Voter information: 中文版本，请点这
REGISTER TO VOTE: Register to vote online at registertovote.ca.gov by October 21, 2024
VOTE IN PERSON: Early voting in San Francisco begins on October 7, 2024 at City Hall Voting Center located at 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place. Or you can vote on election day on November 5, 2024 (polling places open from 7 am to 8 pm) at your local polling location. Find your polling place here.
VOTE BY MAIL: Registered voters will automatically receive their ballots in the mail. Ballots will be mailed out on early October.
Visit SF Department of Elections Voter Portal (https://sfelections.org/tools/portal/index.php) to update language preference for election materials and information regarding vote-by-mail and ballot drop off locations.SF Department of Elections: for English (415) 554-4375, 中文 (415) 554-4367
CALIFORNIA MEASURES
NEUTRAL on Prop 2 – Education bond : Provides $8.5 billion to fix school facilities but the funding formula favors rich school districts over poorer school districts. [Online voter guide only]
Prop 2 would provide $8.5 billion in facility renovations and construction for TK-12 schools and $1.5 billion to community colleges. Our public schools need new and improved infrastructure, but the funding formula favors rich school districts over poor ones because districts receive matching state dollars based on what they can raise themselves. Thus, wealthy districts can raise more money and receive more in matching funds than poorer districts, who have greater infrastructure needs. Districts unable to raise more than $15 million can receive up to a 100% match from the state, but this is on a first-come, first-serve basis, which pits poor districts against each other. Ultimately, schools across the state need more money for facilities, but Prop 2 does not fully address the equity gap.
YES on Prop 3 – Freedom to marry : Marriage equality for all Californians.
Amends the California Constitution to include the right to marry, regardless of sex or gender. CAA supports marriage equality and affirms the dignity of all people.
YES on Prop 5 – Empower local communities : Lowers the threshold for local communities to pass affordable housing, transit, and other public infrastructure measures.
Currently, most local bond proposals require a two-thirds vote of the public to be approved. Yes on Proposition 5 would lower the threshold to 55% for bonds, which would allow local communities to more easily pass low-income housing, road and transit expansion, park, wildfire resilience, and other public infrastructure projects.
YES on Prop 6 – End forced prison labor : Bans forced labor in state prisons.
Amends the California state constitution to ban involuntary servitude, which would end forced labor in state prisons. Currently, the state requires able-bodied inmates to work yet need only pay them as little as 35 cents per hour. Prop 6 is a racial and economic justice issue because involuntary servitude disproportionately impacts African Americans and all people should be paid for their labor.
YES on Prop 32 – Minimum wage : Raises the state’s minimum wage to $18 per hour.
Raises California’s minimum wage to $18 effective January 1, 2025. All working people deserve to earn a living wage that supports their basic needs. Prop 32 can lift over 3.5 million working households out of poverty. An increase to the state’s minimum wage will create a fairer economy, which can allow workers to invest for their future and protect our most vulnerable communities.
YES on Prop 33 – Rent control : Let cities and counties expand rent control.
Ends the state ban on rent control and allows cities and counties to expand rent control. Rent in California, and especially in San Francisco, is very high, and too many tenants spend the majority of their income on housing. Prop 33 gives local governments a way to ease the affordability crisis, which is hurting working class communities.
NO on Prop 36 – Ineffective safety program : Everyone deserves to feel safe, but Prop 36 will not make us safer. Prop 36 will put people in danger by cutting funds to mental health and victim service programs.
Everyone shares a deep concern about community safety. We all want to feel safe in our neighborhoods. We all want our children to go to school and our elders to walk to the park without fear. However, Prop 36 does not make communities safer. Instead, Prop 36 will cut the $800 millions saved from Prop 47, which goes towards effective safety solutions like mental health, re-entry, homelessness prevention, and victim services programs. Taking away funding for programs that help keep people on the right track will only make communities less safe for everyone. Not only will Prop 36 put people in danger, it will also cost a lot of money. At a time when the state is facing a big budget deficit, Prop 36 will cost taxpayers more than $26 billion in prison spending over the next decade – the largest prison spending in California history. This measure will waste money on prisons, without addressing the root causes of crime. For the fact-checked articles about crime and safety, please visit PiYaoBa.
