Prop 1

Water Bond. Funding for water quality, supply, treatment, and storage projects.

Summary

Authorizes $7.545 billion in general obligation bonds for state water supply infrastructure projects, including surface and groundwater storage, ecosystem and watershed protection and restoration, and drinking water protection. Fiscal Impact: Increased state bond costs averaging $360 million annually over 40 years. Local government savings for water-related projects, likely averaging a couple hundred million dollars annually over the next few decades.

What Your Vote Means

A YES vote on this measure means: The state could sell $7.1 billion in additional general obligation bonds—as well as redirect $425 million in unsold general obligation bonds that were previously approved by voters for resource-related uses—to fund various water-related programs.

A NO vote on this measure means: The state could not sell $7.1 billion in additional general obligation bonds to fund various water-related programs. In addition, $425 million in unsold general obligation bonds would continue to be available for resource-related uses as previously approved by voters.

Prop 2

State budget. Budget stabilization account. Legislative constitutional amendment.

Summary

Requires annual transfer of state general fund revenues to a budget stabilization account. Requires half the revenues be used to repay state debts. Limits use of remaining funds to emergencies or budget deficits. Fiscal Impact: Long-term state savings from faster payment of existing debts. Different levels of state budget reserves, depending on economy and decisions by elected officials. Smaller local reserves for some school districts.

What Your Vote Means

A YES vote on this measure means: Existing state debts likely would be paid faster. There would be new rules for state budget reserves. Local school district budget reserves would be capped in some years.

A NO vote on this measure means: Rules for payment of state debts, state budget reserves, and local school district reserves would not change.

Prop 45

Healthcare insurance. Rate changes. Initiative statute.

Summary

Requires Insurance ommissioner’s approval before health insurer can change its rates or anything else affecting the charges associated with health insurance. Provides for public notice, disclosure, and hearing, and subsequent judicial review. Exempts employer large group health plans. Fiscal Impact: Increased state administrative costs to regulate health insurance, likely not exceeding the low millions of dollars annually in most years, funded from fees paid by health insurance companies.

What Your Vote Means

A YES vote on this measure means: Rates for individual and small group health insurance would need to be approved by the Insurance Commissioner before taking effect.

A NO vote on this measure means: State regulators would continue to have the authority to review, but not approve, rates for individual and small group health insurance.

Prop 46

Drug and alcohol testing of doctors. Medical negligence lawsuits. Initiative statute.

Summary

Requires drug testing of doctors. Requires review of statewide prescription database before prescribing controlled substances. Increases $250,000 pain/suffering cap in medical negligence lawsuits for inflation. Fiscal Impact: State and local government costs from raising the cap on medical malpractice damages ranging from tens of millions to several hundred million dollars annually, offset to some extent by savings from requirements on healthcare providers.

What Your Vote Means

A YES vote on this measure means: The cap on medical malpractice damages for such things as pain and suffering would be increased from $250,000 to $1.1 million and adjusted annually for future inflation. Healthcare providers would be required to check a statewide prescription drug database before prescribing or dispensing certain drugs to a patient for the first time. Hospitals would be required to test certain physicians for alcohol and drugs.

A NO vote on this measure means: The cap on medical malpractice damages for such things as pain and suffering would remain at $250,000 and not be subject to annual inflation adjustments. Healthcare providers would not be required to check a statewide prescription database before prescribing or dispensing drugs. Hospitals would not be required to test physicians for alcohol and drugs.

Prop 47

Criminal sentences. Misdemeanor penalties. Initiative statute.

Summary

Requires a misdemeanor sentence instead of a felony for certain drug and property offenses. Inapplicable to persons with prior conviction for serious or violent crime and registered sex offenders. Fiscal Impact: State and county criminal justice savings potentially in the high hundreds of millions of dollars annually. State savings spent on school truancy and dropout prevention, mental health and substance abuse treatment, and victim services.

What Your Vote Means

A YES vote on this measure means: Criminal offenders who commit certain nonserious and nonviolent drug and property crimes would be sentenced to reduced penalties (such as shorter terms in jail). State savings resulting from the measure would be used to support school truancy and dropout prevention programs, victim services, mental health and drug abuse treatment, and other programs designed to keep offenders out of prison and jail.

A NO vote on this measure means: Penalties for offenders who commit certain nonserious and nonviolent drug and property crimes would not be reduced.

Prop 48

Indian gaming compacts. Referendum.

Summary

A “Yes” vote approves, and a “No” vote rejects, tribal gaming compacts between the state and the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians and the Wiyot Tribe. Fiscal Impact: One-time payments ($16 million to $35 million) and for 20 years annual payments ($10 million) from Indian tribes to state and local governments to address costs related to the operation of a new casino.

What Your Vote Means

A YES vote on this measure means: The state’s compacts with the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians and the Wiyot Tribe would go into effect. As a result, North Fork would be able to construct and operate a new casino in Madera County and would be required to make various payments to state and local governments, Wiyot, and other tribes.

A NO vote on this measure means: The state’s compacts with North Fork and Wiyot would not go into effect. As a result, neither tribe could begin gaming unless new compacts were approved by the state and federal governments.

SOURCE: California Secretary of State