Lower housing costs, vote for change in the November election

October 4, 2026

OPINION by ANDY CALDWELL

Some people vote with their feet; others don’t vote at all. Speaking of California, more than ten million people have left in the last sixteen years. Yes, you read that right, ten million!

Why did so many people leave? The high cost of housing? Taxes? Poorly performing schools? Failing roads and infrastructure? Crime? A struggling economy? Problems associated with the homeless, despite tens of billions of dollars spent on the same? An oppressive and corrupt state government?

Yes, to all the above.

“Much has been made of the California exodus to other states, and rightly so,” according to the Public Policy Institute of California. “This migration, over the decades, has the power to reshape the state. That is an understatement, if I have ever heard one”

From 2010 through 2024 almost 10 million people moved from California to other states.” Of course, many more have left since then.

Much of the replacement population is comprised of immigrants, legal and otherwise, and their children. On average, they are poorer and less educated than the people they replaced. Hence, California, along with Louisiana, has the highest poverty rates in America.

According to various polls, another one-third of the state’s population would also like to leave.

I would offer an alternative. Vote for change. And, by that, I mean quit voting for democrats who are, by their complete control of the state for the past 20 years, driving it into a political and economic abyss.

Here are my personal ballot recommendations for state and county races: 

Steve Hilton for Governor.

Gloria Romero for Lt. Governor.

Don Wagner for Secretary of State.

Michael Gates for Attorney General.

Herb Morgan for State Controller.

Jennifer Hawks for State Treasurer.

Sonja Shaw for Superintendent of Public Education.

Bob Smith Congress CD 24

Sari Domingues State Assembly 30

Shannon Kessler State Assembly 37

Maribel Aguilera for 5th District Supervisor

Local mayor races: 

Pismo – Beach Scott Newton

Arroyo Grande – Sean Schuur

Grover Beach – David Swift

Buellton – Dave King

Lompoc – James Mosby

Local tax and bond measures

I rarely support these measures unless they represent an investment in our future and achieve parity with other communities.

Yes on Measure H for Allan Hancock. This could pose huge dividends for the future of our economy by giving opportunities for four-year degrees at a fraction of their regular cost AND more importantly, many, many opportunities for tech training that can pay more than a four year college degree!

Yes on Measure C for City of Santa Maria. Santa Maria is one of the best run cities on the Central Coast. It does more for less than many other jurisdictions but costs beyond its control means it needs help from taxpayers.

Ballot propositions 

A word of caution on the ballot propositions. As you would expect from a third-world banana republic, our state attorney general distorts the meaning and intent of ballot measures with a title that is purposefully confusing to voters.

In other words, in many instances, the title of the ballot measure does not accurately reflect the proposed outcome of a yes or no vote! In other words, voter beware.

Ballot propositions: 

No on Proposition 1 authorizes bonds for housing affordability programs.

Vote No. Why? California needs to reform land use regulations to enable more affordable housing to be built, rather than to continue borrowing us into oblivion, as borrowing actually makes housing less affordable.

No on Proposition 2 increases California’s rainy day fund.

Vote No. Why? This measure simply assures more government spending while ignoring existing budget deficits.

No on Proposition 3 provides permanent funding for schools and health care by extending existing tax on high incomes.

Vote no. Why? Proposition 3 makes temporary income taxes permanent while Sacramento wastes billions on failed programs instead of enacting voters’ priorities.

No on Proposition 4 repeals prohibition against public funding of election campaigns.

Vote no. Why? Instead of fixing potholes and the like, this measure would use tax dollars on political campaigns.

Vote no on Proposition 5 which changes recall election process for statewide officers.

Vote no. Why? Voters should be able to recall and choose the replacement for the office should the recall succeed. Proposition 5 limits voters’ right to select a replacement for recalled officials. Instead, when statewide elected officials are recalled, other politicians would choose a replacement.

No on Proposition 37 creates loan program for middle-income buyers of qualified new homes.

Vote no. Why? This is a “nice try, but no cigar” proposition. It can help with the down payment but at the cost of having both a first and second mortgage from the onset.

The one benefit? The monies for this program will not come from taxpayers but the private sector. The limitation? Private lenders will surely require a really high interest rate for holding the second mortgage.

No on Proposition 38 authorizes bonds for immunology medical research.

Vote no. Why? Again, the state wants to borrow money (over $8 billion) instead of budgeting for the same. In this case, for research.

However, half of the funds automatically go to one research facility instead of letting all researchers compete for the money based upon merit, innovation, and promise.

Yes on Proposition 39 (Warning, very deceptive title!) prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.

Vote yes. Why? This measure allows qualified voters to vote upon presenting a valid ID. This measure is supported by 80% of all voters across all party lines because it ensures election integrity.

No on Proposition 40 imposes one-time tax on certain taxpayers.

Vote no. Why? This is the so-called billionaire’s tax, which, if enacted, will eventually cause all taxes to rise. How so? Because most billionaires have already left the state, our legislators will have to raise taxes on the rest of us to make up for the lost revenue arising from this measure.

Yes on Proposition 41 (Another title meant to confuse) prohibits new state taxes that exclude revenues from state spending limit. Requires audits for new state special taxes.

Vote yes. Why? For example, billions of tax dollars have flowed into programs like homelessness, and nobody knows where the money went or if it accomplished anything.

Proposition 41 requires the independent state auditor to conduct public audits of programs funded by new taxes—so we get more transparency, more accountability, and better outcomes for taxpayers.

Yes on Proposition 42 prohibits new state personal property taxes and certain retroactive state taxes.

Vote yes. Why? California’s Constitution currently allows the legislature to tax your savings, including for retirement and regular savings—even though you already paid taxes on that money when you earned it. Proposition 42 protects Californians from this double taxation.

Yes on Proposition 43 (Very deceptive title.) limits voters’ ability to raise revenues for local government services.

Vote yes. Why? This measure preserves Proposition 13. Proposition 43 protects taxpayers by restoring Proposition 13’s two-thirds vote requirement to pass local special taxes, including sales taxes, real estate taxes, and utility taxes.

No on Proposition 44 requires community health clinics spend 90% of revenue on program services.

Vote no. Why? Proposition 44 is a dangerous measure by a greedy union that will shut down hundreds of community health clinics and eliminate vital patient services for millions of Californians. The goal of the measure is to create leverage over employers in labor negotiations.

Yes on Proposition 45 modifies environmental review for certain projects.

Vote yes. Why? Finally a proposition that amends the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to expedite environmental review for certain projects (including most housing, transportation, water, and health projects) by setting deadlines to complete environmental review and resolve lawsuits challenging project approvals.

Amending CEQA is the only way to lower project costs and increase affordability in our state.

Andy Caldwell is the executive director of COLAB in Santa Barbara County and host of The Andy Caldwell Radio Show, weekdays from 3-5 p.m. on  FM 98.5, FM 99.5, AM 1240, AM 1290 and FM 96.9.