SAN FRANCISCO MEASURES
Yes on A – School improvement bond : $790 million bond to fix school buildings, upgrade security and technology, and provide fresh meals.
Every public school student in San Francisco should enter a school building that is up-to-code. Prop A is a $790 million bond to modernize SFUSD school facilities, including upgrades to school yards, building security, cafeterias, and technology. Prop A includes accountability and oversight so SFUSD will use the funds appropriately to improve school facilities and invest in student nutrition, technology, and outdoor learning spaces.
Yes on B – Improve hospitals and public spaces : $390 million bond to repair hospitals, improve streets and sidewalks, revitalize public parks and downtown spaces, and shelter families at risk of homelessness.
Prop B is a $390 million general obligation bond to fund community health and medical facilities, street safety, public spaces and interim housing to reduce family homelessness. Specifically, Prop B requires renovations to the Chinatown Public Health Center and San Francisco General Hospital, which many Chinese-speaking community members rely on for medical treatment. Prop B money would also fund street and sidewalk safety projects and improvements to public spaces downtown, such as the Powell Street cable car turnaround area. In addition, Prop B provides much-needed family shelters to reduce family homelessness.
Yes on C – Create new Inspector General position : Fights fraud and waste in City government.
Prop C creates the new position of Inspector General in the Controller’s Office. The Inspector General will be able to investigate financial misconduct by city contractors and departments, which will combat fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars. This new position does not cost any additional money because it will be funded through the Controller’s Office. Many major cities, including New York, Chicago, and New Orleans, already have an inspector general. CAA supports good governance, which benefits us all.
No on D – Irresponsible commission reform : Removes commissions that help immigrants, including the Immigrant Rights Commission.
Our community members rely on commissions and commissioners to represent diverse voices and needs. For instance, the Immigrant Rights Commission has been a leader in advocating for language access and immigrant voting, both of which enable all San Franciscans, regardless of language or citizenship status, to fully participate in our City. However, Prop D would eliminate the Immigrant Rights Commission as well as around 83% of existing commissions without any public input. For a better commission reform measure, please see Prop E.
Yes on E – Transparent commission reform : Streamlines city commissions by creating a task force and independent cost-benefit analysis.
Commission reform should occur with public input so that we can speak up for commissions that help us, like the Immigrant Rights Commission (see above). Prop E would streamline the City’s many commissions by creating a task force that operates in full public view and mandating an independent cost-benefit analysis of each commission. Prop E is a transparent and common sense way for the public to decide which commissions to keep, consolidate, or remove.
No on F – Wasteful police program : Brings back an expensive SFPD retirement program, which would cost the City up to $3 million each year.
Prop F would bring back a failed SFPD retirement program that the City stopped in 2011 because it was so costly and ineffective. Under this retirement program, some SFPD officers can collect their regular paycheck and their monthly pension. In other words, they get paid double for the same amount of work. This double pay could cost the City $3 million annually. This retirement program, which existed from 2008-2011, was also ineffective because it did not help SFPD retain or recruit officers. Prop F is a bad idea that already failed once. Let’s not do it again.
Yes on G – Affordable housing : Helps extremely low income seniors, families, and people with disabilities with housing.
Prop G creates the Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund, which will dedicate $8.25 million annually to fund rental subsidies for extremely low-income households, specifically seniors, families, and people with disabilities. Currently, affordable housing rents are still out of reach for almost 66,000 extremely-low income households who earn less than 30% of the median income ($31,450 for a single person, $35,950 for a couple, and $44,950 for a four-person household). According to the City, low-income seniors are the single-fastest growing population in San Francisco, with the majority paying over 75% of their fixed-income to stay housed. The Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund created by Prop G will help 2,200 extremely low-income households cover rent in affordable housing buildings, which will save them from homelessness.
Yes on L – Public transit : Increases funding for MUNI through a new tax on rideshare apps and autonomous vehicles.
