California November 2022 Propositions

We've got a bunch of propositions this time: seven state-wide, fourteen for San Francisco, nine for Oakland, three for Berkeley, and one for Alameda County.

Election Day is Tuesday, November 8th. You can also vote before then at Early Voting locations. Check your ballot package, or ask your county's Registrar of Voters to find out where. For instance, in Alameda County you can vote at the Registrar's office in downtown Oakland, among other places.

Every California voter now gets a ballot in the mail. You can mail it back, return it by hand to a drop box or voting location, or ignore it and vote in person. However if you do decide to vote in person, it's important to bring your mail ballot along. The poll worker will invalidate it and give you a new one. If you forget to bring your mail ballot, you will be given a provisional ballot which may or may not be counted.

State-wide: [1] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31]
Regional: [D]
San Francisco: [A] [B] [C] [D] [E] [F] [G] [H] [I] [J] [L] [M] [N] [O]
Oakland: [Q] [R] [S] [T] [U] [V] [W] [X] [Y]
Berkeley: [L] [M] [N]


yes 1: Constitutional Right to Reproductive Freedom
Codifies reproductive freedom, including abortion and contraceptives, into the state constitution, making it harder for the right-wingers to attack.
no 26: Yet Another Indian Gambling Proposition

no 27: Yet Another Another Indian Gambling Proposition
These two are both about gambling on or by Indian reservations. I don't know if they are legally a pair, where only one can pass. I don't know about the specifics either. And I don't care, because I'm voting No on both. Enough with the Indian gambling already!
yes 28: Arts and Music Education in Public Schools
Funds K-12 arts and music education by about $1 billion / year. That sounds good. I generally dislike budgeting via ballot - propositions that earmark funds for specific programs, instead of letting the legislature do its job. But sometimes the legislature doesn't do its job.
no 29: Yet Another Dialysis Proposition
As with the never-ending Indian gambling propositions, my position on the never-ending dialysis propositions is: stop asking us about this!
no 30: Tax Rich People to Subsidize E-Cars
This one sounds good at first glance. Taxing rich people, ok. Subsidies for e-cars, ok. But it was put on the ballot by Lyft. They want the e-car subsidies to help their illegal cab business. Anyway, there are federal subsidies for e-cars now, thanks Joe Biden, so we don't need this.
yes 31: Referendum on Vape Ban
Affirms the 2020 state law banning sale of candy-flavored vaping supplies.


dgas D: Save Agriculture and Open Space Lands
This one is about floor area ratios and covered equestrian riding arenas in unincorporated Alameda County. Doesn't sound like anything I'm interested in. I'm leaving it blank.

San Francisco

qmark A: Retiree Supplemental Cost of Living Adjustment
I think this one is ok but I'm not sure. It would eliminate the "full funding requirement" from part of SF's retirement system. That requirement is famously what has crippled the US Postal Service, so I'm sure getting rid of it here is good. However the measure has a bunch of other provisions which I don't understand.
no B: Public Works / Sanitation and Streets Re-Org
This would undo 2020's Measure B, which created the Department of Sanitation and Streets and was approved 61% - 39%. I don't see a need to re-vote on something that was just voted on two years ago.
yes C: Homelessness Oversight Commission
San Francisco spends A Lot on homelessness, like a $billion / year. This measure would establish a new commission to oversee that.
yes D: Affordable Housing - Initiative Petition

no E: Affordable Housing - Board of Supervisors
D and E are a pair - if both pass, only the one with the higher number of Yes votes takes effect. They are both about affordable housing. There are a few differences between them. The one that stands out for me is that D removes the Board of Supervisors' authority to review qualified projects. This authority has been abused by nearly all recent supervisors to keep affordable housing projects out of their own district - the big exception being Matt Haney, who unfortunately for SF has moved on to Sacramento. The Board hates this provision, so they put Measure E on the ballot to confuse things. Anyway, vote Yes on D and No on E.
yes F: Library Preservation Fund
Extends the existing Library Preservation Fund for another 25 years.
yes G: Student Success Fund
Establishes a new Student Success Fund to improve academic achievement and social/emotional wellness of students. Paid for out of the general fund. Ok I guess.
yes H: City Elections in Even-Numbered Years
Moves elections for major SF offices to even years, when turnout is better. That's good! It also changes the signature requirement for ballot measures from 5% of voters in the previous election, to 2% of all registered voters. That's probably a wash.
no I: Bring Back Cars to JFK

