Measure U – Local Regulation of Healthcare Costs
This initiative does more harm than good and is a weak attempt to control healthcare costs by targeting healthcare providers located only within the city of Livermore. It requires a municipality, in this case the City of Livermore’s Community Development Department, to enforce this regulation, costing the City $1-2 million annually to administer. This is an unfunded mandate. City government should not be in the healthcare regulation business. Measure U potentially affects over 200 providers operating within Livermore including – a hospital, clinics, physicians, physical therapy and urgent care facilities, dentists, optometrists, chiropractors and others in providing healthcare related services in the community. Local providers will move their practices to neighboring communities that do not have this requirement. Effective healthcare regulation of costs and quality of care should be universal, regulated at the State or Federal level, and apply to all jurisdictions, not a single few. For more info visit Measure U at the Alameda County Registrar of Voters website.
Proposition 6 – Eliminates Certain Road Repair & Transportation Funding
This initiative would repeal all transportation taxes adopted by the State Legislature in 2017 including higher gasoline and diesel excise taxes, a new tax on vehicles, and a new tax on zero-emission vehicles. To address a long underfunded and deep backlog of maintenance needs of State and Local transportation infrastructure, the legislature took bold action to increase vehicle taxes to reflect the 21st Century costs of repairs. This funding is already flowing to Caltrans, local cities and transit agencies for this purpose. Proposition 6 has no provision to replace this funding. Impacts due to the loss of this funding over the next 10 years locally – Alameda County-wide $480 million. For more info visit Proposition 6 at the California Secretary of State website.
Proposition 10 – Expands Local Governments’ Authority to Enact Rent Control on Residential Property
This initiative proposes to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, a bi-partisan bill that placed limits on locally-enacted rent control laws. Specifically, Costa-Hawkins prohibited local rent control rules from applying to housing first occupied on or after February 1, 1995 and single family homes. Costa-Hawkins also requires local rent control rules to allow for “vacancy decontrol.” This means that landlords are free to set rents to market rates when transitioning from one tenant to the next. At the time Costa-Hawkins was enacted, most rent control cities already permitted vacancy decontrol and exempted newly constructed housing from rent limitations. Several cities also exempted single-family homes. The current housing crunch, not enough supply to meet demand, is affecting all segments of the population. However, this initiative has no provision for rent control ordinance best practices or guidelines for local jurisdictions. With 58 counties and 482 cities in California the potential for hundreds of individual rent control ordinances will impact – the feasibility of building future rental units with private investment; the ability to manage and project economic viability of existing rental properties; affect market rates for rental properties across multiple jurisdictions; and affect the ability for local jurisdictions to deliver their fair share of regional housing. For more info visit Proposition 10 at the California Secretary of State website.