Saturday, September 22

Breakdown of the Nov. 8 ballot propositions and measures


The Daily Bruin breaks down state, county and city ballot measures that cover marijuana, criminal justice reform and public transportation.

Proposition 51 – School bonds

  • Yes: Would let state sell $9 billion in general obligation bonds for construction and modernization of schools. $7 billion would be allocated to K-12 schools and $2 billion to community colleges.
  • No: Would not let state sell general obligation bonds to K-12 public schools and community colleges.

Proposition 52 – Medi-Cal hospital fee program

  • Yes: Would indefinitely extend an existing charge imposed on most private hospitals.
  • No: Would let existing charge imposed on most private hospitals expire on Jan. 1, 2018.

Proposition 53 – Revenue bond voter approval

  • Yes: Would require statewide voter approval on any state revenue bond more than $2 billion. Projects that would have required direct voter approval under the proposition include the $33 billion California high-speed rail project and the $15.2 billion Twin Tunnels water pipeline.
  • No: Would not require voter approval for state revenue bonds.

Proposition 54 – Public oversight of legislature

  • Yes: Would require state legislature to post bills online for 72 hours before passage. Would also require online access to meeting records and videos.
  • No: Would let state legislature pass bills without publishing them online.

Proposition 55 – Tax increase extension to fund education and healthcare

  • Yes: Would extend higher income tax rates for those earning over $250,000 to 2030. The state would allocate revenue to K-12 schools, community colleges and healthcare.
  • No: Would let higher income tax rates expire at the end of 2018.

Proposition 56 – Cigarette tax

  • Yes: Would increase cigarette tax by $2 per pack, other tobacco products and electronic cigarettes. Revenue would primarily increase funding for health care for low-income Californians.
  • No: Would not change the cigarette tax.

Proposition 57 – Criminal sentences

  • Yes: Would allow some non-violent felony offenders early release and reward inmates for good behavior in rehabilitation and education.
  • No: Would not change the current inmate release process.

Proposition 58 – English proficiency regulations

  • Yes: Would let public schools choose how to teach English learners, either through English-only, bilingual or other programs. It would also require school districts to consider parent or community input in English education.
  • No: Would let public schools continue teaching English-only programs.

Proposition 59 – Citizens United

  • Yes: Would ask state-elected officials to propose and ratify an amendment to overturn Citizens United in support of more regulation of campaign contributions.
  • No: Would not ask elected officials to support overturning Citizens United.

Proposition 60 – Condoms in adult films

  • Yes: Would require adult film performers to wear condoms and producers to pay for performer vaccinations, testing and other medical examinations. Would let any California resident bring civil suits against producers for workplace health violations.
  • No: Would keep current state health regulations regarding condom use.

Proposition 61 – State prescription drug purchases

  • Yes: Would require state agencies pay the lowest price paid by the United States Department of Veteran Affairs for prescription drugs.
  • No: Would allow state agencies to negotiate drug prices.

Proposition 62 – Death penalty repeal

  • Yes: Would repeal the death penalty and replace it with life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Offenders currently sentenced to death penalty would be re-sentenced to life without parole.
  • No: Would keep death penalty.

Proposition 63 – Firearms control

  • Yes: Would require background checks and Department of Justice authorization to purchase ammunition. Would also relieve firearms from individuals convicted of certain crimes and prohibit large-capacity ammunition magazines.
  • No: Would not enact new ammunition regulations.

Proposition 64 – Marijuana legalization

  • Yes: Would legalize recreational use, growth and possession of marijuana for adults over the age of 21 years. The state would regulate and tax non-medical marijuana businesses.
  • No: Would keep recreational marijuana illegal.

Proposition 65 – Plastic bag revenue

  • Yes: Would ban single-use plastic bags and direct revenue from sale of reusable carryout bags to environmental programs.
  • No: Would let stores keep revenue from sale of reusable or paper bags.

Proposition 66 – Death penalty appeals

  • Yes: Would change court procedures for death sentences, including time limits for appeals and increasing the number of available attorneys to handle death penalty cases. Condemned inmates would be housed at any state prison.
  • No: Would not change current court procedure for death sentences.

Proposition 67 – Ban on single-use plastic bags

  • Yes: Would uphold a statewide ban on plastic bags. Stores would have to charge at least 10 cents for carryout bags and could keep revenue.
  • No: Would overturn the ban on single-use plastic bags.

County Measure A

  • Yes: Would institute a 1.5 cent per square foot parcel tax on developed properties. Revenue would go towards construction of new parks and maintenance of existing ones.
  • No: Would not change current taxes.

County Measure M

  • Yes: Would increase sales tax by half a percent to pay for major public transit projects, including a light-rail to Los Angeles International Airport and subways in Westwood. It would also fund street and sidewalk repairs, new bike paths and earthquake retrofits for bridges.
  • No: Would not raise sales tax.

Los Angeles City Measure HHH

  • Yes: Would use a $1.2 billion in general obligation bonds to finance construction of affordable housing in Los Angeles.
  • No: Would not build affordable housing.

Los Angeles City Measure JJJ

  • Yes: Would require developers to include affordable units in new residential buildings and hire local construction workers. This measure would apply to projects with 10 or more units needing special approval from the city.
  • No: Would let developers build residential projects without affordable units.

election-cover

Click the banner to read more election endorsements and analysis.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Share on Reddit

Janae Yip is currently a news contributor covering Westwood, transportation and Los Angeles.


Comments are supposed to create a forum for thoughtful, respectful community discussion. Please be nice. View our full comments policy here.