Today we vote. Then, we wait 🗳️

Election Day is today, but you’d be hard pressed to find a Californian who expects final results tonight. We’re too accustomed to vote counts that take days or weeks. 

That’s a tradeoff that comes with California’s embrace of mail-in voting, writes CalMatters’ Kate Wolffe. As a result, you could be waiting a while to find out who comes out ahead in the big governor’s race.

Here’s what takes so long:

California sends every registered voter a mail-in ballot, and ballots are valid if they’re postmarked and arrive at election offices within seven days of Election Day. Elections officials have 30 days to finalize their results to the state, who then have 38 days after Election Day to certify the results.

Gov. Gavin Newsom urged elections officials last month to “accurately count every lawfully cast ballot as quickly as possible,” and two changes could speed up the count this time. One is Proposition 50, which redraws congressional districts to favor Democrats. This could make formerly competitive districts easier to “call” for news outlets, analysts and politicians. Another is a new state law that shortens the deadline for counties to finish counting most ballots to 13 days instead of 30.

As votes continue to come in, so do tallies of how much this election cost. While this election is California’s most expensive primary in history — in large part due to billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer who poured $213 million of his own money in his gubernatorial bid — down-ballot candidates have also contributed about a quarter billion dollars of their own money this year.

That’s the most amount of money ever since California started keeping track nearly three decades ago, report CalMatters’ Jeremia Kimelman and Kate Li.

For some voters, candidates who can fund their campaigns have more independence from powerful lobbyists and industries. But it can also raise concerns about people “buying” their way into public office.

• Chris Anderson, a candidate for Lodi City Council who has contributed to his own campaign: “There is a part of me that likes the fact that a person is funding their own campaign because they’re less likely to be beholden to a special interest. But on the other hand, what special interests got them to where they are?”

Read more about California’s slow vote count and self-funded candidates.

And, come back to CalMatters.org for election results. We’ll be posting stories and updates all night.

Kalshi users hoping to win some cash on the prediction marketplace platform are betting on Democrat Xavier Becerra — giving him a 74% chance of becoming governor in November as of Monday. But Kalshi itself is putting its skin in the game, donating $39,200 last week to Becerra’s campaign, writes CalMatters’ Jeremia Kimelman.

The timing of Kalshi’s contribution raises concerns about whether there’s a conflict of interest when a betting marketplace gives money to a candidate while its own customers wage bets on said candidate in the same election.

• Trent Lange, executive director of the California Clean Money Campaign: “It does seem especially problematic when a betting market is giving large contributions to any candidate that they are holding betting markets for.”

The contribution follows a series of moves Kalshi has taken to wield more influence at the state Capitol. Earlier this year, its advocacy group for prediction markets — in coalition with Crypto.com, Coinbase and Robinhood — registered with the state to lobby. Since last year Kalshi also dramatically increased its political spending in California, donating $115,000 to state candidates, including Becerra.

Read more.

Speaking of gambling, a San Francisco judge dealt tribal casinos a setback last month in their long effort to shut down privately-run cardrooms that compete with their businesses. 

The court’s decision is another turn in a multiyear battle between the two entities — and it is one that keeps campaign donations flowing to state policymakers who support each side of the dispute, reports CalMatters’ Ryan Sabalow.

For years, tribal casinos sought to prevent cardrooms from offering blackjack, arguing that they had exclusive rights to host it and other lucrative games. Twenty-seven of the state’s casino-owning tribes have donated at least $15.8 million to current members of the Legislature, according to the CalMatters’ Digital Democracy database.

About the same number of cardrooms and affiliated companies have given lawmakers at least $2.8 million. Cardrooms have also donated at least $244,000 to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose office is involved in pursuing related gambling regulations. Tribes, in turn, have donated $531,000 to Bonta.

In response to CalMatters, Bonta spokesperson Jonathan Underland said, “Contributions have never impacted the Attorney General’s decision-making process.”

Read more.

In the weeks before Election Day, CalMatters teamed up with local partners to bring our voter guide to life, convening more than 600 Californians to share their perspectives and what issues matter most to them. Through this election’s VotingMatters events, CalMatters Director of Partnerships Dan Hu drove more than 2,000 miles, engaging with voters from Vallejo to Riverside. Read more about what he and other attendees experienced.