guide

The proposition creates a down payment loan program, totaling up to $25 billion, for middle-income families looking to buy a new home in California. The program would be run by the California Housing Finance Agency, which already oversees several homeownership assistance programs.

The state would sell bonds to fund the program. It would pay back investors using interest and loan payments from the program — not taxpayer money. The California Housing Finance Agency would administer the program, including setting interest rates for the loans.

To qualify, prospective borrowers would need to buy a newly constructed home or a home that never has sold before, such as a commercial building that was converted into condos. Borrowers wouldn’t need to be first-time homebuyers, but they would need to earn no more than 200% of the median local income; for a family of four in Los Angeles County, that amounts to no more than $216,200 a year.

There also would be limits on the sales prices of homes bought with help from this program. While the exact price would depend on the county, generally the homes would need to sell for between $1 million and $1.5 million. Homebuyers would need to put at least 3% down, and the state finance agency could provide a loan up to 17% of the sales price.

The loans would function like fixed-rate second mortgages.

According to the California Budget and Policy Center, the earnings that would qualify a family for down payment assistance could vary greatly depending on where they planned to buy a home. Per the center’s calculations, a family of four buying a home in Madera County would have to earn no more than $166,800 a year, while a family in Santa Clara County could earn up to $375,800 a year and still qualify.

Other specifics would be worked out if voters pass the measure. That includes the interest rates charged on this second mortgage, which, according to the Budget and Policy Center, likely would be higher than the current rates for conventional mortgages, which have hovered around 7% for a 30-year mortgage.

Because revenue bonds, which would be used to fund this program, are riskier than other bonds, investors might demand a higher return, translating to a higher interest rate.

The Los Angeles Community College District is the largest community college district in the nation, serving 200,000 students with a budget of $10 million.

Voters will elect three members to the board.

Seat 2

Steven F. Veres

Veres is a member of the Los Angeles Community College District Board of Trustees and works as a state political adviser. He says he has worked to strengthen job training programs and improve graduation rates and wants to make college as affordable as possible.

Robert Payne

Payne taught at L.A. Mission College, worked on movie crews and ran an import business. He would focus on low enrollment growth. He also wants to make community colleges “cheaper, faster, better” in part by offering students more training for specific jobs and less expensive online textbooks.

Kristina Irwin

Irwin serves on the general advisory board at Santa Monica College. She previously served on the board of trustees at Palisades Charter High School. She wants to offer students more tools to succeed in college and to establish “preentry” programs in every local high school to better prepare students for community college.

Adriana Cabrera

Cabrera served as president of the Central Alameda Neighborhood Council and co-founded Empowering Youth in South Central. She wants to make student services easier to navigate and to strengthen financial aid and other support, including for food, housing, child care and mental health.

Roy Payan

Payan has suspended his campaign.

Seat 4

Nancy Pearlman

Pearlman is an environmentalist who served on the LACC Board of Trustees from 2001 to 2017 and taught part time at all nine colleges. She would focus on improving low enrollment while ensuring students are given the necessary support and resources to succeed. She also cites the need to make sure faculty receive equal pay.

Darryn Harris

Harris is a government and community affairs officer for St. John’s Community Health and teaches at Santa Monica College. Harris wants to tackle the affordability crisis blocking student achievement by building more low-cost housing on district land and making it “easier for students to get help with food, transportation, child care, and other basic needs.”

Adam Bruno

Bruno has worked as a therapist helping children and been a community college student. His main goals are to increase enrollment and make it easier for students to afford college. He’d explore student stipends as a way to make community college more affordable.

Elaine Alaniz

Alaniz serves as a public affairs specialist with the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience. She wants to better prepare students for a changing workforce and ensure classroom instruction “keeps pace with a rapidly changing workforce” in the age of artificial intelligence and other technologies.

Isidro J. Armenta

Armenta did not reply to The Times’ survey.

Priscilla Umana

Umana works as an American Sign Language interpreter. She says the district’s biggest challenge “is the high percentage of students experiencing housing insecurity, homelessness, and food insecurity.” She would work with the district to expand affordable housing, work-study opportunities and food aid.

Jason R. Aula

Aula has worked as a political campaign consultant and in the world of mobile apps. He considers fraud a major issue including people posing as community college students to steal financial aid. He proposed a moratorium on noncitizens attending district schools and a focus on pandemic learning loss.

Seat 6

Gabriel Buelna

Buelna serves on the board of trustees. He also is an attorney and teaches history and political science at Cal State Northridge. He said a key issue is making college more affordable to students and ensuring that they graduate. He also said the board must conduct strong fiscal oversight of the billions in voter-approved bond funds.

Tonia Arey

Arey has worked in real estate, public advocacy and community engagement. Arey would work to implement campus safety plans, support additional academic advising and career education and more closely “examine spending, contracts, program outcomes and administrative costs to ensure resources reach classrooms and directly support students.”

Randall Winston

Winston works as a licensed architect and attorney and serves as Los Angeles’ deputy mayor of infrastructure and climate resilience under Mayor Karen Bass. Winston’s priorities for the district include ensuring colleges are a pathway to opportunity and good jobs, that students can afford basic needs and people historically shut out of higher education are let in.

Voter ballots were mailed to all registered California voters starting Oct. 5. But if you prefer to vote in person, here’s what you need to know about casting your ballot ahead of and on election day, Nov. 3.

How can I vote in person now?

The first vote centers opened for early in-person voting on Oct. 24 but only in Voter’s Choice Act counties. L.A. County is among the 30 VCA counties where you can vote in person early.

But in-person early voting expands significantly Saturday, with locations open across the state.

To find your polling location, you can visit your county elections official’s website or the secretary of state’s website here.

Now through Nov. 2, in-person voting centers are open from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., according to the office of the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk.

I like to vote in person on election day. Where do I go?

You can find your polling place here or by calling (800) 345-8683 — both provide information from the California secretary of state’s office.

You also can use the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk website here to find polling locations within the county.

All polling locations are open on election day, Nov. 3, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

How do I make sure my ballot was counted?

Once cast, your ballot can be tracked here.

Where do I track election results?

The Los Angeles Times will be covering election night.

