3 measures eligible for the ballot so far.
$302 million spent on campaigning so far.
California Ballot Tracker: Interest groups prepare for expensive 2022 fights
We’re tracking spending on 9 ballot measures that could break records this fall.
By Alexander Nieves , Chris Ramirez , Juhi Doshi and Beatrice Jin
Sports betting on tribal lands
Art and Music K-12 Funding
Wealth tax to support clean air programs
Californians were inundated with campaign ads in 2020 as businesses, unions and other wealthy interests shelled out record-shattering sums on ballot measures. This campaign cycle is already shaping up to be another jaw-dropping display of spending.
Just three initiatives have officially qualified for the November ballot so far, while six more are awaiting confirmation that they’ve received enough signatures. In the meantime, groups have raised more than $300 million in preparation for bruising fights over the next five months. A battle over whether the state should legalize sports betting — and who should control the market — is leading the way with a mammoth $221 million in spending on two ballot proposals.
Voters will also have the chance to settle debates over whether minimum wage should be raised to $18, if a ban on flavored tobacco products should be overturned and whether businesses will be required to slash their use of plastic packaging, among others.
From the key players to the critical political context, here’s POLITICO’s guide for what you need to know in November. — Alexander Nieves
Sports betting on tribal lands
More than half of all U.S. states have legalized sports betting since the Supreme Court overturned a federal ban in 2018, and Native American tribes are hoping California will be next. A coalition of tribes has spent more than $30 million to qualify a measure that would allow for in-person sports gambling at reservation casinos and horse racing tracks. This comes after years of negotiations in the Legislature which failed to produce a compromise between the groups that want to offer sports betting, including cardrooms and online sportsbooks.
The measure would not only make tribal casinos and racetracks the home for sports betting in California, but also allow tribes to offer new games like roulette and craps. Tribes have long had exclusive rights to offer certain types of gambling, like slot machines, but state law prohibits roulette and dice games. The measure would also allow tribes to sue cardrooms, which they argue illegally offer games like blackjack.
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians
California Commerce Club, Hawaiian Gardens Casino, The Bicycle Hotel and Casino
Tribes aren’t the only group trying to grab a piece of California’s sports betting market this fall. A coalition of online sportsbooks, like FanDuel and Draftkings, along with Las Vegas casinos are bankrolling a measure that would allow Californians to place bets through their computers and mobile apps. The proposal would also create extremely high hurdles for entry into the online market, giving the companies near complete control.
Gaming companies hoping to offer online sports betting would have to pay a $100 million fee and already be operating in 10 states, or be licensed in five states and running 12 casinos. Backers of the measure say that a $100 million licensing fee would pay for affordable housing for the homeless, mental health services and financial support for tribes. Opponents, however, say it would block smaller operations from breaking into the market.
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
California became the first state to ban single-use plastic bags at retail stores in 2014, but a range of policy proposals aimed at expanding that plastic prohibition have since failed to clear the state Capitol in the face of stiff business opposition. Conservationists are now taking matters into their own hands, bankrolling an initiative that would force the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to develop new regulations clamping down on plastic waste. Waste-management company Recology has been the financial driving force behind the initiative, pouring more than $6.5 million into the project.
The initiative would require businesses to cut the amount of single-use plastic packaging and foodware sold in California — like forks and spoons — by 25 percent by 2030. These types of plastics also would have to be recyclable, reusable or compostable. A 1 percent fee on their sale would be distributed to state and local government agencies. Groups like the California Business Roundtable estimate it could cost retailers more than $4 million per year.
Recology, Corn Refiners Association, The Nature Conservancy
California Business Roundtable, American Chemistry Council
Tobacco companies are challenging a 2020 law that banned most flavored tobacco products, except for hookah, premium cigars and loose leaf tobacco. Manufacturers like R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris USA say it unfairly blocks products preferred by millions of adults and that it could hurt businesses and create a new underground market. California lawmakers and healthcare providers have long argued that flavored tobacco sales target people of color and minors.
Retailers have been allowed to continue sales of flavored tobacco while the referendum is pending, so a win for tobacco companies would maintain the status quo. If voters decide to uphold the law, California would join a growing number of states and cities that have moved to ban flavored tobacco sales.
R. J. Reynolds, Philip Morris USA, National Association of Tobacco Outlets
Art and Music K-12 Funding
Former Los Angeles Unified Superintendent Austin Beutner is spearheading this push to boost the amount spent on art and music programs at California’s K-12 schools. Arts funding has declined in many school districts as a result of budget cuts during the Great Recession and an emphasis on reading and math. Only one in five public schools still has a full-time teacher for traditional arts programs, according to the initiative’s backers.