Public transportation allows people to get to their jobs, schools, doctor appointments, and more. In San Francisco, working class communities depend on MUNI for their livelihoods. Due to COVID-19, MUNI has a projected $220 million dollar budget deficit. Prop L will generate $20-30 million annually to save MUNI services, increase bus frequency and routes, and expand discount fares programs for people with disabilities, seniors, youth, students, and low-income residents. This money comes from a new tax on Uber, Lyft, Waymo, and other ride hailing companies. Prop L reinvests private transportation dollars into our public transit system, which serves all San Francisco residents and visitors.
Yes on M – Small business tax cut : Cuts taxes for more small businesses by increasing small business exemptions.
Prop M simplifies the City’s business tax categories and cuts taxes for more small businesses. Prop M will help more than 90% of restaurants and 50% of retailers, while also lowering the tax rate for hotels, arts, and entertainment businesses. These tax cuts can benefit Chinatown businesses and encourage economic growth throughout the City, while not hurting the dedicated business tax money that goes to homeless services. Over time, Prop M will not hurt the City’s budget, so government services, resources, and opportunities for public contracts and jobs will remain.
Yes on O – Reproductive rights : Protects and expands reproductive health services.
Under Prop O, the City will create a “Reproductive Freedom Fund” to support reproductive health services, which have been under attack since the Supreme Court ruling in the Dobbs case. Prop O increases access by posting signs about abortion and emergency contraception services online and throughout the City, including at pregnancy centers. Prop O also prohibits the City from using money to help other states prosecute people who come here seeking an abortion.
华人权益促进会背书
2024 年 11 月 5 日：选举日
选民信息：
请在 2024 年 10 月 21 日之前到纲站 registertovote.ca.gov 进行线上选民登记
