1A

Bond Act

Put on the Ballot by
the Legislature

1A - Summary

This nine billion two hundred million
dollar ($9,200,000,000) bond issue
will provide funding for necessary
education facilities for at least four years
for class size reduction, to relieve
overcrowding and accommodate
student enrollment growth and to
repair older schools and for wiring and
cabling for education technology. Funds
will also be used to upgrade and build
new classrooms in community colleges,
the California State University, and the
University of California. These bonds
may be used only for eligible
construction projects. Fiscal Impact:
State cost of about $15.2 billion to pay
off both the principal ($9.2 billion) and
interest ($6 billion) on the bonds. The
average payment for principal and
interest over 25 years would be about
$600 million per year. State cost of
$160 million to offset all or part of
school-related development fees borne
by certain homebuyers and renters.

1A - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: The state would issue
$9.2 billion in general obligation
bonds for the construction and
renovation of public education
facilities (kindergarten through
twelfth grade and higher
education).

1A - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: The state would not
issue $9.2 billion in general
obligation bonds for the
construction and renovation
of public education facilities
(kindergarten through twelfth
grade and higher education).

1A - Pro

Proposition 1A provides desperately
needed funds for public schools, colleges
and universities without raising taxes.
Funds must be spent to build new schools,
repair and update old ones, wire for
technology, reduce class size and help
make schools earthquake safe. The money
cannot be used for any other purpose.

1A - Con

Bonds are the most expensive possible
way to build schools--costing $1.70
in taxes for every $1.00 of schools.
Prop. 1A will cost average families
$2,000 in taxes to re-pay.
Pay-as-you-go financing would have
provided 70 percent more school
construction--but Sacramento
politicians preferred welfare increases
and political pork projects.

1A - For

Californians for Yes on Prop. 1A
1130 K Street, Suite 210
Sacramento, CA 95814
Jim Murdoch (916) 448-8577

1A - Against

Assemblyman Tom McClintock
1127 11th Street, Suite 216
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 448-9321
Fax: (916) 456-3279
Stoos@msn.com
www.peoplesadvocate.org

1

Legislative
Constitutional
Amendment

Put on the Ballot by
the Legislature

1 - Summary

Amends article XIII A of the
Constitution, added by Proposition 13,
to allow repair or replacement of
environmentally-contaminated
property or structures without
increasing the tax valuation of original
or replacement property. Fiscal
Impact: Property tax revenue losses
probably less than $1 million annually
in the near term to schools, counties,
cities, and special districts. School
revenue losses (about half of total)
would be made up by the state.

1 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: In certain cases of
environmental contamination,
a property owner could
transfer the current assessed
value to a replacement
property, resulting in lower
property tax payments. This is
because the replacement
property would not be
appraised at market value.

1 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: Property purchased
as a replacement for an
environmentally
contaminated property
would be assessed like most
other property, at its market
value.

1 - Pro

Provides property tax relief for innocent
homeowners who are victims of
environmental disasters. Existing
Proposition 13 protections will be
preserved for families whose homes are
destroyed as part of an environmental
contamination and clean-up. Guarantees
homeowners are treated fairly and not
forced into paying higher taxes because
of their misfortune.

1 - Con

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

1 - For

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

1 - Against

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

2

Legislative
Constitutional
Amendment

Put on the Ballot by
the Legislature

2 - Summary

Imposes repayment conditions on
loans of transportation revenues to the
General Fund and local entities.
Designates local transportation funds
as trust funds and requires a
transportation purpose for their use.
Fiscal Impact: Not likely to have any
fiscal impact on state and local
governments.

2 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: Additional restrictions
would be placed on loans of
state transportation funds to
the state General Fund. In
addition, local transportation
funds from the one-quarter
cent of county sales tax could
not be diverted from specified
transportation purposes to
other general purposes.

2 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: Loans could continue
to be made from state
transportation funds to the
General Fund without added
restrictions. Local
transportation funds derived
from the one-quarter cent of
county sales tax could be
diverted for
nontransportation purposes
by changing state law.