County elections officials begin reporting results at 8 p.m. and update throughout the night and in the days and weeks that follow.

More election news

There are about 2,000 safety-net clinics in California that deliver primary care to underserved populations. Proposition 44 would set limits on how these federally qualified health centers spend their money.

The basics

Proposition 44 asks voters to require federally funded community health centers to spend at least 90% of their total annual revenue on “program services advancing their charitable purpose.”

The impact

If the proposition passes, the state attorney general will be responsible for determining what services fall into that category. If spending on administrative or non-healthcare functions exceeded 10% of total revenue, a clinic would have to pay a penalty equal to the amount it overspent.

Dig deeper

Proposition 44 was backed by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the same union that is pushing Proposition 40, the controversial billionaire tax. The union appears to be the main supporter of the proposal and says the restrictions would prevent excessive spending on executive salaries, fundraisers and other administrative expenses.

There is a diverse array of opponents, including the California Medical Assn., the California Teachers Assn., the Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, the state Democratic Party and the state Chamber of Commerce. They say the proposition’s vague wording could result in vital services being excluded from the list of program expenses permitted. A study commissioned by the California Primary Care Assn. found that clinics could face up to $1.7 billion in collective penalties in the first year of the measure’s implementation.

More reading

What to know about Prop. 44 (L.A. Times)

An analysis of Prop. 44 (California Legislative Analyst’s Office)

More on the measure, spending (CalMatters)

Union involved in Prop. 44 faces questions (L.A. Times)

The Trump administration has frozen, terminated or delayed billions in congressionally approved research grants since last year. Proposition 38 aims to backfill some of that loss by creating a stable source of money to fund immunology and immunotherapy research.

The basics

Proposition 38 would authorize the state to issue $8.4 billion in bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy research to uncover treatments that help the immune system fight diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer’s disease more efficiently.

The impact

The measure would require at least $4.2 billion of the funds to be used for immunology research on cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s. It also would authorize the state to enter a partnership with an immunology and immunotherapy research institute selected by the California Department of Public Health and allocate half of the bond revenue to it. The remaining funds would be used for competitive grants that focus solely on immunology and immunotherapy research.

Californians would take on an increased cost of $500 million to $600 million annually to repay the bond for about 20 years, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The Yes on 38 campaign says the proposition pays for itself: 10% of all proceeds from the licensing of immunotherapies must be returned to the state to offset the total cost of the bond measure, including interest.

However, it’s difficult to predict whether any research projects will lead to marketable treatments.

Dig deeper

Proposition 38 is backed by organizations including the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research and the ALS Assn., as well as a majority of local chapters of Democratic organizations across the state. Supporters say the proposed funding could give those afflicted with chronic illness hope and potentially more options for treatment.

Its opponents have said the proposed criteria for awarding the grant funding would appear to create an extremely small pool of qualified recipients. Only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, co-founded by billionaire Gary K. Michelson, would qualify under the proposed criteria, according to No on 38, the campaign against the proposition.

Robin Swanson, spokesperson for the Yes on 38 campaign, said “lots of institutions would qualify for funds under this measure.”

But she said at a virtual news conference in mid-September that it was “very likely” that the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy “will qualify for half of the funds under the current criteria.”

Ultimately, Swanson said, the decision lies with the California Department of Public Health.

More reading

Your guide to Proposition 38: Immunology and immunotherapy research funding (L.A. Times)

An analysis of Prop. 38 (California Legislative Analyst’s Office)

This CA proposition will send $4 billion to a single nonprofit. Who’s behind it? (Cal Matters)

This institute could get $4 billion from a ballot measure. With just three workers, is it ready? (Cal Matters)

The so-called billionaire tax has become one of the most contested California propositions in years, generating national interest and massive spending by opponents. It also has spawned two rival ballot measures.

Here’s a cheat sheet for sorting it all out.

Proposition 40

The basics

Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on California billionaires’ assets. The tax applies to people with a net worth of at least $1 billion who resided in California on Jan. 1.

Impact

Ninety percent of the tax would fund healthcare, and 10% would go toward education and food assistance.

The tax would affect hundreds of billionaires whose net worth includes assets such as their businesses, stocks and other investments. Real property, pensions and retirement accounts generally would be excluded.

Proposition 41

It’s called the Improving Transparency, Effectiveness and Efficiency in California Government Act. But it is deeply connected to Proposition 40 and is funded by foes of the billionaire tax.

The basics

Proposition 41 requires the state auditor to review programs funded by proposed special taxes before they appear on the ballot. More importantly, it also prohibits new state taxes from being exempted from a voter-approved state spending limit.

Impact

The Legislative Analyst’s Office says passage of Proposition 41 could prevent Proposition 40, the proposed billionaire tax, from becoming law even if voters approve it. This could happen if Proposition 41 receives more “yes” votes than Proposition 40.

Proposition 42

Proposition 42 would limit the state’s ability to impose certain new taxes. But it’s more complicated and far-reaching than that description might sound. And, yes, it’s also backed by opponents of Proposition 40.

The basics

Proposition 42 would prohibit new taxes on “retirement holdings, individually owned assets, and other forms of personal savings” that take effect after Jan. 1, 2026. It also would bar retroactive taxes on past earnings unless the state is using revenue from the tax to respond to emergencies such as a fire or a flood.

Impact

The Legislative Analyst’s Office says Proposition 42 could nullify Proposition 40 because the two measures conflict with each other. If voters approve both, the one with the most “yes” votes generally would become law, the office says.

Dig deeper

The billionaire tax was pushed by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West and has some labor and progressive support, including from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and the state Democratic Party. They say the tax is needed to help the less fortunate and that the super-rich can afford it. But key Democrats and some key unions are not supporting it.

Critics include some of California’s richest people, and they are spending a fortune to defeat it. They say it will hurt innovation and drive the wealthy out of the state, hurting the treasury.

