Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2408-3349CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Monday, October 21, 2024 Council Chambers & Hybrid 5:30 PM     Agenda Item     14.Adoption of City Council Positions on State and Local Measures Presented to Palo Alto Voters on the November 5, 2024 Ballot; CEQA status – not a project Presentation CITY COUNCIL Staff Report From: City Clerk and City Manager Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Meeting Date: October 21, 2024 Report #:2408-3349 TITLE Adoption of City Council Positions on State and Local Measures Presented to Palo Alto Voters on the November 5, 2024 Ballot; CEQA status – not a project RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council review and discuss the November 5, 2024 state and local ballot measures and consider adoption of formal positions as relevant to the City of Palo Alto or desired by the City Council. BACKGROUND The Secretary of State has qualified ten measures for the November 5, 2024 statewide ballot. There is one local ballot measure in Palo Alto. There are no other measures from other relevant local jurisdictions (such as Santa Clara County, Palo Alto Unified School District, or Valley Transportation Authority) that will be presented to Palo Alto voters this year. This report summarizes the ballot measure that will be presented to Palo Alto voters on the November 5, 2024 ballot and recommends positions for the City Council to consider adopting. The positions are intended to provide information for Palo Alto voters to consider when casting their votes. The City Council considered taking positions on ballot measures on the November 3, 20201 and November 8, 20222 ballots. Townsend Public Affairs, the City’s legislative consultant, prepared Attachment A which summarizes the statewide measures and includes potential local impacts of each measure. The staff-recommended positions are based on the City Council-approved 2024 legislative guidelines3. The legislative guidelines reflect and activate the City Council’s priorities. The legislative guidelines follow one or more of the following four foundational principles: 1 City Council, 9/14/2020; Agenda Item 11, Staff Report #11550: https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=80624 2 City Council, 10/3/2022; Agenda Item #10; Staff Report #14787: https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=82062 3 City of Palo Alto’s 2024 Federal and State Legislative Guidelines: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/city-manager/legislation/adopted-2024-legislative- guidelines.pdf 1. Promote local fiscal sustainability 2. Support funding opportunities 3. Preserve local control 4. Protect the health and safety of the community Staff recommended positions only where the legislative guidelines clearly apply. At your discretion, Council may take positions on these or other ballot measures. ANALYSIS The below section summarizes the November 5, 2024 statewide and local ballot measures. Additional information on statewide and local measures, including arguments in favor and against, impartial analyses, and full text may be found at the California Secretary of State’s Official Voter Information Guide4 or City’s ballot measure page5. Statewide Ballot Measures Proposition Secretary of State Official Summary Staff Recommended Position Proposition 2 •Authorizes $10 billion in state general obligation bonds for repair, upgrade, and construction of facilities at K–12 public schools (including charter schools) and community colleges. •Provides funding for new facilities, to improve school health and safety conditions at existing facilities, and for classroom upgrades (e.g., science, engineering, transitional kindergarten, and vocational classrooms). •Expands eligibility for financial hardship grants for small and disadvantaged school districts. •Provides higher percentage of state matching funds to schools demonstrating greatest need. •Requires public hearings and performance audits. •Appropriates money from General Fund to repay bonds. No recommended position. Proposition 3 •Amends California Constitution to recognize fundamental right to marry, regardless of sex or race. •Removes language in California Constitution stating that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Support. Applicable guidelines: Support policies that promote equity. 4 California Secretary of State November 5, 2024 Official Voter Information Guide – Propositions: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/ 5 City of Palo Alto November 5, 2024 Ballot Measure D: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/City- Clerk/Municipal-Elections/November-5-2024-Ballot-Measure-D Proposition Secretary of State Official Summary Staff Recommended Position Proposition 4 •Authorizes $10 billion in state general obligation bonds for various projects to reduce climate risks and impacts: $3.8 billion for safe drinking water and water resilience; $1.95 billion for wildfire prevention and extreme heat mitigation; $1.9 billion for protection of natural lands, parks, and wildlife; $1.2 billion for protection of coastal lands, bays, and oceans; $850 million for clean energy; and $300 million for agriculture. •Prioritizes projects