California propositions: Outcomes for 2020 poll measures on lease management, property taxes, felony justice reform and extra
We have put collectively an interactive information to the 2020 propositions in California and we’re monitoring election outcomes as they turn into out there. Scroll all the way down to examine every poll proposition.
Polls closed in California at 8 p.m. and we’ll be updating the story under with outcomes as races are known as.
LIVE ELECTION RESULTS: Observe dwell election leads to key California races right here
The poll language for every proposition is obtainable from the Secretary of State’s workplace. You should use the interactive module above or proceed studying under for our summaries of every measure, the argument for and in opposition to it, and a brief checklist of supporters and opponents.
Proposition 14: Funding for stem cell analysis — TOO CLOSE TO CALL
Abstract: Authorizes $5.5 billion generally bonds to go to stem cell analysis, together with analysis on treating Alzheimer’s and dementia.
Argument for: Universities, nonprofits and different analysis teams want extra funding to proceed this very important medical analysis. The $3 billion in funding supplied by Prop 71 in 2004 has been depleted.
Argument in opposition to: There is not sufficient oversight on how the cash might be spent.
Supporters: California Democratic Occasion, UC Board of Regents, a number of medical establishments, amongst others.
Opponents: The nonprofit Heart for Genetics and Society
VIDEO: What’s Prop. 14? California voters might be requested to proceed funding stem cell analysis
Proposition 15: Enhance industrial property taxes for training funding — FAIL
Abstract: Amends the structure to permit industrial and industrial properties to be taxed at their market worth fairly than their buy value. There are exceptions for properties zoned as industrial agriculture and firms valued beneath $3 million. This proposition would revise 1978’s Prop 13, which requires all California properties (residential and industrial) to be taxed at their buy value with an annual enhance of two% or inflation, whichever is decrease. Of the brand new tax income, an estimated $8 billion to $12.5 billion a yr, 60% would go to native governments and 40% to high school districts and group faculties. Residential properties (i.e. houses) usually are not affected by this proposition.
Argument for: California corporations like Chevron and Disneyland sit on extraordinarily precious property, make a lot of cash and do not pay taxes on their land’s market worth. Plus, faculties desperately want the funding.
Argument in opposition to: The huge tax enhance will immediate corporations to flee California at a time when companies are already struggling.
Supporters: Dozens of Democratic lawmakers, a number of CA college districts, California Lecturers Affiliation.
Opponents: A number of native chambers of commerce, Ted Gaines (Republican on the CA Board of Equalization), and several other native branches of the NAACP.
Proposition 16: Repeal Prop 209 to permit affirmative motion — FAIL
Abstract: Repeals 1996’s Proposition 209, which banned the federal government and public establishments (like faculties) from discriminating or giving preferential therapy based mostly on intercourse, race, ethnicity or nationality. Prop 209 successfully banned public employers, universities and the like from utilizing affirmative motion, because it was seen as discriminatory.
Argument for: Repealing the constitutional modification would enable California’s public establishments to work towards higher range. Plus, federal legislation stopping discrimination nonetheless stands.
Argument in opposition to: Discrimination is dangerous even whether or not it advantages traditionally underprivileged teams or not.
Supporters: Dozens of California Democrats, together with Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris, in addition to academics’ unions and the UC Board of Regents.
Opponents: Two Republican state senators and a handful of former Republican U.S. representatives, together with Darrell Issa.
VIDEO: What’s Prop. 16? This is the way it will influence affirmative motion in California
Proposition 17: Permits parolees the suitable to vote — PASS
Abstract: Amends the structure to permit these on parole for a felony conviction to vote in elections. Present California legislation prevents individuals from voting in the event that they’re imprisoned or on parole for a felony crime. Prop 17 solely amends the latter half of that legislation.
Argument for: The change would restore voting rights to a disenfranchised group of people who have totally accomplished their jail sentences and are reintegrating into society.
Argument in opposition to: Folks on parole are nonetheless being intently monitored and have not had their full rights to freedom restored; voting ought to fall beneath that class.
