L.A. Times electoral endorsements for 2024 November election

It’s no exaggeration to say this may be the most consequential election in a generation. And we’re not just talking about the presidential race. From the top of the ticket to local ballot measures, California voters this year are grappling with major decisions that will shape their lives and communities for years to come.

To help voters decide, the Times editorial board offers recommendations based on interviewing candidates, campaign committees and policy experts, examining facts and claims and doing research to inform our endorsements. Every registered voter will be mailed a ballot in early October, allowing time to read up on the candidates, tune in to a forum, consider endorsements — including ours — and make a decision before the last day of voting on Nov. 5.

Politics

Trump elected as the United States’ 47th president following wins in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania

The presidential race between Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris and Republican former President Trump is at the top of the ticket tonight. Follow our live coverage.

Nov. 6, 2024

Proposition 2: Yes
Proposition 2 is a $10 billion bond that will fund repairs for California’s public schools and community colleges, many of which are run-down and lack basic functionality, such as air conditioning.

Proposition 3: Yes
Proposition 3 gives Californians an opportunity to formally renounce a wrongful moment in our voting history and step forward to positively affirm that bigotry toward same-sex couples has no place in our state or its Constitution.

Proposition 4: Yes
Proposition 4 is a $10 billion grab bag of spending on climate, fire prevention, energy, conservation and agriculture projects so disparate that this bond measure almost defies categorization. But it is still better to spend money today to prepare for climate change than to pay much more to respond in the future.

Proposition 5: Yes
Proposition 5 would get California closer to majority rule by lowering the threshold to pass local bond measures to 55% instead of 66.7%. We think it’s a fairer way to make spending and taxing decisions. Requiring supermajority support gives disproportionate power to the naysayers to decide the appropriate level of taxation and spending. Why should one-third of voters get to set priorities for an entire community?

Proposition 6: Yes
Proposition 6 will remove the language in the state Constitution that allows prisons to force incarcerated people to work and punish them when they refuse. If we want people to emerge from prison rehabilitated — and if we care about public safety, we should — that requires allowing them to access as many opportunities as possible to get an education, learn a skill and get treatment to best prepare them for a productive life.

Proposition 32: Yes
Proposition 32 would give the state’s lowest-paid workers a modest raise, setting the minimum wage to $18 an hour in January, up from the scheduled $16.50 under current law. Businesses with 25 or fewer workers would have until 2026 to start paying $18 an hour. Earning a decent wage shouldn’t be a privilege afforded to people who happen to work in a city that has a higher local minimum wage, and raising base pay statewide is more equitable than a patchwork of rules for different regions and industries.

Proposition 33: No
Proposition 33 would repeal a state law that restricts local governments’ ability to expand rent control. But it goes too far by including sweeping language that would prohibit the state from imposing any limits on rent controls set by cities and counties in the future, even if they stymie housing construction.

Proposition 34: No
AIDS Healthcare Foundation calls this a “revenge initiative,” and we agree. Proposition 34 would change the rules for healthcare providers in ways that seem designed to cut off the foundation’s tenant advocacy. Voters should emphatically reject Proposition 34 and send the message that they will not tolerate such a weaponization of the state’s citizen initiative process.

Proposition 35: No
Proposition 35 involves a tax on managed-care organizations, Medi-Cal reimbursement rates for medical providers, federal healthcare funding and the state budget. It’s complicated policymaking that is better suited to the full-time Legislature.

Proposition 36: No
Proposition 36 won’t end homelessness or crime waves. Existing laws already give police the tools to stop petty thieves and smash-and-grab robbers. Proposition 36 will only refill prisons, push more people to the streets and erase criminal justice reform progress. And it would suck up much of the funding Californians recently approved for mental health care and gut programs that have successfully slashed recidivism.

Adrin Nazarian for City Council District 2
A former Assembly member, Nazarian is deeply familiar with the district’s challenges and opportunities, and he has the relationships and knowledge to be an effective member of the council immediately.

