As early results in city, county, and state races pour in, future leaders and policy that will impact Coronado are becoming more clear. (Early results from Coronado’s races are here.)
These are not official results, and updated numbers will be released as remaining ballots are processed. An estimated 590,000 ballots remain to be counted in the county, according to the San Diego County Registrar of Voters.
State-level numbers reflect early election results as of 10:15 a.m. Nov. 6, with around 50% reporting, according to the Associated Press.
San Diego County Board of Supervisors
District 3: Tara Lawson-Remer, 52.72%
Incumbent Terra Lawson-Remer is leading against Kevin L. Faulconer for the District 3 seat on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. District 3 stretches from Coronado to Carlsbad, stretching east to include Mira Mesa, Rancho Peñasquitos, and Harmony Grove.
She accumulated 55.72% of ballots processed so far, compared to Faulconer’s 44.28%.
Sales tax ballot measures
Measure G: 51.67% no
If passed, this measure would increase sales tax by half a cent throughout San Diego County in effort to improve public transportation by creating a rail connection to the airport, a new rail line along Interstate 805, an express service from downtown across to the U.S.-Mexico border, and expanded operating hours.
It would raise an estimated $350 million, if passed.
Measure E: 51.67% no
In San Diego, early returns show voters rejecting a measure that would increase the tax on transactions within the City of San Diego by 1%. If passed, the city’s sales tax would become 8.75%. Measure E would add an estimated $360 to $400 million to the city’s general fund, which is currently facing a $172 million deficit. The tax would not apply to transactions in Coronado, but would apply to residents spending money over the bridge.
State ballot measures
Same-sex marriage as a fundamental right: 61% yes
California Amendment 3 would declare same-sex marriage a fundamental right. It would change the state’s constitution, which currently defines marriage as between a man and a woman (language voters passed in 2008). Same-sex couples have been able to marry in California under a 2015 Supreme Court ruling that extended the right to marry to same-sex couples throughout the country which supersedes the state’s constitution. This amendment would update the language of the state’s constitution.
Bonds for school facilities: 56.9% yes
California Proposition 2 would allow the state to borrow $10 million to build and repair K-12 public schools and community colleges. School districts would have to pass their own local bond initiatives in order to receive a match of the state funding.
Bonds for conservation and climate projects: 57.9% yes
California Proposition 4 would allow the state to borrow $10 billion for climate and conservation projects: $3.8 million would be allocated to projects mitigating drought and flooding; $1.9 million toward increasing drinking water supply; $1.1 billion to help reduce flood risks; $1.5 billion to reducing the risk of wildfires; with the rest being allocated to other land and climate-related projects.
Lowering the vote needed to approve housing and infrastructure bonds: 56.3% no
California Proposition 5 would lower the threshold of votes needed before the state could take out bonds for projects related to affordable housing and public infrastructure. Currently, a two-thirds majority is needed for such a loan. The proposition would lower the threshold to 55%.
An $18/hour minimum wage: 54.9% no
California Proposition 32 would increase the state minimum wage from $16 to $18. It would take effect in 2025 for employers with 25 or more employees, and in 2026 for smaller employers, who would only be required to pay $17/hour in January. It would also raise the state’s minimum wage to $17/hour for the rest of the year.
California ties its minimum wage to inflation, so the current $16/hour minimum wage will increase to $16.50/hour regardless.
Repeal a ban on local rent controls: 61.6% no
California Proposition 33 would repeal a 1995 rent control ban and allow local government to more freely limit rental rates for housing. The ban, enacted by the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, does not allow governments to regulate rent on single-family homes, apartments built after 1995, or units with a new tenant. (The Costa-Hawkins Act did not preclude the state’s Tenant Protection Act of 2019, which caps annual rent increases for existing tenants at 5% plus regional inflation.)
Regulating prescription drug revenue: 51.5% yes
California Proposition 34 would require that healthcare providers spend 98% of the revenue they collect from federal discount prescription drug programs directly on patient care. The proposition applies only to providers that spend at least $100 million on expenses other than direct patient care, who participate in the federal discount drug program, who own and operate apartment buildings, and who have been issued at least 500 health and safety violations in the past 10 years.
Critics say it singles out one provider — The AIDS Healthcare Foundation — to prevent it from its advocacy work for rent control in Los Angeles. The foundation has called the measure unconstitutional. Supporters say that it directs revenue from the federal drug program to patients, as it was intended.
Extend tax on managed healthcare plans: 66.8% yes
California Proposition 35 would make permanent a tax on managed care organizations (MCOs) that was enacted in 2009 to create revenue to pay doctors who see Medi-Cal patients. The tax has been renewed temporarily several times as Medi-Cal, the state’s subsidized insurance plan, has grown in cost and people served. More than 15 million Californians are enrolled, according to the California Health Care Foundation. Managed care organizations are a group of healthcare providers that provide insurance plans within their own network for a monthly fee.
Increase penalties for some drug and theft crimes: 70.4% yes
California Proposition 36 would reinstate harsher penalties for petty crimes that were changed when, a decade ago, the state’s Proposition 47 made prosecution of petty theft and drug charges more lenient. Before it passed in 2014, theft of $450 or more was prosecuted as a felony; the proposition increased the limit to $950. The 2014 law also changed some drug crimes to misdemeanors, rather than felonies.
Prop. 36 would reclassify some drug and theft crimes as felonies once again. It also includes language that could require people with multiple drug charges into treatment.
