there's three county measures on tuesday's ballot for los angeles county. (i can't find the measures online at the official site. you'll have to pull up the sample ballot.)

amendment a would establish term limits for the board of supervisors, the sheriff, and the district attorney. the limit would be three terms. since i'm opposed to term limits, i'll be voting no on this.

amendment b would establish term limits only for the board of supervisors. again, since i'm opposed to term limits, i'll be voting no.

amendment c would increase the sheriff's department by adding one assistant sheriff and four division chiefs. (the additional assistant sheriff and two of the chiefs would be non-sworn and appointed from outside the sheriff's office.) it seems odd that this is on the ballot (don't we elect a board of supervisors for this?), but i'll vote yes.

the la times says to vote yes on amendments s a and b, and hasn't taken a stand on amendment c.

in county elections, i'm already planning to ignore the superior court elections, and zev yaroslavsky is running unopposed for supervisor in my district, so that just leaves assessor and sheriff.

for sheriff, every indication i've seen is that the current sheriff, lee baca, is doing a fine job. so he'll get my vote.

the current assessor (who just served a partial term), rick auerbach, also appears to be doing a bang-up job. he's got my vote, too. (although i admire the tenacity of john lower taxes loew, who legally changed his name to include “lower taxes.”)

la weekly endorsed both baca and auerbach, and recommended voting yes on all three county measures.

« march 3, 2002 10:54pm march 4, 2002 12:56pm »