您的一票代表甚麼
投反對票表示
現行的州環境審查規則（CEQA）維持不變。詳細的環境報告（在需要時）必須考慮多個替代方案。如果沒有正確遵守CEQA，法院可以叫停整個項目。 3
兩個橢圓形都刻意留空。由您自己決定。
修改對某些項目的環境審覈。倡議法規。 修改《California 環境質量法》(CEQA)，規定完成環境審核的截止日期並解決質疑項目批准的訴訟，加快某些項目的環境審核（包括大部份住房、交通、水務和衛生項目）。財政影響：州和當地政府每年的初始成本可能達到數千萬美元的高位區間，甚至可能超過1億美元，部份由相應費用承擔。長期的影響不確定，有可能存在更顯著的長期正面或負面財政影響。支持者：California Children’s Hospital Association; California Water Association; California Council for Affordable Housing 反對者：Coalition for Clean Air; CA Environmental Voters; Physicians for Social Responsibility, LA; National Wildlife Federation
這是官方選民指南中的原文。
如果不獲通過
不獲通過則一切維持不變
如果第45號提案未通過，現行的環境審查規則維持不變。立法分析師（LAO）說，各機構現在會在批准項目前研究它對環境的影響。如果人們認為機構違反規則，可以提起訴訟。 3
為何現在出現在選票上
一項名為《加州環境品質法》（CEQA）的州法律規定，機構在批准項目之前，必須考慮該項目可能如何損害環境。 3
機構必須徵求並考慮公眾意見，設有最短意見期，但沒有最長期限。對於申請人選擇採用新程序的合資格項目，該議案將為意見期設定上限，並將部落諮詢限於聯邦承認的部落。 3
如果人們認為某機構沒有遵守CEQA，可以提起訴訟。如果法院同意，它可以叫停整個項目，並要求該機構解決問題。 3
大多數項目不需要詳細的環境影響報告，而且部分靠近公共交通的住房獲得豁免。許多項目還需要其他許可證，而機構可以多次要求提供更多資料或作出更改。 3
該議案的立法認定（為該議案辯護）說，加州審批必要項目的制度「太慢、太官僚，而且成本太高」，而延誤會提高「生活成本」。 5
資金
立法分析師說，最初的州和地方費用每年很可能達到數千萬美元的高位區間，甚至可能超過1億美元，部分由收費支付。較長期的影響，無論是正面還是負面，都不確定，但可能更大。最新申報總額請參閱資金圖表。 3
- 金額
- 最初每年很可能達到數千萬美元的高位區間，甚至可能超過1億美元
- 為期多久
- 沒有結束日期；最初幾年費用很可能較高
- 由誰支付
- LAO說，州和地方政府（包括州法院）在最初幾年很可能會支付較高的費用。項目申請人和提起訴訟的人所繳付的費用將支付其中一部分。它說，之後，部分費用可能會持續，但訴訟減少可能會降低機構和法院的費用。如果公共項目建得更快，政府的項目費用很可能會較低，而更多完成的項目可能會增加稅收。但批准原本不會出現、具有負面環境影響的項目，可能會增加機構應對的費用。 3
由誰承擔費用
誰在背後
支持來自哪裡
根據背書者和出資者來定位，而非根據我們的意見。 我們如何定位提案
加州共和黨和納稅人團體Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association建議對第45號提案投贊成票，加州民主黨則建議投反對票。倡議團體GrowSF和商業團體San Francisco Chamber of Commerce也支持此提案，而倡導良好施政的團體League of Women Voters of California和三藩市綠黨則反對。支持第45號提案的委員會的最大捐款者是Building A Better California和CA Business PAC。反對此提案的委員會的最大捐款者是Wendy Schmidt和Clean and Healthy California, Sponsored By Environmental Organizations。 10119671281314
背書
追蹤資金
贊成主要捐款者
- Building A Better CaliforniaUS$791.2萬
這是誰？
- CA Business PACUS$308.6萬
這是誰？
California Chamber of Commerce 的政治委員會，該商會是一個商業團體。Times of San Diego 的一則報導稱它是 CalChamber 的 Business PAC。 1
利害關係
根據公開紀錄，並非捐款者本身的解釋。
- California Building Industry AssociationUS$256.3萬
- PG&E Corporation And Affiliated EntitiesUS$240萬
這是誰？
PG&E Corporation擁有總部設於奧克蘭的Pacific Gas and Electric。它向北加州520萬戶家庭供應天然氣和電力。 1
- California Association Of RealtorsUS$118.7萬
- Building Industry Association Of Southern California, Inc.US$90萬
這是誰？
- Lennar CorporationUS$73.8萬
這是誰？
總部位於佛羅里達州邁阿密-戴德郡（Miami-Dade County）的住宅建築公司。它也提供抵押貸款、產權和保險服務。 1
- SempraUS$68.7萬
這是誰？
Sempra在德州和加州擁有公用事業公司，包括San Diego Gas & Electric。其網站說，這些公司服務約4,000萬名消費者。 1
- PG&E Corporation And Affilaite EntitiesUS$50萬
這是誰？
PG&E Corporation擁有總部設於奧克蘭的Pacific Gas and Electric。它向北加州520萬戶家庭供應天然氣和電力。 1
- Bloom Energy CorporationUS$44.8萬
這是誰？
設計並製造燃料電池的公司，燃料電池可在現場發電。總部位於加州聖荷西。 1
- 前5大捐款者捐出此方資金的55%。
- 4%來自加州以外。
- 獨立開支（不受競選活動控制）：US$8.5萬
委員會: Building Industry Association of Southern California Issues PAC - Yes on 45; Building Resilient Infrastructure for a Decarbonized Green Economy Issues PAC (BRIDGE Issues) Yes on Prop 45, Funded by PG&E Corporation; California Building Industry Association Issues Committee Supporting Proposition 45; Yes on 45 - Building a More Affordable California, a Coalition of Water, Affordable Housing, Clean Energy, Small Business, Healthcare & Community Leaders
反對主要捐款者
- Wendy SchmidtUS$1000萬
- Clean and Healthy California, Sponsored By Environmental OrganizationsUS$712.9萬
這是誰？
一個政治委員會。Press Democrat的一篇報導稱它為環保PAC。 1
