Welcome to our

March 2024 Primary Election Guide

 Candidates

  • We’re going with our local politician here as Elward has proven to be a sound advocate for progressive politics. Of special note is that ‘big oil’ (Valero, Phillips 66, Marathon, and Chevron) have contributed $204,536 directly against Elward’s campaign, with an unknown amount spent on campaign firms. No other candidate has garnered that many funds in opposition, and none from these interests. Oftentimes we learn a lot about who someone is by who is funding their opposition. Vote for Elward!

  • This is amended from the original recommendation to write in Aaron Bushnell as the Sonoma County Registrar of Voters will not accept such a write in and thus the political impact of the action is negated.

    Kangas has good progressive policies on some social justice issues and the environment. Clearly not an insider like Huffman, he could be a breath of fresh air.

  • Engdahl is a breath of fresh air in the sad and stilted room that is Mike Thompson. At some point voters will have to do away with the old guard and welcome the new, and Engdahl is the perfect opportunity to do just so. Whereas Thompson is a basic, exhausted, silhouette of a politician who seems more at home in a wax museum than Sonoma County’s community, Engdahl brings a Bernie Sanders-esque grassroots support that is most welcome.

  • We are all in on Yurok Tribe vice-chair Frankie Myers for this primary. Bringing an absolutely needed perspective to an otherwise incredibly bland swath of middle-of-the-road candidates, Myers is a proven leader in the tribal community and capable of bridging a gap that is in desperate need of work. Vote for Myers!

  • Medina is a down to earth public servant who will bring much needed change to the tired cycle of local politicians. Sonoma County desperately needs more Latinx representation in our government and Medina has a long history of good work in his community.

  • Hopkins is a solid supervisor who represents many progressive issues well, though we would like to see her reach further on issues of social justice.

  • This is less of an endorsement of Berrey than a skeptical look at Burk. The latter has endorsements from most of the prominent figures, including distasteful local law enforcement.

  • We strongly endorse Omar Figueroa for Judge as he has proven himself to be a fair and compassionate legal mind. In addition to his years of experience and proven decision making, his election would continue to bring much needed diversity to local judicial offices.

 Propositions and Measures

  • Ultimately this is a poorly executed attempt at addressing the housing crisis through the veil of mental health, and it fails. The League of Women Voters has a concise argument against as well as an unbiased explanation for those looking for more information. Similarly, Disability Rights California makes another good argument for why this proposition falls short. In our view, the item at hand (mental health crises in the unsheltered community) stems from structural issues the blame for which fall on the state and corporate actors, not individuals experiencing houselessness. This proposition remedies few structural issues while potentially increasing state violence through carceral punishment and criminalization. Vote NO!

  • This is a $89 parcel tax renewal set to continue for eight years to fund local schools. While a progressive income tax would be ideal, a parcel tax is better than a sales tax and the funds are needed.

  • The same as Measure A, only this would be the first year instead of renewning an existing tax.

  • This is the school district levying a property tax to fund the issuance of bonds to pay for local school improvements.

  • Essentially the same as Measure C.

  • Similar to Measure B, only for elementary schools.

  • Essentially the same as Measure C.

  • Pros to this measure:

    • It may fund much needed wildfire mitigation and fuel reduction.

    • It may fund the hiring of firefighters.

    • It may fund the improvement of emergency services, disaster warning, and trainings.

    Cons to this measure:

    • None of the above pros are a given. There is no firm verbiage in the text that states what must happen with these funds.

    • It is a regressive sales tax, and not a small one. Unlike property tax, parcel tax, or (heaven forbid) a progressive income tax, sales taxes hurt the poorest the most.

    • The tax targets those who aren’t at fault. Sonoma County is highly parcelized, and the majority of private wildland property is owned by—surprise—wealthy people and corporations. Yet they will feel the hurt of this tax the least, and benefit from its services the most.

    • The proposed oversight is murky. The fire bureaucracy gets to appoint 5 of the 11 oversight committee members, while the public only submits names for 1, and fire labor only 2.

    • It has no end date. This is a sales tax that will continually increase the pain of the poor commensurate with inflation until it is repealed by vote. History shows us that this rarely happens.