2024 年 11 月 5 日：选举日（投票站开放时间为上午 7 点至晚上 8 点）
请溜览旧金山选务处选民门户网站 (https://sfelections.org/tools/portal/index.php)，更新选举资料的语言偏好，以及有关邮寄投票和选票投递地点的信息。旧金山选务处：英语 (415) 554-4375，中文 (415) 554-4367
加州的提案
对第 2 号提案持中立态度—教育债券 : 2号提案将提供 85 亿美元用于修复学校设施，但资助方案有利于富裕学区而不是贫困学区。
第 2 号提案将为 TK-12 学校的设施翻修和建设提供 85 亿美元，为社区大学提供 15 亿美元。我们的公立学校需要新的和改进的基础设施，但资助方案有利于富裕的学区而不是贫困的学区，因为学区根据自己筹集的资金获得配对的州资金。因此，与基础设施需求更大的贫困地区相比，富裕地区可以筹集更多资金并获得更多配对资金。无法筹集超过 1500 万美元的地区可以从州政府获得高达 100% 的配对，但这是按照先到先得的原则进行的，这会使贫困地区的学区相互竞争。最终，全州的学校需要更多资金用于设施建设，但第 2 号提案并没有完全解决公平差距问题。
赞成 第3 号提案——婚姻自由 : 确保所有加州人，不管其性别如何，都享有婚姻平等权利。
修改加州宪法，纳入结婚权利 (无论性别如何)。华促会支持所有人的婚姻平等。
赞成第 5 号提案 – 赋予地方社区权力 : 降低当地社区通过可负担住房、交通和其他公共基础设施提案的门槛。
目前，大多数地方债券提案需要公众三分之二投票才能批准。如果 5号提案 获得批准，债券门槛将降低至 55%，这将使当地社区更容易通过低收入住房、道路和交通扩建、公园、山火抵御能力和其他公共基础设施项目。
赞成第 6 号提案 ——结束强迫监狱劳动 : 禁止州监狱中的强迫劳动。
修改加州宪法，禁止非自愿奴役，这将结束州监狱中的强迫劳动。目前，该州要求身体健全的囚犯工作，但每小时只需支付 35 美分。第六号提案是一个种族和经济正义问题，因为非自愿奴役对非裔美国人的影响特别大，所有人的劳动都应该得到报酬。
赞成第 32 号提案 – 最低工资 : 将加州最低工资提高至每小时 18 美元。
由 2025 年 1 月 1 日起，将加州最低工资提高至 18 美元。所有工人都应获得足以满足其基本需求的生活工资。第 32 号提案可以帮助超过 350 万工薪家庭摆脱贫困。提高州最低工资将创造一个更加公平的经济，使工人能够为自己投资未来，并保护我们最脆弱的社区。
赞成第 33 号提案 – 租金管制 : 让各城市及县扩大租金管制。
结束州对租金管制的禁令，并允许各市县扩大租金管制。在加州，尤其是旧金山的租金非常高，太多的租户将大部分收入花在住房上。第 33 号提案为地方政府提供了缓解负担能力危机的方法，这危机正在损害工人阶级社区。
反对第 36 号提案 – 无效的安全计划 : 每个人都应该感到安全，但 第36 号提案不会让我们更安全。第 36 号提案的通过将会削减心理健康和受害者服务项目的资金，将人们置于危险之中。
每个人都对社区安全深感关注。我们都希望在我们自己的社区能感到安全。我们都希望我们的孩子能够安心的上学及我们的长辈能够无忧无虑地去公园散步，而不用担心人身安全。然而，第 36 号提案并没有让社区变得更安全。相反，第 36 号提案将削减由第 47 号提案节省下来的 8 亿美元，该提案省下来的 8 亿美元用于有效的安全解决方案，如心理健康、更新人士重返社会、预防无家可归和受害者服务计划。取消这项对帮助人们走上正轨的项目的资助只会让我们的社区更加没有安全感。 第36号提案不仅会让人们处于危险之中，还会花费大量金钱。在州面临巨额预算赤字之际，第 36 号提案将使纳税人在未来十年内花费超过 260 亿美元在监狱支出上 — 这是加州历史上最大的监狱支出。这项措施将在监狱上浪费资金，而无法解决犯罪的根源。有关犯罪和社区安全的事实核查文章，请访问PiYaoBa。
旧金山本地提案
赞成 A 提案 — 学校改善债券 : 7.9 亿美元债券用于修复校舍、升级安全和科技以及提供新鲜膳食。
旧金山的每个公立学校学生进入的校舍都应该符合规格。 A 提案是一笔 7.9 亿美元的债券，用于对 旧金山联合学区学校设施进行现代化改造，包括校园、建筑保全、学校食堂和科技的升级。提案 A 包括问责制和监督，因此旧金山联合学区将适当使用这些资金来改善学校设施并投资于增加学生营养、升级科技和扩展户外学习空间。
赞成 B 提案 — 改善医院和公共空间 : 3.9 亿美元债券用于修复医院、改善街道和人行道、振兴公园和市中心空间，以及为面临无家可归风险的家庭提供庇护。
