Organizers behind the statewide initiative delivered more than 130,000 signatures gathered from Riverside County residents to the county Registrar of Voters office on Monday. The petition is part of a larger effort seeking to place a voter ID proposal before California voters in a future statewide election.

Supporters of the measure, including several Republican elected officials, were present when the petitions were turned in. Among them were U.S. Rep. Ken Calvert of Corona, Assemblyman Carl DeMaio of San Diego, Assemblywoman Leticia Castillo of Corona and state Sen. Tony Strickland of Huntington Beach.

The voter ID proposal is being promoted by the organization Californians for Voter ID, which says it collected more than 1.3 million signatures across all 58 counties in the state during a four-month campaign.

Local registrars throughout California will now begin reviewing the petitions submitted in their jurisdictions. Riverside County election officials, like those in other counties, have about a week to conduct an initial verification of the signatures. Once the local review is completed, validated signatures will be forwarded to the California Secretary of State’s office for further examination.

State officials will conduct additional checks, including random sampling, to determine whether the petition meets the legal threshold needed for qualification. If the number of valid signatures falls below a required percentage, the initiative would fail to move forward.

Should the petition qualify, state authorities would begin drafting official ballot language before placing the proposal before voters.

The measure being proposed would require voters to present a government-issued photo identification, such as a driver’s license, when casting a ballot. It would also require verification of U.S. citizenship before a person is allowed to vote.

Advocates say the requirement would strengthen election security and protect the integrity of ballots.

Julie Luckey, chairwoman of Californians for Voter ID, said the proposal has support from voters across the political spectrum.

“Polling consistently shows strong backing from Republicans, Democrats and independents alike,” Luckey said in a statement. “Requiring identification to vote is a straightforward safeguard that many other democratic nations already use.”

Backers argue that verifying identity before voting is comparable to identification requirements used in many other areas of daily life.

Critics, however, contend that voter ID laws can create obstacles for certain groups of voters. Civil liberties organizations say people who are elderly, low-income or living with disabilities may have greater difficulty obtaining the types of identification required under such laws.

Opponents also argue that documented cases of in-person voter fraud are extremely rare and that stricter identification requirements could discourage legitimate voters from participating in elections.

Riverside County has experienced election-related debates in the past, particularly surrounding voting technology and election administration procedures. Community activists have frequently raised concerns at Board of Supervisors meetings regarding transparency and oversight in election processes.

Meanwhile, public opinion polling suggests the issue remains widely debated. Surveys cited by supporters of the initiative indicate strong backing for voter identification requirements and proof-of-citizenship rules among many voters.

The debate has also extended to other California jurisdictions. Recently, officials in Huntington Beach asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a legal challenge involving that city’s attempt to establish its own voter identification requirement.

As the petition verification process moves forward, election officials will determine whether the initiative qualifies to eventually appear on a statewide ballot. If it does, California voters would ultimately decide whether to adopt voter identification requirements for future elections.

The post Thousands in Riverside County Support Petition for Voter Identification Measure appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

A recently cleared statewide initiative would remove property tax obligations for qualifying seniors who meet specific residency requirements. Supporters have begun gathering signatures in hopes of placing the measure before voters in the upcoming election cycle.

Under the proposal, a homeowner — or their spouse — would qualify for the exemption if they are at least 60 years old and have either lived in their primary residence for five consecutive years or resided in California for at least 10 years. The property must remain the individual’s principal residence to maintain eligibility.

Homeowners would also be required to certify their continued qualification every five years. The exemption would not apply to voter-approved special assessments, bonds or parcel taxes.

Financial Impact on Local Governments

State fiscal analysts estimate the proposal could significantly reduce local property tax revenue, which funds schools, cities and counties. Preliminary projections suggest annual losses could range between $12 billion and $20 billion statewide, with impacts expected to grow over time as more homeowners become eligible.

Property taxes are a primary funding source for public education and essential services such as police, fire protection and infrastructure. Any reduction in revenue would require local governments to either reduce services, draw from reserves or identify alternative funding sources.

Supporters Cite Affordability Concerns

Advocates argue the measure would provide financial stability for seniors living on fixed incomes, many of whom face rising utility costs, insurance premiums and healthcare expenses. They contend that long-term homeowners who have contributed to their communities for decades should receive additional protection from housing-related expenses.

California already provides certain property tax benefits for older residents. For example, previous measures allow homeowners age 55 and older to transfer the taxable value of their existing home to a new property under specific conditions. However, the current proposal would go further by eliminating the base property tax bill entirely for qualifying seniors.