This initiative would establish minimum funding for arts and music education in all K-12 public schools by annually allocating from the state general fund an amount equaling 1 percent of required state and local funding for public schools. Schools that have 500 or more students must spend 80 percent of the arts and music funding to employ teachers and pay for training, supplies and educational partnerships. Seventy percent of the guaranteed state spending would be allocated to school districts based on their enrollment in the prior fiscal year. The remaining 30 percent would be distributed to districts based on their share of economically disadvantaged students. The measure would mean increased spending in the range of $800 million to $1 billion annually for arts education in schools, beginning in 2023-24.
Californians for Arts and Music Education in Public Schools, Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District Austin Beutner, former U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, LAUSD
Some of the California entrepreneurs and philanthropists investing in Covid-19 response technology and research are calling for more public health funding. Former Google executive Max Henderson, who founded the coronavirus data tracking nonprofit Covid Act Now, is sponsoring a ballot initiative that would tax wealthy Californians to fund the state’s public health systems with the hope of preventing another pandemic.
This initiative would increase personal income taxes by 0.75 percent for each of the next 10 years only for Californians making more than $5 million. Half the money would fund research and technology development at a newly-developed California Institute for Pandemic Prevention, while the remaining funds would be split between public health programs and school facility improvements to limit the spread of diseases. The tax hike would collect between $500 million to $1.5 billion annually, according to the Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance. But groups such as the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association argue this increase could drive high-income residents out of California.
California Medical Association, County Health Executives Association of California, UNITE HERE Local 11
This is the third time in four years that SEIU United Healthcare Workers West is pushing a ballot initiative to change private, for-profit kidney dialysis clinic rules. Sixty percent of voters rejected 2018’s ballot initiative, Prop 8, and 2020’s revised initiative, Prop 23, failed along similar margins. Opponents, mainly the state’s two largest dialysis companies, have spent nearly a quarter of a billion dollars to stop the measures. They argue the union has wasted members’ dues on previously failed ballot initiative attempts that would force dialysis centers to close and put patients at risk.
This initiative is three-pronged. It would require a physician, nurse practitioner or physician assistant to be present during patient treatments, with exceptions for staffing shortages only if a qualified professional is available via telehealth. Dialysis companies would have to tell patients about physicians who have clinic ownership interests, and centers would be required to report infection data to the state. And clinics would be prohibited from turning away patients based on how they pay for treatments and closing without state approval.
This is the first dialysis proposal that would allow nurse practitioners or physician assistants to meet the in-person requirement. The state Legislative Analyst estimates the annual cost of on-site medical professionals to be in the low tens of millions of dollars.
California Chamber of Commerce, California Medical Association
Wealth tax to support clean air programs
California spends billions annually on wildfire management and the development of zero-emissions vehicles and ZEV infrastructure, but a group of businesses, environmentalists and public health organizations say more needs to be done to stop an accelerating climate crisis. This proposed millionaires tax has gotten the bulk of its funding from Lyft, which is required under state law to increase its share of electric cars by 2030 and would benefit from a larger pool of rebate money.
The initiative would tack a 1.75 percentage point tax increase on personal income over $2 million for individuals or married couples. That would generate an estimated $3 billion to $4.5 billion annually, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. That funding would be split up between three pools: 45 percent for electric vehicle incentives, 35 percent for building EV infrastructure and 20 percent for wildfire prevention.
Lyft, California State Association of Electrical Workers, California Environmental Voters
California Teachers Association, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
California was the first state to set a $15 minimum wage. As of January, eight other states had passed initiatives to gradually increase their minimum wage rates to $15 per hour. Advocates for hiking the minimum wage have said that even $15 minimum wage falls below the threshold of what a Californian needs to earn in order to meet their basic needs in the high-cost state, and that $18 would be closer to a “living wage.”
The ballot initiative, titled the “Living Wage Act of 2022,” would increase the state minimum wage to $18 an hour over several years. For employers with 26 or more workers, the minimum wage would reach $18 on Jan. 1, 2025. For employers with 25 or fewer workers, the minimum wage would reach $18 on Jan. 1, 2026. The $18 rate would be subject to an annual Consumer Price Index adjustment starting in 2027. The governor would have authority to suspend the annual increase up to two times during economic downturns or general-fund deficits.
Joe Sanberg, former Democratic Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez
National Federation of Independent Business