Contra Costa County Ballot

See Also:   Information for the County of Contra Costa
(Elections Office, local League of Women Voters, links to other county election sites)

Polling Location on March 7, 7am-8pm:

Democratic Party; President of the United States

• Al Gore, Democratic
  2,603,865 votes 79.8% (81.3% in party)
• Bill Bradley, Democratic
  640,831 votes 19.7% (18.2% in party)
• Lyndon Larouche, Democratic
  19,340 votes .5% (.5% in party)
• Odessa Lightfoot, Democratic (Write-In)
• Mark Greenstein, Democratic (Write-In)
• Tom O'Brien, Democratic (Write-In)
• Sandra Gandel, Democratic (Write-In)
• Gerald Dalgneau, Democratic (Write-In)

Republican Party; President of the United States

• George W. Bush, Republican
  2,158,489 votes 52.2% (60.6% in party)
• John McCain, Republican
  1,773,494 votes 42.9% (34.8% in party)
• Alan Keyes, Republican
  169,692 votes 4.2% (4% in party)
• Steve Forbes, Republican (Withdrawn)
  14,430 votes .3% (.2% in party)
• Gary Bauer, Republican (Withdrawn)
  10,481 votes .2% (.2% in party)
• Orrin Hatch, Republican (Withdrawn)
  9,157 votes .2% (.2% in party)
• Joe Schriner, Republican (Write-In)
• David Rosenbaum, Republican (Write-In)

American Independent Party; President of the United States

• Howard Phillips, American Independent
  8,931 votes 100% (100% in party)

Libertarian Party; President of the United States

• Harry Browne, Libertarian
  20,771 votes 62.3% (71.7% in party)
• Kip Lee, Libertarian
  4,001 votes 12% (5.8% in party)
• L. Neil Smith, Libertarian
  3,160 votes 9.5% (8.8% in party)
• Larry Hines, Libertarian
  2,969 votes 8.8% (7.4% in party)
• Dave Lynn Hollist, Libertarian
  2,473 votes 7.4% (6.3% in party)

Green Party; President of the United States

• Ralph Nader, Green
  112,104 votes 94.4% (91.9% in party)
• Joel Kovel, Green
  6,689 votes 5.6% (8.1% in party)
• Kent Mesplay, Green (Write-In)

Natural Law Party; President of the United States

• John Hagelin, Natural Law
  5,850 votes 100% (100% in party)

Reform Party; President of the United States

• Donald J. Trump, Reform (Withdrawn)
  15,261 votes 44.3% (37% in party)
• George D. Weber, Reform
  9,376 votes 27.2% (11.2% in party)
• Robert Bowman, Reform
  4,868 votes 14.2% (15% in party)
• John B. Anderson, Reform
  3,148 votes 9.1% (24.4% in party)
• Charles Collins, Reform
  1,825 votes 5.2% (12.4% in party)
• Joel Neuberg, Reform (Write-In)

United States Senator

United States Senator

• Dianne Feinstein, Democratic
  3,749,232 votes 51.2% (95.5% in party)
• Tom Campbell, Republican
  1,690,344 votes 23.1% (56.2% in party)
• Ray Haynes, Republican
  675,984 votes 9.3% (22.5% in party)
• Bill Horn, Republican
  451,051 votes 6.2% (15% in party)
• Michael Schmier, Democratic
  180,405 votes 2.5% (4.5% in party)
• Gail Katherine Lightfoot, Libertarian
  120,132 votes 1.7% (100% in party)
• Medea Susan Benjamin, Green
  99,541 votes 1.4% (74% in party)
• John M. Brown, Republican
  68,122 votes 1% (2.3% in party)
• Linh Dao, Republican
  64,345 votes .8% (2.1% in party)
• JP Gough, Republican
  58,637 votes .8% (1.9% in party)
• Jose Luis "Joe" Camahort, Reform
  46,163 votes .6% (70.4% in party)
• Diane Beall Templin, American Independent
  38,634 votes .5% (100% in party)
• Jan B. Tucker, Green
  35,005 votes .4% (26% in party)
• Brian M. Rees, Natural Law
  26,284 votes .3% (100% in party)
• Valli "Sharp" Sharpe-Geisler, Reform
  19,474 votes .2% (29.6% in party)

United States Representative

United States Representative; District 7

• George Miller, Democratic
  98,451 votes 75.4% (100% in party)
• Christopher A. Hoffman, Republican
  18,926 votes 14.5% (64.4% in party)
• Nicholas "Nick" Mraovich, Republican
  10,503 votes 8% (35.6% in party)
• Martin Sproul, Natural Law
  2,792 votes 2.1% (100% in party)