Heather Hutt for City Council District 10
Hutt has so far done a respectable job in this position and we believe she can grow stronger and get better at it.

Ysabel Jurado for City Council District 14
Jurado is an energetic and idealistic tenants rights attorney who promises to turn a new page on the corruption and neglect that has plagued this district for years.

Charter Amendment DD: Yes
Charter Amendment DD would create an independent redistricting commission so that city’s politicians can’t draw their own lines and, in effect, choose their own voters to boost their reelection chances. This is a long overdue reform that will help restore public confidence in City Hall and encourage more people to participate, which is vital for a healthy democracy.

Charter Amendment LL: Yes
Charter Amendment LL would create an independent redistricting commission to draw the lines for LAUSD Board of Education districts. LAUSD students and their families deserve a school board that better represents them.

Charter Amendment HH: Yes
Charter Amendment HH is a hodgepodge of changes to the City Charter, including giving the city attorney the power to issue subpoenas in civil cases, giving the city controller access to contractors’ records for audits of how city funds are spent and requiring that two members of the Harbor Commission live near the Port of Los Angeles.

Charter Amendment II: Yes
Charter Amendment II would make small changes to the City Charter to improve operations such as clarifying that departments can sell food and merchandise to raise money for operations and allowing electronic signatures on certain government documents.

Charter Amendment ER: Yes
Charter Amendment ER would strengthen the Ethics Commission by giving it a guaranteed budget, increasing penalties and making it harder for elected officials to kill ethics reforms.

Charter Amendment FF: No
L.A. has a budget crisis. This is a pension giveaway to park rangers and officers at the Port and Los Angeles International Airport that the city can’t afford right now.

George Gascón for Los Angeles County District Attorney
Gascón has been unfairly cast as the cause of recent crime waves. He did in his first term exactly what he promised voters: Work to make the justice system more just.

Measure A: Yes
Measure A would repeal the Measure H quarter-cent sales tax early and replace it with a half-cent sales tax increase to pay for both housing and homelessness services. L.A. County’s homelessness crisis was decades in the making and it will take sustained effort and funding over time to resolve this horrible problem.

Measure E: Yes
Measure E would increase property taxes to pay for fire and emergency medical services in Santa Clarita, Lancaster and numerous smaller cities and unincorporated county communities that are part of the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County. It would pay for essential fire protection and allow the county Fire Department to save more lives by responding faster and with better paramedic services to treat grave injuries sustained, for example, in car collisions or natural disasters such as earthquakes and wildfires.

Measure G: Yes
Measure G would make county government more representative by expanding the Board of Supervisors, and more effective by adding checks and balances with an independently elected executive. These changes are long overdue.

Seat 1: Andra Hoffman
As director of career services and job placement at Glendale Community College, Hoffman helps students with transfers to four-year schools and with finding careers in their chosen field. She also teaches as an adjunct professor of political science at the college.

Seat 3: David Vela
Vela worked as a senior advisor to the state Employment Development Department, as a legislative aide to former Assemblymember Jackie Goldberg and as senior deputy to the late Gloria Molina when she was an L.A. County supervisor.

Seat 5: Nichelle Henderson
As the faculty advisor and clinical field supervisor with the Cal State TEACH teacher preparation program, Henderson instructs and mentors teachers in training. She also is active in the California Faculty Assn., where she is chapter vice president as well as chair of the political action committee.

Seat 7: Kelsey Iino
Iino has worked as a community college counselor for more than 15 years. She currently works with students who are involved in the fields of health science, athletics, creative arts and MANA (an Asian American Pacific Islander grant program) at El Camino College in Torrance. She holds the position of president of the El Camino College Federation of Teachers-AFT1388.

Sherlett Hendy Newbill for Los Angeles Unified School Board District 1
Newbill’s experience as a basketball coach, teacher and dean of students and her common-sense, independent approach to problem solving will serve her well on the LAUSD board.

