Open letter
An Open Letter to Prop 38 Proponents
As California voters begin their important work of examining the measures on the November ballot, we are asking you to explain some basic facts about Proposition 38, which authorizes a $8.4 billion bond measure for immunology research.
We think that the voters are entitled to some straight answers about what the proposal would do, who would benefit, and how public money would be awarded.
In our reading of the proposition, half of the funding – over $4 billion – will be allocated to a single research institution that meets all of the following criteria:
- Have existed by January 1, 2025;
- Have entered into an affiliation agreement with a University of California campus by that date;
- Be affiliated with a UC health system recording more than 35,000 inpatient admissions and 3.5 million outpatient visits annually;
- Control at least 200,000 square feet of research space;
- Have identified at least $250 million in philanthropic support; and
- Have secured two separate $50 million commitments for designated research programs.
As reported by CalMatters, only the UCLA medical center and its affiliated sites registered more than 3.5 million outpatient visits in 2025, with 4.1 million visits. UC San Francisco came in second with 3.4 million visits, just slightly below the eligibility criterion. CalMatters also quoted a UCLA spokesperson who “confirmed that among all non-profits affiliated with UCLA, only the Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy could satisfy those stipulations.”
It appears that one institution can qualify: the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, which you helped create and support.
In the spirit of having an honest debate about the merits of Proposition 38, we ask you to publicly acknowledge that half the funding will be directed to the California Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy. The same institute that was established and funded by Prop 38’s billionaire sponsors, Gary Michelson and Meyer Luskin. Michelson is the Chairman of the Board for the institute and Luskin is treasurer.
California is home to many world-class universities, hospitals and independent research centers. Public research funding is ordinarily awarded through competition and scientific review, with applicants evaluated under standards applied equally to all.
Before Californians agree to borrow $8.4 billion and repay it with interest, they deserve to understand why half the money appears reserved for one institution—and why the usual safeguards of competition, peer review and full public transparency do not appear to apply.
Our coalition will examine other aspects of Proposition 38 in the coming weeks. We invite you to begin that public discussion by answering these questions fully and directly.
California voters deserve nothing less.