2020 California Ballot Propositions Megathread

[Coastal Elitist]

Starting another megathred on these like I did last year.

March 3, 2020:
Proposition 13
Issues $15 billion in bonds for school and college facilities
Rejected



Yes   4,147,158   46.7%
No   4,735,953   53.3%

Good to see voters reject a bond measure for once.

On the Ballot
November 3, 2020:
Criminal Sentencing, Parole, and DNA Collection Initiative:
The ballot initiative would make specific types of theft and fraud crimes, including firearm theft, vehicle theft, and unlawful use of a credit card, chargeable as misdemeanors or felonies, rather than misdemeanors. The ballot initiative would also establish two additional types of crimes in state code—serial crime and organized retail crime—and charge them as wobblers (crimes chargeable as misdemeanors or felonies).
The ballot initiative would require persons convicted of certain misdemeanors that were classified as wobblers or felonies before 2014, such shoplifting, grand theft, and drug possession, along with several other crimes, including domestic violence and prostitution with a minor, to submit to the collection of DNA samples for state and federal databases.

Tax on Commercial and Industrial Properties for Education and Local Government Funding Initiative:
The ballot initiative would create a process in the state constitution for distributing revenue from the revised tax on commercial and industrial properties. The ballot initiative would distribute the revenue to specific areas, rather than the General Fund. First, the revenue would be distributed to (a) the state to supplement decreases in revenue from the state's personal income tax and corporation tax due to increased tax deductions and (b) counties to cover the costs of implementing the measure. Second, 60 percent of the remaining funds would be distributed to local governments and special districts, and 40 percent would be distributed to school districts and community colleges

Replace Cash Bail with Risk Assessments Referendum: Replaces cash bail with risk assessments for suspects awaiting trial

Local Rent Control Initiative: The ballot measure would allow local governments to adopt rent control on housing units, except on (a) housing that was first occupied within the last 15 years and (b) units owned by natural persons who own no more than two housing units with separate titles, such as single-family homes, condos, and some duplexes, or subdivided interests, such as stock cooperatives and community apartment projects.[2]
Under Costa-Hawkins, landlords are allowed to increase rent prices to market rates when a tenant moves out (a policy known as vacancy decontrol).[1] The ballot measure would require local governments that adopt rent control to allow landlords to increase rental rates by 15 percent during the first three years following a vacancy
(basically the same thing as prop 10 from 2018 which failed miserably)

Signatures submitted:
Property Tax Transfers and Exemptions Initiative   997,139

25% of signatures reached:
Commercial and Industrial Property Tax for Education and Local Government Funding Initiative deadline: April 14

Changes to Medical Malpractice Lawsuits Cap Initiative
deadline: June 1

Dialysis Clinic Requirements and Consent to Close Initiative
deadline: June 29

App-Based Drivers Regulations Initiative
deadline: June 30   

Consumer Personal Information Law and Agency Initiative   
deadline: June 15

Stem Cell Research Institute Bond Initiative
deadline: June 15

Packaging Waste Reduction Regulations Initiative
deadline: July 6

Legalize Sports Betting on American Indian Lands Initiative
deadline: July 20

[Coastal Elitist]

Propositions have been finalized for the ballot meant to do this earlier but didn't get to it.

For some reason they start with 14
Proposition 14   Bonds   Issues $5.5 billion in bonds for state stem cell research institute

Proposition 15   Taxes   Requires commercial and industrial properties to be taxed based on market value and dedicates revenue

Proposition 16   Affirmative Action   Repeals Proposition 209 (1996), which prohibited the state from considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, education, or contracting

Proposition 17   Suffrage   Restores the right to vote to people convicted of felonies who are on parole

Proposition 18   Suffrage   Allows 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the next general election to vote in primaries and special elections

Proposition 19   Taxes   Changes tax assessment transfers and inheritance rules

Proposition 20   Law Enforcement   Makes changes to policies related to criminal sentencing charges, prison release, and DNA collection

Proposition 21   Housing   Expands local governments' power to use rent control

Proposition 22   Business   Considers app-based drivers to be independent contractors and enacts several labor policies related to app-based companies

Proposition 23   Healthcare   Requires physician on-site at dialysis clinics and consent from the state for a clinic to close

Proposition 24   Business   Expands the provisions of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and creates the California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the CCPA

Proposition 25   Trials   Replaces cash bail with risk assessments for suspects awaiting trial

I guess we're giving rent control another try even though it got crushed last time. It only passed in congressional districts 12, 13, 28, 29, 34, 37 and 43. Hopefully the affirmative action one fails it seems racist.

