There are 12 propositions Californians can vote on in the November election. The propositions address issues including housing assistance, daylight saving time and hospital improvement. Here they are:
Prop. 1: Funds specified housing assistance programs
Proposition 1 would authorize $4 billion in general obligation bonds for housing-related programs, loans, grants, projects and housing loans for veterans.
The proposition was part of a legislative package announced by Gov. Jerry Brown to increase housing production and lower housing costs.
The argument against the proposition in the voter information guide reads, “The housing shortage stemming from the influx of millions to California requires far bigger solutions.”
The Greenbelt Alliance, a nonprofit urban planning organization that has endorsed Prop. 1, said on its website that this is an “excellent opportunity to address the Bay Area’s lack of homes people can afford on a statewide level.”
Prop. 2: Funds an existing housing program for individuals with mental illness
Voting yes on Proposition 2 would be voting to authorize the state to use revenue from Proposition 63 — which enacted the Mental Health Services Act in 2004 — on homelessness prevention and housing for people in need of mental health services.
The revenue generated by Prop. 63 is a 1 percent tax on earnings above $1 million and was allocated for use on mental health services.
Prop. 2 would reinforce and ratify laws backing the No Place Like Home Program, which finances permanent housing for individuals suffering from mental illness who are at risk of becoming homeless or who are currently homeless.
Affordable Housing Now, which is leading the campaign in support of Prop. 2, is joined by organizations such as Habitat for Humanity and California Labor Federation.
Prop. 3: Funds projects for water supply and quality, conservation
Proposition 3, also called the Water Supply and Water Quality Act of 2018, would authorize $8.877 billion in general obligation bonds to water quality and infrastructure improvement, as well as conservation efforts including watershed and habitat restoration.
$2.355 billion of the issued bonds would go to conservancies and state parks to improve restoration and protection on watersheds.
“California is completely dependent on a clean, safe, and reliable water supply. We live in a state prone to drought, wildfire, and floods and our water supply must be managed properly to meet these challenges,” Jerry Meral, the author of Prop. 3, said in an email. “Proposition 3 will provide enough water to meet the needs of more than three million families in California.”
The proposition is sponsored by the Natural Heritage Institute and opposed by organizations such as the Sierra Club and the Southern California Watershed Alliance.
Prop. 4: Funds construction at hospitals providing children’s health care
Proposition 4 would authorize $1.5 billion in bonds for the construction, expansion, renovation and equipping of children’s hospitals in California. The measure was created by the California Children’s Hospital Association.
Seventy-two percent of the $1.5 billion in bond funds will be allocated to nonprofit hospitals, 18 percent will be allocated to five University of California general acute hospitals, and 10 percent will be allocated to public and private hospitals that provide pediatric services to children eligible for California Children’s Services.
“Proposition 4 will help provide the infrastructure funding these hospitals need to maintain and upgrade their facilities to meet strict safety standards, expand their reach and ultimately save more lives,” Ann-Louise Kuhns, president and CEO of the California Children’s Hospital Association, said in an email.
The argument against Prop. 4 warns against the costs of its implementation, adding that voters should look at the “bigger picture and ask how to improve health care outcomes in California.”
Prop. 5: Changes taxes that certain property owners will face when moving homes
Proposition 5 proposes a set of amendments to Proposition 13 from 1978, which limits the maximum allowable taxation on property. The ballot initiative was developed by the California Association of Realtors.
Prop. 5 would permit individuals who are 55 years or older and individuals who are severely disabled to transfer their tax assessments from their previous home to their new home, regardless of the new home’s market value or location or the number of times the buyer moved.
The argument against the proposition asserts that it will cut up to $1 billion in local revenue from public schools, police, health care and other services in exchange for tax breaks for wealthy Californians, helping corporate real estate interests.
The argument in favor of the proposition says that it will allow seniors and those who are severely disabled to move without the existing “moving penalty.”
Prop. 6: Eliminates certain road repair and transportation funding, requires approval for certain taxes and fees
Proposition 6 would repeal fuel tax increases and vehicle fees that were enacted in 2017. It would also require voter approval for the imposition or extension of new fuel taxes or vehicle fees by the California State Legislature.
Prop. 6 is supported by the California Republican Party and opposed by the California Democratic Party.
