle activist aiming to put more stringent restrictions on developers if elected. Both newcomers have accused LaBonge of pushing special favors for his own political supporters.
ENDORSEMENTS: LaBonge: L.A. County Democratic Party, L.A. County Federation of Labor, Gov. Jerry Brown; O’Grady: L.A. Times; Box: L.A. Weekly, L.A. Daily News.

DISTRICT 6 - San Fernando Valley: North Hollywood, Van Nuys, Pacoima
SUMMARY: Four candidates - Current City Councilman Tony Cardenas is running for re-election in this district. Cardenas is one of the more controversial candidates. In eight years as a council member, Cardenas has largely escaped the public eye and sided with the majority on most issues. He’s taken a stand only on a few issues, most notably gang prevention and pushing for more spending on anti-gang organizations. Cardenas advantage is political experience, as his opponents lack much experience, if any, in politics.

Political newcomer Rich Goodman is making his first run for a political office. He’s a former UCLA student who left one class short of a degree in order to start a website. James Cordaro is a local businessman who ran against, and lost to, Cardenas in 2007. He may prove to be the biggest challenger to Cardenas, as he’s led the charge against the councilman’s many previous campaign promises still unfulfilled. David Barron is also a political newcomer, though he’s worked in government for years as a housing and construction inspector. Barron said he chose to run because of L.A.’s economic deterioration over the past few years.
ENDORSEMENTS: Cardenas: L.A. County Democratic Party, L.A. County Federation of Labor, Mexican American Political Association; Rich Goodman: L.A. Times; Cordaro: L.A. Daily News; Barron: No major endorsements.

DISTRICT 8 - South Los Angeles: Jefferson Park, West Adams
SUMMARY: Three candidates - Current City Councilman Bernard Parks is running for re-election in this district. Parks is one of the most recognizable political figures in Los Angeles, as a former chief of the LAPD. He also holds a master’s in public administration from USC. The 67-year-old is one of L.A.’s most conservative pro-business Democrats, but has received mixed reviews from unions for his willingness to oppose public employee union demands.

A former Water and Power commissioner, Forescee Hogan-Rowles runs a nonprofit organization in L.A. and has charged that Parks has not well represented the views of his South L.A. constituents and has not delivered on promises to recruit businesses to the area. Twenty-five-year LAFD firefighter Jabari Jumaane is perhaps the candidate left out in many of the debates, as Parks and Hogan-Rowles have traded verbal barbs. Jumaane says South L.A. has been so neglected that the constituents feel apathetic about future representation, and has pledged to listen to the community’s needs.
ENDORSEMENTS: Parks: L.A. Times, L.A. Chamber of Commerce; Hogan-Rowles: Mark Ridley-Thomas, L.A. County Federation of Labor; Jumaane: No major endorsements.

DISTRICT 10 - Mid City: Crenshaw
SUMMARY: Six candidates - Current City Councilman Herb Wesson, Jr. is running for re-election in this district. Wesson is an experienced politician, having been on the city council for five years and also served in the State Assembly as Speaker. Wesson’s priorities are to increase public safety and boost jobs, and hopes to reduce the budget deficit by giving up the City’s control of poorly managed properties and arenas, including the L.A. Convention Center. Wesson has received praise for being a likable member of the council.

Running against Wesson are a handful of inexperienced contenders with minimal support from businesses and unions. Employment specialist and businessman Austin Dragon is perhaps the favorite of those contenders, but has struggled to provide a detailed plan to reduce financial waste and abuse. Attorney Andrew Kim is one of the only contenders with public service experience, but likewise has failed to elaborate on broad campaign promises to reduce the deficit. Local business owner Luis Montoya has said he’ll cut his own salary by 20 percent if elected, but has garnered little support. Business owner Chris Brown one-ups that plan, saying he’ll cut his salary by half if elected in order to connect better with local residents. Victim advocate Althea Rae Shaw has made sanctuary cities one of her campaign platforms, blaming crime and violence on other elected officials who refuse to press charges against those who illegally live in the United States.
ENDORSEMENTS: Wesson: L.A. County Democratic Party, L.A. Times, L.A. County Federation of Labor; Dragon: No major endorsements; Kim: No major endorsements; Montoya: No major endorsements; Brown: No major endorsements; Shaw: No major endorsements.

DISTRICT 12 - San Fernando Valley: Porter Ranch, Northridge, Chatsworth
SUMMARY: Six candidates - This is a unique election in that there is no one running for re-election and it is bound to be one of the city most hotly contested races. Current City Councilman Greig Smith will be stepping down, but the favorite may be Smith’s chief of staff, Mitch Englander. Englander has been able raise money using Smith’s support and good reputation, and has a significant advantage monetarily over any opponents. The 40-year-old is more business- and Republican-minded than most of his competitors, which may suit him in a more conservative district.

Neighborhood Council Boardmember Armineh Chelebian is another more-conservative leader in the area, and moved from Iran when she was a teenager in 1978. Real Estate brokers Kelly Lord, Jr. and engineer Brad Smith have worked on neighborhood councils in the past, but have limited experience, though Smith has pushed hard for infrastructure building in his campaigning. Restaurant owner Navraj Singh has said he’d push for lower taxes and a better business climate if elected. Dinesh Lakhanpal, a local businessman, has spent significant time pushing for better medical and transportation services, transportation and tourism.
ENDORSEMENTS: Englander: L.A. Daily News, L.A. Times, Sheriff Lee Baca, L.A. County Federation of Labor, Sierra Club; Chelebian: Assemblyman Chuck DeVore; California Republican Assembly; Lord: No major endorsements; Smith: L.A. County Democratic Party; Singh: No major endorsements; Lakhanpal: No major endorsements.

DISTRICT 14 - Northeast Los Angeles: Boyle Heights, Skid Row, Chinatown
SUMMARY: Two candidates - In what is bound to be perhaps the closest race of the evening (in a district with a generally lower voter turnout), current City Councilman José Huizar is running for re-election in this district. The race between Huizar and small business owner Rudy Martinez has gotten a bit nasty at times, with accusations surfacing about Martinez’s arrests for loitering and DUI as a young person, and Huizar’s troubles paying for his own home repairs.

Martinez has received big pushes in recent weeks due to his fervent outreach to the community. Martinez has spent countless hours of his campaigning doing more traditional, or “small town” community outreach, knocking on doors and asking for votes one-on-one with District 14 voters.
ENDORSEMENTS: Huizar: L.A. County Democratic Party, L.A. County Federation of Labor, Sierra Club; Martinez: L.A. Times.