United States Representative; District 10

• Ellen O. Tauscher, Democratic
  110,702 votes 54.4% (100% in party)
• Claude B. Hutchison, Jr., Republican
  36,257 votes 17.8% (41.3% in party)
• Gordon Blake, Republican
  30,532 votes 14.9% (34.8% in party)
• Dennis M. Kilian, Republican
  21,039 votes 10.3% (23.9% in party)
• Valerie Janlois, Natural Law
  5,324 votes 2.6% (100% in party)

State Senator; District 7

• Tom Torlakson, Democratic
  122,081 votes 47.5% (100% in party)
• Dick Rainey, Republican
  119,543 votes 46.6% (93% in party)
• Daryl Chilimidos, Republican
  9,114 votes 3.5% (7% in party)
• Mark Billings, Natural Law
  6,288 votes 2.4% (100% in party)

State Senator; District 9

• Don Perata, Democratic
  147,721 votes 82.2% (100% in party)
• Linda J. Marshall, Republican
  22,619 votes 12.5% (100% in party)
• James M. Eyer, Libertarian
  9,569 votes 5.3% (100% in party)

Member of the State Assembly; District 11

• Joe Canciamilla, Democratic
  56,087 votes 54.5% (77% in party)
• Jim Diaz, Republican
  26,673 votes 25.9% (100% in party)
• Lou Rosas, Democratic
  16,755 votes 16.2% (23% in party)
• Frank J. Manske, Libertarian
  3,518 votes 3.4% (100% in party)

Member of the State Assembly; District 14

• Dion Louise Aroner, Democratic
  84,271 votes 82.8% (100% in party)
• Jerald Udinsky, Republican
  12,207 votes 12% (100% in party)
• Daniel C. Burton, Libertarian
  5,390 votes 5.2% (100% in party)

Member of the State Assembly; District 15

• Lynne C. Leach, Republican
  95,405 votes 65.5% (100% in party)
• Greg Rolen, Democratic
  50,260 votes 34.5% (100% in party)

County

Supervisor; County of Contra Costa; District 2

• Gayle B. Uilkema
  33,839 votes 68.1%
• Ronald E. Carpenter
  9,963 votes 20.1%
• Sean White
  5,864 votes 11.8%

Supervisor; County of Contra Costa; District 3

• Donna Gerber
  30,965 votes 47.9%
• Curt Kinney
  19,758 votes 30.6%
• Brian D. Thiessen
  13,895 votes 21.5%

Supervisor; County of Contra Costa; District 5

• Mary Rocha
  13,176 votes 27.4%
• Federal D. Glover
  12,607 votes 26.2%
• Quintin Kidd
  9,637 votes 20.1%
• Noble O. Elcenko
  7,922 votes 16.5%
• George deLaCruz
  2,887 votes 6.0%
• Sandra Fredrickson
  1,811 votes 3.8%

City

Member, City Council; City of Pinole

• David C. Cole
  2,610 votes 51.6%
• Dave Blase
  1,613 votes 31.9%
• Lorene Scalora
  838 votes 16.6%

Judicial

Judge of the Superior Court; County of Contra Costa; Office 13

• William Daniel "Dan" O'Malley
  116,092 votes 52.5%
• Joel Golub
  54,583 votes 24.7%
• John M. "Jack" Starr
  50,518 votes 22.8%

Proposition 1A Gambling on Tribal Lands
4,727,511 / 64.4% Yes votes ...... 2,608,435 / 35.6% No votes

Modifies existing gambling prohibitions to authorize Governor to negotiate compacts with federally recognized Indian tribes, subject to legislative ratification, for operation of slot machines, lottery games, and banking and percentage card games on Indian lands. Fiscal Impact: Uncertain fiscal effect on state and local tax revenues ranging from minor impact to significant annual increases. State gambling license fees of tens of millions of dollars annually.

Proposition 12 Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000. (The Villaraigosa-Keeley Act)
4,634,942 / 63.2% Yes votes ...... 2,694,337 / 36.8% No votes

This act provides two billion one hundred million dollars ($2,100,000,000) to protect land around lakes, rivers, and streams and the coast to improve water quality and ensure clean drinking water; to protect forests and plant trees to improve air quality; to preserve open space and farmland threatened by unplanned development; to protect wildlife habitats; and to repair and improve the safety of state and neighborhood parks. Fiscal Impact: State cost of $3.6 billion over 25 years (average cost of about $144 million per year) to repay bonds. State and local parks' operating costs of potentially tens of millions of dollars annually.

Proposition 13 Safe Drinking Water, Clean Water, Watershed Protection, and Flood Protection Bond Act
4,721,624 / 64.8% Yes votes ...... 2,559,706 / 35.2% No votes

This act provides for a bond issue of one billion nine hundred seventy million dollars ($1,970,000,000) to provide funds for a safe drinking water, water quality, flood protection, and water reliability program. Fiscal Impact: State cost of up to $3.4 billion over 25 years (average cost of about $135 million per year) to repay bonds. Potential unknown local project operation and maintenance costs.

