The 13 statewide measures on the November ballot address issues ranging from infrastructure development to the government’s ability to seize private property. Five of the propositions come from the Legislature, with the governor’s backing. The other eight were placed on the ballot by petition, a process that gives California’s residents a chance to vote directly to change laws.
Proposition 1A. Should California amend the state constitution to strictly protect transportation funding?
Proponents argue that the state desperately needs new roads and highways to relieve traffic congestion. The state taxes meant to improve transportation - approximately $2 billion a year - are used for other purposes like health care and education. Opponents argue that the amendment is too severe in limiting emergency appropriations from the funds, and will hurt education funding.
Proposition 1B. Should California sell $19.9 billion in bonds to fund transportation projects? Proponents argue that Proposition 1B makes crucial transportation improvements that will decrease congestion and includes strict accountability. Opponents are skeptical that legislators will spend responsibly and object to increasing the state’s debt.
Proposition 1C. Should California sell $2.85 billion in bonds to fund housing programs for needy residents?
Proponents argue this proposition would provide shelters and homeownership assistance to those in need without raising taxes. Low-income seniors, battered women, the disabled and veterans would all receive assistance. Opponents call the measure irresponsible spending and reiterate that selling bonds is a form of state debt.
Proposition 1D. Should California sell $10.4 billion in bonds to improve the infrastructure of public schools?
Opponents argue that this would be a short-term fix and only wealthy school districts will benefit because the proposition requires 50 percent in matching funds from local districts. But supporters hail 1D as an effective fiscal strategy to strengthen education overall.
Proposition 1E. Should California sell $4.09 billion in bonds to fund flood management and levee protection?
Proponents refer to the Hurricane Katrina disaster as proof that flood controls need bolstering. Opponents are against borrowing money to pay off what many deem a federal responsibility.
Proposition. 83: Should California limit where sex offenders can live to locations more than 2,000 feet from parks and schools and require electronic monitoring of all offenders? Supporters claim the proposition will protect children by tracking offenders and limiting their access to high-risk locations. Opponents point out that offenders would be unable to live in dense urban areas like San Francisco, which would move the safety concern to rural communities with fewer resources rather than eliminating it. The electronic monitoring program could cost more than $500 million.
Proposition. 84: Should California issue $5.4 billion in bonds for a variety of projects related to water supply and safety and parks and public land?
Supporters say funds from the bonds would finance water infrastructure and natural resources that have been lacking in support, and increase California’s water supply to allow for its population growth. Opponents say the bonds primarily would benefit environmental interest groups.
Proposition. 85: Should California amend the state constitution to impose mandatory parental notification and a 48-hour waiting period on minors seeking an abortion?
Proponents say that teen girls would be less likely to have unprotected sex if they don’t have access to private abortions and that parents have a right to know about their daughters’ medical procedures. The amendment allows exceptions for medical emergencies and judicial waivers. But critics say the proposition could hurt teens, who would be less likely to seek safe medical care if they can’t count on confidentiality. They also describe this initiative as a continuing effort to chip away at abortion rights.
Proposition 86. Should California raise the cigarette tax by $2.60 per pack?
Proponents argue that taxing tobacco would save lives and raise funds for critical health services. Opponents contend that corporations and HMOs will pocket some of the funding and that there is no guarantee how the money would be spent.
Proposition. 87: Should California raise $4 billion for clean alternative energy projects through taxing oil producers? Supporters argue the initiative would force oil companies to contribute to the development of environmentally safe, renewable resources. Opponents say that the tax hike will get passed on to consumers at the pump and depress California’s local oil industry at the same time.
Proposition 88: Should California impose a $50 tax on each property owner to provide additional school funding?
Supporters of the parcel tax say that it would fund needed projects like textbooks and smaller classroom size. Opponents, including both the Democratic and Republican parties, argue that this bond would raise taxes while benefiting too few schools and school programs and disproportionately affect smaller property owners.
Proposition 89: Should California tax businesses to publicly fund political campaigns?
Supporters say this initiative will clean up California politics by limiting campaign donations. Opponents argue that the proposition is biased, allowing only some groups to continue funding political campaigns while excluding others.
Proposition 90: Should California limit government seizure of private land and allow property-owners to sue government agencies when new laws affect their property values?
Proponents of the initiative say that it would curb governmental abuses of power and protect the rights of property owners. Opponents say it goes too far, putting governmental agencies like school districts at risk of expensive lawsuits and limiting future laws such as environmental legislation.
Information from California Voter Information Guide and www.smartvoter.org.
