Opinion: Prop. 43 threatens Californians’ freedoms to solve their own communities’ problems

Proposition 43 would place a nearly insurmountable roadblock preventing citizens across the state from placing any measure on the ballot that asks their neighbors to support additional funding for community needs. It would require that such measures receive not just majority support, but that they receive a “yes” vote from two out of every three voters.

That would mean, for instance, that voters in Sonoma County — home in the last decade to two of the most destructive wildfires in state history — would have been thwarted two years ago when nearly 62% of them supported a local half-cent sales tax to improve their fire readiness.

Right now, on this very ballot, Los Angeles firefighters are asking voters for a half-cent sales tax to hire more firefighters after staffing levels in the city have remained flat since the 1960s.

Across the state, Californians have used citizen-sponsored ballot initiatives to improve their communities. Confronted by a housing crisis that has priced out working families, some have proposed construction of affordable housing. Alarmed by hospital closures, others have put forth plans to save emergency rooms. Still others have stepped up to enhance library services and improve parks, or to strengthen 911 emergency services.

Each community has different needs and priorities. California towns and cities have come together to strengthen their public safety needs. They have collectively voted to increase funding for local fire protection — to conduct more aggressive wildfire prevention, to beef up emergency response teams, to provide more protective gear and update fire engines, to ensure more sustainable and life-saving fire response capabilities.

These citizen initiatives are then put to a vote of the community. If a majority approves, a small tax is levied to raise funds to address these specific needs.

Since 2018, voters have passed more than two dozen such dedicated-use measures by majority vote. Prop. 43 would have blocked every one of these communities from making the improvements they so clearly desired.

Under Prop. 43, it’s clear that the powerful few would be protected at the expense of everyone else.

It must also be noted what Prop. 43 does not do. It does not lower taxes for anybody. Passing it would have exactly zero effect on anyone’s cost of living.

The motivation behind Prop. 43 is clear. It’s the same motivation that is behind efforts to restrict mail voting and otherwise rig the system to prevent everyday citizens from having a say in their own government.

The summer has come and gone, and for those of us in my profession it signals a heightened state of readiness. In these days of hotter temperatures and drier wildland fuels, the idea of a “fire season” is out of date. As Californians have painfully learned, the threat of destructive fires is now a year-round thing.

Still, there remains something extra worrisome about the months of early fall, before the winter rain comes and as the autumn winds are about to kick in. It means firefighters must be more prepared. It is what we and our communities do before the fires that will most protect us when they come.

In Sonoma County, in Los Angeles County, in Calaveras County and elsewhere, voters have banded together to make their communities safer. That has been their choice. And now, in this election season, along comes a ballot proposition that would effectively take that choice away for every California community.

Prop. 43 is a gimmick backed by big corporations and developers who don’t want to ever have to pay their fair share. It will also greatly undermine our ability to keep our communities safe.

Californians must not fall for it. Vote “no” on Prop. 43. Keep the power where it belongs: with you and your neighbors.

Darrell Roberts is president of California Professional Firefighters and serves as an active-duty battalion chief with the Chula Vista Fire Department.