More reading

A powerful union and the birth of the billionaire tax (L.A. Times)

Why unions are divided over Prop. 40 (L.A. Times)

The Google co-founder fighting the billionaire tax (L.A. Times)

Inside the massive spending to defeat Prop. 40 (L.A. Times)

How the billionaire tax could spark national movement (The New Yorker)

The academics behind Prop. 40 (Sacramento Bee)

Will Prop. 40 reallly bring an exodus? (L.A. Times)

Why healthcare is divided by Prop. 40 (Bloomberg)

Taxing the “ultrarich,” a guide (New York Times)

Two California governors faced recall in the last 30 years.

In 2021, Gavin Newsom survived an effort to recall him amid the COVID-19 pandemic. But in 2003, Gray Davis was ousted from office and replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Now, voters will consider significant changes to recall rules for elected state officials.

The basics

Under current law, when an elected official is recalled in California, the election for their replacement occurs at the same time. Proposition 5 breaks up that process into two parts, prioritizing the voters’ right to oust an official before selecting a replacement.

The impact

This ballot measure would amend the state constitution to change the current recall system. Under the proposed changes, voters would first be asked to choose whether or not to oust an official. Then, in the event of a recall, the official would be replaced by appointment, succession or special election at a later date. In the case of a special election, the former officeholder could run again.

The measure also would designate California’s lieutenant governor as the de facto replacement for a recalled governor until the next term.

Dig deeper

California’s rules for recalling politicians date to the Progressive era and were seen at the time as a way to give more power to voters.

But there have been concerns in recent years that the process needs reform, especially after the 2021 recall that Newsom overwhelmingly beat back; it cost local and state governments more than $200 million.

After the Newsom recall failed, the Legislature began a bipartisan task force to suggest changes.

More reading

California’s costly, confusing recall sparks an effort to rethink the rules (L.A. Times, 2021)

The history of recalls in California (L.A. Times)

The Little Hoover Commission on recall reform (State of California)

Your ballot is overflowing with decisions you need to make. Some you’ve probably heard about — Karen Bass vs. Nithya Raman for L.A. mayor, Xavier Becerra vs. Steve Hilton for California governor, the controversial billionaire tax.

But there are also some more obscure races on the L.A. County ballot that are important as well. Here are seven to keep an eye out for.

Los Angeles County sheriff

This is a rematch between rivals for the job of running the Sheriff’s Department, which also oversees county jails.

• Robert Luna is the sitting sheriff. The former Long Beach police chief, Luna came out of retirement to run for sheriff in 2022, arguing that incumbent Alex Villanueva had taken the department in the wrong direction. Luna points out that violent crime has fallen every year since he took office. Between 2023, his first full year in office, and 2025, homicides fell by more than 25%.
• Alex Villanueva was elected sheriff in 2018 in an upset victory. His tenure was marked by controversy and scandal, and he became a fixture on Fox News, where he appeared repeatedly to vilify “woke” culture and criticize Democrats. He faults Luna, claiming the department has issues with recruitment and retention. He also says the department does not have the resources it needs.

L.A. County Charter Amendment A

This measure deals with labor negotiations for key public safety personnel in L.A. County.

Basics

Measure A is a charter amendment that would require binding arbitration between county government and negotiators representing sheriff’s deputies, firefighters, lifeguards and other public safety workers if contract talks reach an impasse and no compromise can be reached. It would alter the current last step, in which county supervisors can impose a final offer that these employees must accept — by law, public safety personnel cannot strike.

Impact

The initial phase of contract talks still would have union and county representatives seeking to hammer out a mutually beneficial deal, with a presumption that both sides would negotiate in good faith. But if a gap remains and an impasse ultimately is declared, the supervisors no longer would dictate the final offer. Instead, a three-member arbitration panel would be formed. The county and union each would select one member, with the sides together choosing the third person, who would serve as chair. If they can’t agree on the final panelist, a state entity could provide a list of qualified arbitrators to choose from. The arbitrators would focus on key employment elements such as wages and hours and would hold hearings and receive evidence from the parties. At the end of the process, a binding result would be issued and made public.

Read more:

L.A. County Charter Amendment E

This is a highly complicated measure that involves jail financing and seeks to clean up some bureaucratic muddles.

Basics

Jails: In 2020, 57% of county voters approved Measure J. This mandated that at least 10% of locally generated, unrestricted revenue be allocated to incarceration alternatives. The problem? Voters later approved the county reform effort Measure G, which had the unintended effect of repealing Measure J. Measure E would ensure that Measure J remains in effect.

Governance: Measure G also created, among other things, a county ethics commission and an ethics compliance office. Officials determined that for true independence, the commission and the compliance office must be permanently enshrined in the county charter.

Impact

Backers say Measure E would clean up those messy governmental issues.

L.A. County Superior Court judges

Voters will decide runoffs for four open judge seats:

• Maria Ghobadi and Rhonda Haymon are competing for the Superior Court Judge Office 64 seat.
• Justin Allen Clayton and Anna Slotky Reitano are competing for the Superior Court Judge Office 65 seat.
• Anthony “A.J.” Bayne and David DeJute are competing for the Superior Court Judge Office 87 seat.
• Donna Tryfman and David Ross are competing for the Superior Court Judge Office 131 seat.

Voters decide four runoff contests for Superior Court seats on Nov. 3, choosing who will preside over criminal and civil cases across the region.

Seat 131

The candidates

• Donna Tryfman, a deputy public defender, serves in the major cases unit, where she handles homicide and other high-profile defendants. She also has extensive experience in juvenile cases.
• David Ross is an alternate in the Torrance branch of the public defender’s office and also works in Bellflower and Long Beach. He claims to have represented more than 10,000 clients at hearings and in trials.

Dive deeper

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. rates both attorneys as “qualified” for office. Ross said his mix of legal and life experience and his time as a journalist, when he “listened to real people, gathered the facts and told objective stories,” provide a unique perspective. Tryfman has served as a Superior Court judge pro tem, handling traffic and small claims cases. She has proctored teen courts at Dorsey and Hamilton high schools.

Seat 64

The candidates

• Maria Ghobadi is an L.A. County deputy district attorney. As a child, Ghobadi fled Iran with her family during the Islamic Revolution and settled in Southern California. She joined the L.A. County district attorney’s office in 2015 and has handled misdemeanors, felonies and domestic violence cases. She’s spent seven years in the gang homicide division.
• Rhonda Haymon is an L.A. County deputy public defender. She grew up in Southern California and became an attorney in 2001. She started in the Orange County public defender’s office before moving to L.A. County, where she’s spent 23 years as a deputy public defender. She has been assigned to a restorative justice drug court and consulted on police misconduct cases.

