Voters Group Explains Ballot Propositions

The League of Women Voters (LWV) held a forum at the San Leandro Public Library late last month to help voters understand the 10 state propositions on the November 5 ballot.

Marian Handa of the Eden Area chapter of the LWV guided people through the details at the forum. She worked off the league’s printed guide to the proposition’s pros and cons, also available online at CAvotes.org. The audience followed along intently but asked only a few questions.

Proposition 36

Perhaps getting the most media attention among the state measures so far is Proposition 36, which rolls back several key provisions of Proposition 47 that was passed by voters in 2014. Prop. 47 made some drug and theft felonies into misdemeanors. This year’s Prop 36 would make them back into felonies when committed by repeat offenders.

Supporters of Prop. 36 this year have blamed Prop, 47 for rises in overdose deaths, open drug use, and organized shoplifting. The latter has been blamed for numerous business closures. But voters have rejected earlier attempts to roll back Prop 47.

Opponents of this year’s Prop 36. say Prop. 47 has saved taxpayers considerable money on prisons, which had been so overcrowded that federal courts had ordered their populations reduced. They say those savings have been used for crime-prevention efforts.

Prop. 36 opponents also say that putting more people back in prison is not the best way to deal with worsened theft and drug problems.

There is more information available from supporters of Prop 36., Californians for Safer Communities, at voteyesprop36 com, and from opponents, Stop Prop 36, at stopprisonscam org.

Tackling Unaffordable Housing

Many Californians complain that it’s hard to afford housing these days on the incomes people earn. The two pieces of that are the subject of three different propositions, although one is a bit indirect.

Raising the incomes of some Californians is the goal of Proposition 32, which raises the state’s minimum wage to $18 an hour by January 1, 2026, and then adjusts it each year to keep up with  inflation.

Supporters say it would give an income boost to people badly needing one, while opponents especially in the business community, say it would raise costs and thus inflation, and result in cut hours and job loss.

State law does protect many but not all tenants against rent increases. Extending it to more tenants is the goal of Proposition 33, which removes the restrictions on local rent control that are in the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act.

A number of renter groups support this, while rental property owners oppose it.

Proposition 5 addresses housing by lowering the voter approval threshold for local affordable-housing bonds from the current 2/3 (66.7 percent) to 55 percent.

State Bond Measures

There are two statewide bond issues on the ballot.

Proposition 2 would authorize $10 billion in bonds to build new, public school and community college facilities, or renovate existing facilities. It would help the state fund its share of the costs, usually split with local school districts.

Information is available from supporters, Yes on Prop 2, at yesprop2ca.com. There is not an organized opposition website, but Assemblyman Bill Essayli, Republican form Riverside County, has announced his opposition.

Proposition 4 would authorizes 10 billion in bonds for various projects to deal with effects of climate change. Proposed projects include safe drinking water, wildfire prevention, and protecting communities and natural lands from climate risks.

Laws on Marriage

Two other measures involve laws about marriage

Proposition 3 removes language rendered invalid by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage nationwide. The old language, originally inserted by Proposition 8 in 2008 and banning gay marriage, is unenforceable. But proponents of Prop 3 worry that a rollback of federal gay marriage rights is possible. They want a clear state-level right to gay and interracial marriage just in case.

Opponents argue that unclear wording in the constitution could be construed as removing all restrictions on marriage contained in state laws, opening the door to polygamy, child marriage and incest.

There is little controversy so far over Proposition 35, which makes permanent a current tax on managed health care plans to provide ongoing funding for Medi-Cal and other health care services. There is no organized opposition, not even from those managed health care plans.
 

Should Inmates Be Forced to Work?

Proposition 6 gets rid of something most of us probably think was banned just after the Civil War, involuntary servitude. But a loophole in the 13th Amendment does allow forced labor for those convicted of crimes, if a state allows this.

“Chain gangs” of prisoners crushing rocks and building roads became notorious in some states, with opponents viewing the mostly Black prisoner groups as a throwback to slavery. Most states banned any forced labor by prisoners by the 1950s, but not California and 15 other states.

California inmates can be forced to work while imprisoned. While they are paid, they earn very low wages, compared to similar jobs outside the prison.

Proposition 6 would remove the state constitution’s forced labor provisions for prisoners. Prisoners could agree to work to gain credit against their sentences, or for wages that might have to be negotiated with the prisons under other court rulings and laws.

You can get more information from supporters of Prop 6, Yes on Prop, at voteyesoncaprop6.com. There is no organized opposition.

Questions about Prop. 34

Perhaps the most mysterious of this year’s propositions is Prop. 34, which is derided as “revenge” in pro-Prop 33 TV ads. Its text appears to be about health care, not housing. Prop. 34 garnered the most questions at the September 19 LWV forum.

Prop. 34 got on the ballot through the efforts of the California Apartment Association, whose arguments in favor can be seen at caanet.org.

The opponents, Vote No on 34, (whose website is at noon.34.org), say it is being pushed as revenge that would primarily affect one Los Angeles health care provider, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. That group provides health care and affordable housing, while advocating for rent control, which the CAA opposes.