It appears Ballot Measure B is ready to go to voters. Superior Court judges granted small victories to both the city of San Jose and labor when clarifying what language should be used.

UPDATE: The California Superior Court set a hearing for Monday, April 2, to rule on competing lawsuits regarding Measure B.—Editor

Councilmember Pete Constant and Ballot Measure B’s campaign treasurer, Ben Roth, plan to file their own complaint in California Superior Court on Friday morning. Their petition claims opponents of the pension and benefits reform ballot measure used false and misleading statements in their arguments. The filing comes almost a week after labor unions filed their own lawsuit over ballot language. A judge could rule on both the unions’ lawsuit and the more recent petition ahead of the scheduled April 3 hearing.

A judge ruled in favor of attorneys representing city workers Monday to hold an expedited hearing on April 3 about the language of Measure B, the pension and benefits reform ballot measure. The ruling comes on the heels of a lawsuit filed Friday in California Superior Court that claims the ballot question violates the Election Code because it does not contain impartial and non-argumentative language, as the law requires.

The battle over redevelopment agency dollars will now be confined to just the city and state here in San Jose. On Wednesday, a settlement was reached between the city and Santa Clara County, which was owed $62.9 million.