Prop 24, the California Privacy Rights Act Receives Support From 77% Of Likely California Voters

Prop 24, the California Privacy Rights Act Receives Support From 77% Of Likely California Voters

PR Newswire

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Oct. 6, 2020

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Oct. 6, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — Today the YES on Prop 24 campaign released polling results from Goodwin Simon Strategic Research showing that voters continue to overwhelmingly support Prop 24, the California Privacy Rights Act on the November ballot, with 77% of likely voters saying they will vote YES on the ballot measure.

Yes on Privacy, Yes on Prop 24 (PRNewsfoto/Californians for Consumer Priva)
Yes on Privacy, Yes on Prop 24 (PRNewsfoto/Californians for Consumer Priva)

Voters are demanding privacy rights and that’s exactly what we’re giving them in Prop 24- that’s why it has 77% support.

Even more telling is that despite negative campaigning by the opposition, only 11% of voters oppose the measure – the same number as when the last poll was taken in July.

“It’s crystal clear that voters are demanding privacy rights, and that’s exactly what we’re giving them with Prop 24, the California Privacy Rights Act,” said General Consultant and Campaign Manager Robin Swanson. “Voters also don’t believe the misinformation being put out by opponents. When voters read what the measure actually does to expand privacy rights, protect our sensitive personal information, stop hackers and triple fines for violating our kids’ data – they invariably vote YES on 24.”

The poll, which was conducted between September 29October 5 included 750 likely California voters. The 77% support number is within the margin of error of a previous poll taken in July, which showed the measure at 81% support.

CURRENT POLL: (September 29October 5)

NET: TOTAL YES

77%

NET: TOTAL NO

11%

UNSURE

12%

PREVIOUS POLL: (July 26-31)

NET: TOTAL YES

81%

NET: TOTAL NO

11%

UNSURE

8%

About Prop 24 / The California Privacy

Tyler Technologies Improves Computer-Aided Dispatch Process for Port of Long Beach, California

Public safety solution enhances collaboration between patrol officers and dispatchers

Tyler Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: TYL) today announced the Long Beach Harbor Patrol Officers and Dispatchers in California have successfully gone live with Tyler’s New World Enterprise CADand New World ShieldForce® solutions, along with New World Enterprise Records, mobile messaging, and mobile field reporting.

The implementation of Tyler’s solutions replaces the agency’s previous tracking system used to manage dispatch activity.

“We recognized the need to implement a true computer-aided dispatch solution to better manage dispatch activity, streamline communication across the agency, and enhance our reporting processes,” said Jeremy Vetterlein, technical security project manager of Long Beach. “Tyler’s solution is already improving critical communication between our patrol officers and dispatch staff. The solution allows us to precisely locate and quickly respond to issues in the field, helping to ensure safety in our community.”

In addition to the CAD solution, the Long Beach Harbor Patrol Officers and Dispatchers will also leverage Tyler’s latest solution for public safety, New World Enterprise Records.

Following a completely virtual go-live, the Port of Long Beach is now using a true comprehensive CAD solution. A few notable features and benefits include:

  • Increased mobility for Harbor Patrol officers in the field to respond quickly to dispatch activity, initiate calls, and capture field investigation reports

  • GIS-based address points which allow for precise location details to be shared instantly

  • Ability to move most Harbor Patrol daily log documentation from a paper-based to an electronic format to improve accuracy

  • Enhanced reporting capabilities for all staff

“We’re pleased to bring the Port of Long Beach live with our comprehensive public safety solution, including CAD and enterprise records,” said Bryan Proctor, president of Tyler’s Public Safety Division. “Not only will our CAD solution and reporting capabilities increase efficiency for

Case closed: California judge ends SpaceX’s lawsuit against the U.S. Air Force

The judge said the Air Force’s actions were not arbitrary, capricious, or in violation of the law, and that SpaceX was not entitled to any relief in this action.”

WASHINGTON — A California judge Oct. 2 officially ended SpaceX’s 18-month-long lawsuit against the U.S. Air Force. Following a Sept. 24 ruling denying SpaceX’s claim, the judge on Friday ordered the case to be closed. 

