California voters will decide on 14 statewide measures this general election, addressing housing, taxes, financial regulation and more.
At their core, the initiatives ask Californians to ponder three questions: Can people afford to live in California? Who pays for public services? And how should the state govern elections and health care?
Nine are ballot initiatives, meaning measures were proposed by California citizens who collected enough signatures to be considered by the Secretary of State. The other five were referred to by the California State Legislature.
Housing, Development and Cost of Living
Prop. 1 addresses the affordable housing crisis with an $11.25 billion housing bond to be distributed throughout the state. It aims to house vulnerable populations, feeding directly into programs like CalVet that help veterans and their families get home loans. Money from the statewide bond would flow through existing affordable housing programs, like Santa Barbara’s.
The measure would also fund development and preservation of sites with housing potential and work to acquire affordable sites.
Prop. 37 creates a loan program—and funds it with $25 billion—to help eligible middle-income buyers purchase qualifying new homes. Homes that qualify are under $1.5 million, and offered to buyers at a fixed-rate mortgage for up to %17 of purchase price, according to the ballot.
Prop. 45 would change the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to expedite the environmental approval of mostly housing and transit projects. It aims to create a faster delivery process from project proposal, to construction to completion.
CEQA passed in 1970 to study and disclose the environmental impacts of proposed developments. The process can stretch to last years, especially when proposals get tied up in litigation. Prop. 45 would require qualifying projects to be completed in one year. If legal challenges are involved, courts have just under 9 months to resolve them.
Proponents of Prop. 45 say that CEQA has come to be used against its original purpose: challengers intentionally delay projects because of personal interest rather than genuine environmental concern. Opponents say important environmental regulations cannot be given shortcuts.
Taxes, State Spending and Public Services
Prop. 2 would increase California’s “Rainy Day Fund,” a budget reserve approved by voters in 2014 to fund essential services like education, health care and public safety during economic downturns.
Currently, the state is allowed to deposit up to 10% of its general fund tax revenue in the reserves. If Prop. 2 is passed, the constitution would be amended to raise this ceiling to 20%. Supporters say the measure would even out California’s budget and strengthen the emergency reserves, while opponents say politicians can dip into reserves as a “slush fund.”
Prop. 3 would increase taxes on higher earners’ incomes, money that would be allocated to schools and health care. The tax was first enacted in 2012, set to expire in 2031. Prop. 3 would make the tax permanent.
The measure was initiated by the California Teachers Association. 89% of the money would go to K-12 public schools and 11% to community colleges, with any excess feeding into public health care, according to Cal Matters.
Proponents say the tax is vital to public school funding—it typically raises $5-15 billion per year. Opponents say the measure may drive wealthy Californians to states with lower income-taxes.
Prop. 40 is known as the “billionaire’s tax.” It imposes a one-time, 5% tax on Californians with assets of over $1 billion. It’s been projected to raise around $100 billion over five years, which would be directed toward healthcare, food security and education.
There are an estimated 250 billionaires in California, most oppose the proposition. Supporters note that with congress defunding Medi-Cal healthcare, more funding is needed, especially for low-income people.
Prop. 41 would require new state tax proposals to be reviewed by The California State Auditor, making it harder to get on the ballot. It would prohibit new state taxes that exempt their revenue from California’s existing voter-approved spending limit.
This proposition is controversial because it was placed on the ballot by opponents of the billionaire tax, according to Cal Matters. Its supporters say that the state auditor needs to ensure that programs are spending money wisely. Opponents say that it was designed to trick voters into blocking the billionaire tax.
Prop. 42 also counteracts the billionaire tax. It would prohibit taxes on personal property and other expensive assets like financial portfolios or valuable art. If passed, assets would not be taken into account when taxing wealth, therefore it would be more difficult to pass Prop. 40.
This proposition was also placed on the ballot by opponents of the billionaire tax.
Prop. 43 would require a two-thirds (66.67%) voter approval, instead of a simple majority, to authorize all local special taxes. Special taxes refers to fees created by local governments targeted to specific public projects or services. Money collected from a special tax also goes directly toward a designated voter-approved project.
Proponents of Prop. 43 say that it protects taxpayers by making special taxes more difficult to approve. Opponents say that Prop. 43 would limit the ability to fund essential services like natural disaster response.
Elections, Voting and Political Accountability
Prop. 4 would allow state and local governments to fund the campaigns of political candidates, which has been banned in most places since 1988.
With private money in politics always a controversial topic when it comes to political campaigns, the supporters of the proposition hope Prop. 4 would even things out for less funded candidates. Opponents don’t want to see their tax dollars going toward candidates they don’t support.
Prop. 5 changes the process of replacing recalled officials. Currently, voters elect replacement candidates at the same time as the election for whether or not the elected official should be recalled. Under Prop. 5, the selection of a successor would be delayed until a separate, special election.
Additionally, the lieutenant governor would take over if the governor was recalled.
Prop. 39 establishes new voter ID requirements, requiring voters to show a government-issued identification at the polls. For mail-in ballots, election officials are required to verify that all voters are U.S. citizens. While an ID is currently required to register to vote, it’s not requested at polling locations.
Conservative groups put this proposition on the ballot, arguing for strengthened trust in the elections process. Opponents say the proposition would disproportionately impact low-income people, people with disabilities, and those without a driver’s license.
Health Care and Medical Research
Prop. 38 authorizes $8.4 billion state bond for medical research in immunology and immunotherapy. Half the money would go to a University of California affiliated research institute, and the other half would be distributed to research grants at public universities and non-profit organizations.
Immunology research targets cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease. Supporters say the funding would curb cuts from the Trump Administration. Opponents question if California should fund a wider variety of medical research, and the distribution of the money.
Prop. 44 requires local health clinics, most that serve low-income patients, to spend 90% of their annual revenue on patient care and qualifying program services. Clinics that don’t meet the requirement would be fined.
Supporters of the measure attempted to put it on the ballot last year, but it failed. They argue that clinics should prioritize direct patient care, as more people are becoming uninsured under the Trump Administration. Opponents say clinics are already too heavily regulated.
Election day is Tuesday, November 3
Up until election day, voters can mail in their ballots or drop them off in election drop boxes. October 19 is the final day to register to vote in this midterm election.
