2024 California Proposition 5
 | ||||||||||
ALLOWS LOCAL BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE WITH 55% VOTER APPROVAL. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. | ||||||||||
| Results | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| Elections in California |
|---|
 |
Proposition 5 is a California ballot proposition that was voted on as part of the 2024 California elections on November 5. It failed, with 55.0% of voters voting "no."[1] If passed, the proposition would have amended the California Constitution to reduce the supermajority requirement from two-thirds of the vote to 55% for local bond measures to fund affordable housing and some types of public infrastructure.[2]
Background
[edit]Most city and county bonds require voter approval in California, needing the support of at least two-thirds of voters to pass.[3] This requirement was put in place by Proposition 13 which was passed in 1978 and reduced property taxes.[4]
In 2000, Proposition 39 reduced the supermajority to 55% to approve taxes for local school bonds.[4] According to the California Policy Center, a conservative think tank, since Proposition 39 was passed, voters in California have decided on almost 1,150 school bond measures and have approved 911 of them.[5]
Proposition
[edit]Proposition 5 was placed on the ballot via legislative referral.[4] The legislation, called ACA 1, was authored by Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, Marc Berman, Matt Haney, Alex Lee, and Buffy Wicks.[6] It passed the California State Assembly on September 6, 2023 by 55 votes to 12, with 13 members not voting.[7] It passed the California State Senate on September 14, 2023 by 29 votes to 10, with one senator (Josh Newman) not voting.[7]
Proposition 5 would have allowed a city, county or special district in California to issue bonds with 55% voter approval, so long as the bonds were to fund affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, or public infrastructure.[7] The proposition would have gone into effect immediately if it had passed, meaning local bonds voted on at the November elections would only have needed 55% approval to pass.[8]
Politico suggested that a lower supermajority would mean more bond measures would pass, but also that more local governments would put them on the ballot to begin with.[2]
Campaign
[edit]The proposition's ballot label was challenged by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association who argued that it lacked important information that the proposition would reduce the supermajority rather than raising it.[9][10] Sacramento County Superior Court judge Shelleyanne W. L. Chang agreed and ordered the state government to rewrite the label.[11] The Third District Court of Appeal reversed Chang's ruling, finding that the ballot label was "factually accurate" and would not mislead voters.[4]
Support
[edit]Supporters of the proposition said that it gave local voters the power to address challenges facing their communities.[12] They suggested that Proposition 5 would make it easier for cities to fund their projects, such as affordable housing, safer streets initiatives, or additional fire stations.[8]
Supporters also argued that allowing just a third of voters to block measures is undemocratic.[3][13]
Endorsements
[edit]US Representatives
- Barbara Lee, US representative for California's 12th congressional district (2023-present)[14]
Newspapers
Organisations
Opposition
[edit]Those opposing the proposition argued that the proposition would make it easier for bond debt to increase, leading to higher property taxes.[12] It was also argued that Proposition 5 was an attempt by Democrats to dodge property tax restrictions under Proposition 13.[3]
They additionally highlighted that the proposition's wording, which they argued allowed a wide interpretation of what is an infrastructure project.[8]
Endorsements
[edit]Neutral/no endorsement
[edit]Polling
[edit]| Poll source | Date(s) administered |
Sample size[note 2] |
Margin of error |
Yes | No | Undecided |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Policy Institute of California | October 7–15, 2024 | 1137 (LV) | ± 3.7% | 48% | 50% | 3% |
| Public Policy Institute of California | August 29–September 9, 2024 | 1071 (LV) | ± 3.7% | 49% | 50% | 1% |
Results
[edit]The proposition failed, with 8,129,819 voters (55.0%) voting "no" and 6,640,122 voters (44.0%) voting "yes".[1][18] The Associated Press projected that Proposition 5 had failed on 8 November.[19]
Notes
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b "Proposition 5: Bonds for Affordable Housing and Infrastructure". California Secretary of State: Unofficial Results. November 6, 2024. Retrieved November 7, 2024.
- ^ a b Will McCarthy; Emily Schultheis (October 16, 2024). "Your Guide to California's 2024 Ballot Measures". Politico. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b c d e f g h "Make it easier for local governments to fund affordable housing, infrastructure projects". CalMatters. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b c d Bob Egelko (August 13, 2024). "Prop 5 ballot label doesn't have to mention 2/3 voter approval rule". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ Adhiti Bandlamudi (November 5, 2024). "Voters Turn Down Proposition 5, but Some Local Bond Measures May Pass Anyway". KQED. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ "ACA-1 Local government financing: affordable housing and public infrastructure: voter approval.(2023-2024) - Status". California State Legislature. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b c "ACA 1: Local government financing: affordable housing and public infrastructure: voter approval". Digital Democracy CalMatters. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b c Dave Pehling (November 5, 2024). "California Proposition 5 would lower the votes required to pass local bond measures. Here's what to know". CBS News. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ Alan Riquelmy (August 1, 2024). "Taxpayer group sues California claiming ballot language misleads". Courthouse News Service. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ Catherine Allen; Will McCarthy; Emily Schultheis (August 12, 2024). "The ballot measures racking up small-dollar donations". Politico. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ Alan Riquelmy (August 8, 2024). "California judge rules that ballot label for November referendum needs rewrite". Courthouse News Service. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b "Prop 5 - ALLOWS LOCAL BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE WITH 55% VOTER APPROVAL. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT". California Secretary of State. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b "Endorsement: Yes on Prop. 5. It's too hard to pass local bond measures". Los Angeles Times. September 20, 2024. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b c d e f "Our Coalition". Yes on Prop 5. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ a b Emily Schultheis; Will McCarthy (October 16, 2024). "The shifting shapes of this year's California ballot-measure coalitions". Politico. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ "Election Center - Current Endorsements". Equality California. Retrieved October 17, 2024.
- ^ "Recommendation on Prop 5 (2024)". League of Women Voters of California. Retrieved November 6, 2024.
- ^ Christopher, Ben (July 24, 2024). "California Proposition 5: Lower Voting Threshold". CalMatters. Retrieved November 7, 2024.
- ^ Daniel Macht (November 8, 2024). "California Prop 5: Voting change for affordable housing, infrastructure projects fails, AP projects". KCRA. Archived from the original on November 9, 2024. Retrieved November 12, 2024.