Today we vote. Then we wait 🗳️

Election Day is today, but you’d be hard-pressed to find a Californian anticipating the final results tonight. We are too used to counting votes that take days or weeks.

It’s a trade-off that comes with California’s acceptance of postal votingwrites Kate Wolf of CalMatters. As a result, you may be waiting a while to find out who comes out ahead in the big one gubernatorial race.

Here’s what’s taking so long:

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

Gov. Gavin Newsom urged election officials last month to “accurately count every legally submitted ballot as quickly as possible,” and two changes could speed up the count this time around. One is Proposition 50, which redraws congressional districts in favor of Democrats. This could make 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 the votes continue to roll in, so do the tallies of what this election has cost. Although this election is the most expensive California primary in history — thanks in large part to billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer, who poured $213 million of his own money into his gubernatorial bid — candidates with fewer votes also contributed about quarter of a billion dollars of equity this year.

That’s the most money since California began tracking nearly three decades ago, CalMatters’ Jeremiah Kimmelman and Kate Lee report.

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

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

Read more about California slow vote counting and self-financing candidates.

And go back to CalMatters.org about the election results. We’ll be posting stories and updates throughout the night.

Kalshi users hoping to cash in on the prediction market platform are betting on Democrat Xavier Becerra — giving him a 74 percent chance of becoming governor in November as of Monday. But Kalshi himself puts his skin in the game, you donated $39,200 last week to Becerra’s campaign, writes Jeremia Kimelman of CalMatters.

The timing of Kalshi’s contribution raises concerns about whether there is a conflict of interest when a betting market gives money to a candidate while its own clients are betting on the candidate in question in the same election.

• Trent Longexecutive director of the California Campaign for Clean Money: “It seems particularly problematic when a betting market makes large contributions to every candidate for whom they hold betting markets.”

The contribution follows a series of moves Kalshi has made to exert more influence at the state Capitol. Earlier this year, her prediction markets advocacy group — in coalition with Crypto.com, Coinbase and Robinhood — registered with the state to lobby. Since last year, Kalshi has also dramatically increased his 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-running effort to shut down private gaming halls that compete with their business.

The court’s decision is another twist in the multi-year battle between the two entities – and it is keeps campaign donations flowing to state politicians that support each side of the dispute, CalMatters’ Ryan Sabalow reports.

For years, tribal casinos tried to prevent card rooms 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 card rooms and related companies have given lawmakers at least $2.8 million. Cardrooms also donated at least $244,000 to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose office is involved in prosecuting gambling-related regulations. The Tribes, in turn, have donated $531,000 to Bonta.

In response to CalMatters, Bonta spokesman Jonathan Underland said, “Contributions have never influenced the attorney general’s decision-making process.”

Read more.

In the weeks leading up to Election Day, CalMatters teamed up with local partners to bring our voter guide to life, bringing together more than 600 Californians to share their perspectives and which issues matter most to them. Through VotingMatters events this election, CalMatters Director of Partnerships Dan Hu traveled more than 2000 milesengaging with constituents from Vallejo to Riverside. Read more about what he and the other attendees experienced.