We know educational success has much to do with safe, quality facilities, and while funds have been spent, lower income areas still have too many substandard structures. There is a sliding distribution scale that is a good start to prioritizing highest need schools in poor areas.

Passage of Prop 2 is critical to our children’s health, safety, and educational progress. At the same time, the measure’s funding formula is not equitable…. While the League of Women Voters of California urges the state to create an equitable funding formula that addresses the dire needs of our most underserved students, we support Prop 2 because providing no funding would hurt all students.

Voters should support this well-crafted measure to invest in California schools. It would modernize classrooms and campuses, many of which have gone for so long without upgrades and repairs that they could charitably be called neglected, if not run-down.

Vote YES on Prop 3 to protect the fundamental right to marry, regardless of gender or race.

It is clear that a revision in that status of Obergefell by today’s US Supreme Court could, under Article 6, Sec. 2 of the Constitution, invalidate the California Constitution, but in light of the threat, particularly if it is left to the states, it is important for California and for IMPACT to provide faithful and political state Constitutional support for the current law of the land and the equal justice it upholds.

Despite the existence of modern legal safeguards guaranteeing marriage equality, California’s Constitution carries the shameful stain of language declaring that only marriage between a man and a woman will be recognized by the state. Prop 3 would enshrine marriage equality in the California Constitution. This upholds our state’s values of fairness, equality, and non-discrimination and ensures permanent protection for the rights of all individuals to marry the person they love, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, or race.

Proposition 3 gives Californians an opportunity to formally renounce a wrongful moment in our voting history and step forward to positively affirm that bigotry toward same-sex couples has no place in our state or its Constitution.

Vote YES on Prop 4 for $10 billion in bonds to help California meet climate change challenges.

The impacts from uncertain weather conditions prompted by climate change are never ending. This revenue is not money operating in a vacuum since these funds are combined after disasters with federal funds as well as for ongoing measures to prevent disasters.

The economic toll of climate change is immense, with billions spent on disaster response, health impacts, and infrastructure repair. We have an urgent need for proactive measures to combat increased wildfire risks, sea-level rise, and severe droughts. By funding critical projects, Prop 4 will enhance resilience, protect communities, and ensure California continues to lead in environmental stewardship and innovation.

Proposition 4 is a $10 billion grab bag of spending on climate, fire prevention, energy, conservation and agriculture projects so disparate that this bond measure almost defies categorization. But it is still better to spend money today to prepare for climate change than to pay much more to respond in the future.

Vote YES on Prop 5 to create more housing that is affordable for low-income and middle-income Californians.

Prop 5 would reduce the voting margin necessary to approve local bonds and taxes for affordable housing, transportation, parks and other public infrastructure, from 66.7% to 55%. The constitutional amendment is essential to eliminate the anti-democratic supermajority vote requirement that hinders the approval of local housing and infrastructure bonds.

Proposition 5 on the Nov. 5 ballot would get California closer to majority rule by lowering the threshold to pass local bond measures to 55% instead of 66.7%. We think it’s a fairer way to make spending and taxing decisions.

Vote YES on Prop 6 to end slavery and promote rehabilitation over exploitation in jails and prisons.

This is far from an adequate revision of all prison practices, but it appears to be a very good start.

Prop 6, the End Slavery in California Act, is long overdue and both a moral imperative and practical necessity. Morally, it addresses a profound injustice embedded in the state’s constitution, which permits involuntary servitude as a punishment for crime. This archaic exception allows for modern-day slavery. Due to persistently large racial disparities in arrest and sentencing, this form of slavery disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities and perpetuates systemic racial and economic inequalities​​.

Involuntary servitude is a remnant of a post-slavery practice that is repugnant and has no place in the state, even in its prisons. Proposition 6 will remove the language that allows prisons and jails to force incarcerated people to work and punish them when they refuse.

Voting YES on Prop 32 will move California closer to providing living wages to workers.

A minimum wage of $18 an hour will reduce income inequality and improve the standard of living for millions of California workers. Plus, an $18 minimum wage is likely to increase wages across the board which will increase consumer spending that will help the economy. And increased spending creates more jobs, making everyone better off.

The reality is, as even proponents acknowledge, that this modestly higher minimum wage is still far short of a living wage. Nor does Proposition 32 fix the underlying issues, chiefly the housing shortage, that make California such an expensive place to live. But a slightly bigger paycheck would be life-changing for the millions of people struggling to make ends meet.

Vote YES on Prop 33 to expand local governments’ ability to enact rent control.

State Prop 33 will give us a fighting chance to increase affordability and allows more Californians to afford current rent by giving more flexibility to municipalities to set rent caps.

To prevent evictions, homelessness, and the erosion of affordable housing stock, some California cities have laws that cap the legal allowable amount landlords can raise the rent each year. But because of California’s 1995 Costa-Hawkins Act, these caps can’t apply to single-family home rentals or apartments built after February 1, 1995. Costa-Hawkins also allows landlords to raise the rent to whatever they want once an apartment is vacant, incentivizing the eviction of tenants paying below-market rates. SAJE supports repealing Costa-Hawkins and protecting all California renters from unaffordable rents and unjust evictions.

Prop 34 was put on the ballot because a so-called non-profit (The AIDS Healthcare Foundation) has received hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds for their programs through government contracts and has used those funds to engage in ballot measure campaigns to advance liberal policies. Prop 34 would end that scheme.

The Managed Care Organization tax allows California to increase the amount of federal money it gets to support Medi-Cal while decreasing the amount it pulls out of the general fund. This use of federal money will come with some reduction in spending flexibility, which could curtail needed services for vulnerable populations or limit the state government’s ability to allocate funds differently in times of need. But the net effect of a permanent MCO tax will be to increase funding for healthcare for low-income Californians, a group of people who are disproportionately likely to face health challenges.

In 2014 California’s liberal politicians lied to voters on the ballot with a false title on Prop 47 – claiming the measure enhanced public safety but it actually coddled criminals by eliminating the ability of police and prosecutors to arrest and punish criminals for a wide range of crimes.

Co-authored by Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón, whose re-election is at stake this November, Prop. 47 aimed to reduce prison overcrowding by reclassifying certain felonies as misdemeanors. However, it has led to unintended consequences, including a surge in crime across the state and difficulties in prosecuting serious offenses such as fentanyl-related drug crimes and “smash and grab” retail theft.