|
- 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
-
|