- California State Council of Laborers Issues PACUS$152.7萬
這是誰？
這個PAC以California State Council of Laborers命名。一名候選人的網站說，該理事會代表超過7萬名工會建築工人，是LiUNA的政治發聲者。 1
- Members' Voice of the State Building and Construction Trades Council of CaliforniaUS$122.6萬
- Disctrict Council of Iron Workers of the State of California VicinityUS$99.5萬
這是誰？
捐款者的說法
該理事會會長 Dave Osborne 說，第45號提案會“剝奪加州每個家庭確保在其社區興建的項目安全的權利”。 3
- International Union of Operating Engineers Local 12US$99.5萬
這是誰？
International Union of Operating Engineers 的 Local 12。它在南加州和南內華達州設有學徒訓練場所。 1
- Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 Issues Advocacy/
Ballot Initiative PACUS$99.5萬 - Southern California District Council of Laborers Issues PACUS$99.5萬
這是誰？
以南加州勞工工會（Laborers）區域理事會命名的委員會。Rebuild SoCal Partnership的網站說，該理事會有14個附屬地方工會。 1
- State Building and Construction Trades Council of California Independent Expenditure PACUS$82.4萬
- Kat TaylorUS$50萬
- 前5大捐款者捐出此方資金的68%。
- 3%來自加州以外。
- 獨立開支（不受競選活動控制）：US$7.7萬
委員會: Campaign for People Over Polluters, No on Prop. 45, Sponsored by Environmental & Healthcare Organizations; No on Prop 45 - Protect California Communities; No on Prop 45, Sponsored by Labor, Health and Environmental Organizations; No on Prop. 45, SMART Local 105 PAC; Working People in Supporting of Prop 3 and in Opposition of Prop 39, 43 and 45, Sponsored by Los Angeles County Federation of Labor AFL-CIO
- California Building Industry Association Issues Committee Supporting Proposition 45 (FPPC 1353866) supports or opposes several measures; the Secretary of State attributes $7,009,737 of its $10,196,208 to this one. Donor amounts here are scaled by that same share (69%).
- California Building Industry Association Issues Committee Supporting Proposition 45: added $186,791 of 24-hour late contributions dated after the Secretary of State's 2026-10-22 cutoff.
- Yes on 45 - Building a More Affordable California, a Coalition of Water, Affordable Housing, Clean Energy, Small Business, Healthcare & Community Leaders (FPPC 1484853) supports or opposes several measures; the Secretary of State attributes $28,230,874 of its $35,682,874 to this one. Donor amounts here are scaled by that same share (79%).
- Yes on 45 - Building a More Affordable California, a Coalition of Water, Affordable Housing, Clean Energy, Small Business, Healthcare & Community Leaders: added $912,010 of 24-hour late contributions dated after the Secretary of State's 2026-10-22 cutoff.
- YES side: $8,253,433 given by one committee on this side to another was counted once.
- YES side independent expenditures (Form 496) of $84,899, mostly by: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDERS $75,000; Reform California with Carl DeMaio - Ballot Measure Committee $8,000; REPUBLICAN PARTY OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY $1,899. Separate from total_raised.
- Campaign for People Over Polluters, No on Prop. 45, Sponsored by Environmental & Healthcare Organizations (FPPC 1493079) supports or opposes several measures; the Secretary of State attributes $1,880,513 of its $9,623,396 to this one. Donor amounts here are scaled by that same share (20%).
- Campaign for People Over Polluters, No on Prop. 45, Sponsored by Environmental & Healthcare Organizations: added $2,220,000 of 24-hour late contributions dated after the Secretary of State's 2026-10-22 cutoff.
