By Kenneth P. Miller, Katherine Jackson and Katherine Lanzalotto | Inland Empire Economic Partnership Election Day is fast approaching and in California early voting has already begun. By now, most people have firmly decided how they will cast their votes in top-of-the-ballot races, such as the contest for president between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. But as they move down the ballot, voters face decisions that require additional thought and information. Most notably, this year’s California ballot includes 10 statewide propositions on topics ranging from school bonds to rules for prison labor to Medi-Cal funding. These measures are  complex and can cause voters to throw up their hands in confusion and frustration. Yet most voters take seriously their responsibility to say “Yes” or “No” to the propositions because the stakes of these contests are high. Consider a few examples. Housing California faces an acute shortage of affordable housing, and more than 70% of residents say this shortage is a serious concern in their part of the state. This year’s ballot presents two proposals designed to attack the problem. First, Proposition 5 seeks to facilitate local funding for affordable housing projects. More specifically, it would make it easier for voters to approve local bond measures to fund affordable housing projects (as well as infrastructure projects) by lowering the vote requirement for these bonds from two-thirds to 55%. This change would likely lead to the greenlighting of more local housing and infrastructure bonds and thereby expand public resources for local housing programs. Opponents argue, however, that increasing the number of voter-approved bonds would result in higher levels of local bond debt that, in turn, would require funding through local property taxes. The second housing-related measure, Proposition 33, would expand the authority of local governments to impose rent control. In 1995, the California Legislature passed the Costa Hawkins Act, which limited the ability of local governments to impose rent control. For years, rent control advocates have attempted without success to repeal Costa-Hawkins. Proposition 33 on this year’s ballot is another such effort. If the measure passes, it would allow any city or county in California to control rent on any form of housing and would prevent the state from limiting local rent control ordinances in the future. The measure would likely provide relief for some renters, but opponents argue that capping rents would reduce the state’s housing supply and lower tax revenues and property values. Minimum wage California has the nation’s highest poverty rate when the state’s high cost of living is factored in. Some contend that raising the state’s minimum wage would lift many of its residents out of poverty. California’s minimum wage is currently $16 per hour (more than double the federal minimum wage of $7.25), with higher minimums in some cities and for workers in some sectors such as the fast-food industry. Proposition 32 on this year’s ballot would increase the state’s minimum wage to $18 per hour by 2025 for businesses with 26 or more employees, and by 2026 for businesses with 25 or fewer employees, with subsequent annual adjustments for inflation. While this proposal would surely benefit some workers, opponents argue it would put too much stress on California businesses, many of which already struggle to survive. Higher wages, they note, would likely force some employers to lay off workers or at least reduce the number of hours of those working. The bottom line is that higher minimum wages benefit those who continue to work for the business but hurt those who are laid off as a result. Moreover, some of the minimum wage increases will be passed on as higher prices to consumers. Crime California also struggles with high crime rates — especially property crimes. Some argue that a measure voters approved a decade ago, Proposition 47 of 2014, has contributed to this problem by making most drug possession crimes misdemeanors, not felonies, and reducing punishment for many thefts under $950 to misdemeanors. Proposition 36 on this year’s ballot, backed by a coalition of law enforcement groups and major retailers, would push the criminal justice pendulum back toward tougher penalties. Among other provisions, the measure would define thefts of up to $950 as felonies for those with two or more prior theft convictions; increase sentences for theft or property damage if three or more people commit the crime; impose longer sentences for selling hard drugs and require the time be served in state prison, not county jail; and mandate that some convicted of illegal drug possession be given the choice between mandated drug treatment or a felony conviction and a prison sentence. Supporters say Proposition 36 would help reduce crime in California. Opponents, however, argue that the measure would reignite the war on drugs and reestablish a “carceral state” that imprisons too many people. How to navigate the ballot As these examples show, the California ballot is filled with complex and consequential choices. How can a voter make informed decisions about them? One cannot hope to rely on the paid advertisements for and against ballot measures that run incessantly on TV, radio, and the internet in the weeks before the election. These ads are easy to consume but notoriously distorted. A diligent voter can turn to the state’s official Voter Information Guide, which is more reliable than partisan ads. But for many, this guide is overwhelmingly long and complicated. We at the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College are offering a welcome alternative. A team of the Institute’s researchers has created a series of objective, non-partisan summaries of California’s 10 statewide ballot measures in two formats: written backgrounders and short videos. Related Articles Politics | Election 2024: Measure L in Riverside could bring watchdog to City Hall Politics | Riverside rejects ‘overreaching’ regulations for public protests Politics | Steve Garvey and Adam Schiff spar over Trump, housing and abortion in US Senate debate Politics | Jose Medina, Richard Roth face off in Riverside County supervisor race Politics | Donald Trump to speak at Coachella campaign rally Oct. 12 These sources present an accessible overview of what each proposition would do, a list of its prominent supporters and opponents, and concise summaries of the leading arguments for and against the measure. The project’s videos in particular are designed to appeal to younger voters, but can help anyone who is perplexed by the state’s ballot measure system. We encourage all eligible Californians to vote on this year’s ballot propositions, and we invite those voters to get informed by visiting www.roseinstitute.org/video-voter-guide/. Kenneth P. Miller: Director, Rose Institute of State and Local Government, Professor, Department of Government, Claremont  McKenna College, Inland Empire Economic Council; Katherine Jackson and Katherine Lanzalatto: research analysts, Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College. The Inland Empire  Economic Partnership’s mission is to help create a regional voice for business and quality of life in Riverside and  San Bernardino counties. Its membership includes organizations in the private and public sector