California Propositions 2020: Latest Results

California Propositions 2020: Latest Results

Taylor Martinez

Prop 14: Authorizes bonds continuing stem cell research

Results (10:00am): YES (51.1%), NO (48.9%)

Summary: Authorizes $5.5 billion state bonds for: stem cell and other medical research, including training, research facility construction, administrative costs. Dedicates $1.5 billion to brain- related diseases. Expands related programs.

Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to repay bonds estimated at about $260 million per year over the next roughly 30 years.

 

 

Prop 15: Increases funding sources for public schools, community colleges, and local government sources by changing tax assessment of commercial and industrial property.

Results (10:00am): YES (48.3%), NO (51.7%)

Summary: Taxes such properties based on current market value, instead of purchase price.

Fiscal Impact: Increased property taxes on $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion in new funding to local governments and schools.

 

Local coverage:

Prop. 15, The California Schools and Local Communities Funding Act

 

 

Prop 16: Allows diversity as a factor in public employment, education, and contracting decisions. Legislative constitutional amendment. 

Results (10:00am): YES (43.9%), NO (56.1%)

Summary: Permits government decision-making policies to consider race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in order to address diversity by repealing constitutional provision prohibiting such policies.

Fiscal Impact: No direct fiscal effect on state and local entities. The effects of the measure depend on the future choices of state and local government entities and are highly uncertain.

 

 

Prop 17: Restores the right to vote after completion of prison term. Legislative constitutional amendment. 

PROP 17 HAS PASSED

Results (10:00am): YES (59%), NO (41%)

Summary: Restores voting rights upon completion of prison term to persons who have been disqualified from voting while serving a prison term.

Fiscal Impact: Annual county costs, likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars statewide, for voter registration and ballot materials. One-time state costs, likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, for voter registration cards and systems.

 

 

Prop 18: Amends California Constitution to permit 17-year-olds to vote in primary and special elections if they will turn 18 by the next general election and be otherwise eligible to vote. Legislative constitutional amendment. 

Results (10:00am): YES (44.9%), NO (55.1%)

Summary: Amends California Constitution to permit 17-year-olds to vote in primary and special elections if they will turn 18 by the next general election and be otherwise eligible to vote. Legislative constitutional amendment.

Fiscal Impact: Increased statewide county costs likely between several hundreds of thousands of dollars and $1 million every two years. Increased one-time costs to the state of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

 

 

Prop 19: Changes certain property tax rules. Legislative constitutional amendment. 

Results (10:00am): YES (51.5%), NO (48.5%)

Summary: Allows homeowners who are over 55, disabled, or wildfire/disaster victims to transfer primary residence’s tax base to replacement residence. Changes taxation of family-property transfers. Establishes fire protection services fund.

Fiscal Impact: Local governments could gain tens of millions of dollars of property tax revenue per year, probably growing over time to a few hundred million dollars per year. Schools could receive similar property tax gains.

 

 

Prop 20: Restricts parole for certain offenses currently considered to be non-violent. Authorizes felony sentences for certain offenses currently treated only as misdemeanors. Initiative statute. 

PROP 20 HAS FAILED

Results (10:00am): YES (37.7%), NO (62.3%)

Summary: Limits access to parole program established for non-violent offenders who have completed the full term of their primary offense by eliminating eligibility for certain offenses.

Fiscal Impact: Increase in state and local correctional, court, and law enforcement costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually, depending on implementation.

 

Local Coverage:

Proposition 20; Past and Current California Leaders Chime In

 

 

Prop 21: Expands local government’s authority to enact rent control on residential property. Initiative statute. 

PROP 21 HAS FAILED

Results (10:00am): YES (40.2%), NO (59.8%)

Summary: Allows local governments to establish rent control on residential properties over 15 years old. Local limits on rate increases may differ from statewide limit.

Fiscal Impact: Overall, a potential reduction in state and local revenues in the high tens of millions of dollars per year over time. Depending on actions by local communities, revenue losses could be less or more.

 

 

Prop 22: Exempts app-based transportation and delivery companies from providing employee benefits to certain drivers. Initiate statue. 

Results (10:00am): YES (58.4%), NO (41.6%)

Summary: Classifies app-based drivers as “independent contractors,” instead of “employees,” and provides independent-contractor drivers other compensations, unless certain criteria are met.

Fiscal Impact: Minor increase in state income taxes paid by rideshare and delivery company drivers and investors.

 

Local coverage:

Prop 22 Exclusively Makes App Ride Share and Delivery Drivers Independent Contractors

 

 

Prop 23: Establishes state requirements for kidney dialysis clinics. Requires on-site medical professional. Initiative statue. 

PROP 23 HAS FAILED

Results (10:00am): YES (36%), NO (64%)

Summary: Requires physician, nurse practitioner or physician assistant on site during dialysis treatment. Prohibits clinics from reducing services without state approval. Prohibits clinics from refusing to treat patients based on payment source.

Fiscal Impact: Increased state and local government costs likely in the low tens of millions of dollars annually.

 

Local Coverage:

Prop 23 would make changes to dialysis care requirements

 

 

Prop 24: Amends consumer privacy laws. Initiative statute. 

Results (10:00am): YES (56.1%), NO (43.9%)

Summary: Permits consumers to: prevent businesses from sharing personal information, correct inaccurate personal information, and limit businesses’ use of “sensitive personal information,” including precise geolocation, race, ethnicity, and health information. Establishes California Privacy Protection Agency.

Fiscal Impact: Increased annual state costs of at least $10 million, but unlikely exceeding low tens of millions of dollars, to enforce expanded consumer privacy laws. Some costs would be offset by penalties for violating these laws.

 

 

Prop 25: Referendum on laws that replaced money bail with system based on public safety and flight risk.

Results (10:00am): YES (44.6%), NO (55.4%)

Summary: A “Yes” vote approves, and a “No” vote rejects, law replacing money bail with system based on public safety and flight risk.

Fiscal impact: Increased costs possibly in mind hundreds of millions of dollars annually for a new process for release from jail prior to trial. Decreased county jail costs, possibly in high tens of millions of dollars annually.

 

 

The information on these props is cited from official ballot guide as well as from Ballotpedia and CalMatters

Trending Stories