2 - Pro

Proposition 2 will make sure the money
you pay in fuel taxes is used to build and
maintain California's roads and transit
systems. Without paying 1¢ more at the
pump, you can help improve
transportation by joining with the
California Taxpayers Association,
business, labor, and environmental
organizations in voting "yes."

2 - Con

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

2 - For

Transportation California
P.O. Box 980336
West Sacramento, CA
95798-0336
(916) 600-4260

2 - Against

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

3

Legislative
Initiative
Amendment

Put on the Ballot by
the Legislature

3 - Summary

Changes existing open primary law to
require closed, partisan primary for
purposes of selecting delegates to
national political party presidential
nominating conventions. Limits voting
for such delegates to voters registered
by political party. Provides partisan
ballots to be voted only by members of
the particular party. Fiscal Impact:
Minor costs to state and county
governments statewide.

3 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: A voter would be
permitted to vote only for the
delegates to a presidential
nominating convention of a
political party with which the
voter is affiliated.

3 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: A voter would
continue to be permitted to
cross party lines in a
primary election to vote for
delegates to a party's
presidential nominating
convention.

3 - Pro

Proposition 3 fixes an accidental error in
California's Open Primary Law. This
error will throw out every presidential
primary vote cast by Californians of all
political parties in the Year 2000.
Proposition 3 protects the right of
California voters to join with the other 49
states in nominating presidential
candidates.

3 - Con

Political Party bosses want to
overturn the will of the voters. The
voters want to vote for candidates
based on the individual--not party
affiliation. Party bosses want to
remove the freedom of choice for
the office of the President. Let
Democracy have its full voice--No
on Proposition 3!

3 - For

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

3 - Against

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

4

Initiative Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

4 - Summary

Prohibits trapping fur-bearing or
nongame mammals with specified
traps. Prohibits commerce in fur of
animals so trapped. Generally
prohibits steel-jawed leghold traps on
mammals. Prohibits use of specified
poisons on animals. Fiscal Impact:
Unknown state and local costs of
several hundred thousand to in the
range of a couple of million dollars
annually, depending on workload and
effectiveness of alternative trapping
methods.

4 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: Commercial and
recreational trappers could no
longer use body-gripping traps
to trap any fur-bearing or
nongame mammal.
Additionally, all leghold traps
would be prohibited, except
that government employees
could use padded steel-jawed
leghold traps when those traps
are the only means of
protecting human health or
safety. The use of two specific
poisons for killing animals
would be banned.

4 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: Persons trapping
mammals, including
commercial and recreational
trappers, could continue to
use a range of body-gripping
traps, subject to current
restrictions. The use of two
specific poisons for killing
animals would continue to be
permitted, subject to existing
restrictions.

4 - Pro

Protect pets and wildlife! Ban the
barbaric steel-jawed leghold trap and
other cruel and indiscriminate traps for
the fur trade. Ban two dangerous poisons
that harm animals and the environment.
Proposition 4 allows for the protection of
public health and safety, endangered
species, and property. Vote yes on 4!

4 - Con

Proposition 4 is a wolf in sheep's
clothing! While claiming to ban
inhumane animal traps, this
confusing, badly written, extreme
initiative actually threatens
human health and safety. It also
endangers wildlife and livestock,
adds bureaucrats and costs
taxpayers millions. Tell the radical
animal rights activists no. No on 4!

4 - For

Protect Pets And
Wildlife/Yes On 4
1388 Westwood Blvd. #201
Los Angeles, CA 90024
(310) 441-4499
Fax: (310) 441-4599
propaw@ix.netcom.com
http://www.volunteerinfo.org/propaw

4 - Against

Californians for People,
Pets and Wildlife
(916) 444-8080
www.calvoterguide.com/No4

5

Initiative Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

5 - Summary

Specifies terms and conditions of
mandatory compact between state and
Indian tribes for gambling on tribal
land. Allows slot machines and banked
card games at tribal casinos. Fiscal
Impact: Uncertain impact on state and
local revenues, depending on the
growth in gambling on Indian lands in
California. Effect could range from
little impact to significant annual
revenue increases.

