What to know about California's ballot measures

Proposition 2: Bonds for public school and community college facilities

• This measure would allow the state to borrow $10 billion to renovate or build new public school and community college facilities. About 38% of students statewide attend schools that don't meet minimum facility standards, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.
• Proponents say it'd enable much-needed basic health and safety repairs, including upgrades that'd attract both students and teachers. Opponents say it'd increase bond obligations and cost taxpayers $18 billion when repaid with interest.

Proposition 3: Constitutional right to marriage

• This measure would amend the state constitution to recognize the right to marry regardless of sex or race. It'd remove existing language that says marriage is only between a man and woman.
• Supporters say it'd protect the freedom to marry and remove current language that discriminates. Opponents argue it'd remove all rules for marriage, put children at risk, and enable child marriages, incest and polygamy.

Proposition 4: Bonds for climate change response and natural resources conservation

• This would authorize $10 billion in general obligation bonds to boost safe drinking water, wildfire prevention, and protection of communities and lands with high climate risks. Repaying the bonds would increase state costs by about $400 million per year for 40 years.
• People in favor argue it's a proactive approach that will save the state money in the long run and prevent devastating impacts. Others say water and wildfire mitigation is a necessity that should be budgeted for, not bonded.

Proposition 5: Allowing local bonds for housing and public infrastructure

• Prop. 5 would make it easier for local governments to borrow money for infrastructure and affordable housing projects by lowering voter approval requirements from two-thirds to 55%. It would be repaid with higher property taxes and would require independent audits of all spending.
• Proponents say it'd shift local spending priorities away from the state government and put the tools to address issues like homelessness and safety in the impacted communities' hands. Opponents say it'd make it easier to increase bond debt, resulting in higher property taxes, and shift the financial burden to homeowners, renters and consumers.

Proposition 6: Involuntary servitude for incarcerated persons

• This proposition would amend the state constitution to remove a provision that allows jails and prisons to force incarcerated people to work. It'd make California one of several states to adopt such a measure in recent years.
• State prisons, which employ nearly 40,000 inmates for 16 to 74 cents per hour, would no longer be allowed to use involuntary servitude as punishment for crime or discipline for those who refuse to work. It'd turn into a voluntary program instead.
• Advocates say that the current system is a vestige of slavery and that incarcerated people often face retaliation for declining assignments, even if they're dangerous, like fighting wildfires. The opposition says that the state needs to focus on the budget deficit for now, not reparations efforts, and that the current system helps promote order and rehabilitation.

Proposition 32: Raises minimum wage

• For employers with 26 or more employees, this would raise minimum wage from $16/hour to $17/hour immediately and $18/hour on Jan. 1, 2025. For companies with 25 or fewer employees, minimum wage would increase to $17/hour on Jan. 1, 2025 and $18/hour on Jan. 1, 2026.
• Proponents say the measure would allow service and essential workers to afford basic needs amid ever-increasing costs of living. Opponents say it'd eliminate jobs and worsen state and local governments' budget deficits.

Proposition 33: Expands local authority to enact rent control

• This would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, which restricts the kinds of rent control laws cities and counties can impose on properties first occupied after Feb. 1, 1995. Voters have rejected the proposal twice.
• Supporters argue thousands of people are leaving California due to rising rent and the state's 17 million renters need relief. Others say it'd freeze construction of new housing, cause property values to drop and drive up existing rent.

Proposition 34: Restricts spending of prescription drug revenue

• This would require certain health care providers to spend 98% of revenue from federal discount prescription drug programs on direct patient care. The measure would also authorize statewide negotiation of Medi-Cal drug prices.

• People in favor say it'd protect patients, ensure accountability and prevent corporations from spending health care dollars on things like stadium naming rights. However, those against say its sole goal is silencing AIDS Healthcare Foundation and sets a dangerous precedent for weaponizing the ballot.

Be smart: Prop. 34's narrow criteria primarily applies to the the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which has rallied against legislation to permit denser housing and owns a number of rental properties that have faced health complaints.

• The foundation has also funded rent control measures, including this year's Prop. 33. California Apartment Association, which represents rental property landlords, is sponsoring Prop. 34.

Proposition 35: Permanent funding for Medi-Cal health care services

• This would make permanent an existing tax on managed health care insurance plans that provides revenue to pay for Medi-Cal health care services, which about a third of California's population uses. If it fails to pass, the tax would end in 2027 unless the Legislature continues it.
• The measure would also require that 99% of revenue go to patient care to prevent the state from redirecting funds for non-health care purposes.
• Advocates say it'd secure dedicated funding to protect health care access for low-income Californians without raising taxes. Critics include Gov. Gavin Newsom, who indicated that it'd hamstring the state's ability to reappropriate money as needed.

Proposition 36: Felony charges for certain drug and theft crimes

• This would allow felony charges and longer sentences for possession of certain drugs and thefts under $950 if the defendant has had two prior drug or theft convictions. It'd also create a new category of crime — "treatment-mandated felony" — that allows people who don't contest charges to complete drug treatment instead of going to prison.

Yes, but: It would partly roll back Proposition 47, which made some theft and drug crimes into misdemeanors. Voters approved it in 2014 in a bid to reduce overcrowding in state prisons, but some have since attributed more property crimes and homelessness to the measure.

• Proponents say Prop. 36 would address drug trafficking and rampant theft, such as "smash-and-grabs," and toughen penalties for repeat offenders while encouraging treatment for addiction. Opponents say it'd reignite the war on drugs, waste money on prisons and slash funding for crime prevention and rehabilitation efforts.

What's next: The clock is ticking. Happy voting!

Editor's note: This article has been updated with all 10 ballot measures.