benefitting disadvantaged communities. •Requires annual audits. •Appropriates money from General Fund to repay bonds. Support. Applicable guidelines: Promotes the use of renewable resources, water conservation, and the flexible use of existing resources; Supports the protection of our natural environment, including open space, trees/tree canopy, and biodiversity. Proposition 5 •Allows local bonds for affordable housing for low- and middle-income Californians, or for public infrastructure including roads, water, and fire protection to be approved by 55% of voters, rather than current two-thirds approval requirement. •Bonds must include specified accountability requirements, including citizens oversight committee and annual independent financial and performance audits. •Allows local governments to assess property taxes above 1% to repay affordable housing and infrastructure bonds if approved by 55% of voters instead of current two-thirds approval requirement. Support. Applicable guidelines: Supports lowering or maintaining of voter thresholds for local revenue measures. Proposition 6 •Amends the California Constitution to remove the current constitutional provision that allows jails and prisons to impose involuntary servitude to punish crime (i.e., forcing incarcerated persons to work). •Prohibits the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from punishing incarcerated persons for refusing a work assignment. Allows incarcerated persons to voluntarily accept work assignments in exchange for credit to reduce their sentences. No recommended position. Proposition 32 •California's minimum wage is currently $16 per hour. This measure increases that minimum, as follows: o Employers with 26 or more employees would pay $17 hourly for the remainder of 2024 and $18 hourly beginning on January 1, 2025. o Employers with 25 or fewer employees would pay $17 hourly beginning January 1, 2025, and $18 hourly beginning January 1, 2026. •Thereafter, as existing law provides, the minimum wage annually adjusts for inflation. •In addition to the generally applicable minimum wage described above, current laws establish a higher minimum wage in specified industries. This measure does not amend those laws. No recommended position. Proposition Secretary of State Official Summary Staff Recommended Position Proposition 33 •Current state law (the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995) generally prevents cities and counties from limiting the initial rental rate that landlords may charge to new tenants in all types of housing, and from limiting rent increases for existing tenants in (1) residential properties that were first occupied after February 1, 1995; (2) single- family homes; and (3) condominiums. •This measure would repeal that state law and would prohibit the state from limiting the ability of cities and counties to maintain, enact, or expand residential rent- control ordinances. No recommended position. Proposition 34 •Requires health care providers meeting specified criteria to spend 98% of revenues from federal discount prescription drug program on direct patient care. •Applies only to health care providers that: (1) spent over $100,000,000 in any ten-year period on anything other than direct patient care; and (2) operated multifamily housing reported to have at least 500 high-severity health and safety violations. •Penalizes noncompliance with spending restrictions by revoking health care licenses and tax-exempt status. •Permanently authorizes state to negotiate Medi-Cal drug prices on statewide basis. No recommended position. Proposition 35 •Makes permanent the existing tax on managed health care insurance plans (currently set to expire in 2026), which, if approved by the federal government, provides revenues to pay for health care services for low-income families with children, seniors, disabled persons, and other Medi-Cal recipients. •Requires revenues to be used only for specified Medi-Cal services, including primary and specialty care, emergency care, family planning, mental health, and prescription drugs. •Prohibits revenues from being used to replace existing Medi-Cal funding. •Caps administrative expenses and requires independent audits of programs receiving funding. No recommended position. Proposition 36 •Allows felony charges for possessing certain drugs and for thefts under $950—both currently chargeable only as misdemeanors—with two prior drug or two prior theft convictions, as applicable. Defendants who plead guilty to felony drug possession and complete treatment can have charges dismissed. •Increases sentences for other specified drug and theft crimes. •Increased prison sentences may reduce savings that currently fund mental health and drug treatment programs, No recommended position. Proposition Secretary of State Official Summary Staff Recommended Position K-12 schools, and crime victims; any remaining savings may be used for new felony treatment program. Palo Alto Ballot Measure Proposition Ballot Question Staff Recommended Position Measure D Undedicates a 0.33-acre portion of existing parkland in El Camino Park for the purpose of creating a new road primarily for transit vehicles linking the Palo Alto Transit Center with El Camino Real Support. Applicable guidelines: supports expansion and/or maintaining of public transit options throughout Palo Alto, especially funding for transit. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT There is no financial impact associated with adopting support or oppose positions on ballot measures. The City Council annually budgets for legislative advocacy services, and these efforts are led by staff in the City Clerk’s Office with stakeholder support across departments, especially the City Manager’s Office. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Staff from multiple departments are involved in the City’s legislative advocacy process. Staff meet regularly with the City’s legislative consultants to review pending state and federal activity, including legislation, grant opportunities, and ballot measures with potential impacts to the City. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City’s legislative advocacy activities are not a project under section 15378(b)(25) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (administrative activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical change in the environment). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Townsend Public Affairs November 2024 Ballot Initiatives Memo APPROVED BY: Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk Staff: Christine Prior, Deputy City Clerk Page 1 of 7 M E M O R A N D U M To: City of Palo Alto Honorable Mayor Stone and Members of the City Council Ed Shikada, City Manager From: Townsend Public Affairs Niccolo De Luca, Vice President Carlin Shelby, Senior Associate Date: October 8, 2024 Subject: November 2024 Ballot Initiatives OVERVIEW On Tuesday, November 5, 2024, millions across the nation will cast their ballot in the General Election. Not only will voters be weighing in on nationwide races such as the Presidential and Congressional elections, but Californians will also be voting on Legislative offices, statewide ballot measures, as well as local offices and measures. In order for ballot initiatives, referendums, and constitutional amendments to qualify for the November 2024 ballot, measures had to collect sufficient signatures, or receive legislative approval, prior to June 27. Notably, the 2024 General Election ballot featured a number of last- minute changes, including intervention from the California Supreme Court to pull the Government Transparency and Taxpayer Protection Act from the ballot entirely, a series of deals with proponents of qualified ballot measures to remove them in exchange for legislative action, and the inclusion of two last-minute statewide bond proposals for climate and school facilities funding. Following the race to ballot finalization, the official November 2024 ballot will include 10 statewide ballot measures, ranging from statewide bond proposals, local rent control authority, a Proposition 47 referendum, and a statewide minimum wage increase. Below is a summary of statewide voter initiatives, as well as additional information related to those items that may impact local public agencies. STATEWIDE VOTER INITIATIVES: ALL INITIATIVES Below is a comprehensive list of the 10 eligible initiatives that will be on the November 2024 ballot, in numerical order: Proposition 2: Issues $10 billion in bonds to fund construction and modernization of public K-14 education facilities. Proposition 3: Repeals Proposition 8 and establishes a right to marry. Page 2 of 7 Proposition 4: Issues $10 billion in bonds to fund state and local parks, environmental protection projects, water infrastructure projects, energy projects, and flood protection projects. STATEWIDE VOTER INITIATIVES WITH LOCAL AGENCY IMPACTS The following summaries correspond to initiatives that could have potential impacts on local public agencies. This list is not comprehensive of all measures that will appear on the statewide General Election ballot. PROPOSITION 2: Kindergarten Through Grade 12 Schools and Local Community College Public Education Facilities Modernization, Repair, and Safety Bond Act of 2024 Origin: Legislature – AB 247 Summary: If passed, this initiative issues $10 billion in bonds to fund the construction and modernization of public education facilities, with the following breakdown: •$4 billion for the modernization of school facilities, with at least 10% being reserved for small schools and $115 million for testing/remediation of lead in water •$3 billion for new construction of school facilities, with at least 10% being reserved for small school districts •$1.5 billion for community college facilities •$600 million for charter school facilities •$600 million for career technical education programs Page 3 of 7 Potential Local Agency Impacts: The construction and rehabilitation of public K-12 facilities are funded by a combination of state and local general obligation (GO) bonds, developer's fees and local assessments such as Mello-Roos community facilities districts. If approved by voters, the bond funds could work to lower developer fees and local assessments, thus decreasing the cost of building housing. Support and Opposition: Supporters of Proposition 2 include the California Federation of Teachers, the Californian Labor Federation, the California Republican Party, the Californian