5 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: The state must enter
into a specific agreement with
Indian tribes who wish to
conduct certain gambling
activities on Indian lands in
California.

5 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: The state would not
be required to enter into the
agreement specified in this
measure. The state could
still negotiate with
individual Indian tribes on
the extent of gambling
allowed on Indian lands in
California.

5 - Pro

Prop. 5 protects Native Americans' rights
to have limited gaming, restricted to
their tribal land. Prop. 5 promotes
self-reliance among California's Indians,
keeping them off welfare. Prop. 5 shares
gaming revenue with non-gaming tribes
for education and health programs, and
saves taxpayers hundreds of millions
annually. Vote yes on 5.

5 - Con

Proposition 5 isn't about allowing
tribes to operate casinos on their
lands. Federal law already
guarantees that tribes can operate
Indian casinos. Prop. 5 is a
dramatic expansion of unregulated,
untaxed casino gambling
throughout California! Law
Enforcement, Labor, Business,
Seniors, Educators, Environmental
and Local Government groups all
oppose Proposition 5.

5 - For

Californians for Indian
Self-Reliance
1130 "K" Street, Suite 150
Sacramento, CA 95814
1-800-258-7471
www.yeson5.org

5 - Against

Coalition Against
Unregulated Gambling
915 L Street, Suite C119
Sacramento, CA 95814
800-866-6433
www.bad4cal.org

6

Initiative Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

6 - Summary

Makes possession, transfer, or receipt
of horses for slaughter for human
consumption a felony. Makes sale of
horsemeat for human consumption a
misdemeanor. Fiscal Impact: Probably
minor, if any, law enforcement and
incarceration costs.

6 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: Both the slaughter of
horses for human consumption
and the sale of horsemeat for
human consumption would be
illegal in California. In
addition, horses could not be
sent out of California for
slaughter in other states or
countries for human
consumption.

6 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: Both the slaughter of
horses for human
consumption and the sale of
horsemeat for human
consumption would remain
legal in California. In
addition, it would remain
legal to send horses out of
California for slaughter for
human consumption.

6 - Pro

Proposition 6 protects California's horses
from being purchased without the
knowledge of the owner and shipped out
of state to be cruelly slaughtered for
gourmet human consumption overseas.
Horses are pleasure animals, not raised
for food. Horses are an integral part of
California's heritage and deserve our
protection.

6 - Con

If horsemeat is outlawed, only
outlaws will eat horsemeat! People
have the right to eat horsemeat if
they choose. Horses would still be
killed for dog food. Violators would
be felons, taking up scarce prison
space. Just say neigh to nutty,
unconstitutional proposals by
wealthy socialites with nothing
better to do.

6 - For

Save the Horses
3940 Laurel Canyon Blvd. #166
Studio City, CA 91604
(415) 273-6070
FAX: (818) 768-7744
www.savethehorses.com

6 - Against

Just Say NEIGH!
c/o Ted Brown/
Libertarian Party
P.O. Box 5362
Pasadena, CA 91117
(626) 578-8454
tebrown@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~tebrown

7

Initiative Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

7 - Summary

Authorizes $218 million in state tax
credits annually, until January 2011,
to encourage air-emissions reductions
through the acquisition, conversion,
and retrofitting of vehicles and
equipment. Fiscal Impact: Annual
state revenue loss averaging tens of
millions to over a hundred million
dollars, to beyond 2010. Annually,
through 2010-11: state cost of about
$4.7 million; additional local revenues,
potentially in the millions of dollars.
Potential unknown long-term savings.

7 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: The state Air
Resources Board would
administer a new tax credit
program. Tax credits would be
awarded through 2010 for
various categories of projects
that reduce emissions of
pollutants into the air.

7 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: The state Air
Resources Board would not
be directed to establish a
new tax credit program
designed to reduce emissions
of pollutants into the air.

