KQED has been following several local measures in the June 5 primary election. Here are results for a few of them.
San Francisco Measures C and D
The dueling ballot measures would hike taxes on commercial landlords in San Francisco.
Measure C would place a 3.5 percent tax on office space rents to pay for child care, while Measure D would tax at a more modest 1.7 percent to provide housing and services for the homeless. Measure C is currently passing by fewer than 1,000 votes, with 100 percent of precincts reporting but some mail-in and provisional ballots still yet to be counted. Measure D is failing with 55 percent of votes against.
Measure C needs a simple majority to pass because it was put on the ballot with a voter signature drive, while Measure D needs two-thirds support to pass because it was placed on the ballot by the Board of Supervisors.
San Francisco is the first city in the nation to ban all flavored tobacco products from all store shelves. With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Measure E garnered 68 percent of the votes.
The R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company spent nearly $13 million on a campaign to stop the ban. The company sells the nation’s best-selling menthol cigarette. All that money was appalling to Patrick Reynolds. He's an heir of the company, and he lost his father to emphysema.
“The only memory I have of him is a man lying down dying gasping of breath,” Reynolds said.
Reynolds is an anti-tobacco advocate stridently opposed to candy-flavored e-cigarettes like berry, nacho cheese or gummy bear flavor.
"It is an obscene, outrageous brazen ploy by the tobacco industry and by the vaping industry to ensnare another generation to be addicted,” Reynolds said. “And it's just got to stop."
The city-wide ban will go into effect 10 days after the election is certified.
San Francisco Measure H
Measure H would have enshrined looser rules for when San Francisco police officers can use Tasers, overriding a stricter policy that the Police Commission hammered out earlier this year. With 100 precincts reporting, the measure has failed with 60 percent of voters opposing.
The current policy approved by the San Francisco Police Commission in March requires officers to be faced with an imminent physical threat to use the weapon.
Measure H was drafted and almost exclusively funded by the San Francisco Police Officers Association. It would set a lower “active resistance” standard for when the electro-shock weapons can be used. Active resistance is defined in SFPD use-of-force rules as “physically evasive movements to defeat an officer’s attempt at control including bracing, tensing, running away, verbally or physically signaling an intention to avoid or prevent being taken into or retained in custody.”
Police Officers Association President Tony Montoya told KQED last month that officers should be able to use Tasers “preemptively,” and that Measure H would require the Police Commission to allow that when the weapons are deployed, tentatively planned for the end of this year.
Montoya said in a text message Tuesday night that he is “disappointed with the early results.”
In a written statement Wednesday morning, Montoya said the measure forced San Francisco to finally put a plan in place for deploying the weapons.
"The greatest result of this undertaking was forcing the hand of the Police Commission to expeditiously create and adopt a taser policy for fear our proposition would succeed," Montoya wrote. "Through political activism we reached a compromise whereby tasers will be issued and, through the will of the voters, to be used under very particular circumstances."
"No on H" campaign co-chair Alexander Post said Tuesday night that while he was surprised by the early lead in "no" votes, the rejection of the measure followed opposition from a broad group of city leaders.
"Whatever political power the POA used to have has clearly faded in this town," Post said.
San Francisco Police Chief William Scott and District Attorney George Gascón are among many law enforcement leaders in the city who opposed Measure H.
“The people of San Francisco are seeing this for what it is,” Gascón said at an election party in the city’s Mission District Tuesday night, after the first round of results had just been released.
“They essentially jumped the gun,” Public Defender Jeff Adachi said of the POA, noting that much of the “Yes on H” campaign ads and literature portrayed a vote for the measure as a vote for SFPD officers to carry Tasers – without mentioning that the weapons are already scheduled to be deployed. “San Francisco voters are smart. They read between the lines."
San Jose Measures B and C
Like Measures C and D in San Francisco, San Jose's Measures B and C are going head-to-head, this time over housing and urban sprawl.
With 95 percent of precincts reporting, Measure B was failing with 55.92 percent of voters opposing the measure, and Measure C was passing with 58.95 percent in favor.
Measure B, backed by developers, would rezone the Evergreen Hills area above San Jose to allow for development, in hopes of increasing housing supply, specifically up to 900 units for seniors. But critics say it would contribute to urban sprawl without adding much truly affordable housing.
Measure C, placed on the ballot as a counter measure by the City Council, would restrict development unless it met strict affordability and environmental requirements. It would also override Measure B if both passed.
"[If Measure C passes] it signals that the community is united against developer-backed initiatives telling communities how they have to grow," said Megan Medeiros, the chair of the "No on B/Yes on C" campaign.
Measure C in Napa Valley, known as the Watershed and Oak Woodland Protection Initiative, would establish protections for oak woodlands and streams located along Napa's hillsides by limiting how many acres can be cut for vineyards.
With 100 percent of precincts reporting but some mail-in ballots still yet to be counted, the measure is passing narrowly with 7,191 votes in favor and 7,149 against - a difference of 42 votes.
“There’s a tremendous amount of pressure to expand vineyard holdings up into the forested hillsides in Napa County floor because the valley floor is basically planted out," said Jim Wilson, who is with the "Yes on C" campaign. "Ultimately we can no longer afford to be cutting our forests down. ”
Supporters say Measure C would help protect forests, nearby streams, and conserve water, including for existing vineyards.
Opponents feel the measure is not necessary and say the county already has many environmental and conservation regulations on farmers. A coalition of Napa Valley wine and agricultural groups oppose the measure.
KQED's Don Clyde, Raquel Maria Dillon, Alex Emslie, Ryan Levi, Shia Levitt and Lesley McClurg contributed reporting to this story.