What Happens Next

To qualify for the statewide ballot, supporters must collect hundreds of thousands of valid voter signatures by a designated deadline this summer. If the threshold is met, voters would decide the measure in November.

The proposal is expected to generate debate over affordability, tax equity and the long-term fiscal health of local governments, setting up a broader conversation about how California balances homeowner protections with public funding needs.

The post Proposed Ballot Measure Would Eliminate Property Taxes for Some California Homeowners Over 60 appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The two previously planned to place competing initiatives before voters, each stipulating that the one that got the most “yes” votes would win. OpenAI’s proposal largely reflected existing law, while the Common Sense measure included new bans on what AI systems children could access.

The merged measure is known as the Parents & Kids Safe AI Act. It would, among other things:

• Require chatbot developers use technology to estimate a user’s age range and apply filters and protective settings for  people with an age predicted under the age of 18
• Require AI systems to undergo independent audits to identify child safety risks and report them to the California attorney general
• Ban child-targeted advertising and the sale or sharing of kids’ data without a parent’s consent
• Stop manipulation through emotional dependency by preventing AI systems from promoting isolation from family or friends, simulating romantic relationships with kids, or claiming that they’re sentient

 A Common Sense spokesperson said the measure was filed Thursday afternoon. It’s not yet visible on the attorney general’s website but you can read a copy obtained by CalMatters here. As described in a press release, the combined measure drops a ban on student smartphones in K-12 California schools and prohibition on minors using chatbots capable of engaging in erotic or sexually explicit talk that were part of Common Sense Media’s original initiative. 

The initiative must receive 546,651 signatures in order to come before voters in November. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber has until June 25 to determine if it reaches that threshold or qualifies for the ballot.

Common Sense put forward its original ballot initiative, the California Kids AI Safety Act, last fall, not long after the Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill the nonprofit had authored that contained similar provisions.

In response, in December 2025, OpenAI put forward a competing ballot measure that mirrors a bill that Newsom signed into law last October, requiring companion chatbot providers to enact a suicidal ideation protocol and inform people every three hours that they’re speaking with AI. Critics called that move manipulative and designed to thwart stronger protections for kids.

Common Sense Media research has found that seven in 10 teens have used companion chatbots and that the tech is too dangerous to be used by minors. In promoting its original ballot initiative, the group warned that without action the tech could lead to more harm and addiction for young people. In one well-publicized case, the parents of California teen Adam Raine sued OpenAI, alleging Raine was coached by OpenAI’s ChatGPT to commit suicide.

OpenAI’s willingness to compromise marks a contrast with how tech companies banded together to get their way in a policy fight in 2020. That year, major gig economy players like DoorDash, Instacart, Lyft, and Uber spent $200 million bankrolling a successful ballot initiative regulating gig work, Proposition 22. It effectively exempted them from a state law that would have required the companies to provide full employment benefits to their drivers.

Sen. Steve Padilla, the Chula Vista Democrat who carried the chatbot bill signed by Newsom, called the merged ballot measure a significant breakthrough. But he added that he thinks the matter should be handled by lawmakers and the governor instead of directly by voters. Since the ballot initiative would amend the state constitution, Padilla said it “would create an unnecessarily high-bar to revise and update that law in the future. Moreover, legislative hearings will provide the broader public an opportunity to comment and provide input on this important issue.” 

In recent weeks, Padilla has proposed a bill with a four-year moratorium on the sale of toys with companion chatbots inside. OpenAI signed a partnership with Barbie-maker Mattel but has yet to produce any products.

OpenAI’s fight at the California ballot box isn’t limited to kids’ online safety issues. One proposed ballot initiative would give a state commission the power to slow or stop AI model development if commission members suspect catastrophic risk of harm to Californians. Two other proposals target corporate conversions from nonprofit to for-profit companies, as OpenAI has planned. The initiatives compel nonprofits that restructure in such a way to dedicate all their assets to the public benefit of humanity. To reach that goal, the initiatives would create a commission that has the power to shut down AI models and that hosts competitions that invite the public to propose ways AI can help humanity. Under one of the initiatives, the commission would also have the power to revoke nonprofit conversions.

OpenAI was founded about a decade ago with a charter stating its purpose was to benefit humanity. Its plans to convert to a public benefit corporation led to heavy criticism from nonprofits and scrutiny by attorneys general in California and Delaware. Both states eventually reached agreements with OpenAI to allow a restructuring after the company agreed to place roughly 25% of its assets into a nonprofit.