Scott Schmerelson for Los Angeles Unified School Board District 3
Incumbent Schmerelson is the better of two strong candidates to keep the board stable and focused on what matters most.

Karla Griego for Los Angeles Unified School Board District 5
Griego, a special education teacher, has a clear and constructive agenda, valuable ground-level perspective and a demonstrated commitment to fighting district bureaucracy to fix unaddressed problems.

Measure US: Yes
Measure US is a $9-billion bond measure designed to help the Los Angeles Unified School District address the backlog of construction projects and the inevitable maintenance work that will arise in the coming years. Despite concerns that the district rushed this big bond to the ballot, it’s worth supporting because the needs are great and students deserve safe and welcoming schools.

Office No. 39: Steve Napolitano
Napolitano stands apart from most judicial candidates because of the diversity of his experience, which will give him a wider and more balanced perspective as a judge.

Office No. 48: Ericka J. Wiley
Before practicing law Wiley worked at a maternity home, taking teenage mothers to their appearances in dependency and delinquency court. She has spent most of her career in criminal defense but has varied experiences that give her a broader perspective.

Office No. 97: Sharon Ransom
Ransom, a deputy district attorney, has a breadth of personal and professional experience, and combines expertise in the law with a willingness to exercise discretion not merely to hold offenders accountable but to solve underlying problems, including addiction, mental illness and poverty.

Office No. 135: Steven Yee Mac
Mac, a deputy district attorney, has a breadth of experience and is a well-regarded trial attorney with the skill, demeanor and maturity to make an outstanding judge.

Office No. 137: Tracey M. Blount
Blount represents Los Angeles County in dependency court and has worked as a paralegal and appellate attorney. She is highly regarded for her skill and calm demeanor.

Jessica Caloza for State Assembly District 52
Caloza has extensive experience in local, state and federal government. She has strong track record on reproductive rights and would be an important pro-housing voice in Sacramento.

Mark Gonzalez for Assembly District 54
As a longtime Assembly staffer, Gonzalez has a deep on-the-ground understanding of the needs of residents across the district and is the best positioned to deliver results.

Sade Elhawary for State Assembly District 57
Elhawary, a community activist and educator, offers the clearest and most ambitious vision for uniting the district’s communities and improving the everyday lives of people struggling with California’s high cost of living, homelessness, crime and other pressing challenges.

Michelle Chambers for Senate District 35
Chambers, who worked for the state attorney general and is a former Compton City Council member, has shown a capacity to learn and to grow into a job and is more likely to be the representative the district needs.

Adam B. Schiff for U.S. Senate
Schiff is an experienced, practical, thoughtful and responsible lawmaker who will represent Californians well in Washington.

George Whitesides for the 27th Congressional District
Whitesides, a former aerospace executive and advocate on megafire protection, is a smart, pragmatic Democrat whose goal in Congress is to work with colleagues, regardless of party, to address problems facing Americans.

Laura Friedman for the 30th Congressional District
Friedman has been an innovative, courageous and effective state legislator in Sacramento, particularly on the environment, housing and transportation. Her record in Sacramento shows that she is more interested in building support for smart legislation than trolling rivals or participating in the polarizing, asinine culture wars.

Derek Tran for the 45th Congressional District
Tran is a consumer- and employee-rights attorney who is a believer in helping Americans gain quality, affordable education and healthcare — and respecting their freedom to make their own medical and family decisions.

Dave Min for the 47th Congressional District
Min is the only candidate in the race to replace Katie Porter who will defend reproductive rights and fight for the environment.

Opinion

Editorial: L.A. Times’ judicial endorsements explained

Confused about judges on the March 5 ballot? Here’s a guide to how and why you end up voting for Los Angeles Superior Court judges.

Feb. 26, 2024

The editorial board endorses selectively, choosing the most consequential races in which to make recommendations.