7 - Pro

American Lung Association, California
Nurses Association, and Sacramento
Chamber of Commerce support
Proposition 7, the Air Quality
Improvement Act . Uses Private sector tax
incentives to reduce toxic emissions from
buses and trucks. Cleaner air benefits
the health of children and the elderly.
Creates no new bureaucracy. Cuts no
existing programs.

7 - Con

Proposition 7 is corporate welfare,
pure and simple. It gives tax
breaks to the corporations that
paid to put it on the ballot. It
guarantees billions in taxpayers'
money to polluters, with no
accountability or regulation in
return. It takes money from
universities, the environment and
law enforcement. Vote No.

7 - For

Gerald H. Meral
Executive Director
Planning and Conservation League
926 J Street, Suite 612
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 444-8726 ext. 126
www.pcl.org

7 - Against

Taxpayers Against
Corporate Welfare
926 J Street, Suite 710
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 446-4300
www.noon7.org

8

Initiative Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

8 - Summary

Permanent class size reduction
funding for districts establishing
parent-teacher councils. Requires
testing for teacher credentialing; pupil
suspension for drug possession. Fiscal
Impact: Creates up to $60 million in
new state programs, offset in part by
existing funds and fees. Local school
districts' costs potentially in the high
tens of millions of dollars annually.

8 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: Various changes to the
state's education system would
be made. For instance, the
measure (1) creates a state
Office of the Chief Inspector of
Public Schools, (2) increases
the responsibilities of school
site councils and principals, (3)
alters the qualifications that
must be met by teachers in
California, and (4) prevents
the state from reducing
funding for the existing
kindergarten through grade
three class size reduction
program.

8 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: The various changes
to the state's education
system described in the "yes"
statement would not be
made.

8 - Pro

Proposition 8 is comprehensive education
reform: guaranteed funding for
permanent class size reduction without
increased taxes; mandatory expulsion for
the possession of dangerous drugs;
educational accountability to taxpayers;
and active parental participation in their
child's school. It gives our children a solid
foundation upon which they can succeed
in life.

8 - Con

Cuts education programs. Funds a
new unaccountable school
bureaucracy (triple the existing
size)--a political appointee (with
no limit on his salary ) and 8000
committees (not elected by
taxpayers) authorized to spend
tax-dollars and set 8000 different
local curricula (ignoring uniform
state standards). Join taxpayers,
teachers and parents. Vote "no!"

8 - For

Mitch Zak
Californians for
Smaller Classes,
Drug-Free Schools and
Educational Accountability
555 Capitol Mall,
Suite 600
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 492-7758

8 - Against

Parents, Teachers, Cops
and Taxpayers
Against Prop. 8
111 Anza Boulevard,
Suite 406
Burlingame, CA 94010
(650) 340-0470 or
(310) 996-2671
www.noprop8.org

9

Initiative Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

9 - Summary

Prohibits assessment of taxes, bonds,
surcharges to pay costs of nuclear
power plants. Limits recovery by
electric companies for costs of
non-nuclear power plants. Prohibits
issuance of rate reduction bonds.
Fiscal Impact: State government net
revenue reductions potentially in the
high tens of millions of dollars
annually through 2001-02. Local
government net revenue reductions
potentially in the tens of millions of
dollars annually through 2001-02.

9 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: There would be
significant changes to recently
enacted laws restructuring the
state's electricity industry.
Specifically, private utility
companies (1) could not charge
customers certain costs related
to nuclear power plants, and (2)
could not charge residential and
small commercial customers for
repaying bonds sold to help
finance an existing 10 percent
rate reduction. The measure also
requires an additional rate
reduction of at least 10 percent.

9 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: The laws that
restructured the state's
electricity industry would
not be changed. Private
utility companies would
continue to charge customers
for certain costs related to
nuclear power plants, and
would continue to charge
residential and small
commercial customers for
repaying bonds that have
been sold to help finance the
existing 10 percent rate
reduction.