Supporters: A number of outstanding California Democrats, the ACLU and League of Girls Voters.
Opponents: California State Sen. Jim Nielson (R-Crimson Bluff).
What’s Prop. 17? Voters requested to revive proper to vote for parolees after completion of jail time period
Proposition 18: Grant some 17-year-olds proper to vote in primaries — FAIL
Abstract: Would amend the state structure to permit 17-year-olds who might be 18 by the point of the final election to vote in major or particular elections that precede them.
Argument for: Younger people who find themselves legally allowed to take part generally elections ought to have the ability to take part in that full electoral cycle.
Argument in opposition to: Seventeen yr olds are legally kids and subsequently too younger to vote.
Supporters: California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, plus it had majority Democrat assist when it began as an modification within the Meeting.
Opponents: When it was being thought of within the Meeting, the opposition was largely Republican.
Proposition 19: Adjustments sure property tax guidelines — PASS
Abstract: Adjustments a number of the tax evaluation guidelines on property transfers by householders 55 or older or those that have misplaced a house in a pure catastrophe. These householders would have the ability to switch their tax evaluation to a costlier dwelling thrice (as an alternative of the at present allowed one time) with an upward adjustment. It might additionally remove one exemption that exists when somebody transfers a house to a toddler or a grandchild; if the recipient would not use the house as their major residence, its tax worth could be reassessed beneath Prop 19. The ensuing income would go to establishing a Fireplace Response Fund.
Argument for: Empty nesters aren’t placing houses available on the market to downsize as a result of they worry paying larger taxes on a brand new home. It additionally closes a loophole that enables rich individuals to go on houses to kids who use them as rental properties.
Argument in opposition to: The proposition, largely backed by actual property particular pursuits, eliminates one loophole, nevertheless it creates a much bigger drawback by permitting rich householders to proceed reaping the advantages of Prop 13 from 1978, writes the Mercury Information/East Bay Instances editorial board. Plus, income from property taxes should not be mechanically earmarked for hearth suppression.
Supporters: California Affiliation of Realtors
Opponents: Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Affiliation, newspaper editorial boards together with San Jose Mercury Information, East Bay Instances and Orange County Register.
Proposition 20: Reclassifies sure crimes and expands DNA assortment — FAIL
Abstract: Makes it so firearm theft, car theft and illegal use of a bank card are categorized as “wobblers,” which means they are often charged as misdemeanors or felonies. Prop 20 additionally establishes two new crimes within the code, serial crime and retail organized crime, additionally each wobblers. The proposition additionally expands necessary DNA assortment to these convicted of sure misdemeanors.
Argument for: The proposition provides prosecutors the discretion to pursue harsher sentences in retail crimes.
Argument in opposition to: The change in crime classification would result in over-sentencing of nonviolent crimes and contribute to overcrowding in prisons.
Supporters: Two meeting members, a Democrat and a Republican, a number of legislation enforcement unions and the Albertsons Safeway grocery chain.
Opponents: Former Gov. Jerry Brown and the ACLU of Northern California.
This is how Prop. 20 will have an effect on felony justice in California
Proposition 21: Lease management overhaul — FAIL
Abstract: Permits native jurisdictions to place lease management in place for every kind of housing, together with single household houses, condos and townhomes. There are two exceptions: if the house or constructing is newer (first occupied prior to now 15 years) and if the owner solely owns as much as two properties. This proposition would exchange the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995. Beneath Costa-Hawkins, landlords can elevate rents after a tenant strikes out, however Prop 21 would put a restrict on how a lot they will elevate the lease of a vacated unit to fifteen% over three years.
Argument for: Renters want extra protections in California’s costly housing market and the proposition would enable native governments the flexibility to develop extra of these protections.
Argument in opposition to: Extra lease management may worsen the housing disaster by lowering personal builders’ revenue incentive to construct extra housing.
Supporters: The California Democratic Occasion, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Basis who has funded lease management campaigns prior to now.
Opponents: A number of commerce unions, actual property teams, veterans teams and extra.