Democratic Party, and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, among others. The Yes on Proposition 2 Campaign has raised $5.7 million in campaign funds. Opponents include the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, with no official campaign PAC funding raised. PROPOSITION 4: The Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024 Origin: Legislature – SB 867 Summary: If passed, this initiative issues $10 billion in bonds to fund state and local parks, environmental protection projects, water infrastructure projects, energy projects, and flood protection projects. With a general breakdown as follows: •$3.8 billion for safe drinking water, drought, flood, and water resilience programs •$1.5 billion for wildfire and forest resilience •$450 million for extreme heat mitigation •$1.2 billion for biodiversity programs •$300 million for sustainable, climate-smart farms and working lands programs •$1.2 billion for coastal resilience programs •$700 million for park creation and outdoor access •$850 million for clean air programs •<$20 million for administrative costs •Up to 10% of funds within each funding pot must be allocated to severely disadvantaged communities Potential Local Agency Impacts: Proposition 4 includes funding for numerous programs that local agencies are eligible to apply for, including, but not limited to, park and open space, water storage and conveyance, wildfire and forest resilience, and coastal programs. If passed by voters, these funds would supplement the state’s budget and provide additional insurance against potential budget deficit issues that could lead to spending reductions across climate-related accounts. Support and Opposition: Supporters of Proposition 4 include SEIU California, the California Democratic Party, California Professional Firefighters, the California Teachers Association, and the California Municipal Utilities Association, with $1.2 million raised in campaign funds. Opponents include the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Republican Party, and several Republican state legislators, with no campaign funds raised. Page 4 of 7 PROPOSITION 5: Local Government Financing: Affordable Housing and Public Infrastructure: Voter Approval Legislature – ACA 1, as Amended by ACA 10 This initiative reduces voter threshold requirements from 2/3 to 55% for general obligation bonds financing affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, or public infrastructure, and any associated ad valorem taxes needed to pay the interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness. This measure defines public infrastructure to include facilities for the delivery of public services, including education, police, fire protection, parks, recreation, open space, emergency medical, public health, libraries, flood protection, streets or highways, public transit, railroad, airports, and seaports. Additionally, facilities or infrastructure that are energy-related, communications-related, water-related, or wastewater-related also would qualify to be considered at the lower vote threshold. This measure would cap the maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property at 1% of the property’s value. By reducing the voter threshold for the passage of local bond measures, Proposition 5 will make it easier for local agencies to raise bond revenues. Investment initiatives often fail to reach the legal requirement of a 2/3 vote, a threshold under which opponents’ votes count twice as much as those community members who support infrastructure investments. Current law authorizes school districts to pass bond measures at a 55% vote threshold. Proposition 5 would create voter threshold parity between school districts and cities, counties, and special districts. Notably, the provisions of Proposition 5 impact bond measures on the same ballot. If Proposition 5 receives a majority vote, the 55% threshold could be applied to major revenue measures such as the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) $20 billion affordable housing bond, thus increasing its chance of passage. Supporters of Proposition 5 include the California Democratic Party, the California State Building and Construction Trades Council, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, California YIMBY, and the California Labor Federation, with $5 million in campaign funds raised. Proposition 5 opponents include the California Chamber of Commerce, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Republican Party, and Catalysts for Local Control, with $29.7 million in campaign funds raised. Citizen-led initiative This constitutional amendment increases the state minimum wage to $18.00 per hour by 2026 for all employers, and thereafter adjusts the rate annually by increases to the cost of living. Existing law requires annual increases to California’s minimum wage until it has reached $15.00 per hour for all businesses on January 1, 2023. This measure extends these annual increases ($1.00 per year) until minimum wage—currently, $15.00 per hour for businesses with 26 or more employees, and $14.00 per hour for smaller businesses—reaches $18.00 per hour. Thereafter, as existing law requires, the minimum wage will annually adjust for