In just a few days, California voters will be asked to return to the polls to make their voices heard on a series of ballot initiatives, the successful passage of which are widely viewed as our only currently available means to avert a catastrophic $23 billion state budget shortfall.

Thus, on May 19, it will be within our power to prevent what will likely otherwise be deep cuts in public safety and many other government services, to prevent the suspension of services critical to the well-being of many of the most needy and vulnerable among us — many of whom are children — and to establish more stable and reliable funding resources that are essential to meeting those needs in the future.

Following on the heels of last November’s historic election, the upcoming special election may seem relatively unimportant to many voters. And it arguably promises to be nowhere near as exciting nor as interesting as its most recent predecessor. And yet its outcome may very well have a significantly more profound effect on the day-to-day lives of many Californians than did that of last November’s election.

California, like a growing number of those who call it home, is currently in the midst of a fiscal crisis of epic proportions. This election will give voters the opportunity to deliver the “first aid” that is critically needed to stop the bleeding and begin to stabilize the condition of the Golden State’s economic health. Propositions 1A through 1F are the medicine it needs to put it on the path to recovery.

Just as it is prudent for you and I to set aside a share of our earnings in a savings account so it will be available to us “on a rainy day,” Proposition 1A will compel the state to set a reasonable amount aside each year during “good times” so that California is similarly better prepared, going forward, to deal with the “bad times,” too.

Proposition 1B serves to explicitly and symbolically elevate the priority we attach to providing the resources necessary to more successfully meet the challenge of educating our richly diverse student body. Toward this end, it will (over time) provide the means by which to incrementally close the $9 billion gap between what the state school funding law requires that we spend, and the woefully inadequate amount we actually have spent over the last several years and, among other things, will keep thousands of talented, highly-qualified, caring, dedicated teachers in our classrooms where our children desperately need them.

Proposition 1C significantly improves the capacity of our state lottery system to provide a more meaningful amount of funding for our state school system; this measure alone is expected to provide our schools an additional $5 billion over current levels.

Proposition 1D allows a portion of the currently unutilized $2.5 billion now in the Children and Families Trust fund account (established in connection with the voter-approved tobacco tax), to be redirected to pay for other presently under-funded, critically needed children’s health and social services in order to sustain those services during this period of shortfall. Similarly, Proposition 1E allows for a portion of the unutilized Mental Health Trust fund to be allocated to General Fund programs, including children’s health services, that would otherwise have to be cut drastically or eliminated. Both of these initiatives — unhappy compromises though they both may be — are nonetheless necessary stopgap measures. Though each is a somewhat bitter pill, they become much easier to swallow when one is reminded that both are only temporary measures that automatically expire within just two years.

As measured only in hard dollars, Proposition 1F, which prohibits state legislators, the governor and other state politicians from getting pay raises when California’s budget is running a deficit, promises to save California taxpayers only a comparatively modest sum. However, it has considerable additional value as both a symbolic gesture and as an actual means to keep our public officials in closer touch with the day-to-day realities, such as wage stagnation, that so many of their constituents who earn their livings in the private sector must contend with during difficult economic times.

With those important considerations in mind, the Democrats of Napa Valley join, among many others, AARP California, the League of California Cities, the California Children’s Hospital Association, the California League of Conservation Voters, the California Teachers Association, the California Taxpayers Association, the California Police Chiefs Association, and our local state legislators, Noreen Evans and Patricia Wiggins, in supporting California Propositions 1A through 1F. We strongly urge you and your readers to do likewise.

On May 19, please do the right thing for California: vote “yes” on Propositions 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E and 1F.

(Gifford is president of Democrats of Napa Valley.)