Dive deeper

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. ranked Ghobadi as “well qualified” and Haymon as “qualified.”

Seat 87

The candidates

• David DeJute, who defended President Obama against the so-called birther claims, spent a decade as vice president of litigation at Sony Pictures Entertainment. He now works in litigation at a private firm. An adjunct professor at Pepperdine’s Caruso School of Law, he’s taught ethics, antitrust, copyright and patent law. After last year’s wildfires, he returned as director of the disaster relief clinic, where he instructed students who provided pro bono legal services to victims of the Palisades and Eaton fires.
• Anthony “A.J.” Bayne’s background includes nearly two decades serving in the Compton Courthouse, where he for a time served as deputy in charge. He’s now handling serious felony cases at the Torrance branch. Bayne is an inventor, with patent-pending applications for artificial intelligence tools that automate legal workflows. One helps with closing arguments; another uses court reporter transcripts to generate cross-examination questions.

Dive deeper

DeJute is rated “qualified” to serve by the Los Angeles County Bar Assn. Bayne is rated a notch higher, “well qualified.”

Seat 65

The candidates

• Justin Allen Clayton is in charge of the Inglewood branch of the public defender’s office and has defended three cases with life sentences. Clayton said a priority is improving court efficiency through pretrial preparation and “firm but fair enforcement of deadlines.” Clayton said running a public defender branch office gives him a “comprehensive understanding” of the courtroom.
• Anna Slotky Reitano represented juvenile and adult clients, many of them accused of felonies, before joining the county counsel’s office. Reitano focused on mental health diversion and treatment, aiming to support rehabilitation when possible. A former child actor, she volunteers with local schools and, according to her website, mentors “future lawyers” through moot court competitions.

Dive deeper

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. considers both qualified to serve.

There has been much debate about efforts in California to tax the rich. But almost all of it centers around Proposition 40, the heavily contested billionaire tax, and two countermeasures, Propositions 41 and 42.

But there is another ballot measure that also would tax California’s wealthiest citizens that is getting far less attention — and has even garnered support from some billionaires who oppose Proposition 40.

The basics

Proposition 3 would make an expiring state income tax on high earners permanent.

The impact

Tax rates for the top 2% of earners would remain as they are. Income brackets rise with inflation, but last year the top 2% of taxpayers earned at least $371,000 for single filers and $743,000 for joint filers. Money generated by Proposition 3, like the current tax, would flow to education, with 89% going to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.

Dig deeper

In 2012, California voters approved a temporary increase in the income tax rate for the top 2% of California earners. In 2016, voters approved another extension through 2030. Proposition 3 would make the additional levy permanent.

Backers say the measure is crucial to maintain education funding levels and predict there would be grave problems if the measure is not approved. The state could expect to lose $5 billion to $15 billion annually in tax revenue starting in 2031, according to estimates from the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Opponents say taxes are already too high and the state should focus on cutting waste.

More reading

What to know about Prop. 3 (L.A. Times)

How Prop. 3 fared in Berkeley poll (L.A. Times)

Prop. 3 ballot language (California secretary of state)

Inside the Prop. 3 campaign (EdSource)

The California Environmental Quality Act is one of the most consequential and controversial laws on the books.

CEQA, which dates to the 1970s, requires state and local agencies to consider the environmental effects of many proposed projects before approving them. If a project could cause significant environmental harm that can’t easily be avoided, it undergoes a more detailed environmental review to examine its potential effects and alternatives.

Backers say CEQA is a vital tool for environmental review and gives the community a voice in development. But critics say CEQA is too often used to slow down needed housing and has been exploited as a bureaucratic weapon.

Enter Proposition 45.

The basics

Proposition 45 would impose stricter deadlines on environmental reviews, permits and court challenges. Agencies would have to spell out application requirements up-front and could not make repeated requests for more information or project changes. The measure caps public comment periods, while current law only sets minimum lengths. It also limits what courts may consider in CEQA lawsuits.

The impact

The law clearly would change the CEQA process; whether that would be for better or worse is the subject of debate. Backers say it would make the process faster and easier. Critics say it would roll back important environmental protections.

Dig deeper

The fight over Proposition 45 comes as California struggles to build enough housing to meet demand, causing prices to skyrocket. Housing prices, polls show, are a major issue for California voters.

But the proposition also is touching on another hot-button issue: data centers. Supporters and foes are battling over whether the measure would make it easier to build more of those controversial facilities.

More reading

California’s Prop. 45 aims to speed construction projects. Opponents say data centers will benefit (L.A. Times)

CEQA overhaul outrages environmentalists (L.A. Times)

The history of CEQA and its future (L.A. Times)

Could Embracing Sprawl Ease California’s Housing Crunch? (New York Times)

It’s finally election day and you’re ready to head to the polls to cast your ballot in California’s 2026 midterm, but you don’t know where the nearest polling location is. Or perhaps you misplaced your ballot.

Here are some common last-minute election-day hiccups and how to navigate them so you can earn your “I voted” sticker on Tuesday.

I forgot to register to vote

You can still register as a conditional voter on election day through the “same day” voter registration process.

Eligible citizens who need to register or re-register to vote within 14 days of an election can complete this process at county elections offices, polling places or vote centers.

If you’ve become a U.S. citizen fewer than 15 days before the election, you may register to vote by visiting your county elections office anytime before the polls close on election day. You must bring proof that you are a U.S. citizen and sign a form saying you are eligible to vote in California.

For all those registering, the application requires a state driver’s license or California identification card number, or you can use the last four digits of your Social Security card.

If you don’t have any of those, you can still register. You’ll be assigned a unique identifier to validate your registration.

With same-day registration, you are “conditionally” registered to vote, and your ballot is provisional. Once officials have confirmed you are registered to vote in that county, your ballot is then processed and counted.

I don’t know where my polling place is

You can look for the nearest polling place by entering your address in the “Find your polling place” tool on the California secretary of state’s website.