inflation. In periods of decreased economic activity, or General Fund deficit, the Governor may suspend the annual increase up to two times, thereby extending the timeline for reaching $18.00 per hour. Page 5 of 7 Potential Local Agency Impacts: Unclear change in annual state and local tax revenues, likely between a loss of a couple billion dollars and a gain of a few hundred million dollars. An increase in annual state and local government costs is likely between half a billion dollars and a few billion dollars. Support and Opposition: Supporters of Proposition 32 include the California Labor Federation, the Working Families Party California, the California Democratic Party, and the League of Women Voters of California, with over $609,000 in campaign funds raised. Opponents of Proposition 32 include the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Grocers Association, the California Republican Party, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, with $65,000 in campaign funds raised. PROPOSITION 33: Expands Local Governments’ Authority to Enact Rent Control on Residential Property Origin: Citizen-led initiative Summary: This constitutional amendment repeals the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act. Potential Local Agency Impacts: According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), the proposed initiative could have economic ramifications for state and local revenues, particularly affecting property taxes, sales taxes, and income taxes. Page 6 of 7 Income tax payments by landlords are also expected to fluctuate. Some landlords may experience decreases in their income tax payments due to reduced rental income from lower rents. Conversely, landlords could see potential increases in income tax payments over time as they benefit from reduced expenses related to property acquisition, such as mortgage interest and property taxes. However, the net effect on state income tax revenues remains uncertain and will depend on various factors. Overall, the measure is likely to result in a reduction in state and local revenues, with property taxes expected to be the most significantly affected. The extent of these revenue losses will depend on how communities respond to the measure, particularly in terms of expanding or implementing rent control laws. Additionally, local governments may face increased costs associated with administering new or expanded rent control policies, potentially funded through fees imposed on owners of rental housing. Support and Opposition: Supporters of Proposition 33 include the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the California Democratic Party, the California Nurses Association, UNITE HERE Local 11, and Consumer Watchdog, with $43.8 million in campaign funds raised. Proposition 33 opponents include the California Small Business Association, the California Council of Carpenters, California YIMBY, the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Republican Party, and several Democratic state legislators, with over $119 million in campaign funds raised. PROPOSITION 36: Allows Felony Charges and Increases Sentences for Certain Drug and Theft Crimes Origin: Citizen-led Initiative Summary: If approved by voters, this constitutional amendment would increase penalties for certain drug crimes by increasing sentence lengths and level of crime. The proposition would add fentanyl to the list of drugs that would warrant a felony charge if an individual possesses one of the listed drugs and a loaded firearm. The punishment for this crime is up to four years in prison, whereas currently possessing fentanyl and a loaded firearm is punishable by up to one year in jail. This initiative would increase sentences based on the quantity of certain drugs sold illegally. The measure would also require individuals who receive increased sentences because of this to serve their entire sentence in state prison, regardless of their criminal history. The proposition would increase penalties for certain theft crimes. For crimes where money or property worth $950 or less is stolen, the initiative would make the crime punishable as a felony for individuals who have two or more prior theft-related convictions. The initiative would make the punishment up to three years in jail or prison, depending on the individual’s criminal history, an increase from the current six months. The initiative would also increase sentences based on the amount of property stolen. Potential Local Agency Impacts: According to the LAO, the proposed measure is expected to have significant implications for county jail populations and community supervision. It includes provisions that would shift certain sentences from county jails to state prisons, reducing local jail populations. Conversely, it introduces changes that could extend jail time for lower-level theft crimes, potentially increasing the number of people under county supervision. Moreover, the measure is anticipated to increase the number of individuals sentenced to prison, subsequently increasing the population under Post-Release Community Supervision (PRCS) upon their release. Overall, this could lead to a net annual increase of thousands in the county Page 7 of 7 correctional population. Financially, the