In April, the 43rd District will hold a special election to fill the state assembly seat Paul Krekorian just left. The election will be open, with no party primaries. If no candidate gets 51% of the vote, the two candidates with the highest number of votes will go on to a run-off election in June.

In June, all California candidates running in political primaries in advance of the November election will be on the ballot. If two 43rd district candidates are in a run-off in June, their names might very well be on the ballot a second time, as primary candidates in their political parties for the November election.

O’Shaughnessy has been in touch with the California Secretary of State on this issue. Further clarifications will be posted on this blog.

Voters authorized the Citizens Redistricting Commission in the November 2008 General Election. Before that, California lawmakers drew the boundaries themselves every ten years. The 2010 commission will be the very first commission made up of citizens from across the state.

We Draw the Lines (www.WeDrawtheLines.ca.gov) has details and links to application documents and procedures. The panel reviewing the applications was chosen by lottery; the three reviewers were announced November 16.

Applications will be accepted from December 15, 2009 through February 12, 2010.

More taxes aren’t the issue. What California needs is more taxpayers relative to government workers and users of government services. There are not enough taxpayers in California to support the level of services, wages, benefits, and programs our state government has decided to provide.

Fox & Hounds opinion has a similar viewpoint, focused on business development:

Activists who want to lower the two-thirds vote and raise taxes will argue that a low turnout election really doesn’t represent the will of California’s people. Expect to see tax raising initiatives aimed for the general election in 2010 along with a measure to lower the two-thirds vote.

Voters rejected a move five years ago to reduce the two-thirds standard and their attitude on the issue seems more set in stone today. I doubt it will soften much in another year.

So, if raising fees, seeking tax increases via the ballot, and attacking the two-thirds vote requirement must not happen next, what should happen next?

Besides implementing restructuring that has been addressed by the California Performance Review and other studies over the years, the legislature should do everything it can to spur economic activity and create jobs. That’s how we can get out of this mess. Encourage the entrepreneur to lead the way.

University and State reveals that the majority of California voters want spending cuts instead of higher taxes, and insist on the two-thirds majority vote requirement preventing simple majorities from raising taxes. The problem, according to this blog post, is that the majority also opposes “cutbacks in ten of twelve major categories of state spending, including the three largest – the public schools, health care and higher education.” In other words, ordinary Californians don’t know exactly how to cut the budget, or they expect (as they well should) their elected representatives to make the tough budget choices.

Matthew Yglesias includes the two-thirds requirement in his list of California’s political and financial problems. His mention of population as a source of “dysfunction”, however, reveals the real problem: high demand for services that can’t be met with reasonable tax rates.

The crux of the matter, as best I can tell from the East Coast, is that California has a set of political institutions that don’t work. The 2/3 rule in the state legislation doesn’t make sense, the profligate use of the initiative process doesn’t work, the combination of the two is disastrous. There seem to me to be other sources of institutional dysfunction in California (LA County is almost twice as big as the country’s second-largest, and five of the fifteen top population counties form a contiguous belt in southern California) but those are the big obvious ones.

GHCC hosts the first of these forums tomorrow:

Glendale Homeowners’ Coordinating Council City Candidates Forum
Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 7-9 p.m. (Doors open at 6:30 p.m.)
Glendale Central Library Auditorium

GHCC connects 20 neighborhood groups throughout the city, offering a vital information and support network. This council and its members are a great resource for Glendale residents, and the forums are a great way to get to know people in the community and deal with neighborhood concerns. Information about each member group will be available at the GHCC forum.

Additional candidate forums hosted by GHCC member groups are listed in this blog’s Glendale Community Calendar section, and here below:

Royal Canyon Property Owners Association City Council Candidates’ Forum
Saturday, February 21, 2009, Noon-2 p.m.
Oakmont Country Club

Chevy Chase Homeowners Association Candidates Forum
March 11, 2009, 6-9 p.m.
Chevy Chase Country Club

Verdugo Woodlands Homeowners Candidates Forum
March 27, 2009, 7-8:30 p.m.
First Congregational Church, 2001 Canada Blvd.

Northwest Glendale Homeowners Association City Council Candidates’ Forum
April 2, 2009, 7-9 p.m.
Brand Park Auditorium

There are several other homeowner groups, including Adams Hill, College Hills, Far North Glendale, Montecito Park, and others. For a complete list, go to the GHCC forum tomorrow and stop at the information table.