VOTERS WILL SEE SEX, DRUGS, COWS ON BALLOTS

Initiatives in some cities include a bid to ease limits on the growing
of medical marijuana and an effort to keep giant dairies out of town.

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."