The argument opposing Prop. 6 says it would jeopardize the safety of bridges and roads, eliminating much-needed local transportation funding.
“Don’t be fooled by opponents who claim there is no money to fix roads if Prop. 6 passes,” the argument in support of Prop. 6 reads. “If the transportation-related taxes and fees we already paid before this new tax increase took effect were spent on transportation—the state would have $5.6 billion annually for transportation needs, without raising taxes.”
Prop. 7: Allows for permanent daylight saving time in California
Proposition 7 would allow the state Legislature to enact permanent daylight saving time year-round in California by a two-thirds vote if federal law changed to allow it, according to the official voter information guide.
Proponents of the proposition, including the proposition 7 campaign website, argue that the current biannual switches to and from daylight saving time are dangerous, increasing on-the-job injuries, deadly vehicle accidents and heart attacks. The proposition is supported by state Assemblymembers Kansen Chu, D-San Jose, and Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, D-San Diego.
Opponents, including state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, and Assemblymember Phillip Chen, R-Diamond Bar, argue that Californians will wake up to darkness during significant parts of the year.
“You’ll be getting your family ready for the day in the dark; your kids will be walking to school or waiting for the school bus before the sun rises,” the argument reads.
Prop. 8: Regulates amounts outpatient kidney dialysis clinics charge for dialysis treatment
Proposition 8 seeks to limit kidney dialysis clinics’ revenues and potentially require them to issue rebates to patients or to their insurance providers, according to the official voter information guide.
The Yes on 8 campaign argues that dialysis corporations make billions of dollars in profits. Prop. 8 would push those corporations to increase spending on patient care and stop consumer overcharging, according to the Yes on 8 campaign.
“California’s largest dialysis company marks up its charges for some patients as much as 350 (percent),” the official argument in favor reads. “PROP. 8 will provide strong incentives for dialysis companies to lower costs and improve their quality of care, making patients the priority everywhere.”
Opponents, including the American Nurses Association and California Medical Association, however, argue that Prop. 8 will force dialysis clinics to cut services and close, thereby endangering patients.
Prop. 9: Splits California into three states
The California Supreme Court struck down Proposition 9, which would have split California into three states if enacted.
Prop. 10: Expands local governments’ authority to enact rent control on residential property
Proposition 10 would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, thus lifting restrictions on what kind of rent control laws local governments can enact.
“We know better on the streets that we live in and the communities that we call home,” Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, a supporter of the proposition, said during a news conference. “We know the stories of our neighbors, we know the stories of our colleagues, of our co-workers.”
Opponents of the proposition argue that Prop. 10 would put bureaucrats in charge of housing, harm renters by increasing costs and add costs to local governments.
The California Democratic Party supports Prop. 10. Both 2018 California gubernatorial candidates, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and John Cox of the California Republican Party, oppose the measure.
Prop. 11: Requires private-sector emergency ambulance employees to remain on call during work breaks
Proposition 11 would require private-sector emergency ambulance employees to remain on call during work breaks, according to the official voter information guide.
The Yes on 11 campaign says Prop. 11 would also provide additional Federal Emergency Management Agency-level disaster training.
“It is essential that EMTs and paramedics are able to respond quickly and deliver lifesaving medical care during mass casualty events, like active shooter incidents and natural disasters,” the official argument supporting the proposition states.
No argument in opposition to the proposition was filed.
Prop. 12: Establishes new standards for confinement of specified farm animals
Proposition 12 would enact a new minimum requirement on farmers to provide more space for egg-laying hens, breeding pigs and calves raised for veal, according to the official voter guide.
Supporters of the proposition include the Humane Society of the United States and the California Democratic Party.
“It’s cruel to confine a baby calf in a tiny cage,” the official argument in favor reads. “Taken away from his mother shortly after birth, he’s confined in that abusive way until he’s sent to slaughter — at just four months old.”
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, opposes the proposition, arguing on its website that it would actually allow for farms to keep egg-laying hens in cages with only one foot of room per bird until 2022.
“It would ingrain the farming practice of giving hens a minuscule amount of space for years to come—at a time when companies are already requiring that hens be ‘cage-free’ as a result of massive consumer demand,” PETA said on its website.