The Los Angeles County office of the registrar-recorder/county clerk has a vote center locator that includes the wait time to cast your ballot.

I’m here at the polling place but forgot my ballot at home

You can request a provisional ballot at any polling place in the county in which you are registered to vote.

A provisional ballot is a regular ballot that is placed in a special envelope prior to being put in the ballot box.

It’s counted once election officials verify that you are a registered voter in that county and haven’t already voted in the election.

I can’t submit my mail-in ballot myself

You can have someone else submit your ballot.

Anyone can drop off your mailed ballot as long as you authorize them to do so and they do not get paid on a per-ballot basis, according to the secretary of state.

You and the person you’ve authorized to submit your mailed ballot must fill out and sign the outside of the ballot envelope.

I forgot my check-in code for in-person voting

Los Angeles County election officials say you can check in at a vote center by scanning your “quick check-in code” — a number that verifies your voter registration.

Your unique code can be found on your mailed sample ballot and vote center postcard. Take either of those hard copies to the vote center.

If you forgot the hard copies, you can find the code online. You retrieve it by verifying your voter registration here. You’ll need to input your last name, birth date, the house number of your residential address and your ZIP Code. For assistance call, (800) 815-2666, Option 2.

I’ve heard about touch-screen voting machines not working

It’s a common issue: You touch your voting machine screen, and it doesn’t show your intended selection.

Election officials say touch-screen challenges are commonly caused by user error or an easily fixed screen miscalibration.

Flag a poll worker if you’re having difficulty. If you’ve already printed a ballot that doesn’t reflect your intended selections, don’t cast it; notify a poll worker who will follow procedures for replacing the ballot.

How late is too late to put my ballot in a ballot box?

There are three ways you can submit your mailed ballot on election day:

• You can put it in a ballot drop box. The cutoff time to do so is the same time that polls close, 8 p.m.
• Drop it off at a polling place, vote center or county elections office by 8 p.m.
• Drop it off at a United States post office. To ensure your ballot is postmarked by election day, mail it at least by Thursday — five days before Tuesday’s election. If mailing on election day, get a hand-stamped postmark from a postal employee at a U.S. post office.

Where is my nearest ballot box?

The Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk’s office has an online tool here to help you find a ballot box near you.

I think I forgot to sign my mailed ballot envelope

If you turned in your vote-by-mail ballot and forgot to sign it, your vote will still count.

Your county elections official will notify you by mail, phone or email. You can also be notified by way of the “Where’s My Ballot?” tracking tool, which offers automatic notifications that will ping you if there are issues with your ballot.

To remedy the issue, your county elections office will provide you with a form to fill out and return completed.

The form will be given to you two days prior to the day your county certifies the election, so be sure to fill it out and return it to your county elections office right away.

How late is too late to vote at the polls on election night?

In California, any voter who is in line at 8 p.m. when the polls are scheduled to close is allowed to vote, according to the secretary of state.

If there is a line when the polls close, a poll worker stands at the back of the line to let people who arrive after 8 p.m. know that the polls have closed.

Any voter who arrives after the polls have closed may not be allowed to vote, even if voters who were in line to vote before the polls closed are in the process of voting.

Following a series of scandals that shook public trust in local government, Los Angeles City Council launched a massive charter reform to boost accountability across city departments. Charter PRT emerged from that reform.

McOsker, who co-sponsored the amendment, said it would offer greater public access and participation into government processes. He believes it is important that those overseeing LAX and Van Nuys understand how neighboring communities are affected by airport decisions.

“The folks that live and work and drive around and experience the impacts of the airport operations should have some say in the future of airport operations,” McOsker said. “They know the best of what the impacts are on the tens of thousands of folks that live around each of those facilities.”

McOsker stressed that the port is on public land and another space that residents should have greater insight into by offering transparency into how leaseholder agreements affect the local economy.

The two sides disagree sharply over what the changes to the law would mean in practice.

Dan Dunmoyer, president and chief executive of the California Building Industry Assn., a trade group supporting the measure, said the state is the slowest in the nation when it comes to reaching a conclusion about whether projects can be built. Per Dunmoyer, it’s one of the top two reasons housing here is so pricey.

Supporters point to accumulating interest on loans, shelling out for litigation and rising costs for materials.

Dunmoyer believes the measure would make the review process faster and easier. He estimated it will reduce the cost of building single family homes by $75,000 a pop.

“We think … it will allow us to provide more housing of all types, not just for sale, but for rent and legally defined affordable housing, even homeless shelters, more quickly than under the current environmental review process,” he said, “and we think that’s beneficial to Californians who very much want a place to call home.”

Proponents of the measure characterize the effort as procedural: It will firm up timelines, but projects still will be reviewed. But those fighting it, as well as some legal experts, say the 41-page proposal essentially guts CEQA for projects that qualify.

Aruna Prabhala, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, a conservation group opposing the measure, said it would eliminate the need to analyze a project’s specific impacts, such as how it affects people living nearby. Instead, the process would become a “checklist” to see if the project complies with existing environmental laws.

The measure also states it “should be interpreted and implemented to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and realization of, essential projects.” Prabhala and others believe it flips the purpose of CEQA to approve projects, rather than protect the environment.

“So much of what’s in the initiative mirrors what we’re seeing from the federal level and the Trump administration from rolling back environmental review, from really limiting public participation,” she said. “For not only failing to enforce protections for our air and water quality, but making it that much harder for agencies to do that.”

You have until 8 p.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 3, to cast your vote in California’s general election. The Times has answers to last-minute questions about the voting process.

Here’s what you need to know:

What are the key races to watch?

1. The California governor’s race has narrowed down from six contenders to two top candidates: Xavier Becerra, a Democrat who has a long résumé in California electoral politics and received an endorsement from outgoing Gov. Gavin Newsom. Steve Hilton is a Republican immigrant, an ally of President Trump and a former senior advisor to British Prime Minister David Cameron. Your guide to the race for California governor can be found here.
2. In the Los Angeles mayoral race, incumbent Karen Bass faces a reelection challenge from Councilmember Nithya Raman, who was, until recently, a close ally of the mayor. In October during the only televised debate between the candidates, Bass portrayed Raman as someone who wasn’t ready to lead the city; Raman continues to allege the mayor is “missing in action” and that a vote for Bass would put the city in a position of further decline. Your guide to the L.A. mayor’s race can be found here.

