&.
E>C8=6 6D834
Proposition 21 Vehicle Fee for Parks Prop. 21, the Vehicle License Fee for Parks Act, is exactly what it sounds like: a fee ($18 per year) tacked on to the fees California drivers pay annually to the DMV. The roughly $500 million that the initiative would raise would go toward maintaining the state’s 278 parks, which are plagued by slashed budgets. Most California drivers would get free access to the parks, and $130 million would be directed to the cash-starved general fund. While any added fees imposed on residents should be treated with skepticism, there is no doubt that keeping state parks open is a worthy move—not only to attract the millions of tourists who routinely visit the state’s parks, but also to allow all Californians to share in the state’s rich natural heritage. The Bohemian recommends: YES on Prop. 21
Contemporary/Museum Framing
Art With Attitude 10/9-11/12
Conceptual Art Gallery
707.473.9600 707.474.9600 www.hammerfriar.com
RIVERFRONT ART GALLERY
Calabi Gallery
The Landing by Jim Spitzer
Opening Sun 10/10, Reception 1-4pm 144 Petaluma Blvd N | 707.781.7070 | calabigallery.com
Call Today to Advertise! 707.527.1200 sales@bohemian.com
132 PETALUMA BLVD. NORTH, DOWNTOWN PETALUMA
707-778-4ART(4278)
WWW.RIVERFRONTARTGALLERY.COM
What are you thankful for? VAPORIZERS ON SALE AT
Gravenstones
2 new great vapes for your on the go lifestyle: The Launch Box $99 • Essential Vaaap $99 Both are made here in California, come in and check them out! Plus fantastic deals on Cali blown spoons, bats, bubblers and tubes! Organic Raw papers in stock Friendly knowledgeable staff—come see us, you’ll be glad you did!
707-795-8498 8246 Old Redwood Hwy. Downtown Cotati Mon–Sat 11am to 7pm Sun 12 noon–6pm (Next door to Redwood Cafe) We have the best priced Detox in Sonoma County. We now have detox online. To get detox delivered to your door, go to www.Gravenstones.com
20
10.13.10-10.19.10
THE BOHEMIAN
Proposition 22 Ban on State Borrowing from Local Governments Among the many band-aids that the state legislature has employed to keep California from bleeding to death, one has gotten a lot of local attention. In the past year, the state, facing a horrendous deficit, has exercised its authority to take money from local redevelopment and transportation agencies in what is universally described as a “raid� on local funds. On its surface, this proposition seems to make sense. And were it proposed in a different year, in a different economy and in more moderate form, it might well be worth recommending. But at a time when nearly every state in the nation, including California, is strained to the breaking point by the largest economic downturn in a century, it just doesn’t make sense to pass a law that would prohibit even 1 cent of variation in shares of state and local revenue, even in the event of natural disasters. Among the many structural problems facing our state, one is the inf lexibility forced on the Legislature because of “budgeting by ballot.� This proposition would make matters worse. The Bohemian recommends: NO on Prop. 22
Proposition 23 Suspend AB 32, the Global Warming Act California’s landmark anti-global warming legislation, AB 32, was passed in 2006 with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Now that statewide unemployment is hovering around 12 percent, antiregulation groups are targeting the climate change law
and its objective, saying environmental regulations are the cause of the Golden State’s financial woes. If passed, the law would suspend most of the provisions of AB 32 until the state posts unemployment figures of 5.5 percent or lower for four straight quarters— something that has happened only three times since 1980. Curbing greenhouse gasses is a responsibility that runs deeper than the ebb and f low of unemployment figures, and the revenue generation estimated to be produced by axing the law is modest by nearly all accounts. To keep California leading the way toward a greener and more sustainable future, vote no on Prop. 23. The Bohemian recommends: NO on Prop. 23
Proposition 24 Repeal of Corporate Tax Breaks This proposition reverses three tax breaks negotiated during the last two years’ state budget showdowns which primarily benefit multinational businesses. They represent about $1.3 billion a year in lost revenue to the state. A yes vote will ensure that money stays in state coffers rather than going to a few well-lined pockets. One of the breaks lets interstate businesses pick their in-state share of business taxes from a menu: choosing whether to pay on the property they occupy, their payroll value or sales. The second allows distribution of tax credits to affiliates, a game that some companies have gotten too good at playing. And the third allows corporations to collect refunds of past taxes during years in which they’ve shown net losses. The California Chamber of Commerce has labeled this prop a “jobs tax,� claiming that it will reduce new hiring. It’s the tired old trickle-down argument. Don’t buy it. The Bohemian recommends: YES on Prop. 24
Proposition 25 Majority Rules on Budget In some ways, this is the only proposition that matters. California’s compound fracture of a system currently requires the approval of two-thirds of both legislative houses to pass a budget, a threshold shared only by the great states of Arkansas and Rhode Island (the other 47 require simple majorities). The result, here in the eighth largest economy in the world, are budgets that are almost always late, a fixed system of minority rule with a legacy of intense gerrymandering to maintain it, suspended services, wasted millions on needlessly high interest payments, and a credit rating nestled snugly between those of the Czech Republic and Greece. Opponents—mainly alcohol and tobacco interests and Chambers of Commerce—say that if passed, Prop. 25 will allow lawmakers to raise taxes with only a majority vote. That’s false. State law