Build-Your-Own Long Beach Voter Guide

There are 17 state-wide propositions and five local measures Long Beach residents will have the opportunity to vote for on Tuesday, November 8. Save yourself some time at the polls and use this handy tool to create your own personalized voter guide.

Read below what a "YES" or "NO" vote means for each proposition, then click or tap "YES" or "NO" depending on how you'd like to vote. If you're undecided, you can leave it blank. At the bottom, click the button to create your personalized voter guide that you can print out or save to your mobile device to take with you to the polls.

Proposition 51: Funding for K-12 School and Community College Facilities

The California K-12 and Community Colleges systems serve about 8.3 million students that span 950 school districts and over 10,000 individual campuses. Proposition 51 would authorize a $9 billion bond to improve facilities with $3 billion going toward new facilities, $500 million for charter schools, $3 billion for modernization, $500 million for career technical education programs and $2 billion for community college facilities. It’s estimated that the bond would cost $17.6 billion ($8.6 billion in interest) in total, to be paid in $500 million average annual installments over the next 35 years.

For: Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, Patrick O’Donnell, Democratic and Republican Parties

Against: Governor Jerry Brown



Proposition 52: Medi-Cal Hospital Fee Program

Over 13 million Californians qualify for Medi-Cal services, which include primary care visits, emergency room visits, surgery and access to prescriptions drugs. Since 2009, the state has charged most private hospitals a “Hospital Quality Assurance Fee” to ensure that those hospitals gain access to federal matching funds, but to also fund the state’s share of Medi-Cal payments. Last year the fee, which is set to expire January 1, 2018, created a net benefit of $3.5 billion for the state’s Medi-Cal fund and deposited nearly $1 billion into the state’s General Fund savings, which went toward children’s health care services that would have otherwise been paid out using general fund money.

For: Rep. Alan Lowenthal, Patrick O’Donnell, Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, Miller Children’s Hospital, Democratic and Republican Parties of California

Against: Rep. Tom McClintock, Libertarian Party of California



Proposition 53: Revenue Bonds, Statewide Voter Approval

Two types of bonds are sold by the state to finance projects. General obligation bonds are paid for by using general fund dollars raised by taxes on residents and require voter approval. Revenue bonds are financed through fees imposed on users of the particular project (toll paid by users of a completed highway project) and do not require voter approval. Proposition 53 would require infrastructure-related revenue bonds over $2 billion for projects financed, owned, operated or managed by the state to require statewide voter approval. Two potential future projects that would fit this definition are the proposed Sacramento-San Joaquin River water tunnel and the high speed rail project.

For: Californian Republican Party, various regional taxpayers associations

Against: Governor Jerry Brown, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California



Proposition 54: Legislature, Legislation and Proceedings Initiative

The California State Senate and Assembly are currently required to air most of, but not all, of their public meetings and are required to publicly disclose bills under consideration. However, changes to those original proposals often change before they eventually face a final vote. Under Proposition 54, the two legislative bodies would be prohibited from passing any bills without first disclosing publicly (in print and online) the finalized version of bills for at least 72 hours and would be required air all open meeting sessions. Video and audio recordings would be required to be made public no later than 24 hours after the meeting and be downloadable for at least 20 years at no charge to the public. If passed, Prop. 54 is expected to include one-time costs of $1 million to $2 million for cameras and an annual cost of $1 million for recording and storage.

For: California Republican Party, California Chamber of Commerce.

Against: California Democratic Party, California Nurses Association.



Proposition 55: Tax Extension to Fund Education and healthcare Initiative

In 2012, a temporary tax on those earning $250,000 or more per year ($500K for joint filers, $340K for heads of household) was enacted to help fund K-12 and community college education, and in some instances, healthcare. Passing Proposition 55 would extend this temporary tax by 12 years through 2030 with an estimated impact of $4 billion to $9 billion annually being added to fund K-12 and community colleges. In certain years, it could also provide upward of $2 billion for the state’s Medi-Cal fund to help pay for low-income person’s healthcare costs. The current tax is set to expire after 2018.

