The San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce has put together a 2020 Election Guide for you to consider when marking your ballot’s this November. Learn more about where the SLO Chamber stands on the issues affecting our community.

Measure G-20 San Luis Obispo

Yes on Measure G

In a unanimous decision, the SLO Chamber Board of Directors voted to support Measure G-20 which would increase SLO City’s current sales tax by a net 1% — a mere penny on the dollar.

Th passage of this measure is essential to our long term community and economic health and will forward a number of priorities outlined in Imagine SLO including investments in:

  • Retaining our local businesses
  • Key infrastructure
  • Open space
  • Vibrant neighborhoods

The SLO Chamber also successfully advocated for business representation to be prioritized on the committee that oversees the revenues as well as the creation of an eight-year strategic plan that will allow the community to regularly provide input on how this money is spent.

Because visitors pay 70% of sales tax revenue, Measure G-20 is the fairest and best way to sustain our city’s health without overburdening residents.

With the passage of Measure G-20, SLO’s tax rate will still be the same or lower than many California cities including Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and Monterey.  SLO will also remain on par with the rest of our county as similar measures are on the ballot in Paso Robles, Atascadero, Pismo Beach, Grover Beach and Morro Bay.

These extraordinary times demand action. Measure G-20 is an affordable path forward, a way to help ourselves, and control our destiny. 

Learn more about SLO Measure G-20.

Proposition 15 2020 Election

No on Proposition 15

The SLO Chamber opposes Proposition 15 because it would have a significant negative impact on small businesses – the majority of our members — at a time when they are already struggling to make ends meet.

Proposition 15 would require commercial and industrial properties, except those zoned as commercial agriculture, to be taxed based on their market value, rather than their purchase price.

Most small businesses rent the property on which they operate. Proposition 15’s higher property taxes will mean soaring rents at a time when many small businesses are just trying to keep their doors open. Now is not the time to raise their rents by hiking property taxes.

Lean more about No on Prop 15

Proposition 16 2020 Election

Yes on Proposition 16

The SLO Chamber Supports Proposition 16 because it is in line with our economic vision to promote and model diversity and inclusion in business, nonprofit, local government and educational institutions.

Proposition 16 would allow state and local governments, public universities, and other public entities to consider race, sex, color, ethnicity and national origin (within the limits of federal law). California is one of only nine states that bans these considerations as a tool to fight discrimination.

Proposition 16 is our chance to change that by ending the ban and expanding opportunity for all.

Learn more bout Yes on Prop 16.

Proposition 17 2020 Election

Yes on Proposition 17

The SLO Chamber supports Proposition 17 because it is in line with our economic vision to urge government to continuously improve and refine its approach to civic engagement — to increase participation and empower citizens.

Proposition 17 would allow people on parole for felony convictions to vote, restoring voting rights to approximately 50,000 Californians.

When people return home from prison, they can’t vote even though they are raising families, holding jobs, paying taxes, and contributing to society in every other way. They should be encouraged to reenter society and have a stake in their community, not be punished by having their voting rights denied. Prop 17 will right this injustice and restore voting rights to Californians returning home from prison.

Evidence shows that people who are able to become civically engaged in their communities after they are released are actually three times more likely to never be arrested again.

Learn more about Yes on Prop 17.

Proposition 19 2020 Election

Neutral on Proposition 19

Proposition 19 would allow eligible homeowners — persons over 55 years old or with severe disabilities to:

  • transfer their tax assessments anywhere within the state
  • allow tax assessments to be transferred to a more expensive home with an upward adjustment
  • increase the number of transfers from one to three
  • require that inherited homes that are NOT principal residences (second homes/rentals) be reassessed at market value when transferred
  • allocate additional revenue/net savings resulting from the ballot measure to wildfire agencies and counties

The SLO Chamber has a neutral position on Proposition 19. While we value funding for local governments, school districts and increased movement in the housing market, there could be unintended consequences to local first time home buyers and ranching families in SLO as a result of this measure.

See more information on Prop 19.

Proposition 21 2020 Election

No on Proposition 21

The SLO Chamber opposes Proposition 21 because it would not be effective in creating affordable housing or addressing the underlying causes of homelessness.

Proposition 21 would allow local governments to enact rent control on housing that was first occupied over 15 years ago, with an exception for landlords who own no more than two homes with distinct titles or subdivided interests.

In 2019, the California State Legislature passed legislation, titled AB 1482, to cap annual rent increases at 5% plus inflation for tenants. The bill also:

  • requires a landlord have a just cause to evict tenants that had occupied the rental for at least one year
  • includes exemptions for housing built in the past 15 years and some single-family homes and duplexes

Before opening the door to a patchwork of regulations across the state, we need to see the impacts of AB 1482.

Learn more about No on Prop 21.

Proposition 22 2020 Election

Yes on Proposition 22

The SLO Chamber supports Proposition 22 because it would allow for innovation and keep app-based services viable in more rural communities such as San Luis Obispo.

Proposition 22 would define app-based transportation and delivery drivers as independent contractors and adopt labor and wage policies specific to app-based drivers and companies. It would also ensure that:

  • Drivers always receive at least an amount equal to 120% of minimum wage plus 30 cents per mile compensation toward expenses, with the potential to earn more and no limits on how much drivers can make
  • Health care contribution equal to 100% of the average employer payment toward a Covered California Plan — for an average driver, this would be $367 per month.
    • Drivers start earning this amount at 15 hours per week and reach the full amount at 25 hours per week
    • Drivers can earn multiple contributions from multiple platforms
    • The health care provision in Proposition 22 is more generous than state and federal laws, which only require health care to be provided to those working at least 30 hours per week, with no benefits for part time workers.
  • Occupational accident insurance to cover injuries and illnesses acquired on the job
  • Automobile accident and liability insurance
  • Protection against discrimination and sexual harassment

Learn more about Yes on Prop 22.

Proposition 24 2020 Election

No on Proposition 24

Proposition 24 would:

  • Change parts of the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 
  • Create the California Privacy Protection Agency
  • Eliminate the existing 30 day fix-it window for violations
  • Require businesses to:
    • provide consumers with an opt-out for having their sensitive personal information used or disclosed for advertising or marketing
    • obtain permission before collecting data from young consumers 
    • And — upon request of the consumer:
      • correct inaccurate personal information 
      • not share personal information

While we value consumer privacy and data protection, the SLO Chamber opposes Proposition 24 because the CCPA has not had enough time to take effect and we do not we do not believe that the creation of a new agency will improve consumer privacy.

Learn more about No on Prop 24.