yes J: Confirm Car-Free Use of JFK
I and J are a pair - if both pass, only the one with the higher number of Yes votes takes effect. They are both about whether cars should be allowed on the JFK Promenade. Measure I would bring cars back to JFK, and to Upper Great Highway on the weekends, and also require that the city keep the Great Highway Extension open to cars forever even though it is falling into the sea. Measure J reaffirms the status quo, keeping JFK open to non-car use, UGH open to non-car use on weekends and to be re-evaluated for more use later, and closing GHX as scheduled next year. Please vote NO on I and YES on J.
yes L: Sales Tax for Transportation Projects
This would continue the existing 0.5% sales tax for the next 30 years, giving Muni a dependable source of funding.
no M: Vacancy Tax
As with Berkeley's version of a vacancy tax, the details matter. This one wouldn't apply to commercial space at all. Prolonged retail vacancies are just as disruptive as residential ones.
yes N: Golden Gate Park Underground Parking Garage
This would allow the city to buy the underground parking garage in Golden Gate Park. It is currently owned by the Golden Gate Park Concourse Authority, which is controlled by the de Young Museum and Academy of Sciences. Their management of the garage has been bad, and not in accord with the will of the voters expressed in 1998's Measure J, which authorized construction of the garage.
yes O: Additional Parcel Tax for City College
The tax would be $150/year for single-family homes. City College has been struggling financially for a while. To some extent their problems are self-inflicted, by incompetent administration, and giving them more money would not necessarily fix this. I suggest we try anyway.


yes Q: Authorize 13,000 Units of Low-Income Housing
These authorization measures are required by state law. Shouldn't be, but are.
yes R: Switch the Charter to Gender-Neutral Language
Sure, no reason not to.
yes S: Allow Non-Citizen Parents to Vote for School Board Director
A reasonable idea that harms no one. San Francisco did this a while back and while it was challenged in court, it's still in effect right now pending a final decision. The same people who filed that lawsuit tried to keep Oakland's version off the ballot, but failed. If S passes and then the SF lawsuit succeeds, it will apply in Oakland too.
yes T: Progressive Business Tax
Progressive meaning larger businesses would pay a higher rate; Oakland's current business tax is flat, everyone pays the same rate.
yes U: $850 Million Infrastructure Bond
This would fund street repairs, parks, infrastructure, and affordable housing. It's a follow-on to 2016's Measure KK, a $600 million bond which passed 82% - 18%..
qmark V: Changes to the Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance
This would add a bunch of new restrictions on when renters can be evicted. Unfortunately I don't follow rental politics so I can't really make a recommendation.
yes W: Election Reform
Makes a bunch of changes to public campaign financing. Also restricts former city officials from being lobbyists. Not sure either of those has been a big problem in Oakland, but also they seem harmless.
yes X: City Council Changes
This includes a bunch of changes but the big one is term limits for city council members. I like term limits.
qmark Y: $68 Parcel Tax for the Oakland Zoo
I dunno, $68/year seems like a lot for the zoo.


yes L: $650 Million Infrastructure Bond
Infrastructure in this case means streets, sidewalks, utilities, and in particular affordable housing. The 3000 units of affordable housing authorized by measure N below won't get anywhere without the funding to build them. There are valid criticisms of this measure for lacking specifics and oversight on how the money will be spent. I'm still for it.
no M: Vacancy Tax
I like the idea of vacancy taxes but the details matter. This one would tax each vacant unit in apartment buildings individually. As a twitter friend put it, "2 vacant houses is blight. 2 vacant apartments in a 100-unit apartment complex is a supply crunch." Also doesn't apply to commercial buildings in zones that allow residential. Anyway, the way to get more housing is to build more housing, not to squabble over a tiny percentage of the existing housing. I recommend No.
yes N: Authorize 3000 Units of Low-Income Housing
These authorization measures are required by state law. Shouldn't be, but are.

California's Voter Information Guide for propositions.
San Francisco's Department of Elections.
Oakland Ballot Measures.
Berkeley Ballot Measures.
Alameda County's measures.
Ballotpedia's information page.
Pete Rates the Propositions.
SPUR Voter Guide.
SF's League of Pissed Off Voters.
My recommendations for the 2020, November 2018, June 2018, November 2016, June 2016, 2014, November 2012, June 2012, November 2010, June 2010, 2008, 2006, 2005, and 2004 propositions.
Back to Jef's page.