[Mr. Smith]

Gee, measures like these make it awfully tempting to just let another year with my current absentee status roll by...even as a vote for/against Trump is far more critical in Texas than here.

Not sure what to think about Prop. 16. Prop. 22 I'm reluctantly gonna have to support for fear of what these companies would do for entry level qualifications to even get in, and I'd rather not lose my fallback/really-hard-times job. 17 and 18 are totes-goes, and the rest I'll want more specifics on.

[AndyHogan14]

I'm not sure if I will be voting to approve any new bond measures right now considering the fact that the COVID-related economic crisis has blown a hole in California's budget. I will definitely be voting in favor of Props 17/18, but I could pretty much go either way on most of the other ones. I will have to see what the economic situation is in November and what the official literature says for them.

[bagelman]

What exactly does prop 19 do?

[sparkey]

What exactly does prop 19 do?

Makes it so that old people who move get to keep their low property tax rates to some degree, but removes the ability of people who inherit houses to keep low property tax rates. Pushed hard by realtors, who would love to see both seniors and inheritors selling houses more often.

[sparkey]

I'm feeling like this set needs a whole lot of NO votes. Only 22 seems to deserve a YES, and that's really only because a YES on 22 is basically a NO on the awful Assembly Bill 5, at least for app-based drivers.

I'm leaning:
14: no
15: no
16: NO
17: no
18: no
19: no
20: no
21: NO
22: yes
23: no
24: no
25: no

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

14 sure, why not
15 Hell yes
16 idk
17 Yes
18 Yes
19 idk
20 hell no
21 probably yes
22 no, f*** off Uber
23 ugh, not another dialysis prop
24 idk, I like the idea, but kinda seems like it could get to be like prop 65
25 Sure

Edit: Fixing thread title in my post

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Prop 14: Yes
Prop 15: Yes
Prop 16: Yes
Prop 17: Yes
Prop 18: Yes
Prop 19: No
Prop 20: No
Prop 21: Yes
Prop 22: No. Interested in this one the most just because I have no idea how much people care about this prop or gig drivers.
Prop 23: Yes
Prop 24: Not sure
Prop 25: Yes

[Coastal Elitist]

Not sure why a British polling firm is polling this but we have our first poll of proposition 22 and they went quite in depth on the numbers as well:
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/california-proposition-22-voting-intention-9-august/

Yes 41%
No 26%
Undecided 34%

[Coastal Elitist]

New polls for proposition 15 and 16 from PPIC: https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2020.pdf

Proposition 15 (amends prop 13):
Yes 51%
No 40%

Proposition 16 (affirmative action):
No 47%
Yes 31%

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

New polls for proposition 15 and 16 from PPIC: https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2020.pdf

Proposition 15 (amends prop 13):
Yes 51%
No 40%

Proposition 16 (affirmative action):
No 47%
Yes 31%

I really hope prop 16 fails. Affirmative action is racist.

[Intell]

14: No
15: Yes
16: No
17: No
18: No
19: No
20: No
21: No
22: Yes
23: No
24: No
25: Yes

[Donerail]

Prop 14 Yes — it's dumb that stem cell research in California is funded via proposition (has to do with Bush-era restrictions on stem cell funding), but I have to vote in favor of the grad student-industrial complex.
Prop 15 Yes — Prop. 13 was a massive tax break to our largest corporations and this rightfully undoes it.
Prop 16 No
Prop 17 Yes — expand the franchise as much as possible
Prop 18 Yes — see above
Prop 19 Yes — would free up housing market inventory and maybe make this state slightly more affordable
Prop 20 No — tried this before and it blew up the state's prison population (and spending) without making much of a dent in petty theft
Prop 21 Lean No — concerned about impacts on housing construction
Prop 22 No — unfortunate to force some (mostly part-time) drivers out of the market but good to get the remainder (mostly full-time) predictable schedules and benefits
Prop 23 Yes
Prop 24 No — I'm concerned about some provisions in this proposition that would make it easier to charge people more if they don't let companies sell their data
Prop 25 No — cash bail bad, algorithms are probably not the answer

[Coastal Elitist]