U.S. District Court Judge Judge Otis Wright II of the Central District of California on Sept. 24 ruled against SpaceX in its legal complaint over contracts the U.S. Air Force awarded in October 2018 to United Launch Alliance, Northrop Grumman and Blue Origin. 

The judge’s Sept. 24 order, first reported by Reuters, was sealed by the court because it contained sensitive information.

In the Oct. 2 motion to close the case, the judge noted that his Sept. 24 order denied SpaceX’s claim, “concluding that the Air Force’s actions were not arbitrary, capricious, or in violation of the law, and that SpaceX was not entitled to any relief in this action.”

SpaceX first filed the complaint May 17, 2019, with the Court of Federal Claims. The company argued that the Air Force gave an unfair advantage to the other companies by awarding them Launch Service Agreements and excluding SpaceX. 

After the Court of Federal Claims ruled that it lacked jurisdiction, the case was transferred in August 2019 to the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California.

The Air Force awarded Launch Service Agreements contracts to Blue Origin ($500 million), United Launch Alliance ($967 million) and Northrop Grumman ($762 million) to help the companies defray the costs of developing new rockets and infrastructure as they competed for a launch service procurement contract. 

SpaceX’s proposal for a Launch Service Agreement contract was to leverage its Starship

Andrew Yang takes lead in California data privacy measure

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The Fitbits on our wrists collect our health and fitness data; Apple promises privacy but lots of iPhone apps can still share our personal information; and who really knows what they’re agreeing to when a website asks, “Do You Accept All Cookies?” Most people just click “OK” and hope for the best, says former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang.

“The amount of data we’re giving up is unprecedented in human history,” says Yang, who lives in New York but is helping lead the campaign for a data privacy initiative on California’s Nov. 3 ballot. “Don’t you think it’s time we did something about it?”

Yang is chairing the advisory board for Proposition 24, which he and other supporters see as a model for other states as the U.S. tries to catch up with protections that already exist in Europe.

The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 would expand the rights Californians were given to their personal data in a groundbreaking law approved two years ago, which took effect in January. The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 was intended to give residents more control over their personal information collected online. It limited how companies gather personal data and make money from it and gave consumers the right to know what a company has collected and have it deleted, as well as the right to opt out of the sale of their personal information.

But between the time the law was passed and took effect, major companies have found ways to dodge requirements. Tech and business lobbyists are pressuring the Legislature to water it down further, with proposals to undo parts of the law, says Alastair Mactaggart, a San Francisco real estate developer who spearheaded support for the 2018 law and is behind the effort to amend

California Ushers In A Bold New Era Of Board Diversity

Efforts to secure diversity on corporate boards have reached a new level of intensity. Governor Gavin Newsom of California signed a statute into law on Wednesday, September 30, which will require publicly held corporations whose principal executive offices are located in California to satisfy mandated levels of racially, ethnically and other diverse directors beginning in 2021.

By emphasizing the interests of “underrepresented communities,” the new legislation promises to significantly increase the level of boardroom engagement on matters of leadership diversity. In so doing, it serves to broaden existing concepts of diversity to include specific ethnic groups and matters of sexual orientation. It is also a dramatic supplement to 2018 California legislation that required public companies headquartered in the state to assure the appointment of specified numbers of women to the board of directors—a groundbreaking development at the time.

While California politics are unique in many ways, this new law may well spark similar legislative initiatives in other states— as occurred with California’s 2018 legislation. For that and other reasons, the new law is noteworthy to the board nominating committees of public, private, and nonprofit corporations across the country and across industry sectors. Many boards may already believe, with some justification, that they have made great strides on matters of diversity. They just may no longer be enough, given the goals and objectives of the California statute, and the likelihood that they will be broadly promoted by corporate stakeholders and other interested parties.

The law provides for an escalating level of racial and ethnic diversity on the board, to be implemented over the next several years. Specifically, the new law requires affected companies to ensure that their boards have a minimum of one director from an