The post OpenAI, childrens’ advocates join forces on initiative to protect kids from chatbots appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The poll, released Wednesday evening, shows that 71% of voters are likely to vote yes on the initiative, while 26% would vote no. California Republicans favor the ballot measure the most, with 85% saying they would vote yes. About 63% of Democrats and 73% of independents also said they would vote yes.  

A “yes” vote on Prop. 36 would roll back provisions of Prop. 47, a voter-approved initiative that reduced some felonies to misdemeanors and set a $950 threshold for shoplifting charges.

Proposition 36 would also create a new treatment-focused court process for some drug possession crimes and require courts to warn people convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs to others that they can be charged with murder if they keep doing so and someone dies, according to the state’s Legislative Analyst Office.

“When asked how important the outcome of the vote on Proposition 36 is, three in four likely voters say it is very (41%) or somewhat important (36%). Those who would vote yes on the measure are three times more likely than those who would vote no to call it very important (51% to 16%),” according to the study.

Despite millions being allocated by Gov. Gavin Newsom to cities and counties targeting organized retail crime, shoplifting crimes continue to be an issue.

A study by the Council of Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan research organization, showed that shoplifting incidents in New York and Los Angeles had increased by over 60% between 2019 and the middle of 2023.

Recently, Newsom signed a “smash and grab” law that would increase penalties for individuals who take, damage, or destroy property while committing any felony.

The study also evaluated likely voters’ views on other ballot measures, such as Prop 3, which would enshrine marriage rights in the state constitution, and Prop 35, which would provide permanent funding for Medi-Cal Health Care Services.

The poll was conducted between Aug. 29 and Sept. 9 among 1,071 likely voters. The sampling error is plus or minus 3.7%.

The post California voters overwhelmingly support Proposition 36, new study says appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Proponents, including law enforcement organizations and major retailers, say the law would help reduce rampant retail theft and tackle homelessness. But opponents point out that not only does the measure lack funding for drug treatment and shelter efforts, it actually could end up taking money away from those services in order to fund increased prison and judicial costs.

The measure, dubbed the Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act, on Tuesday was cleared by state officials to appear on the Nov. 5 ballot after organizers gathered the required number of signatures.

If approved by voters, the measure would roll back some of the changes made by Proposition 47, which reclassified certain felonies as misdemeanors. Most notably, the 2014 law made theft and other property crimes under $950, as well as the personal use of most illegal drugs misdemeanors.

While violent and property crimes have increased statewide since 2020, they remain relatively low compared other the 1980s and 1990s, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

Critics of Prop. 47 blame the measure for increasing crime and a host of other issues, despite a lack of conclusive data proving that correlation.

“Our homelessness problem is directly connected to these unintended consequences of Proposition 47, which the voters now desire to correct,” reads the new measure.

The measure would allow for felony charges to be filed against those who commit thefts under $950 as well as for possessing certain drugs, including fentanyl, in cases where the suspect has two prior drug or two prior theft convictions.

Currently, such cases can only be prosecuted as misdemeanors.

Defendants who plead guilty to felony drug possession and complete treatment could have their charges dismissed under the measure.

The measure has earned strong support from the state’s top retailers, including Walmart, Target, Home Depot and 7-Eleven, who are among the campaign’s major funders, Bloomberg reported.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and the state associations of police chiefs and prosecutors are also among the effort’s backers.

“The Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act will make targeted but impactful changes to our laws around fentanyl and help us tackle the chronic retail theft that hurts our retailers, our workers, and our cities. I fully support this measure and know it will make a meaningful difference for cities across California,” reads a quote from Breed on the campaign’s website.

But critics say the bill’s targeting of Prop. 47 is overly simplistic at best.

“We have to dispense with this simplistic narrative that reforms are what caused the crime and the crime is what causes all of the retail problems that the retail establishments are reporting,” said Charis Kubrin, a professor of Criminology, Law and Society at UC Irvine told the Sacramento Bee.

Additionally, an analysis of the measure by state officials found that increased sentences and incarceration may cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars. And to pay for it, the state might have to reduce spending on mental health and substance abuse services, truancy and dropout prevention and victim services, based on requirements in current law.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and other lawmakers oppose the measure in favor of their own competing bill package, arguing that concerns about retail theft can be addressed without altering Prop. 47,the Bee reported.

The post CA Ballot Measure Would Put More Thieves, Drug Users In Jail: State appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.