By Adam Echelman, CalMatters
A voter casts their ballot at a polling site in Modoc Hall at the Sacramento State campus in Sacramento on March 5, 2024. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
Voters are deciding the fate of 14 statewide propositions, including the contentious billionaire tax. The campaigns for and against these propositions have spent a total of nearly $1 billion — the most in history on state ballot measures.
Beyond the billionaire tax, Californians are facing decisions on a wide range of topics, including how recall elections are conducted, speeding development by capping environmental reviews, and whether the state should put more money toward housing and medical research.
This story will be updated as election results come in.
Prop. 1: This measure authorizes the state to borrow up to $11.25 billion toward housing construction and renovations, mostly for rental units. Many developers and local governments that receive the money would have to reserve a portion of it for affordable housing for low-income renters or for specialized housing that serves the homeless.
The measure passed, with 59% of voters in favor of the bond as of 11:00 p.m.
Prop. 2: Voters decided to allow the state to deposit more money into its reserves, otherwise known as the rainy day fund. California has a fairly volatile tax system that rises and falls with the incomes of its highest earners, but 1970s-era state rules limit how much money the state can save in surplus years.
The measure passedwith 60% of voters supporting it as of 10:00 p.m., according to the Associated Press.
Prop. 3: This income tax for high earners would send more money to K-12 education. First passed in 2012 as a temporary measure, this tax, which affects individuals making over $360,000 a year, would become permanent if voters approve Prop. 3.
The measure passed, with nearly 59% of voters in favor as of 2.55 a.m.
Prop. 4: This measure would allow the state and local governments to create public financing for political campaigns, which proponents say could help cap political spending. In order to accept public money for campaigns, candidates usually have to accept certain spending limits.
No is leading, with nearly 52% of voters opposed as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 5: California’s recall elections ask voters whether they want to oust the officeholder and who they want instead. This measure would make it so that recall elections only ask whether voters want to remove the elected official from office. A second election would determine who should replace the officeholder.
Yes is leading, with a slim margin as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 37: The state would create a new fund that gives out loans to middle-class homebuyers if Prop. 37 passes. Homebuyers who benefit from the fund would slowly pay back the state.
The measure passed with more than 61% of voters supporting it as of 10:00 p.m., according to the Associated Press.
Prop. 38: This measure would pump $8.4 billion in state funding to immunology research — with a catch: About half the money would go to one, three-person nonprofit organization, the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. Gary K. Michelson, the institute’s co-founder, put this proposition on the ballot.
Yes is leading, with 57% of voters in favor as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 39: This ballot proposition would increase identification requirements for California voters. This campaign, funded in large part by Illinois billionaire Richard Uihlein, would require state voters to provide proof of citizenship at the polls or write their Social Security number or other government-issued ID number on mail-in ballots.
The measure will failwith more than 60% of voters opposing it as of 10:00 p.m., according to the Associated Press.
Prop. 40: The contentious billionaire tax would enact a one-time 5% tax on billionaires’ net worth. The healthcare workers union that put the measure on the ballot says it would raise roughly $100 billion over five years and help struggling healthcare programs. Opponents point out that billionaires pay a large share of state taxes already and worry it could cause them to flee the state.
No is leading, with just over 56% of voters opposed as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 41: Created by the opponents to the billionaire tax, this measure would invalidate Prop. 40 by creating stricter rules about new California taxes. If both Prop. 40 and Prop. 41 pass, whichever gets more votes will prevail.
No is leading, with nearly 53% of voters opposed as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 42: Also created by the opponents to the billionaire tax, Prop. 42 would make it harder for the state to levy a new tax on wealth, such as investment accounts or personal property, and effectively invalidate the billionaire tax. If voters approve both Prop. 40 and Prop. 42, the measure with the most votes will win.
Yes is leading, with more than 54% of voters in favor as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 43: This measure would make it harder for local citizen-driven tax measures to pass. These local tax measures only need a majority to win, but if Prop. 43 passes, they would need two-thirds of the vote.
No is leading, with more than 54% of voters opposed as of 10:00 p.m.
Prop. 44: Health clinics would need to spend at least 90% of their annual revenue on patient care if Prop. 44 passes. The measure is backed by the same union that proposed the billionaire tax, Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West.
The measure will fail with more than 81% of voters opposing it as of 10:00 p.m., according to the Associated Press.
Prop. 45: Voters will decide whether to pare down California’s landmark environmental review law, known as CEQA. The 1970 law requires agencies to consider environmental harm before building, but developers say the law is often a tool to delay much-needed affordable housing and infrastructure projects.
No is leading, with more than 54% of voters opposed as of 10:00 p.m.
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.