B 提案是一笔 3.9 亿美元的一般责任债券，用于资助社区健康和医疗设施、街道安全、公共空间和临时住房，以减少家庭无家可归的情况。具体来说，B 提案要求对华埠公共卫生局和旧金山总医院进行翻修，因为许多讲华语的社区成员依赖这些医院接受治疗。 B 提案的资金还将资助街道和人行道的安全项目以及市中心公共空间的改善，例如鲍威尔街缆车周转区。此外，B 提案还提供急需的家庭庇护所，以减少家庭无家可归的情况。
赞成 C 提案— 创建新的监察长职位 : 打击市政府的贪污和浪费。
C 提案在主计长办公室设立了监察长这一新职位。监察长将能够调查旧金山承包商和市府部门的财务不当行为，这将打击欺诈和滥用纳税人资金的行为。这个新职位不需要任何额外费用，因为它将由财务总监办公室提供资金。许多主要城市，包括纽约、芝加哥和新奥尔良，已经设立了监察长。 华促会 支持良好的治理，这使我们所有人受益。
反对D提案 — 不负责的委员会的改革 : 将撤去帮助移民们的委员会，包括移民权利委员会。
我们的社区成员依靠各个委员会和委员们来代表不同的声音和需求。例如，移民权利委员会一直是倡导语言服务和移民投票的领导者，这两者都使所有旧金山人，无论其语言或公民身份如何，都能充分参与我们的城市事务。然而，D 提案将在没有任何公众意见的情况下取消移民权利委员会以及约 83% 的现有委员会。更好的委员会改革措施，请参见E提案。
贊成E提案 — 透明的委员会改革 : 通过创建一个工作小组和独立的成本效益分析来简化三藩市的各个委员会。
委员会改革应在公众意见的基础上进行，以便我们能够为帮助我们的委员会发声，例如移民权利委员会（见上文）。 E提案将通过创建一个在公众视野下运作的工作组并要求对每个委员会进行独立的成本效益分析来简化市內的许多委员会。 E 提案是一个透明且符合常识的方式，让公众决定保留、合并或取消哪些委员会。
反对F提案 — 浪费的增加警察福利计划 : 恢复一项昂贵的旧金山警察局 退休福利计划，该计划每年将花费我市高达 三百 万美元。
F 提案将恢复失败的旧金山警察局退休计划，该计划于 2011 年被市政府叫停，因为该计划成本高昂且效率低下。根据这项退休计划，一些 旧金山警察局警员可以同时领取定期工资和每月的养老金。换句话说，他们做同样的工作量，得到双倍的报酬。这种双重工资每年可能会让市政府损失 三百万美元。这项2008年至2011年间存在的退休计划也是无效益的，因为它无助于旧金山警察局留住或招募警员。 F 提案是一个差的方案，已经失败过一次了。我们不要再重蹈覆辙了。
赞成 G提案 -— 可負担住房 : 帮助极低收入的老年人、家庭和残疾人获得住房。
G 提案设立了可负担住房机会基金，每年将投入八百二十五万美元，为极低收入家庭（特别是老年人、家庭和残疾人）提供租金补贴。目前，对于近 66,000 个收入低于中位收入 30% 的极低收入家庭（即单人 31,450 美元，夫妻 35,950 美元，四人家庭 44,950 美元）来说，可负担住房的租金仍然遥不可及。 据旧金山市称，低收入老年人是旧金山增长最快的单身人口，其中大多数人支付超过 75% 的固定收入用于住房。 G 提案创建的可负担住房机会基金将帮助 2,200 个极低收入家庭支付可负担住房的租金，从而使他们免于无家可归。
贊成 L 提案—公共交通 : 通过对乘车应用程序和自动驾驶汽车征收新税，增加对 旧金山城市铁路 MUNI 的资助。
公共交通让人们可以去上班、上学、医生约诊等等。在旧金山，工人阶级社区依靠 MUNI 维持生计。由于 COVID-19 疫情，MUNI 预计预算赤字为 2.2 亿美元。 L 提案每年将筹集 二千万到三千万美元，用于节省 MUNI 服务、增加公交车班次和路线，并扩大针对残疾人、老年人、青少年、学生和低收入居民的折扣票价计划。这笔钱来自对 Uber、Lyft、Waymo 和其他出租车公司征收的新税。 L 提案将私人交通资金重新投资到我们的公共交通系统中，该系统为所有旧金山居民和游客提供服务。
贊成 M提案 — 小企业减税 : 通过增加小企业免税额来为更多小企业减税。
M 提案简化了市內的营业税类别，并为更多小企业减税。 M提案将帮助超过90%的餐馆和50%的零售商，同时还降低酒店、艺术和娱乐企业的税率。这些减税措施可以使唐人街的商户受益，并鼓励整个城市的经济增长，同时不会损害用于无家可归者服务的专用商业税资金。随着时间的推移，M 提案不会损害市政府的预算，因此政府服务、资源以及公共合约和就业机会将继续存在。
赞成 O 提案— 生殖权利 : 保护和扩大生殖健康服务。
根据O提案，市政府将设立一个“生殖自由基金”来支持生殖健康服务。自最高法院对多布斯案(Dobbs)做出裁决以来，生殖健康服务一直受到攻击。O提案 过在网上和整个城市（包括怀孕中心）张贴有关堕胎和紧急避孕服务的标志来增加获得服务的机会。 O 提案还禁止市政府使用金钱帮助其他州起诉来这里寻求堕胎的人。