For: Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, Senator Ricardo Lara, Rep. Anthony Rendon, Rep. Patrick O’Donnell, California Democratic Party

Against: California Republican Party, California Chamber of Commerce



Proposition 56: Cigarette Tax to Fund Healthcare, Tobacco Use Prevention, Research

Under Proposition 56, taxes on cigarettes would increase by $2 per pack with an equivalent increase in taxes on other tobacco products, including e-cigarettes containing nicotine. Revenue from the tax would go toward funding health care programs, tobacco prevention programs and tobacco-related research. The state currently levies an 87 cent per pack tax on cigarettes and the national average state tax on tobacco is $1.65. If passed, revenue from the new tax would go toward physician training, Medi-Cal, cancer, heart and lung disease research as well as school programs focusing on tobacco-use prevention and reduction.

For: Secretary of State Alex Padilla, State Senator Kevin DeLeon, Michael Bloomberg

Against: California Republican Party, Philip Morris USA, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company



Proposition 57: Criminal Sentences, Parole, Juvenile Criminal Proceedings and Sentencing Initiative

Would allow increased chances for parole and good behavior opportunities to certain non-violent felony offenders and would leave decision up to a judge, not a prosecutor, whether to try certain juveniles as adults in court. Prop. 57 would allow the Department of Corrections to award sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior or education achievements. The net savings to the state is projected to be in the tens of millions of dollars annually due to reductions in prison populations, something the state was ordered to do in a 2011 ruling by the United States Supreme Court ruling that found the overcrowded conditions in California prisons violated prisoners' Eighth Amendment rights, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment.

For: Governor Jerry Brown, Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck

Against: US Rep. Loretta Sanchez, California Republican Party, Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey



Proposition 58: English Proficiency, Multilingual Education Initiative

Over 20 percent of students in California’s public school systems are considered English learners, meaning that they are not yet fluent in English. Proposition 58, also known as The California Non-English Languages Allowed in Public Education Act would repeal a 1998 law that required English immersion courses to be taught only in English. Under Prop. 58, school districts would be allowed to use community and parent input to craft programs that could instruct English learners “nearly all in English” and authorizes districts to establish dual-immersion programs for both native and non-native speakers. No notable costs are associated with Proposition 58 passing.

For: Senator Ricardo Lara, Governor Jerry Brown, Mayor Robert Garcia, California Teachers Association

Against: California Republican Party, US Representative Tom McClintock



Prop 59: Corporations, Politcal Spending, Federal Constitutional Protections Legislative Advisory Question

In 2010 the United States Supreme Court decided that corporations and their campaign donations should be protected as free speech in the "Citizens United” decision, which has led to countless discussions about campaign finance laws. If passed, Proposition 59 would ask the California State Legislature to work on overturning the Citizens United decision and other legal precedents through attempts at constitutional amendments. There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the passage of this proposition and the decision merely “encourages” action by elected officials. It does not legally require them to act.

For: Senator Bernie Sanders, California Democratic Party, Courage Campaign

Against: US Representative Tom McClintock and over 35 members of the California State Legislature who voted against placing Prop 59 on the ballot.



Prop 60: Adult Films, Condoms, Health Requirements Initiative

California leads the nation in adult film production, with the bulk of it being filmed in Los Angeles County’s San Fernando Valley. Under the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), performers are required to wear condoms in pornographic films, but enforcement of this policy is usually only doled out in response to complaints. In 2012, Los Angeles voters approved Measure B, which upheld the law requiring condoms on set. Under Prop. 60, adult film producers would have to provide condoms performers, in addition to vaccinations and testing and exams for STIs. The measure states that condoms would not have to be visible in the films, but producers would have to prove that they were used. Analysts have projected a negative net impact if Prop 60 passes, as they predict a dip in local and state tax revenues if production companies relocate.