What is on the ballot?

There are several races, ballot measures, local district seats and statewide races that Southern Californians must decide on.

Most of the attention will be on the races for California governor and mayor of Los Angeles.

Residents of the city of Los Angeles have several other items to consider, including:

Los Angeles County residents will be asked to vote on:

On the ballot are 14 statewide propositions including:

Voters will decide on six local congressional district seats and other statewide races including:

Six state congressional district seats are on the ballot including:

Is it too late to vote by mail?

No. You can return your vote-by-mail ballot by:

1. Dropping it off in the return envelope at a secure official drop box now through the close of polls on Nov. 3.
2. Dropping it off in person at a polling place, vote center or county elections office by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3.
3. Dropping it off at the post office. To ensure your ballot is postmarked by election day, mail it at least by Thursday — five days before Tuesday’s election. If mailing on election day, get a hand-stamped postmark from a postal employee at a United States post office.

What is the deadline to return a vote-by-mail ballot?

To be counted, vote-by-mail ballots must be postmarked on or before election day, Nov. 3, and received by your county elections office by Nov. 10.

How do I check if I’m registered to vote?

To find out if you’re registered to vote, visit the secretary of state’s website. You’ll need to enter a California driver’s license or identification number or the last four digits of your Social Security number.

How do I register to vote? Can I register on election day?

The deadline to register to vote was Oct. 19.

If you’ve failed to meet the deadline, you can register as a conditional voter through the same-day voter registration process.

Eligible citizens who need to register or re-register to vote within 14 days of an election can complete this process at county elections offices, polling places or vote centers and fill out their ballot the same day.

To find an early voting location, use the secretary of state search tool here. You can find your local polling places here.

Your submitted ballot will be processed and counted once the county elections office has completed the voter registration verification process.

Where is the closest drop box?

Secure ballot drop-off locations opened Oct. 5. You can visit the Los Angeles County Office of the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk’s website here to find a ballot box near you.

How do I track my ballot?

Once you cast your ballot, you can track it here.

More election news

Today we discuss board games, snacks and boomerangs.

So where do things stand less than a week from election day?

With the usual caveats, about no certainties in life or politics …

Of course …

…. it seems pretty darned certain that Democrats are going to take control of the House next week, notwithstanding the delusions (or professed confidence) of Speaker Mike Johnson and his Republican allies. The only question is the margin.

Democrats need to flip just three seats, and even the most conservative handicappers (in terms of circumspection, not political views) see them netting more than half a dozen, at a minimum. From there, forecasts climb into the double digits.

“In the best-case scenario,” Erin Covey wrote in a recent analysis for the Cook Political Report, Democrats “could enter the new Congress with more seats than they had after successfully flipping control of the House in 2006 and 2018.”

Didn’t Republicans gerrymander several states to boost their chances?

They did, starting in Texas. Then California moved to gerrymander its political map, to boost Democratic chances.

That helped precipitate a nationwide redistricting war which, once the haze cleared, resulted in a third of the nation’s 435 House districts being redrawn to at least some extent. But that only marginally increased Republicans’ advantage. And there are signs the rejiggering of political lines may have backfired, or boomeranged, on the GOP.

How so?

By spreading their reliable voters thin and counting on support from 2024 Trump backers who’ve since soured on the president. In particular Latinos. In doing so, Republicans have put several House seats into play, most notably in Texas and Florida.

That’s what’s known in the business as a “dummymander.”

A knife’s edge

What about the Senate?

That remains a toss-up, which few would have imagined at the start of this election season.

Virtually all the contests that will decide control of the Senate are being fought in states that President Trump carried — several by landslide margins — making them not exactly friendly Democratic territory. But war, inflation and Trump’s wretched approval rating have dragged GOP candidates down in states such as Kansas, Mississippi and Texas, which, a year ago, would have required hallucinogens to appear remotely competitive.

So what’s the math?

Democrats need to hold on to all of their seats and gain four to flip the Senate.

While incumbent Jon Ossoff seems certain to win in Georgia, Democratic-held seats in Minnesota, New Hampshire and, especially, Michigan are more problematic. In terms of pickup opportunities, the aforementioned Kansas and Texas are toss-ups, along with Alaska, Iowa, Ohio and Maine. North Carolina seems ready to flip Democrats’ way.

And, who knows, there might be a surprise or two — which, obviously, wouldn’t be a surprise if we’re talking about it here.

One thing to bear in mind: Close races all tend to break in favor of one party or the other. Think of dominoes falling, not checkers hopscotching across the board.

Polls look good for Democrats.

They do. But as both of my faithful readers know, your friendly political columnist can’t stand the constant chattering about polls.

It’s not just how surveys understated Trump’s support the two times he won the White House. (In their defense, pollsters did pretty well in the last two midterm elections, in 2018 and 2022.)

It’s that too many people — including folks who should know better — ascribe a false precision to polls, which at best offer nothing more than an educated guess.

Are the polls again overstating Democratic support?

Could be.

In a recent analysis, the Economist found that polls tend to underestimate a party’s strength in states they dominate. That could mean surveys showing toss-up races in red states such as Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio and Texas could be overstating Democratic strength.

(Research also has shown that dispirited voters are less likely to participate in a poll, which could mean an oversampling of Democratic sentiments despite quite conscious attempts to adjust and weight the data.)

All of which is to say, ignore the polls and don’t let your hopes get too high, or your mood too low. We’ll have election results soon enough.

What does the early voting tell us?

Nothing dispositive. (That’s a fancy way of saying, again, don’t read too much into those numbers.)

Democrats are evidently way more enthused about voting this election than Republicans. And there have been some eye-popping turnout numbers among Black and Latino voters. But maybe Republicans are holding back to cast their ballots closer to or on election day.

Things will be abundantly clear after the fact, as they always are.

Table stakes

How about all the money Republicans — and Elon Musk — are pouring into the election?

