We recommend: The statewide propositions

The editorial board gave its recommendation on Proposition 15 in Thursday’s newspaper. Here are our recommendations on the other 11 statewide measures on the Nov. 3 ballot.

PROPOSITION 14 » No. This is a $5.5 billion bond measure, with the funds going to stemcell research. While a promising field ofmedical research, we don’t like the idea of the state taking on additional debt in the uncertain COVID-19 economy. The Legislative Analyst’s Office says servicing the bond would take $260 million out of the state general fund each year for about 30 years. This is not the time for this

PROPOSITION 15 » No, for reasons stated on Thursday’s editorial page.

PROPOSITION 16 » Yes. This would allow race to be considered in public employment, education and contracts. Philosophically we don’t like the premise of affirmative action, but as has been proven recently, systemic racism isn’t going away by itself. Reality tops philosophy. We have to try something. PROPOSITION17 » No. Thiswould allow felons the right to vote after they’ve been released from prison but are still on parole. Sorry, but parole is part of the sentence. It’s a test to see whether the criminal got the message.

PROPOSITION 18 » Yes. This would allow people who would be 18 years old at the time of a general election to vote in that year’s primary if they’re just 17. It seems reasonable that if someone is going to be able to vote in November, they should have a say on who will be on the ballot then.

PROPOSITION 19 » No. This expands the existing rules certain classes of homeowners can use to transfer the property tax base of a home destroyed bywildfire or disaster to a new residence.

Sounds good, but Proposition 19 would also likely destroy family farms. That’s because any farm with a property tax base over $1million (that’s most of them) could not be passed on from parent to child without being re-assessed and re-taxed at the value it would have if it were sold.

This would result in a significant jump in tax bill, probably one that in many cases couldn’t be met without selling all or part of the land. PROPOSITION 20 » Yes. This is a measure that tries to correct some of what we see are problems in Proposition 57, passed in 2016. It would change penalties for some thefts, change the way inmates are released into the community, and require DNA collection from adults convicted of some crimes.

We like it primarily because it expands the list of just 23 violent crimes that make inmates ineligible for the early release granted by Proposition 57.

One example: Rape is now only considered a violent crime if done by force or threat, or threat of retaliation on the victim or another. Proposition 20 would add rape of someone mentally of physically unable to give consent, or someone who had been drugged, or someone who had passed out.

Or how about this: Spousal rape is only considered a violent crime if it’s a gang rape. Proposition 20 fixes that. PROPOSITION 21 » No. Would expand local governments’ authority to impose rent control. Sound familiar? It should. It’s almost identical to Proposition 10 on the November 2018 ballot. That lost 59 percent to 41 percent, and there really should be a law against running out the same idea over and over.

Rent control doesn’t increase affordable housing. It may protect those who already have rental homes, but it’s a disincentive to builders to add housing.

PROPOSITION 22 » Yes. This is the gig economy reliefmeasure. It’s designed to allow app-based businesses like Uber, Lyft and Doordash to continue treating their drivers like independent contractors rather than employees.

Since newspapers were also an industry targeted by AB5, we understand how a noblesounding idea can be out of touch with reality. Folks who are paid by the gig don’t have all of the security nets conventional workers do. But it’s a perfect job option for lots and lots of people, which is why they voluntarily signed on.

It’s a valued service for many more, and that’s why it was one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. If Proposition 22 passes, it will continue to grow.

PROPOSITION 23 » No. Sets new requirements on dialysis clinics. And like Proposition 21, this should sound familiar, because an almost identical measure, Proposition 8 was on the November 2018 ballot. It lost 60 percent to 40 percent. It should lose again.

PROPOSITION 24 » No. Would strengthen California’s consumer privacy laws, andset up a state Privacy Protection Agency to enforce those new laws. California already has the strongest privacy protection laws in the nation, and do we really need another multi-million- dollar -sucking state agency?

PROPOSITION25 » No. A no vote would reinstate the money bail option for people arrested on criminal charges. It’s a referendum on the law that eliminated bail and replaced it with a judgement whether or not the arrestee was a threat if released. That sounds like a pretty subjective way to determine who’s released and who isn’t.