For: Michael Weinstein, president of AIDS Healthcare Foundation, California Peace and Freedom Party

Against: United States Representative Tom McClintock, AIDS Project Los Angeles, Los Angeles LGBT Center



Prop 61: State Prescription Drug Purchases, Pricing Standards

The State of California provides prescription drugs for a variety of residents in California, including low-income Medi-Cal patients, current and retired state employees and prison inmates. Last year the cost for these prescription drugs totaled nearly $3.8 billion with over 80 percent of that sum going toward Medi-Cal and state employees. Prop. 61 would require purchases of prescription drugs made by the state to be at a cost no higher than what the United States Department of Veterans Affairs pays for access to the same drug. The VA benefits from federally established discount programs that result in lower prices generally not available to private payers. Medicaid managed programs would be exempt from Prop 61, which at this point, has no clear projection of a fiscal impact due to the unknown nature of the pharmaceutical industry’s reaction if it passes.

For: Senator Bernie Sanders, California Nurses Association, AARP California

Against: California Republican Party, Johnson & Johnson, Purdue Pharma L.P., California Medical Association



Prop 62: Death Penalty Initiative Statute

While California remains in the majority of states who have capital punishment on the books, it hasn’t executed anyone since January 2006. Since 1978, the state has condemned over 900 people to death (15 have been executed) and currently has over 740 death row inmates, which it spends an average of about $55 million on legal challenges from those inmates sentenced to death. Prop. 62 would repeal the death penalty as the maximum punishment for those convicted of first degree murder and replace it with life in prison without the possibility of parole. Those prisoners would be required to work while in prison and Prop 62 would increase the portion of their wages that go toward victim restitution. An estimated $150 million in annual savings to the state is projected if Prop. 62 passes and eliminates death row legal appeals.

For: Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, Senator Bernie Sanders, President Jimmy Carter

Against: Former Governor George Deukmejian, California Republican Party, Long Beach Police Officers Associations



Prop 63: Firearms, Ammunition Sales Initiative

Under Proposition 63 persons seeking to purchase ammunition in California would have to obtain a four-year permit from the California Department of Justice and dealers would be required to verify the permit before selling them ammunition. The proposition would also require those seeking a permit to first pass a background check and would ban “large capacity” magazines (more than 10 rounds) and require the disposal of ones in circulation. The proposition would forbid anyone convicted of stealing a firearm from owning one, require stolen firearms to be reported to law enforcement and mandates that all ammunition sales be made by an authorized dealer which must then report the sale to the DOJ.

For: Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, California Democratic Party, California Nurses Association

Against: California Police Chiefs Association, National Rifle Association, California Republican Party



Prop 64: Marijuana Legalization Initiative

Legalizes the use of recreational marijuana for adults over the age of 21 and establishes avenues for resentencing and destruction of records for past marijuana convictions. Under Prop. 64 the state would impose a 15 percent tax on retail sales of marijuana, establish packaging, labeling, advertising and marketing standards and would allow for further taxation at the local level. It would prohibit direct advertising and marketing to minors. State projections put the fiscal impact at the high hundreds of millions of dollars to $1 billion annually in net tax revenue, most of which would be spend on youth services, environmental protection and law enforcement.

For: ACLU of California, Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson

Against: Senator Dianne Feinstein, California Police Chiefs Association, Humboldt Growers Collective Steve Dodge



Prop 65: Carryout Bags, Charges Initiative

Requires all revenue generated from the sale of carryout bags (10 cents each) to be allocated for a new environmental fund call the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Fund. The fund would be managed by the Wildlife Conservation Board which would use the money for environmental protection purposes and for grants to organizations seeking to ease drought, provide clean drinking water, remove litter and clean up efforts and state and local parks. The proposition would also allow local governments to ensure that revenues raised through bag sales be directed to the newly created fund rather than stay with the stores as it currently does.

For: California Republican Party, American Progressive Bag Alliance

Against: Surfrider Foundation, Heal the Bay



Prop 66: Death Penalty Procedures Initiative

Proposition 66 would keep the death penalty in place in California but would change some of the court room procedures after conviction. It would shift appeals filed by death row inmates to the superior courts instead of the state’s supreme court, and the original trial court would hear the appeal. It would require appeals be completed within a five-year window after the initial conviction and would allocate 70 percent of the money earned by the inmate while working on death row to the victims’ family. It would also allow the housing of death row inmates in any prison, rather than the two currently used by the state.

