This Guide was prepared and illustrated by Alfred Twu.
Prop 1 would authorize $4 billion in affordable housing bonds – enough to fund 100,000 homes.
California Democratic Party, labor unions, and many community groups have endorsed Prop 1.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Back in 2004, California passed an extra 1% income tax on millionaires to fund mental health services. Prop 2 would allocate some funds from that tax to authorize a $2 billion bond to fund supportive housing.
California Democratic Party, labor unions, and many community groups have endorsed Prop 2.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 3 would authorize an $8.877 billion bond for water projects. While there are some good projects in the mix, most of the funding is earmarked for projects benefiting those that helped pay to get this massive barrel of pork on the ballot, including big ag and dam interests. The Sierra Club recommends a No vote. We just passed a water bond in June 2018 – let’s reject Prop 3 and come back in 2020 with a better plan. The California Democratic Party did not take a position on Prop 3.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 4 would authorize a $1.5 billion bond for children’s hopsital expansions and retrofits.
California Democratic Party has endorsed Prop 4.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Currently, property taxes in California are based on price at time of purchase, with a below-inflation annual increase. However, when people move and buy a new home, usually they will have to pay full taxes. Currently, there are exemptions for people over 55. Realtors put Prop 5 on the ballot to expand the number of exemptions.
California Democratic Party and unions oppose Prop 5, as nearly all the benefit would go to the rich, and schools and local governments would lose up to $1 billion a year each.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 6 would repeal the recent 12-cent/gallon gas tax. This would remove $3-5 billion a year in transportation funding from bridges, highways, and transit.
California Democratic Party and unions oppose Prop 6.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 7 would allow the state to extend Daylight Savings Time to be year-round, eliminating the time changes. Sunrise and sunset would be later in the winter than currently.
California Democratic Party endorses Prop 7.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Currently, private clinics provide most kidney dialysis services. Prop 8 would limit their profits to 15%, and require any additional money to go back into services or lowered prices. Labor unions want clinics to address problems of understaffing. The California Democratic Party also endorses Prop 8.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 9 is a *****ing dumpster fire that a billionaire paid to get on the ballot, only to have the courts declare it unconstitutional. Please don’t sign any more of his ballot measures to divide California into multiple states.
Prop 10 would repeal Costa-Hawkins, allowing cities to pass stronger forms of rent control, such as vacancy control (no rent increases between tenants), rent control on single family houses, and rent control on buildings built after 1995.
The California Democratic Party, tenant and community groups, and unions endorse Prop 10. East Bay for Everyone also endorses Prop 10, YIMBY Action was divided among Yes and No and did not reach a consensus.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 11, funded by private ambulance corporation AMR, would give ambulance companies an exemption from labor laws, allowing them to require staff to be on call during their lunch breaks. What could possibly go wrong? Unions and the California Democratic Party oppose Prop 11.
https://ballotpedia.org/
Prop 12 sets minimum cage sizes for chickens, cows, and pigs. The Humane Society and the California Democratic Party endorse Prop 12. Meat corporations oppose it, PETA also opposes it because they don’t think it goes far enough and are concerned it might give consumers a false sense that things are OK.
https://ballotpedia.org/
I’m going with No on Proposition 7. If we are to lock in a single time setting, why in the world would we want to have it at PDT, rather than PST? The idea of kids having to get up in the 3 months of the year — I still have horrible memories of this when I was a student in the seventies — it will be a bad show. Plus kids & teens shouldn’t be getting up so early, and this will just make it harder.
I tend to agree with you. However, I don’t care enough either way and Alfred – who did the illustrations and text – definitely did.
Because more light in the evening is a good thing. I’m voting YES.
I totally agree… but why make dst permanent?
Shifting back and forth has been very bad for our health and our emotional stability, but how about we just cut out daylight savings time altogether?
We adjust to living in standard time… all the time!
Funny, I was just going over the propositions today, and putting together my choices. Mine were exactly the same as this guide!
California NAMI the country’s largest grass-roots advocacy organization for mental health clients and their families is opposing prop 2, stating the money will go to political cronies and not help the target population, actually making homelessness worse. Vote NO on Prop 2!
Good information, Chuck. Mental health services for the homeless are direly needed, and I hate to cut into funds earmarked for that purpose. I don’t know how I will vote on this yet, but I will check what NAMI has to say.
The CA state NAMI is not opposing this, only one local chapter of NAMI that is not sympathetic to progressive mental health approaches. See my longer comment.
You are wrong. The California state NAMI is not opposing Prop. 2. There is only one branch of NAMI, in Contra Costa county, that is opposing it. My friend who is a patients rights activist says that particular local NAMI branch is known for being unsympathetic to patients rights and in favor of forced treatment, as opposed to more holistic and progressive approaches. The people who are actually affected by this proposed change, people who are in the mental health system as current or former patients, for the most part support prop. 2 (because they believe that good mental and emotional health begins with having a roof over your head). There are no patients rights organizations (that represent patients, not their family members) that are opposing this to my knowledge. If anyone knows of one, please let us know. The charge of cronyism is very weak (and trumped up) because the opponents would prefer that this money not be used for housing.
where did you find this information?
NAMI’s site says otherwise: https://www.namicaadvocacy.org/prop2
just went to NAMI and they support prop. 2 https://www.namicaadvocacy.org/prop2
Prop 2:
I agree with Chuck and am voting no.
Quoting the Green Party of Alameda County Voter Guide (https://acgreens.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/gpac-vg-11-18web.pdf):
“$6 billion for 20,000 units? Yep, ¼ million dollars a shot. It
would be cheaper to buy today’s overpriced family homes
and give people rooms in them.”
Prop 2 is a giveaway to developers. The Contra Costa chapter of NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness) opposes proposition 2, and their argument is found in the official voter information guide: http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/propositions/2/arguments-rebuttals.htm
Prop 4:
Why is public money being used to fund private hospitals?
From the League of Women Voters (https://lwvc.org/news/our-voting-recommendations-november-ballot-measures):
“While the League supports quality healthcare for all Californians, Prop 4 would use $1.5 billion in public, general obligation bond money to support privately-owned children’s hospitals, along with five children’s hospitals in the University of California system. State funds should not be used to support private facilities. This principle stands even when, as is the case in this measure, the facilities serve severely ill children. The bond money would be used for construction, expansion, renovation, and equipment projects. These are capital improvements that could be funded either through revenues the private hospitals generate or through capital campaigns (where, for example, a building is named after a donor).”
California NAMI is supporting Prop. 2, contrary to the misinformation you are posting here. Maybe do your homework before posting? As far as cramming mental health clients into single family homes with a bunch of strangers, do you think your own mental health would benefit from such a living situation?
Jenny,
I have to waste my time to type a response to you. Read what I wrote in bold before being arrogant in telling me to do my homework. I know full well what you stated. That’s why I specified the the matter in bold.
Furthermore, if we disagree, we disagree, but don’t be arrogant and say that I spread misinformation. The links I provided are functional.
No on 8. The Unions should organize and bargain directly with dialysis providers. Using a proposition as a forum to consider a one-size fits all proposal is wrong.
My personal recommendations differ from Alfred. You can see them here:
http://politics.voxpublica.org/2018/11/04/margas-recommendations-on-2018-california-propositions/