Here's my thoughts:
Prop 14: No - Just say no to bonds we are in debt
Prop 15: No - Lots of loopholes and will hurt small businesses
Prop 16: No - It's just racist, lets judge people on their accomplishments not on their race
Prop 17: No - They can vote once there sentence is complete which includes parole
Prop 18: No - I have no problem with them voting in primaries, but special elections are still an election so you should have to be 18 for that
Prop 19: No - Sounds good at first, but it's just a steal by real estate special interests
Prop 20: Yes - Fixes the loopholes in proposition 47 and 57 that have made it easier to steal
Prop 21: No - Once again rent control is not the solution and will only lead to more problems
Prop 22: Yes - Uber, Lyft, Doordash and other jobs like this were never intended to be full time jobs, the business model was always to earn money on the side.
Prop 23: No - another attempt to make voters health regulators
Prop 24: No - sounds good at first, but creates lots of loopholes that renders most of this null and void anyways
Prop 25: No - This would allow computer programs to decide who gets bail and who doesn't, which probably won't help minorities

If anyone want to discuss these I'm more than happy to.

[sparkey]

If anyone want to discuss these I'm more than happy to.

You're so close to nailing my thoughts exactly that it's making me reconsider my one disagreement with you, which is Prop 20. My first reaction is that it will significantly increase prison population, almost exclusively for people who have been charged with theft, some as low as $250, which seems excessive. Has there been a significant uptick in related property crimes in California that I'm not aware of, that calls for this sort of change right now?

[Coastal Elitist]

Ah thank god lol im prob voting Yes on 15 and no on 16 I really dislike affirmative action people should be hired on their merit not race good to see their both were their at im really interested in how Prop 22 is doing. Theirs a lot of anti uber sentiment here after they threatened to pull out of the state people feel like Uber is blackmailing us but again I have a lot of friends dependent on Uber for their jobs.

I'm glad you feel that way with 16. With 15 I thought it would be good at first, but the more I looked at it the more I didn't like it. It wouldn't just effect big corporations it would also effect small businesses. Former mayor Antoni Villaraigosa makes good points in this article: https://calmatters.org/commentary/my-turn/2020/09/prop-15-the-legislature-should-reform-californias-tax-system/

The thing with 22 is that Uber, Lyft and these other places like doordash were never intended to be full time jobs and if these companies abide by AB5, which has been a disaster, they would have to fire lots of workers that they couldn't afford and all current drivers would probably have to apply for a job instead of just signing up and being able to do it whenever they want. So there would be no guarantee that you get to drive for a place like Uber and of course rides would be more expensive. Basically the legislature is trying to turn Uber and Lyft into taxis. By a 4-1 margin app based drivers want to be independent so it's clear that the majority don't want to be employees as AB5 requires. AB5 was a solution for a problem that didn't exist and in reality the legislature just wanted to target companies like Uber and Lyft but knew they couldn't do that so they came up with AB5 not realizing how many industries it would effect.

[SevenEleven]

14: Yes
15: Yes
16: Yes
17: Yes
18: Yes
19: No
20: No
21: No
22: Yes
23: No
24: Yes
25: Yes

[bagelman]

I've already seen a Australian and a Floridian post here, so might as well give my outsider opinions

14. Yea sure whatever.
15. Yes
16. No. Hard no.
17. Yes
18. Yes
19. No
20. idk
21. Yes
22. Hard No.
23. Yes
24. I like the idea but it's opposed by the ACLU and it's not backed by the EFF.
25. Soft yes.

[Donerail]

I've already seen a Australian and a Floridian post here, so might as well give my outsider opinions

I am a California resident

[coloradocowboi]

I vote in Los Angeles:

Measure J: absolutely yes. so stoked to start defunding the police
Prop 14: tbd leaning yes
Prop 15: absolutely yes. the vast majority of this tax will fall on big business, not small businesses, especially retailers.
Prop 16: yes. honestly will hurt me and my children as a white person, but it's the right thing to do
Prop 17: yes, because i'm not a fascist. i think it's unconstitutional that we don't let prisoners vote anyway
Prop 18: yes because who cares. 17 year olds are more qualified to vote on, say, tech policy than a 77 year old with early signs of dementia (and can vote)
Prop 19: leaning no
Prop 20: nope! this is just a money grab by the prison industrial complex and won't make us safer
Prop 21: YES! I am so tired of having to jump over homeless ppl walking to the train. LA and SF are unbelievably unaffordable, and we keep getting told by the real estate industry that regulation like this will "stifle innovation" and prevent construction of affordable units. if that's true, WHERE ARE THE F'ING UNITS? they are liars, their paid experts are liars, and absent an alternative we need more rent control
Prop 22: absolutely not. speaking of liars, this is basically a ballot initiative with a single purpose--to keep lyft/uber drivers from unionizing. sure, it does provide some admirable protections for them. but in denying them collective bargaining it basically gives them some, but not all of their demands, and guarantees they will never be able to demand anything again. i'll be phonebanking on this one because the misinfo is insane
Prop 23: yes
Prop 24: leaning yes, but need to do a lot more research
Prop 25: yes, so important, it's just classist and wrong the way cash bail works now

[lfromnj]

If anyone want to discuss these I'm more than happy to.

You're so close to nailing my thoughts exactly that it's making me reconsider my one disagreement with you, which is Prop 20. My first reaction is that it will significantly increase prison population, almost exclusively for people who have been charged with theft, some as low as $250, which seems excessive. Has there been a significant uptick in related property crimes in California that I'm not aware of, that calls for this sort of change right now?

I have remembered reading a few articles(albiet anecdotal) about store owners complaining about repeat shoplifters who they can't really do anything about due to the fact the cops can't really do much till its a felony
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/california-news/business-owners-upset-over-increase-of-shoplifters-due-to-prop-47/133757/

https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-prop-47-shoplifting-theft-crime-statewide

I would actually like to see some data on how prop 47 did with regards to shoplifting crime.

[Canis]

Ah thank god lol im prob voting Yes on 15 and no on 16 I really dislike affirmative action people should be hired on their merit not race good to see their both were their at im really interested in how Prop 22 is doing. Theirs a lot of anti uber sentiment here after they threatened to pull out of the state people feel like Uber is blackmailing us but again I have a lot of friends dependent on Uber for their jobs.

I'm glad you feel that way with 16. With 15 I thought it would be good at first, but the more I looked at it the more I didn't like it. It wouldn't just effect big corporations it would also effect small businesses. Former mayor Antoni Villaraigosa makes good points in this article: https://calmatters.org/commentary/my-turn/2020/09/prop-15-the-legislature-should-reform-californias-tax-system/

The thing with 22 is that Uber, Lyft and these other places like doordash were never intended to be full time jobs and if these companies abide by AB5, which has been a disaster, they would have to fire lots of workers that they couldn't afford and all current drivers would probably have to apply for a job instead of just signing up and being able to do it whenever they want. So there would be no guarantee that you get to drive for a place like Uber and of course rides would be more expensive. Basically the legislature is trying to turn Uber and Lyft into taxis. By a 4-1 margin app based drivers want to be independent so it's clear that the majority don't want to be employees as AB5 requires. AB5 was a solution for a problem that didn't exist and in reality the legislature just wanted to target companies like Uber and Lyft but knew they couldn't do that so they came up with AB5 not realizing how many industries it would effect.

Yeah exactly I agree most Uber Drivers I know use it as a part time hustle while they do college work before they have enough time to commit to a full time job I just really dislike Ubers reaction to the state governments attempt to regulate and essentially threatening us to pull out of the state im undecided right now but leaning No at the moment I might flip to Yes when I get my ballot though its just clear this is desperate move by Uber to prevent their workers from unionizing after they lost in the courts.

[S019]

Just going to drop by and say: Everyone voting against 16 should be ashamed of themselves

[S019]

Just going to drop by and say: Everyone voting against 16 should be ashamed of themselves

No lol the prop would make employeers consider race as a factor when hiring thats racist af
Another reason im probably gonna vote no is.
Most people haven't read the actual text of Prop 22.  If a person reads the text they will find that the per mile rate will be reduced to 30 cents per engaged mile.  Engaged mile are not all miles driven for the company. With the Rideshare companies in most areas in California were paying roughly 60 cents per mile.  If proposition 22 passes, this will have a devastating effect on a drivers earnings.  If you vote yes drivers will make less.  Dont be fooled by these Gig Companies.  The Gig Companies have spent 180 million dollars in advertising & getting Prop 22 on the ballot as of 08/16/2020.

Affirmative action allows for disadvantaged minorities to have a chance to get ahead in life