{¿Quiere que lo lleve a su lugar de votación?}{¿Quiere un paseo?}
Click here
{¿Quiere que lo lleve a su lugar de votación?}{¿Quiere un paseo?}
Click here
Elija UnoFederal
Elija UnoFederal
This vote is for Alex Padilla to serve a full term in the Senate beginning 1/2023
Elija UnoFederal
Elija UnoEstatal 
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija Uno (carrera no partidista)Estatal
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija UnoEstatal
Elija UnoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
Groban was appointed to the court by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in 2018. Groban received a partisanship confidence score of Strong Democrat.
Sí
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
Liu was appointed to the court by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in 2011. He received a partisanship confidence score of Strong Democrat
Sí
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
Jackson was appointed to the court by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2019 and serves as the presiding justice.
Sí
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
Guerrero was appointed to the court by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2022.
Sí
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
Rodriguez was appointed to the court by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) in 2021.
Sí
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
¿Que este juez continúe en al cargo? Elija Sí o NoEstatal
Elija UnoLocal
Elija UnoLocal
Elija UnoLocal
Elija Uno (carrera no partidista)Local
Elija TresLocal
Elija UnoLocal
Elija Tres (carrera no partidista)Local
|
|
A "yes" vote supported amending the state constitution to prohibit the state from interfering with or denying an individual's reproductive freedom, which is defined to include a right to an abortion and a right to contraceptives. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed this amendment providing a right to reproductive freedom in the state constitution. |
|
|
A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to (i) legalize sports betting at American Indian gaming casinos and licensed racetracks in California; (ii) tax profits derived from sports betting at racetracks at 10%; and (iii) legalize roulette and dice games, such as craps, at tribal casinos. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative, thus continuing to prohibit sports betting in California and roulette and dice games at tribal casinos. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported legalizing online and mobile sports betting for persons 21 years of age or older, establishing regulations for the mobile sports betting industry, imposing a 10% tax on sports betting revenues and licensing fees, and allocating tax revenue to an account for homelessness programs and an account for tribes not operating sports betting. |
|
|
A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative, thus continuing to prohibit sports betting in California. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed requiring an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98. |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant while patients are being treated; report data on dialysis-related infections; and not discriminate against patients based on the source of payment for care. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative to require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant while patients are being treated; report data on dialysis-related infections; and not discriminate against patients based on the source of payment for care. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported increasing the tax on personal income above $2 million by 1.75% and dedicating the revenue to zero-emission vehicle subsidies; zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging stations; and wildfire suppression and prevention programs. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed increasing the tax on personal income above $2 million by 1.75% and dedicating the revenue to zero-emission vehicle subsidies; zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging stations; and wildfire suppression and prevention programs. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote is to uphold the contested legislation, Senate Bill 793 (SB 793), which would ban the sale of flavored tobacco products. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote is to repeal the contested legislation, Senate Bill 793 (SB 793), thus keeping the sale of flavored tobacco legal in the state. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported allowing city employees who retired before November 6, 1996, to receive a supplemental cost of living adjustment to their pensions whether or not the retirement system is fully funded and allowing the Retirement Board to enter into an individual employment contract with its executive director. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed allowing city employees who retired before November 6, 1996, to receive a supplemental cost of living adjustment to their pensions whether or not the retirement system is fully funded and allowing the Retirement Board to enter into an individual employment contract with its executive director, thereby requiring the Retirement Board to follow city civil service hiring rules, which limit the Board's salary and benefit offerings. |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported eliminating the Department of Sanitation and Streets and transferring its duties to the Department of Public Works and retaining the Public Works Commission and the Sanitation and Streets Commission. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed eliminating the Department of Sanitation and Streets and transferring its duties to the Department of Public Works. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported creating a Homelessness Oversight Commission to oversee the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing and requiring the city controller to conduct audits of services for people experiencing homelessness. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed creating a Homelessness Oversight Commission to oversee the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing and requiring the city controller to conduct audits of services for people experiencing homelessness. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed the following:
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported creating the Student Success Fund to provide additional grants to San Francisco Unified School District through 2038, with the city allocating $11 million to the Fund in 2024, $35 million in 2025, and $45 million in 2026. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed creating the Student Success Fund to provide additional grants to San Francisco Unified School District. |
|
|
A "yes" vote supported changing elections for Mayor, Sheriff, District Attorney, City Attorney, and Treasurer from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years (in November of presidential election years) and changing signature requirements for ballot initiatives from 5% of votes cast for mayor to 2% of registered voters. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed the proposed changes, thereby continuing to hold elections for Mayor, Sheriff, District Attorney, City Attorney, and Treasurer during odd-numbered years and maintaining that the basis for determining the number of signatures required for ballot initiatives shall be 5% of votes cast for mayor in the previous mayoral election. |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported allowing private motor vehicles on John F. Kennedy Drive and connector streets, known as the JFK Promenade, except from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays and legal holidays as well as on Saturdays from April through September. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed allowing private motor vehicles on John F. Kennedy Drive and connector streets, known as the JFK Promenade, except from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays and legal holidays as well as on Saturdays from April through September, thereby maintaining current law providing for the closure of these roads to use the area as recreational open space. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported upholding an ordinance adopted in May 2022 that provided for the closure of portions of John F. Kennedy Drive and certain connector streets in Golden Gate Park, known as JFK Promenade, to use the area as open recreation spaces. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed upholding an ordinance adopted in May 2022 that provided for the closure of portions of John F. Kennedy Drive and certain connector streets in Golden Gate Park, known as JFK Promenade, to use the area as open recreation spaces |
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported continuing an existing one-half cent sales tax through 2053 for transportation project funding and allowing the Transportation Authority to issue up to $1.91 billion in bonds for transportation projects. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed continuing an existing one-half cent sales tax through 2053 for transportation project funding and allowing the Transportation Authority to issue up to $1.91 billion in bonds for transportation projects. |
|
|
A "yes" vote supported allowing the city to use public funds to acquire, operate, or subsidize public parking in the underground parking garage in Golden Gate Park; dissolves the Golden Gate Park Concourse Authority and transfers management of the garage to the Recreation and Park Commission. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed allowing the city to use public funds to acquire, operate, or subsidize public parking in the underground parking garage in Golden Gate Park; dissolves the Golden Gate Park Concourse Authority and transfers management of the garage to the Recreation and Park Commission. |
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
|
|
A "yes" vote supported levying a parcel tax at varying rates between $1504,000 per parcel, beginning on July 1, 2023 and ending on June 30, 2043, with funding appropriated to the City College of San Francisco for student and workforce development programs. |
|
|
|
|
|
A "no" vote opposed levying a parcel tax at varying rates between $1504,000 per parcel, beginning on July 1, 2023 and ending on June 30, 2043, with funding appropriated to the City College of San Francisco for student and workforce development programs. |
|
|
|
|
|
"sin opinión" |
|
|
Y¡Su voto importa!
