Voters will make key decisions Nov. 8

This November’s Special Election offers all local voters eight statewide propositions to vote on. Bonsall voters will be able to express their opinions on a $17 million bond for the Bonsall Union School District (BUSD) as those in Division Five of the Rainbow Municipal Water District (RMWD) will choose whether or not to recall their current representative, Robert Glick. If Glick is recalled, it is likely that Rua Petty, the only candidate listed for the position, will take Glick’s seat.

Proposition 73

Waiting period and parental notification before termination of minor’s pregnancy. Initiative constitutional amendment.

If passed, a physician will need to notify an un-emancipated minor’s parent in writing at least 48 hours prior to an abortion. Notification must be in writing but can either be given in person or through certified mail with a return receipt and first class mail.

Exceptions would be allowed with a medical emergency or an approved waiver from a court or guardian.

The fiscal impacts are unknown, but it is likely to have little significance. One prediction is that the State Administrative costs would total $350,000 for implementing the program the first year and would likely be $150,000 per following year.

Proposition 74

Public school teachers. Waiting period for permanent status. Dismissal. Initiative statute.

Prop 74 would increase the required length of time a teacher had before becoming a permanent employee. It would expand to five consecutive years instead of the current requirement of two consecutive years.

Districts would be authorized to discharge teachers who received unsatisfactory reviews two years in a row.

The costs, if implemented, are unknown.

Proposition 75

Public employee union dues. Restrictions on political contributions. Employee consent requirement. Initiative statute.

The dues and fees of public employee unions would not be allowed to be used for political contributions, unless the employee completed a specified form giving permission.

The organization would have to submit records to the Fair Political Practices Commission, but these would not need to be disclosed publicly.

Expenses are expected to be minor.

Proposition 76

State spending and school funding limits. Initiative constitutional amendment.

State spending would be limited to the prior year’s level plus three previous year’s average revenue growth. It will alter Proposition 98 by changing the minimum school funding requirements. Excess general fund revenues would shift to budget reserve, specified construction and debt repayment; currently they go to schools/tax relief. In certain situations, the governor would be able to reduce the appropriations of his choosing.

If the state budget is delayed, appropriations from the previous year will be continued. Borrowing of state special funds would be prohibited and payment would be required of local government mandates.

This could change the amount of spending to specific programs. It will likely reduce state spending.

Proposition 77

Reapportionment. Initiative constitutional amendment.

The legislature would create a panel of three retired judges to determine the redistricting of California’s Senate, Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts. Public hearings would be required and once the panel made its decision and filed with the Secretary of State, it would become effective immediately.

A one-time-cost would occur, equaling no more that $1.5 million for the state and near $1 million for county costs. There could be a potential reduction after 2010.

Proposition 78

Discounts on prescription drugs. Initiative statute.

By establishing a discount prescription drug program, the California Department of Health Services would contract with pharmacies to sell prescription drugs at an agreed-upon price to certain low- and moderate-income Californians. Those that choose to participate would have a $15 application fee each year. It would also include an outreach program.

Costs could be as high as the tens of millions of dollars, but savings could occur through the state and county health programs.

Proposition 79

Prescription drug discounts. State-negotiated rebates. Initiative statute.

A program would be setup to fund prescription drug discounts through rebates with participating drug manufacturers. New Medi-Cal contracts would be required to provide the Medicaid best price to this program. An oversight committee would be created.

Fiscal impacts would be in the low tens of millions of dollars.

Proposition 80

Electric service to providers. Regulation. Initiative statute.

If passed, the California Public Utilities Commission would oversee electric service providers. Electricity customers would be restricted from altering between private utilities and other electric providers.

All retail electric sellers would need to increase renewable resource energy procurement by at least 1% each year. By 2010, 20% of retail sales need to be procured by from renewable energy.

The estimated fiscal impact would be slight to $4 million.

Prop C - BUSD

If voters choose to accept Prop C, the district will be eligible for $3.7 million in State funds by issuing $17 million in bonds. In August, Dick Olson, a BUSD board member, said the primary goal of the money would be to replace Bonsall Elementary, although the text of the proposition does not specify what schools the money will be intended for.

Recall Election – RMWD Division 5

Shall Robert Glick be recalled (removed) from the office of Member of the Board of Directors, Division No. 5, of the [RMWD]?

By June, opponents collected more than the required 462 signatures to place RMWD board member Robert Glick on the ballot to be recalled. If voters decide to recall him, they will then need to choose his successor. The only contender listed on the ballot is Rua Petty, a local businessman and grower. A write-in option will also be available.

Petty believes Glick “has not represented the feelings of residents in the division.” One of his main objectives is to “see how we can communicate better [with the ratepayers].”

Glick was unavailable for comment.