It’s gross. But money alone is not determinative.

Just ask Tom Steyer, who spent the GDP of a small country on his failed run for California governor. Or Trump, who was outspent by Hillary Clinton nearly 2-to-1 when he was elected in 2016.

A certain amount of money is necessary to compete; it’s like the table stakes required for a serious competitor to get into the race. Beyond that, factors like candidate performance, external events and, especially, the overall political climate matter a good deal more.

The big Republican money advantage can help drive turnout, which is no small thing, especially if it helps coax reluctant GOP voters to the polls. But elections aren’t like vending machines, where the more money you put in, the more you take out.

Thankfully, we haven’t reached a point where public office can be purchased automatically like soda or a candy bar. At least not yet.

So get out and vote, or make a plan to, if you haven’t already.

What else you should be reading

Get smart: Many Latinos are done with Trump. The shift is especially striking in Texas
The deep dive: “A butter knife against a nuclear arsenal:” Tech billionaires vastly outspend wealth tax supporters
The L.A. Times Special: Skelton: Need help deciding on the state ballot measures? Here are my recommendations
Until next time,
mzb
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

The dueling campaigns over a Pasadena ballot measure that would levy a special tax on property owners for fire department funding are heating up in the run-up to the Nov. 3 election.

In a press release, the city of Pasadena last month encouraged neighborhood associations, homeowner groups and other organizations to host informational sessions on Measure PFD, featuring presentations from Fire Chief Chad Augustin and other city staff.

But if you ask opponents of the measure, these events are actually campaign stops.

The presentations focus on “everything that supposedly won’t happen” if the measure fails, according to a press release from the No on Measure PFD Campaign.

“The city has turned the fire department into the grassroots campaign arm for Yes on PFD,” said Matt Klink, a consultant for the No campaign.

Augustin disputed that characterization of the presentations and said he’s provided only factual information about the measure so residents can understand the choices before them. “That, in my mind, is education, not advocacy,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Yes on Measure PFD Campaign has accused the No campaign of running a digital ad and using website language suggesting that local firefighters don’t support the measure.

“None of the Pasadena firefighters support a no on Measure PFD,” said Raffy Bitchakdjian, president of the Pasadena Firefighters Assn. 809. “So for them to use our name, our likeness, and actually go say that is very deceptive.”

Here’s what to know about Measure PFD:

Gomez, 51, won a special election to Congress in 2017, replacing Becerra, who stepped down after then-Gov. Jerry Brown nominated him for state attorney general.

On Aug. 17, the House Ethics Committee announced it was investigating Gomez for “inappropriate sexual contact with a House staffer.”

Two days later, attorneys Lisa J. Banks and Sarah E. Nesbitt said in a statement that they represented a woman the committee interviewed. The woman accused Gomez of sexual harassment and assault, according to the attorneys, who declined further comment.

Gomez acknowledged in a statement earlier this year that he made “personal mistakes outside my marriage,” but said that his “actions were consensual in nature and haven’t violated the law or House Ethics rules.”

He declined an interview request and is keeping a low profile during his reelection campaign. He successfully fended off challenges from David Kim, a progressive Democrat targeting him from the left, in 2020, 2022 and 2024. Kim has endorsed Gonzales-Torres.

Since Trump’s immigration crackdown, Gomez has focused on the treatment of immigrants and congressional oversight of federal detention centers. He and 12 other House members successfully sued the Trump administration after he was blocked from entering a detention facility and has said he trained legal observers to document ICE abuses.

His campaign touts his record as chair of the affordability-focused Congressional Renters Caucus and his support for proposed legislation that seeks to lower housing costs, expand supply and strengthen pathways to ownership.

He also backs two hallmark progressive initiatives, the Green New Deal and Medicare for all.

Gonzales-Torres, 31, previously worked as a part-time counselor for formerly incarcerated Pasadena City College students, interned in Mayor Karen Bass’s administration and volunteered on the Metro Public Safety Advisory Committee.

She is backed by the Los Angeles branch of the L.A. chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, as well as Justice Democrats, the influential left-wing PAC known for helping Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) win her first election in 2018.

If elected, Gonzales-Torres would focus on dismantling the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and seek a federal wealth tax on the ultra-rich.

She is calling for a moratorium on new data center construction until federal standards are in place and wants to end federal fossil fuel subsidies.

Gonzales-Torres has not held elected office beyond her two years — one as president — on the Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council in 2023-25.

Several board members criticized her tenure. One, Caroline Aguirre, filed a police report alleging Gonzales-Torres thrust a finger into her face at a meeting. Aguirre shared the incident report with The Times but said police ultimately took no action.

Darren Gold, who is now board president, said Gonzales-Torres falsely accused him of shaking her, prompting a city investigation. Gold denied the interaction, accused Gonzales-Torres of lying and won reinstatement.

Both Gold and Jens Jonasson, another board member, described Gonzales-Torres’s leadership as chaotic, adding that she used the position to express personal views on gentrification and out-of-neighborhood issues such as Gaza.

“She was not effective at turning priorities into results, working through disagreements and staying with the job when things didn’t go her way,” said Jonasson.

Gonzales-Torres declined to comment on the incidents Aguirre and Gold alleged. She said that she was proud of her work connecting businesses with city services and other achievements.

She said she stepped down as president to volunteer for Kim’s 2024 campaign.

Outside money

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee has repeatedly backed Gomez’s re-election campaigns, including this cycle, prompting criticism by both the Justice Democrats and Gonzales-Torres.

Gomez’s campaign points to his call for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s resignation, a push for humanitarian aid in Gaza and a ceasefire.

In July, Gomez voted against an amendment to cut off aid to Israel, even as many other Democrats supported the initiative.

Gomez told Politico the amendment was “overly broad and would also restrict programs that facilitate humanitarian aid for Palestinians and refugee resettlement, peace-building efforts, and our ability to confront terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.”

“It would empower the Trump administration to determine what gets funded and what does not,” he said.

AI is also an issue in the race, although both candidates support regulation.

Guardrails Alliance, a political action committee seeking stricter regulation of the tech industry, backs Gonzales-Torres.

