Voter Guide: State Propositions on the Nov. 6 ballot

Proposition 30: Creates temporary taxes to fund education

Initiated by: Gov. Jerry Brown

Proponents: The California Federation of Teachers, the California Teachers Association, the Democratic State Central Committee, the League of Women Voters, SEIU Local 1000.

Opponents: Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the Small Business Action Committee.

If approved: Increases the state sales tax from 7.25 percent to 7.5 percent for the next four years. Raises income tax on individuals with incomes of $250,000 or more.

If defeated: Cuts statewide education and public-safety program funding by $5.9 billion for period ending July 2013.

Financial impact: An increase of $6 billion in revenue annually for the next seven years, according to figures from the Legislative Analyst’s Office.


Proposition 31: Changes state budget process

Initiated by: California Forward, a coalition of foundations working to reform state and local government.

Proponents: The California Republican Party, Nicholas Berggruen Institute.

Opponents: The California Democratic Party, the California Federation of Teachers, the California League of Conservation Voters, the California Tax Reform Association, the East Bay Tea Party and Health Access California.

If approved: Modifies state budget cycle from a one-year to a two-year budget. Gives the governor unilateral budget decisions in emergency situations. Requires legislators to publish bills three days before votes, as well as restricts legislators from creating new programs or tax deductions without identifying offsets. Allows local governments to modify state laws to meet new budget goals.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: Estimated to cost up to tens of millions of dollars annually for state government. Local governments would gain $200 million in money transfers from the state.


Proposition 32: Restricts collection of political contributions by unions and some corporations

Initiated by: A group financially supported by billionaire physicist Charles Munger and business executive Thomas Siebel.

Proponents: The California Republican Party, Democrats for Education Reform and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association.

Opponents: The California Democratic Party, California Professional Firefighters, labor unions (the AFL-CIO, the California School Employees Association, SEIU and many others) and the League of Women Voters.

If approved: Restricts unions and certain corporations from donating directly to political candidates from payroll deductions. Bans government contractors from donating to the campaigns of elected officials who award them contracts. Individuals, LLCs, partnerships, real estate trusts and super political action committees are excluded from the proposed contribution rules.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: $1 million annually for enforcement of the measure.


Proposition 33: Raises auto insurance rates for drivers without continuous coverage

Initiated by: Chairman of the Mercury (Insurance) General Corporation Jeanne Woodford.

Proponents: The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, firefighters and the California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

Opponents: The Consumer Federation of California, the California Nurses Association and Consumer Watchdog.

If approved: Allows insurance companies to increase rates on drivers with lapses in coverage during a five-year period. Expands “continuous coverage” auto insurance discount to drivers if they switch insurance companies.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: Little to no fiscal effect on insurance premium tax revenues; potentially increases the cost of insurance to drivers who have not maintained continuous coverage.


Proposition 34: Repeals death penalty

Initiated by: Former San Quentin State Prison warden Jeanne Woodford.

Proponents: The ACLU, the California Conference of Catholic Bishops, the California Democratic Party and the League of Women Voters.

Opponents: The California District Attorneys Association, the California State Sheriffs’ Association, the state Republican Party.

If approved: Replaces the death penalty with lifetime imprisonment without parole. Requires prisoners convicted of murder to work while in prison as a way to contribute to a fund for crime investigations.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: Savings of $100 million a year for the first four years and $130 million a year subsequently. During the first four years, a portion of savings would support a project to help law enforcement solve criminal cases.

Proposition 35: Increases fines and prison terms for human trafficking

Initiated by: Facebook executive Chris Kelly.

Proponents: California Against Slavery, the California Police Chiefs Association and the Peace Officers Research Association of California.

Opponents: ACLU of Northern California and the Erotic Providers Legal, Education and Research Project Inc.

If approved: Redefines human trafficking to include creating and distributing child pornography. Increases fines and prison terms for those convicted of trafficking. Requires police officers to receive training on how to handle trafficking cases.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: Initial law enforcement training costs of several million dollars; increased prosecution and correction costs of a few million dollars annually; revenue of several million dollars annually from fines for law enforcement training on trafficking (30 percent), as well as prevention, rescue operations and victims’ services (70 percent).


Proposition 36: Revises ‘three-strikes’ law for criminals

Initiated by: The NAACP Legal Defense Fund and Stanford Law School professor David Mills.

Proponents: District attorneys in San Francisco and Santa Clara County, George Soros, Peter Ackerman and the NAACP.

Opponents: The California Police Chiefs Association, the California District Attorneys Association, the California State Sheriff’s Association and the Los Angeles Police Protective League.

If approved: Modifies the “three strikes” law to impose the life-in-prison penalty only to those committing violent or serious crimes.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: Annual savings of between $70 million to $90 million, but an increase of several million dollars a year for the first few years for new resentencing cases.

Proposition 37: Requires labeling of genetically engineered foods

Initiated by: California Right to Know and advocate Pamm Larry of Chico.

Proponents: Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, Nature’s Path Foods and the Organic Consumers Fund.

Opponents: Coca-Cola, Kellogg, Kraft, General Mills, Grocery Manufacturers Association, Monsanto, Nestle and PepsiCo.

If approved: Requires labeling to identify any genetically engineered raw and processed foods.

If defeated: No change.

Financial impact: Up to $1 million for inspections by the state Department of Health.

Proposition 38: Increases income tax to fund education and pay off state debt

Initiated by: Civil rights attorney Molly Munger.

Proponents: The California State Parent Teacher Association.

Opponents: The California Chamber of Congress’s California Business PAC, the California Democratic Party and the California State Sheriffs’ Association.

If approved: Increases income taxes up to 2.2 percent until 2025 to fund K-12 public schools and early education programs.

If defeated: No change, but if propositions 30 and 38 both fail, the state will need to cut $5.9 billion in funding from education and public-safety programs.

Financial impact: An increase of $10 billion in revenue annually for schools, education programs and debt payment initially.


Proposition 39: Adjusts equation for taxing multistate businesses

Initiated by: Hedge Fund manager Thomas F. Steyer.

Proponents: Californians for Clean Energy & Jobs, the Latin Business Association and the Los Angeles Business Council.

Opponents: The California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce, the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, Friends for Saving California Jobs and the National Tax Limitation Committee.

If approved: Requires multistate businesses to calculate their income taxes based on the percentage of sales made in California. Dedicates $550 million annually for five years to fund the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund for job training in clean energy as well as retrofit projects.

If defeated: No change to current tax structure that allows businesses to based on other criteria.

Financial impact: An increase of $1 billion in additional tax revenues.


Proposition 40: Redraws Senate district political boundaries in California

Initiated by: The California Republican Party.

Proponents: AARP California, the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Democratic Party, the California Republican Party and the League of Women Voters of California.

Opponents: None.

The California Republican Party no longer supports a no vote but could not withdraw the proposition from the ballot.

If approved: Retains current Senate districts until the next census survey.

If defeated: Requires state Senate districts to be redrawn.

Financial impact: If defeated, adds $500,000 in expenses for the state and $500,000 for counties.

Schools »

Read More

Sports »

Read More

People »

Read More

Special Sections »

Special Sections
Read More

Photos of Los Altos

Browse and buy photos