Ballot Proposition Recommendations
Election Day is Nov. 5
—–
At its fall meeting, Ag Council’s board of directors took formal positions on some of the November General Election ballot propositions, and those positions on Prop 32, Prop 36 and a local ordinance are below, as well as a message from an Ag Council board member about Prop 35.
Importantly, counties were required to mail all California registered voters a vote-by-mail ballot. Returned ballots must be postmarked either before or on Election Day – November 5 – and received by your county elections office by November 12. Ballot drop-off locations are also open throughout the state. Please go to your county elections office website for further details.
Vote No on Prop 32
——–
Ag Council urges members and friends to reject Proposition (Prop) 32 given it will add to the surging cost of operating a business in California and lead to higher prices when many can least afford it.
Prop 32 will be especially challenging for those in agriculture fighting to stay afloat while facing ever-increasing challenges to run a business, including implementing ambitious energy and environmental standards.
Prop 32 raises the minimum wage in the following manner:
Employers with 26 or more employees
• For the remainder of 2024, minimum wage = $17 per hour.
• Beginning January 1, 2025, minimum wage = $18 per hour.
Employers with 25 or fewer employees
• Starting January 1, 2025, minimum wage = $17 per hour.
• Beginning January 1, 2026, minimum wage = $18 per hour.
Inflation adjustments paused until 2027
• Minimum wage adjusted every year starting in 2027.
Ag Council’s members care deeply about the wellbeing of workers, and California’s food and agriculture community pays some of the highest wages in the nation. However, Prop 32 is not the right path forward because it punishes businesses and harms the very workers it is intended to help by increasing prices even further. As an example, California’s fast food wage law has led to fast food price increases of seven percent over the past several months and some “value meals” in California cost over 40 percent more than in other states.
Ag Council is assisting in a No on Prop 32 effort by contributing funding to provide education to voters about the impact of such a wage increase, particularly how it affects affordability. Other associations are participating, as well, recognizing that Prop 32 adds to the ever-increasing cost of doing business in California and makes California less affordable overall.
For these reasons, Ag Council urges members and friends to vote no and reject Prop 32.
If you would like to learn more about Ag Council’s efforts regarding Prop 32, please contact Ag Council at ph. (916) 443-4887.
Support Prop 36
——-
Ag Council recommends a “yes” vote on Proposition (Prop) 36, which is a bipartisan measure to address serial retail theft, add fentanyl to the list of hard drugs, grant judges more discretion in the sentencing of drug traffickers and those who steal repeatedly, and prioritize mental health and drug treatment.
Prop 36 would:
• Turn some misdemeanors into felonies.
• Lengthen certain felony sentences.
• Require some felonies be served in prison.
• Allow those possessing illegal drugs to be charged with a “treatment-mandated felony,” instead of a misdemeanor, in some cases.
• Close the loophole in current law where thieves repeatedly stealing less than $950 receive almost no consequences.
Agriculture is not immune from the effects of crime. For example, stolen farm equipment, beehives, as well as cargo theft have all harmed farming families and the agriculture community. Prop 36 will provide greater accountability and deterrence than the current system for these crimes and others.
For these reasons, Ag Council recommends a “yes” vote on Prop 36. Read more about Prop 36 HERE.
Vote No on Measure J
Local Sonoma County Measure
——–
Measure J bans any new Combined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in Sonoma County. Ag Council urges Sonoma County residents to vote against Measure J.
The ordinance requires existing CAFOs to either terminate operations or modify during a three-year phase-out period, so that the facility no longer qualifies as a CAFO. Measure J will effectively drive farming families out of business in Sonoma County and lead to significant job losses and a reduction in locally grown food.
Ag Council and our dairy members support No on J efforts underway in Sonoma County. Please click HERE for further details.
UnitedAg Urges Support for Prop 35
by Jayson Welter, general counsel and corporate secretary at UnitedAg, and an Ag Council board member
——–
Proposition (Prop) 35 is vital to maintaining access to healthcare in our rural communities. While many of our struggling rural hospitals have been helped by the Distressed Hospital Loan Program, it does not address the root cause of their financial struggles which, in most cases, is the inadequacy of Medi-Cal payments. Medi-Cal payments are insufficient, and hospitals lose money when seeing Medi-Cal patients. Additionally, fee schedules need to be modified on an ongoing basis to keep up with the increased costs and inflationary pressures on hospital systems. Many of the hospitals in our rural communities are struggling, and our agricultural communities are already underserved and lack access to healthcare.
Our rural and agricultural communities have a high percentage of Medi-Cal patients, and a low percentage of patients covered by commercial insurance. Hospitals cannot make up the loss they incur by seeing Medi-Cal patients with the profits from commercial insurance because there are not enough patients with commercial insurance to make up the difference. If Medi-Cal payments were high enough to provide our hospitals a small profit, there would not be a need for the Distressed Hospital Loan Program.
To address the issue, Prop 35 creates a stable funding mechanism for access to healthcare, specifically, increased Medi-Cal payments. Prop 35 does not create a new tax, rather, it is an extension of an existing tax on health insurance companies. However, Prop 35 does have one very important improvement to the current tax, which is accountability. Prop 35 ensures that the money raised by the tax will be used for healthcare. Previously, the money raised by this tax was routinely used for other purposes not related to healthcare. Prop 35 ensures that this tax will continue and will be allocated for its intended purpose — access to healthcare.
UnitedAg encourages you to vote yes on Prop 35 and support access to healthcare in our agricultural communities. Click HERE for further details.