9 - Pro

Proposition 9 cuts electric rates, reducing
consumers' bills by hundreds of dollars
each year. It stops the massive bailout of
bad utility investments in nuclear power.
It's time to send a message to
Sacramento. We want fair rates and
clean and reliable energy choices. Vote yes
on Prop 9.

9 - Con

Consumer, environmental,
business, police, fire, taxpayer and
school groups agree Proposition 9
can't deliver on its false promises.
Proposition 9 would: jeopardize
electric rates and reliability, hit
taxpayers with liability for $6
billion in previously sold bonds,
undermine school, police and fire
budgets, and damage California's
economy. Vote no.

9 - For

Californians against
Utility Taxes (CUT)
1750 Ocean Park Bl.,
Suite 200
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(310) 392-0522
www.nonukebailout.org

9 - Against

NO on 9 COMMITTEE
1201 K Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 341-1025
www.NOonProp9.org

10

Initiative
Constitutional
Amendment and
Statute

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

10 - Summary

Creates state and county commissions
to establish early childhood
development and smoking prevention
programs. Imposes additional taxes on
cigarettes and tobacco products. Fiscal
Impact: New revenues and
expenditures of $400 million in
1998-99 and $750 million annually.
Reduced revenues for Proposition 99
programs of $18 million in 1998-99
and $7 million annually. Other minor
revenue increases and potential
unknown savings.

10 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: Excise taxes would be
increased on cigarettes by 50
cents per pack and on other
tobacco products by the
equivalent of $1 per pack. The
increased revenues would
primarily fund early childhood
development programs
administered by a new state
commission and county
commissions.

10 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: Excise taxes on
cigarettes and other tobacco
products would not be
increased and, therefore,
these new revenues would
not be raised for early
childhood development
programs.

10 - Pro

Provides child immunizations, health
care, nutrition services, domestic violence
prevention and treatment for pre-school
children. Doubles dollars available for
anti-smoking education. Funds Breast
Cancer research. Endorsed by: American
Cancer Society, California School Boards
Association, teachers and children's
advocates. Don't be fooled by tobacco
industry lies. Vote yes on 10.

10 - Con

Opposed by California education
officials and taxpayer advocates.
Amends Constitution to keep funds
from California's schools.
Duplicates existing programs for
children and families. Creates
huge new bureaucracy; 59 new
commissions, thousands of new
bureaucrats and over 500 political
appointees to spend millions of
taxpayer dollars with no
independent oversight.

10 - For

California Children and
Families Initiative
Rob Reiner, Chair
1875 Century Park East, Suite 300
Los Angeles,CA 90067
1-800-847-4743 or
(213) 627-5140 or
(310) 285-2328
Fax: (213) 627-5709 or
(310) 205-2721
children98@aol.com
http://www.children98.org

10 - Against

Committee Against
Unfair Taxes
555 Capitol Mall,
Suite 600
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 446-6667
www.defeatprop10.com

11

Legislative
Constitutional
Amendment

Put on the Ballot by
Petition Signatures

11 - Summary

This measure would authorize local
governments to voluntarily enter into
sales tax revenue sharing agreements
by a two-thirds vote of the local city
council or board of supervisors of each
participating jurisdiction. Fiscal Impact:
No net change in total sales tax
revenues going to cities and counties.
Potential shift of sales tax revenues
among cities and counties.

11 - Yes

A YES vote on this measure
means: Cities and counties
could enter into sales tax
revenue-sharing contracts
with a two-thirds vote of
each affected jurisdiction's
governing body.

11 - No

A NO vote on this measure
means: Cities and counties
could enter into sales tax
revenue-sharing contracts
only with a majority vote of
the people in each affected
jurisdiction.

11 - Pro

Proposition 11 authorizes local governments
to voluntarily share sales tax revenue by a
two-thirds vote of the city council or board
of supervisors of each jurisdiction. It was
placed on the ballot by the Legislature with
overwhelming bipartisan support and
support from local governments and
taxpayer and business groups.

11 - Con

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED

11 - For

Assemblyman
George C. Runner, Jr.
(916) 441-3888

11 - Against

 
 
 
NOT PROVIDED