Proposition 22: Classifies rideshare and supply drivers as contract staff — PASS
Abstract: Establishes app-based drivers – together with Uber and Lyft rideshare drivers and meals supply drivers like DoorDash, Instacart, and many others. – as contract staff as an alternative of staff and establishes labor legal guidelines particular to this type of job. The brand new wage and labor guidelines would come with a minimal wage ground whereas on-line and dealing, healthcare subsidies for frequent drivers and accident insurance coverage. This is able to exempt gig employee drivers from Meeting Invoice 5 (or AB5).
Argument for: Classifying drivers as staff, as is legislation beneath AB5, would make these companies costlier and firms would not have the ability to supply as many positions, which means fewer gig jobs and fewer flexibility for drivers.
Argument in opposition to: The businesses are attempting to make use of the poll proposition to keep away from paying drivers hourly wages and providing them advantages they’re entitled to beneath present California legislation.
Supporters: Firms like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates and Instacart, in addition to a number of chambers of commerce organizations.
Opponents: Outstanding Democrats like Joe Biden, Sen. Kamala Harris and Sen. Elizabeth Warren; Speaker of the State Meeting Anthony Rendon; a number of labor organizations.
Prop. 22: Now that rideshare measure has handed, what does it imply for part-time staff in different California industries?
Proposition 23: Dialysis clinic necessities — FAIL
Abstract: Requires dialysis clinics to have a minimum of one doctor current whereas sufferers are being handled (besides the place there is a scarcity), to report affected person an infection knowledge to the state and to get consent from the state earlier than closing. The measure additionally bans clinics from discriminating on the premise of who’s paying for a affected person’s care.
Argument for: The elevated laws will make clinics safer for sufferers and ensure sufferers with any insurance coverage might be handled equally.
Argument in opposition to: The elevated laws would make care extra pricey for and fewer out there to sufferers.
Supporters: SEIU healthcare staff union
Opponents: For-profit dialysis clinics like DaVita and Fresenius and the California Medical Affiliation.
Proposition 24: Client knowledge privateness protections — PASS
Abstract: Modifies the California Client Privateness Act to drive corporations to honor shoppers’ requests that their knowledge not be shared and to get permission earlier than gathering knowledge on teenagers and youngsters. It additionally would let shoppers decide out of non-public data getting used for advertising and marketing and request incorrect details about them be corrected. The proposition would set up a brand new company to supervise shoppers’ knowledge privateness.
Argument for: The legislation would give individuals with privateness considerations extra management over the place and the way their knowledge is used.
Argument in opposition to: The lengthy and wonky poll initiative incorporates a number of loopholes and provisions that really weaken shopper protections (in some circumstances) in comparison with present California legislation. It additionally provides giant firms a bonus over people with fewer monetary and authorized property.
Supporters: Alastair Mactaggart, a San Francisco actual property developer, put ahead the poll initiative and former presidential candidate Andrew Yang is listed as a supporter.
Opponents: The ACLU of California and Client Federation of California.
Proposition 25: Remove the money bail system, or return to it — FAIL
Abstract: Senate Invoice 10 eradicated the money bail system in California and changed it with an algorithmic threat evaluation methodology that determines who will get launched from jail whereas awaiting trial based mostly on threat to society as an alternative of skill to publish bond. It is a referendum on that legislation, a course of in California that enables the individuals to basically veto or uphold a legislation by placing it on the poll. A sure vote upholds SB 10, whereas a no vote repeals it.
Argument for: SB 10 creates a system that’s fairer to everybody accused of crimes and the bail bonds companies is just placing the difficulty on the poll to attempt to proceed profiting off the money bail system.
Argument in opposition to: The brand new threat evaluation system can be flawed because it nonetheless leaves room for racial bias, so it isn’t a superb alternative for California’s longstanding money bail system.
Supporters: Dozens of California Democratic lawmakers, the California Democratic Occasion and the League of Girls Voters.
Opponents: The American Bail Coalition,a number of chambers of commerce and Human Rights Watch.
Copyright © 2020 KABC-TV. All Rights Reserved.