Voters Will See Sex, Drugs, Cows on Ballots

Along with deciding conventional ballot issues Tuesday, such as public safety, governance and taxes, voters in some California cities will consider initiatives dealing with sex, drugs and the fate of a 43-foot-tall cross.

Some voters will even weigh in on the future of movie theaters. And cows.

These are just a handful of the local ballot measures that will be seeking the blessing of voters, who experts say have mastered the art of using citizen initiatives to show their political clout and underscore their local autonomy.

“They allow citizens to legislate directly when unresponsive and unrepresentative elected officials, like boulders in the stream, block progress and thwart popular will,” said Rich DeLeon, a political science professor at San Francisco State.

Local initiatives are more numerous, more likely to qualify and more likely to become law than statewide initiatives, according to a recent study by Tracy Gordon, a research fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. And Californians are more prone to use them than anyone else in the country.

It’s not surprising, DeLeon said, that some quirky measures are on ballots in the Bay Area. “They have a very active and quite sophisticated citizenry,” he said.

Three of Berkeley’s 12 measures have sparked particularly fiery debate. Measure Q would not legalize prostitution -- only the state can do that -- but seeks to make it the Police Department’s lowest priority.

Supporters contend that police would have more time to focus on violent crimes, and they hope the initiative would eventually spur a statewide legalization campaign.

“Our biggest statement is: ‘Arresting women and putting them in prison for solicitation is not the solution,’ ” said Robyn Few, a former prostitute and executive director of the Sex Workers Outreach Project, a Berkeley-based group that gathered far more than the 2,077 signatures needed to put the measure on the ballot.

But opponents fear that reduced enforcement of the laws would cause an influx of prostitutes into Berkeley, where opponents say sexual solicitation already gets scant police attention.

“It’s going to be the Sodom and Gomorrah of the Bay Area,” said Frankie Lee Fraser, president of the San Pablo Park Neighborhood Council.

Berkeley residents are also arguing over Measure R, which would make it easier to establish a place to grow and dispense medical marijuana.

The measure would eliminate limits on the amount of pot that patients and caregivers could possess and cultivate. It also would establish a peer group to review who could dispense the drug.

Citizens such as Dege Coutee argue that the city’s marijuana regulations endanger patients because the 10-plant limit makes it hard to maintain a steady supply. As a result, they must sometimes buy pot from dealers, and the safety of such marijuana is questionable, they say.

Opponents worry that the measure would promote pot for more than medicinal purposes.

“Not only is it an entry-level drug for use, but frequently leads to harder drugs and addiction,” said Dr. Davida Coady, executive director of Options Recovery Services, a support group for substance abusers. “It will make it possible for anyone to open a cannabis club, which is more marijuana than is needed for medical use.”

Drugs will also be on the ballot in Oakland. Supporters of Measure Z want laws governing the use of pot to be eased by decriminalizing the adult recreational use of marijuana and downgrading offenses such as possession, sale and cultivation. The measure is largely symbolic, but its supporters argue that the war on drugs has failed and that regulating pot would take it out of the hands of dealers.

The city’s law enforcement dollars would also be put to better use, proponents say.

“We want to redirect valuable police resources to fighting violent crime in Oakland,” said Judy Appel, an attorney for Oakland’s Drug Policy Alliance Network. Opponents are concerned that passage of the measure would turn Oakland, which is already plagued by drugs, into a center for narcotics.

In the small Kern County town of Wasco, there is Measure U, which seeks to keep giant dairies at least 10 miles from town. The measure has only symbolic weight. But supporters say they want to send a message to county supervisors, who seem poised to approve 10 planned dairies that would bring few jobs but add 100,000 cows to Wasco.

Back in Berkeley, another divisive measure concerns trees. Measure S seeks to create a tree board that would, among other things, approve planting and maintenance.

City representatives are concerned that the board’s authority would be too broad, giving it unfettered powers to override the decisions of any city agency, including the Fire Department and City Council. It would also carry an annual $350,000 price tag initially that Berkeley cannot afford, they say. Supporters argue that the initiative would save the city money by preventing the unnecessary removal of trees.

In San Francisco, movie stars are weighing in on a proposition that promises to preserve the city’s single-screen movie theaters and promote the local film industry by using 15% of the city’s hotel tax surcharge.

A fledgling nonprofit group called Save Our Theaters would be in charge of the funds. Its members say single-screen theaters are cultural anchors in this age of mushrooming multiplex movie houses.

But opponents, among them Oscar-winning actor Sean Penn, criticize the proposition as little more than a power grab. “It would hijack $10 million a year from city funds to give it to a group that has never managed a theater and didn’t exist until they wrote this proposition,” Penn says in a trailer being aired at San Francisco movie houses.

And to the south, San Diegans will try to resolve the long-running dispute over a cross that has been on Mt. Soledad for 50 years.

If voters say yes, the land will be sold to the highest bidder, who will decide whether to keep the 21-ton concrete landmark. If the proposition fails, City Atty. Casey Gwinn said, he will instruct the City Council to remove the cross because it violates a federal ban on displaying religious symbols on public property.

The issue has divided city residents since 1989, when an atheist challenged the location of the cross on constitutional grounds. Previous sales of the symbol have been legally flawed, and in the last five years, 14 federal judges have heard matters in the case.

“I don’t think [the proposition] will solve the issue one way or another,” Gwinn said. “But the voters have the right to weigh in on it.”

Times staff writer Mark Arax contributed to this report.