Proposition 1: Proposition 1 authorizes $4 million in bonds to fund existing affordable housing programs, loans, grants and projects specifically for low-income residents, veterans, farmworkers, manufactured and mobile homes, infill and transit-oriented housing. The measure would distribute the bond revenue with $1 billion for the CalVet Home Loan Program, $1.5 billion for the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), $150 million for the Transit-Oriented Development Implementation Fund, $300 million for the Regional Planning, Housing, and Infill Incentive Account, $150 million for the Home Purchase Assistance Program, $300 million for the Joe Serna, Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Fund, $300 million for the Local Housing Trust Matching Grant Program and $300 million for the Self-Help Housing Fund.

Proposition 2: Ratifies an existing law establishing the No Place Like Home Program, which finances permanent housing for individuals with mental illness who are homeless or at risk for chronic homelessness. It also ratifies an issuance of up to $2 billion in previously authorized bonds to finance the No Place Like Home Program. This proposition also amends the Mental Health Services Act to authorize transfers of up to $140 million annually from the existing Mental Health Services Fund to the No Place Like Home Program, with no increase in taxes. This also allows the state to use up to $140 million per year of county mental health funds to repay up to $2 billion in bonds. These bonds would fund housing for homeless people with mental illness.

Proposition 3: Issues $8.877 billion in bonds towards water-related systems and environmental projects. The largest cut of $2.355 billion will be directed towards water-based conservation areas and state parks for the restoration and maintenance of watersheds, which direct water that falls into them to a common outlet, such as reservoirs or the ocean. The money would also be used for the implementation of groundwater sustainability plans and the improvement of public drinking water infrastructure. $1.398 billion would benefit state-defined “disadvantaged communities” where the median household income is under $51,026.

Proposition 6: Repeals the gas tax established by Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), with calculated revenues of $5.1 billion. Passing this measure would mean less funding aimed towards the maintenance and repair of highways and roadways as well as transit programs. Future tax plans put forward by the California Legislature would need voter approval before being put into effect. It would also result in lower gas prices.

Proposition 7: Establishes the time zone “Pacific standard time” as the standard time within California. This proposition provides that California daylight saving time begins at 2 a.m. on the second Sunday of March and ends at 2 a.m. on the first Sunday of November, which is consistent with the federal law. This also allows the Legislature to vote to make future changes to California’s daylight saving time period, if those changes are consistent with federal law. This measure has no direct fiscal effect.

Proposition 8: Kidney dialysis clinics would have their revenues limited by a formula and could be required to pay rebates to certain groups, mainly health insurance companies, that pay for dialysis treatment. It limits the charges to 115 percent of the costs for direct patient care and quality improvement costs, including training, patient education, and technology support. This proposition requires rebates and penalties if charges exceed the limit as well as annual reporting to the state regarding clinic costs, patient charges and revenue. It prohibits clinics from refusing to treat patients based on the source of payment for care. State administrative costs of around $1 million annually to be covered by increases in license fees on chronic dialysis clinics. State and local government savings largely associated with reduced government employee and retiree health benefits spending on dialysis treatment.

Proposition 10: Proposition 10 is a state statute that would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act which limits the use of rent control in California and also says that landlords have a right to increase rent prices to market rates when a tenant moves out. This would allow counties and cities to adopt rent control ordinances that regulate how much landlords can charge tenants for any type of rental housing. Proposition 10 also states that a local government’s rent control ordinance cannot cut fair return rates for landlords.