COC, League of Women Voters offer breakdown of 2020 ballot propositions

From rent control to rules for app-based drivers, registered voters have a dozen ballot measures to consider before heading to the polls.

To help those who have yet to cast their ballot, College of the Canyons political science Professor Phil Gussin and Jim de Bree, a board member of the League of Women Voters of the Santa Clarita Valley, recently offered a virtual breakdown of all 12 propositions:

Prop. 14: Stem cell research

This measure would allow California to borrow $5.5 billion to continue funding the state’s California Institute for Regenerative Medicine for stem cell research and other medical research, therapy development, medical training and the construction of research facilities.

California would issue state general obligation bonds and over three decades taxpayers would repay the $5.5 billion, plus interest. The estimated total cost is $7.8 billion.

A yes vote: Supports issuing $5.5 billion in bonds for stem cell research for brain and nervous system diseases.

A no vote: Prevents the state

from issuing the bonds.

Prop. 15: The ‘split roll’

Known as the “split roll,” this measure would increase taxes on businesses and commercial and industrial real estate worth $3 million or more and the revenue would go toward funding schools and local government.

The measure would specifically amend the state Constitution by requiring commercial and industrial properties to be taxed based on their market value rather than their purchase price. Property taxes on commercial properties at or above the $3 million mark are estimated to rise from $6.5 billion to $11.5 billion, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

A yes vote: Supports revising the constitutional amendment to require said properties to be taxed based on their market value rather than their purchase price.

A no vote: Keeps the status quo of taxing these properties based on their purchase price with annual increases equal to the rate of inflation or 2%.

Prop. 16: Restoring affirmative action

This measure would end the state’s ban on affirmative action and allow schools and public employment to consider race, gender and ethnic diversity as factors in college admissions.

If passed by voters, the measure would discard Prop. 209, which banned preferential treatment based on race, gender and ethnic diversity.

A yes vote: Allows for the repeal of Prop. 209.

A no vote: Keeps the 24-yearold ban on preferential treatment based on those factors.

Prop. 17: Allowing parolees to vote

This measure would allow those currently on parole for felony convictions to vote in California. Currently, under the California Constitution, individuals with felonies cannot vote until their prison term and parole are completed.

A yes vote: Allows people on parole for felony convictions to vote.

A no vote: Continues what the state currently prohibits.

Prop. 18: Voting at age 17

This measure would allow 17-year-olds who will be 18 at the time of the next general election to vote in primary elections and special elections. The California Constitution currently permits individuals who are at least 18 years old on the date of an election to vote in that election.

A yes vote: Supports allowing 17-year-olds to vote under said conditions.

A note vote: Continues the status quo.

Prop. 19: Property tax transfers

Prop. 19 would allow eligible homeowners to transfer their tax-assessed value of existing residence to a replacement residence anywhere within the state and allow tax assessments to be transferred to a more expensive home with an upward adjustment.

Eligible homeowners include individuals who are 55 years or older, people with severe disabilities and victims of natural disasters and hazardous waste contamination.

A yes vote: Supports eligible homeowners to transfer their tax assessments anywhere within the state and to a more expensive home with an upward adjustment.

A no vote: Opposes making these changes.

Prop. 20: Criminal sentencing

This measure would allow theft crimes such as firearm theft, vehicle theft and unlawful use of a credit card to be charged as felonies rather than misdemeanors and require individuals convicted of specified misdemeanors to submit to the collection of DNA samples for the state database. For example, “serial shoplifting” and crimes where the value is between $250 and $950 would be charged as felonies.

A yes vote: Supports this initiative to add crimes to the list of violent felonies for which early parole is restricted.

A no vote: Preserves the status quo.

Prop. 21: Rent control

Prop. 21 would allow cities to establish rent-control laws on residential properties over 15 years old and allow rent increases on rent-controlled properties of up to 15% over three years from the previous tenant’s rent above any increase allowed by local ordinance. Landlords with single-family homes with no more than two properties would be exempt.

A yes vote: Supports allowing local governments to enact rent control on housing that was first occupied over 15 years ago, with an exception for landlords who own no more than two homes with distinct titles or subdivided interests.

A no vote: Opposes the proposal and keeps prohibiting rent control on housing that was first occupied after Feb. 1, 1995, and homes with distinct titles, such as single-family housing.

Prop. 22: App-based drivers as contractors

This measure would define app-based transportation and delivery drivers, such as for Uber and GrubHub, as independent contractors and adopt labor and wage policies specific to app-based drivers and companies.

The measure does not affect employee classification of workers in other industries.

A yes vote: Allows companies not to classify drivers as regular employees but provide them with some benefits that employees receive, such as minimum compensation, vehicle insurance, safety training and sexual harassment policies.

A no vote: Continues the Assembly Bill 5 requirement that app-based drivers be classified as employees and must receive minimum wage and workers’ compensation.

Prop. 23: Dialysis clinic requirements

This measure would require chronic dialysis clinics to have an on-site physician while patients are being treated, report data on dialysis-related infections, obtain consent from the state Health Department before closing a clinic and not discriminating against patients based on their payment for care.

A yes vote: Supports adding these new requirements.

A no vote: Keeps dialysis clinics running as they have.

Prop. 24: Consumer personal information

Prop. 24 would expand the state’s consumer data-privacy laws, including following provisions that allow consumers to direct businesses to not share their personal information and remove the period in which businesses can fix violations before being penalized.

If passed, the measure would also create the Privacy Protection Agency to enforce the state’s consumer data privacy laws.

A yes vote: Enacts the new protections and creates the agency for enforcement.

A no vote: Leaves the state’s data-privacy law as is.

Prop. 25: Replacing cash bail

This measure would overturn the 2018 law that eliminated cash bail statewide and would replace the practice of offering money for early release to those who cannot financially afford to do so, with risk assessments for detained suspects awaiting trials.

A yes vote: Upholds the contested legislation (Senate Bill 10).

A no vote: Keeps in place the use of cash bail for detained suspects awaiting trials.