- No on Prop 45 - Protect California Communities (FPPC 1479255) supports or opposes several measures; the Secretary of State attributes $9,421,588 of its $9,471,866 to this one. Donor amounts here are scaled by that same share (99%).
- No on Prop 45 - Protect California Communities: added $100,000 of 24-hour late contributions dated after the Secretary of State's 2026-10-22 cutoff.
- No on Prop 45, Sponsored by Labor, Health and Environmental Organizations: added $1,201 of 24-hour late contributions dated after the Secretary of State's 2026-10-22 cutoff.
- NO side: $2,985,120 given by one committee on this side to another was counted once.
- NO side independent expenditures (Form 496) of $77,399, mostly by: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local No. 11 Political Action Committee $50,000; Senator Menjivar Ballot Measure Committee $8,886; Million Voter Project Action Fund, Sponsored by Social Justice Organizations $5,299. Separate from total_raised.
- Committee totals are the Secretary of State's per-measure 'Total Reported Contributions' through 2026-10-22 (secretary of state page), plus later 24-hour reports from the Cal-Access bulk export built 2026-10-28. Donors, geography and independent expenditures come from the itemized Cal-Access filings. Contributions to committees that back several measures are credited pro rata to the share the Secretary of State assigns to this measure.
- Source cutoff: the Cal-Access export used was built 2026-10-27 (UTC) and the Secretary of State's per-measure totals run through 2026-10-22. as_of is the latest filing from this measure's own committees, which can be earlier.
- Money given to a committee by another committee is shown as that committee, not the money's original source (e.g. a union's issues PAC, not its members). Donor type is inferred from the name; check the filing for sponsors.
資料來源: CA Secretary of State: Proposition 45 contribution totals · Cal-Access raw campaign finance data export · FPPC Top 10 Contributors, November 2026 General Election
支持與反對的最有力論點
雙方各自最有力的論點，按其支持者的說法撰寫。兩者都不代表我們的觀點。
支持的最有力論點
選票標籤上列出的支持者包括加州兒童醫院協會（California Children's Hospital Association）、加州水務協會（California Water Association）和加州可負擔住房委員會（California Council for Affordable Housing）。他們說，延誤、繁文縟節和「無理的訴訟」阻礙了需要的項目，並提高了生活成本。支持者認為，第45號提案設定了「可執行的時間表」，以及更快、更可預測的法律挑戰程序。他們說，許可延誤使一棟新房屋的成本增加超過7.5萬美元，並說第45號提案「將有助降低租金和房貸」。他們認為，它有助降低電費，並有助項目按時、按預算完成。支持者說，它「並不豁免任何一個項目的環境審查」。他們說，市和縣保留「批准或拒絕項目的全部權力」，而且「居民保有有意義的發言權」。 14
反對的最有力論點
選票標籤上列出的反對者包括清潔空氣聯盟（Coalition for Clean Air）、CA Environmental Voters、Physicians for Social Responsibility, LA和全國野生動物聯合會（National Wildlife Federation）。他們說，第45號提案限制對重大新項目的環境審查，以及「公眾發表意見的權利」。反對者認為，它減少了機構考慮公眾意見的責任，他們說，這些意見往往揭露「空氣和水的潛在污染」。他們說，審查減弱意味著住宅和學校附近有更多污染，以及更多哮喘。反對者認為，它並不要求任何項目降低租金、房貸或水電費。他們說，它給予開發商挑戰市和縣的新權利，同時使項目反對者更難成功挑戰機構的決定。他們認為，當污染者不清理時，由納稅人和公用事業用戶付費。 14
資料來源
本頁每項事實都連結至以下其中一個來源。
- Ballot label: title (table of contents) and summary (Quick Reference Guide), Proposition 45 (en edition), CA Official Voter Information Guide, Nov 3, 2026, p. 3, 11
- Proposition 45: Official Title and Summary (prepared by the Attorney General), CA Official Voter Information Guide, Nov 3, 2026, p. 1
- Proposition 45: Analysis by the Legislative Analyst, CA Official Voter Information Guide, Nov 3, 2026, p. 1-4
- Proposition 45: Arguments and rebuttals, CA Official Voter Information Guide, Nov 3, 2026, p. 5-6
- Proposition 45: Text of Proposed Law, CA Official Voter Information Guide, Nov 3, 2026, p. 1-17
- GrowSF: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- San Francisco Chamber of Commerce: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- San Francisco Green Party: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- California Democratic Party: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- California Republican Party: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- League of Women Voters of California: recommendations for the November 3, 2026 election
- How endorsers line up on Prop 45: this guide's coalition groupings (endorsement method 1.0, data as of 2026-10-27)
- Campaign finance filings as of 2026-10-26 (compiled by this guide from CA Secretary of State: Proposition 45 contribution totals; data/money/ca-2026-11-p45.json, main@0dcbec8)
- Ballot label: title (table of contents) and summary (Quick Reference Guide), Proposition 45 (zh-Hant edition), CA Official Voter Information Guide, Nov 3, 2026