Proposition 14 California Reading and Literacy Improvement and Public Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act of 2000
4,276,519 / 59.0% Yes votes ...... 2,966,239 / 41.0% No votes

This act provides for a bond issue of three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000) to provide funds for the construction and renovation of public library facilities in order to expand access to reading and literacy programs in California's public education system and to expand access to public library services for all residents of California. Fiscal Impact: State cost of $600 million over 25 years (average cost of about $24 million per year) to repay bonds. One-time local matching costs of $190 million, plus potential additional operating costs of over $10 million annually.

Proposition 15 The Hertzberg-Polanco Crime Laboratories Construction Bond Act of 1999
3,248,618 / 46.5% Yes votes ...... 3,739,929 / 53.5% No votes

This act provides for a bond issue of two hundred twenty million dollars ($220,000,000) to provide funds for a program for the construction, renovation, and infrastructure costs associated with the construction of new local forensic laboratories and the remodeling of existing local forensic laboratories. Fiscal Impact: State cost of $377 million over 25 years (average cost of about $15 million per year) to repay bonds. Local government costs of $20 million (one-time) and potentially millions of dollars in annual operating costs.

Proposition 16 Veterans’ Homes Bond Act of 2000
4,373,887 / 62.3% Yes votes ...... 2,644,643 / 37.7% No votes

Fiscal Impact: This proposition would allow the state to sell $50 million in general obligation bonds to (1) replace $24 million in currently authorized lease-payment bonds for new veterans' homes and (2) provide $26 million in additional bonds for new or existing veterans' homes. This would result in a net state cost of about $33 million over 25 years, with costs of around $1 million per year.

Proposition 17 Lotteries. Charitable Raffles
4,085,260 / 58.7% Yes votes ...... 2,875,142 / 41.3% No votes

Modifies current constitutional prohibition against private lotteries to permit legislative authorization of raffles conducted by private nonprofit organizations for beneficial and charitable purposes. Fiscal Impact: Probably no significant fiscal impact on state and local governments.

Proposition 18 Murder: Special Circumstances
5,072,130 / 72.5% Yes votes ...... 1,926,068 / 27.5% No votes

Provides special circumstances warranting death penalty or life without parole exist for intentional murders committed in connection with kidnapping or arson or committed by "means of" rather than "while" lying in wait. Fiscal Impact: Unknown, probably minor, additional state costs.

Proposition 19 Murder. BART and CSU Peace Officers
5,089,043 / 73.6% Yes votes ...... 1,829,503 / 26.4% No votes

Provides second degree murder of peace officer employed by BART or State University is punishable by life imprisonment without possibility of parole where aggravating circumstances are present. Fiscal Impact: Unknown, probably minor, additional state costs.

Proposition 20 California State Lottery. Allocation for Instructional Materials.
3,692,563 / 53.0% Yes votes ...... 3,280,210 / 47.0% No votes

Provides one-half of any increase beyond the current amount allocated to public education from state lottery revenues be allocated for purchase of instructional materials. Fiscal Impact: In the near term, tens of millions of dollars in annual lottery revenues that go to public education would be earmarked for instructional materials, with unknown earmarked amounts in future years.

Proposition 21 Juvenile Crime
4,455,530 / 62.0% Yes votes ...... 2,728,078 / 38.0% No votes

Increases punishment for gang-related felonies, home-invasion robbery, carjacking, witness intimidation and drive-by shootings; and creates crime of gang recruitment activities. Fiscal Impact: State costs of more than $330 million annually; one-time costs of $750 million. Potential local costs of up to more than $100 million annually, and one-time costs of $200 million to $300 million.

Proposition 22 Limit on Marriages
4,579,386 / 61.2% Yes votes ...... 2,897,689 / 38.8% No votes

Adds a provision to the Family Code providing that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Probably no fiscal effect on the state or local governments.

Proposition 23 "None of the Above" Ballot Option
2,339,915 / 36.3% Yes votes ...... 4,105,732 / 63.7% No votes

Provides that voters may vote for "none of the above," but such votes will not be counted in determining who wins election. Fiscal Impact: Generally minor costs to state and county governments.

Proposition 25 Election Campaigns. Contributions and Spending Limits. Public Financing. Disclosures
2,429,183 / 34.8% Yes votes ...... 4,556,830 / 65.2% No votes

Provides for public financing of candidate and ballot measure campaign costs, disclosure of top contributors and fund-raising time restrictions; establishes contribution, spending limits; and bans corporate contributions. Fiscal Impact: State costs of more than $55 million annually offset to an unknown extent. Potential local government costs of several million dollars annually.