A PAC affiliated with the AI industry, Leading the Future, supports Gomez, though it has yet to announce spending in his race.

This runoff election for an open seat features two veteran attorneys with extensive experience as public defenders: Justin Allen Clayton and Anna Slotky Reitano.

Clayton is in charge of the Inglewood branch of the public defenders office and has defended three cases with life sentences.

Reitano represented juvenile and adult clients, many of them accused of felonies, before joining the county counsel’s office.

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. considers both qualified to serve. Here’s more of what you need to know about the candidates.

Justin Allen Clayton, L.A. County deputy public defender

Bar rating: Qualified

Clayton is a Los Angeles native who attended public schools, earned a bachelor’s degree in criminology and passed the bar in 2012. He joined the public defender’s office two years later and since 2023 has served as deputy in charge of the Inglewood branch.

Clayton describes himself as a “working supervisor” who conducts arraignments and represents clients at preliminary and other hearings. He has completed dozens of trials, including three with life sentences, according to his website.

The position involves overseeing and training attorneys, as well as law clerks and summer interns, on misdemeanor and felony case preparation and trial strategy.

Clayton said a priority is improving court efficiency through pretrial preparation and “firm but fair enforcement of deadlines.”

Time as a candidate, he said, has shown him the importance of effective communication within the court system in bridging language and cultural differences. He called that a guiding principle, particularly for clients who lack counsel.

“Sometimes, one additional question, or one additional statement, can make all the difference in resolving an issue,” he said.

Clayton said running a public defender branch office, which brings him in contact with judges, sheriffs, court clerks, interpreters and others, combined with 14 years as a trial attorney, gives him a “comprehensive understanding” of the courtroom.

“That combination of courtroom experience, leadership and daily interaction with the many people who make our justice system work has uniquely prepared me to serve as a Superior Court judge,” he said.

Anna Slotky Reitano, L.A. County deputy county counsel

Bar rating: Qualified

Reitano spent the early part of her career in criminal defense, contract law and other sectors. In 2014, she joined the L.A. County public defender’s office. A decade there included three years in juvenile court, where she primarily handled felony cases, and five years at the San Fernando Courthouse, where she represented indigent clients facing felony charges.

Reitano focused on mental health diversion and treatment, aiming to support rehabilitation when possible. Having a brother with schizophrenia and witnessing how families navigate the legal system when dealing with mental illness has informed her approach.

“This has given me a deeper understanding of both the challenges individuals and families face and the ways in which the system can fall short in addressing those needs,” she said.

This is not her first bid for office. She lost a campaign for a judgeship in 2022 and two years later assumed her position in the county counsel’s justice and safety division, where she supervises litigation and advises county departments.

Reitano, a former child actor, volunteers with local schools and, according to her website, mentors “future lawyers” through moot court competitions.

Campaigning, Reitano said, has shown her that constituents, no matter how different, uniformly want “a judge who is experienced, prepared, fair and willing to listen.”

“My experience across criminal, juvenile, civil, administrative and government law has uniquely prepared me to serve wherever the court needs me,” she said.

This race for an open seat pits a former U.S. assistant attorney who represented President Obama, the FBI and NASA against a seasoned Los Angeles County public defender who has taken more than 100 trials, some with three-strikes implications, to verdict.

David DeJute, who defended Obama against the so-called birther claims, spent a decade as vice president of litigation at Sony Pictures Entertainment. He now works in litigation at a private firm.

Anthony “A.J.” Bayne’s background includes nearly two decades serving in the Compton Courthouse, where he for a time served as deputy in charge. He’s now handling serious felony cases at the Torrance branch.

DeJute is rated “qualified” to serve by the Los Angeles County Bar Assn. Bayne is rated a notch higher, “well qualified.”

Here’s what you need to know about the candidates.

Anthony “A.J.” Bayne, L.A. County deputy public defender

Bar rating: Well qualified

Bayne’s 31-year legal career includes more than a quarter-century as an L.A. County deputy public defender. He has taken more than 100 jury trials to verdict, including murder, special circumstances and three-strikes cases, some of which carried sentences of death or life in prison.

“Even during the [election] primary period, I continued taking cases to trial rather than continuing them, because my clients should not be prejudiced by unnecessary delay,” he said.

He spent 19 years at the Compton Courthouse, where for a time he served as deputy in charge, supervising misdemeanor trial deputies. He now is stationed in the Torrance branch, where he handles serious felonies.

Bayne is an inventor, with patent-pending applications for artificial intelligence tools that automate legal workflows. One helps with closing arguments; another uses court reporter transcripts to generate cross-examination questions.

Using AI to address the county’s heavy caseload is a priority. He argues the technology could modernize court infrastructure, aiding in case management, scheduling and document processing.

Bayne, who trains in jiujitsu and Krav Maga self-defense, said extensive jury trial experience has prepared him to be an effective judge.

“Wherever I go, people want the same things: a judge who is prepared and fair, who will listen to their side of the case, and who treats them with respect,” he said.

David DeJute, law professor/attorney

Bar rating: Qualified

The son of a late judge, DeJute has had a 35-year legal career. After graduating from law school, he clerked for a U.S. district judge and then worked at a boutique litigation firm. He spent nearly a decade as vice president of litigation at Sony Pictures Entertainment.

In 2005, he was appointed as an assistant U.S. attorney. Over more than a decade, he worked on 10 trials, including successfully defending President Obama against “birther” lawsuits that challenged his eligibility to hold office. DeJute represented the FBI and NASA in other cases.

He joined Michelman & Robinson in 2017 and is part of the complex litigation group.

An adjunct professor at Pepperdine’s Caruso School of Law, he’s taught ethics, antitrust, copyright and patent law. After last year’s wildfires, he returned as director of the disaster relief clinic, where he instructed students who provided pro bono legal services to victims of the Palisades and Eaton fires.

“I continue to provide free legal help to wildfire survivors who have asked me to stay involved,” he said, though he no longer runs the clinic.

DeJute said he has experienced discrimination as an openly gay man, which drives his desire to ensure that everyone in the justice system is treated with dignity and respect.

“Justice requires more than achieving certain results,” he said. “It requires a fair process untainted by bias.”