For: Former Governor George Deukmejian, California Republican Party, Long Beach Police Officers Association, Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell

Against: Senator Barbara Boxer, ACLU of California, California NAACP, California Democratic Party



Prop 67: Ban on Single-Use Plastic Bags Referendum

Upholds the current restriction on plastic bags passed by the state legislature with Senate Bill 270 and would prohibit businesses from giving out single-use carryout bags to customers. The proposition would still allow single-use bags for meat, bread, produce, bulk food and perishable items but requires stores to charge customers 10 cents for recycled, compostable or reusable bags upon checkout. The revenue would be partially kept by stores to cover costs non-plastic bags and to educate customers and upward of $2 million would be provided to plastic bag manufacturers to retain jobs and help the transition to thicker, recycled plastic products.

For: Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Ricardo Lara, Senator Kevin DeLeon, Tom Steyer

Against: American Progressive Bag Alliance



Measure MM

A citizen initiative to repeal the city’s current ban on medical marijuana, Measure MM would allow between 26-32 medical marijuana businesses throughout the city and create a tax schedule of six percent for storefront dispensaries only, require entities (non-retail) to pay a minimum annual tax of $1,000 and reduce the cultivation tax to $10 per square foot. Under MM, business operators would have to meet certain specifications to obtain a permit to operate in Long Beach. If MM and MA both pass, the measure with the largest amount of support would win.

For: Long Beach City Council Members Jeannine Pearce, Dee Andrews and Roberto Uranga, United States Representative Alan Lowenthal



Measure MA

Imposes a gross receipts tax on medical marijuana of six percent and provides an avenue to tax recreational marijuana in the event that it’s approved by a statewide vote and the city council approves its sale in Long Beach. Medical would be taxed anywhere from six to eight percent and recreational between eight to 12 percent. Processing, distribution, testing and transportation would be taxed at six to eight percent and cultivation would have a $12-$15 per square foot tax imposed on it. These taxes are in addition to the state’s proposed 15 percent tax. Revenue generated from the tax (estimated $13 million ) would go toward public safety and public health resources. If MM and MA both pass, the measure with the greater voter approval would take effect.

For: Mayor Robert Garcia, LBPD Police Chief Robert Luna, LBFD Chief Mike Duree



Measure M

Metro has proposed an indefinite half-cent sales tax increase for Los Angeles County to help it fund projects aimed at easing traffic congestion in the region. If passed, municipalities in the county would see their sales tax rates increase half a cent (Long Beach would go up to 10.5 percent) which would create an estimated revenue flow of $860 million annually according to the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation. The projects, including bus and rail improvements, regional rail projects and local street repairs, are expected to be completed over a 40-year period. Repealing the tax would require another vote by residents.

For: Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, as well as unanimous support from the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Against: Taxpayers Organizations, Bus Riders Union



Measure E

The measure, which is open to voters within the Long Beach Unified School District boundaries, would grant a $1.5 billion bond to the district for facility improvements including air conditioning units which has an estimated cost of $750 million. Over 80 percent of the district’s campuses are 60-years-old or older and the revenue generated from the bond would go toward ensuring campuses meet earthquake standards, improving technological capabilities and outdoor recreational safety. The language of the bond forbids any of the funds to be used on administrator salaries and stipulates that it all must be spent on local schools. The bond would cost homeowners approximately $5 per month for every $100,000 of assessed property value.



Measure A

Would levy an annual tax of 1.5 cents per square foot of improved property in Los Angeles County. It’s estimated that the average homeowner with a 1,500 square foot home would pay about $22.50 per year under the measure. Funds generated by the measure would go toward improving parks, playgrounds, neighborhood and senior centers and water resources. They would also be used to help reduce gang activity and ensure that drinking water is safe. The measure includes required citizen oversight and independent audits of the use of the funds. It’s estimated that the parcel tax would generate about $94.5 million annually, and like Measure M, would have no set expiration date.



Get your printable, personalized voter guide:



Share this:


NEVER MISS A STORY