Proposition 26 School Facilities. Local Majority Vote. Bonds, Taxes
3,499,678 / 48.8% Yes votes ...... 3,676,062 / 51.2% No votes

Authorizes local voter approval by majority vote, not current two-thirds, for school construction and improvement bonds and property taxes in excess of 1% to pay bonds. Fiscal Impact: Local school costs-- potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually statewide within a decade-- depending on results of voter action on future local school bond issues. Potential state savings in the longer run.

Proposition 27 Elections. Term Limit Declarations for Congressional Candidates
2,717,209 / 40.4% Yes votes ...... 4,004,393 / 59.6% No votes

Permits congressional candidates to voluntarily sign non-binding declaration of intention to serve no more than three terms in House of Representatives or two terms in the United States Senate. Requires placement of information on ballots and state-sponsored voter education materials when authorized by candidates. Candidates may appear on ballot without submitting declaration. Fiscal Impact: Unknown, but probably not significant, election costs to the state and counties.

Proposition 28 Repeal of Proposition 10 Tobacco Surtax
1,999,141 / 27.8% Yes votes ...... 5,198,554 / 72.2% No votes

Repeals additional $. 50 per pack tax on cigarettes and equivalent increase in tax on tobacco products enacted by Proposition 10. Eliminates funding for Proposition 10 child development and anti-smoking programs. Fiscal Impact: Reduced state revenues and expenditures of $670 million annually. Annual decreases in other state General Fund revenues of $7 million and local government revenues of $6 million. Loss of potential long-term state and local savings.

Proposition 29 1998 Indian Gaming Compacts
3,630,323 / 53.1% Yes votes ...... 3,209,950 / 46.9% No votes

A "Yes" vote approves, a "No" vote rejects a 1998 law which authorized certain tribal-state gaming compacts, provided procedures for future negotiations with tribes, and designated the Governor to negotiate with tribes. Fiscal Impact: Probably no significant fiscal impacts on state and local governments.

Proposition 30 Insurance Claims Practices. Civil Remedies.
2,221,290 / 31.6% Yes votes ...... 4,813,631 / 68.4% No votes

A "Yes" vote approves, a "No" vote rejects legislation that:

• restores right to sue another person's insurer for insurer's unfair claims settlement practices;
• allows such lawsuits only if insurer rejects a settlement demand and injured party obtains a larger judgment or award against insured party;
• bars such lawsuits against public entities; workers' compensation insurers; and professional liability insurers under certaincircumstances; or if convicted of driving under the influence;
• authorizes requests for consensual binding arbitration of claims under $50,001 against parties covered by insurance. Insurers agreeing to arbitration cannot be sued for unfair practices.

Proposition 31 Insurance Claims Practices. Civil Remedy Amendments. Referendum
1,969,492 / 28.4% Yes votes ...... 4,955,137 / 71.6% No votes

Measure A -- City of El Cerrito (Approved by two-thirds of the voters)
5,918 / 67.0% Yes votes ...... 2,913 / 33.0% No votes

Shall the City of El Cerrito impose a special tax in the maximum yearly amount of $58.46 per single family residential unit, and comparable amounts for multifamily and nonresidential property, collected with the property tax, for up to 20 years, to renovate the Swim Center, rehabilitate Canyon Trail Clubhouse, restore restrooms at Huber, Poinsett and Harding Parks and establish a dedicated fund with yearly and mandatory contributions from the general fund to maintain and replace city capital facilities."

Measure B -- City of Oakley (Majority Vote)
4,097 / 75.0% Yes votes ...... 1,368 / 25.0% No votes

Shall an ordinance be adopted to elect members of the City Council of the City of Oakley at-large rather than by district?

Measure C Special Tax -- Diablo Community Services District
233 / 46.2% Yes votes ...... 271 / 53.8% No votes

Shall Ordinance No. 99-47 of the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County be approved so as to authorize a one-time special tax of no more than $75 per residential property to fund the development and consideration of a general plan amendment and zoning ordinance regulations to establish in the Diablo Community Services District area a Floor Area Ratios proportionality between houses and their lot sizes?

Measure D Advisory Measure -- Diablo Community Services District
233 / 46.1% Yes votes ...... 272 / 53.9% No votes

Should the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors amend the General Plan and the Zoning Code as they apply to the Diablo area to adopt a Floor Area Ratio Ordinance substantially in the form mailed to the Diablo residents on or about December 10, 1999, and a copy of which is available for public inspection at the District 3 Supervisor's office 309 Diablo Road, Danville, CA, so as to provide proportionality between house and lot size?