growth in county correctional populations is projected to incur additional costs, albeit partially offset by reduced expenses as individuals are shifted to state prisons. This net increase in county correctional costs is estimated to be potentially tens of millions of dollars annually. Support and Opposition: Supporters of Proposition 36 include Walmart, Target, Home Depot, the California District Attorneys Association, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, the California Chamber of Commerce, and the California Republican Party, with $14.7 million in campaign funds raised. Proposition 36 opponents include Governor Gavin Newsom, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, ACLU of Northern California, and the California Democratic Party, with $3.7 million in campaign funds raised. October 21, 2024 www.cityofpaloalto.org 2024 Ballot Measures Discussion and Possible Positions Mahealani Ah Yun, City ClerkChristine Prior, Deputy City ClerkChantal Cotton Gaines, Deputy City ManagerCarly Shelby, Senior Assoc., Townsend Public Affairs 1 •City Council considered adoption of formal positions on state and local ballot initiatives presented to Palo Alto voters in 2020 and 2022 •Purpose: Provide information to Palo Altans to consider when voting and offer opportunity for City Council discussion •Staff recommended positions are based on the City Council adopted 2024 Legislative Guidelines Background 2 1 Local Measure •Measure D – Quarry Road Connection Project; Recommended Position: Support November 5, 2024 Recommended Positions 3 10 Statewide Measures November 5, 2024 Recommended Positions Proposition Recommended Position Prop 2 – Education Bond None Prop 3 – Marriage Equality Support Prop 4 – Climate Bond Support Prop 5 – Housing Finance Voter Approval Support Prop 6 – Slavery None Prop 32 – Minimum Wage None Prop 33 – Local Rent Control None Prop 34 – Limit Major Healthcare Group’s Non-Patient Spending None Prop 35 – Medi-Cal Healthcare Services Funding None Prop 36 – Proposition 47 Reform None 4 Ballot Initiatives •Repeals unenforceable provision of the California Constitution stating that the only marriage valid or recognized in the state is that between a man and woman. Proposition 3: Marriage equality (ACA 5, Low) •Prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude in any form, including as punishment for a crime. Proposition 6: Slavery (ACA 8, Willson). •Current law requires annual increases to the state minimum wage until it has reached $15.00 per hour for all businesses. This measure extends the annual $1.00 increases until minimum wage reaches $18.00 per hour for all businesses. The measure allows the Governor to suspend the annual increase up to two times, in periods of General Fund deficit. Proposition 32: Minimum wage. 5 Ballot Initiatives •Repeals the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act and prohibits the state from limiting the right of cities and counties to maintain, enact, or expand residential rent-control ordinances. Proposition 33: Local Rent Control •Limits how certain healthcare providers spend revenues from a federal prescription drug program. If a healthcare provider has spent over $100 million in any 10-year period on things besides direct patient care and runs a multifamily housing with more than 500 “high-severity health and safety violations”, then the provider must spend 98% of its revenues from a federal prescription drug program on direct patient care. Proposition 34: Effort to limit major healthcare group’s non-patient spending 6 Ballot Initiatives •Allows felony charges for possessing certain drugs (and adds fentanyl to the list of felony substances), and for thefts under $950, with two prior drug or two prior theft convictions. Defendants who plead guilty to felony drug possession and complete treatment can have charges dismissed. Increases sentences for other specified drug and theft crimes. Proposition 36: Proposition 47 Reform 7 Bonds $10 Billion for Construction and Renovation of Schools •$8,500,000,000 allocated for elementary and secondary educational facilities, and •$1,500,000,000 allocated for community college facilities Proposition 2: Education Bond • $10 billion to finance projects relating to safe drinking water, extreme weather resilience, coastal resilience, nature-based climate solutions, climate-smart, sustainable, and resilient farms, ranches, and working lands, state park creation, and clean air programs. Proposition 4: Climate Bond 8 Other Fiscal Tools on the Ballot •Allows a city, county, or special district, with 55% voter approval, to incur bonded indebtedness to fund projects for affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, or public infrastructure. Proposition 5: Housing finance - voter approval (ACA 1/ ACA 10, Aguiar-Curry). •Makes existing MCO tax permanent, currently set to expire in 2026, which the state uses to pay for health care services for groups covered by the Medi-Cal program. Proposition 35: Provides permanent funding for Medi-Cal health care services. 9 City Council review and discuss the November 5, 2024 state and local ballot measures and consider adoption of formal positions as relevant to the City of Palo Alto or desired by the City Council Recommendation