Ballot Measure Breakdown: Its Official
July 11, 2024
The Secretary of State has released the official proposition numbers and titles for the November 2024 ballot measures. June 27th marked the final deadline for proponents of citizen-led initiatives to withdraw their ballot measures from appearing on the November ballot. Since the last update from CSAC, two late-breaking bond measures passed out of the legislature just before the break for summer recess.
Voters will be tasked with deciding the fate of ten measures on the upcoming November 5 ballot. A downloadable table of the qualified ballot measures is available here.
*Note: Assembly Constitutional Amendment 13 has been moved to appear on the November 2026 ballot as a result of the passage of Assembly Bill 440. CSAC’s Board of Directors voted to support the measure on April 19, 2024.
Origin: Legislature (Assembly Bill 247)
Summary: This bond measure would allow the state to borrow $10 billion to fund repairs and upgrades for K-12 schools and community colleges.
Proposition 3 – Marriage Equality
Origin: Legislature (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 5)
Summary: Currently, the California Constitution only recognizes marriages between a man and a woman. This measure would revise this provision to instead provide that marriage is a fundamental right. The original provision has not been enforceable since the United States’ Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015 that requires all states to recognize and grant same-sex marriages.
Fiscal Analysis from Senate Appropriations Committee: This measure is estimated to result in minimal and absorbable one-time costs for the SOS for printing and mailing expenses associated with placing the measure on the ballot. There are no immediate anticipated fiscal impacts to local governments as a result of this measure.
Origin: Legislature (Senate Bill 867)
CSAC Position: This measure has been referred to CSAC’s Agriculture, Environment, and Natural Resources policy committee for consideration. The policy committee will meet on Monday, July 29 at 1:00pm via Zoom to consider this measure. Click here to register to attend.
Summary: This bond measure would allow the state to borrow $10 billion to fund climate and environmental projects. The bond would support projects to provide clean water, enhance water recycling facilities, and add capacity to California’s ground water storage. This bond will also create new parks, protect wildlife and habitats, fight air pollution, address extreme heat and fund sustainable agriculture.
Fiscal Analysis: The Legislative Analyst’s Office is currently drafting their analysis on the bond measures, developing an expert understanding of the fiscal impact of these bonds and what the future debt serving will look like.
Origin: Legislature (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1, as amended by Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10)
CSAC Position: The CSAC Board of Directors voted to support this measure on April 19, 2024, but will need to reconsider its position due to recent amendments. (CSAC Support Letter) The CSAC Government Finance and Administration policy committee will meet in late July to consider the amendments (date and time TBD).
Summary: Proposition 5, as amended via ACA 10, would reduce vote requirements for general obligation bonds financing affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, or public infrastructure, as defined, and any associated ad valorem taxes needed to pay the interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness. The previous version of this measure would have reduced vote requirements for special taxes to raise revenue for those same categories.
Fiscal Analysis from Senate Appropriations Committee: This measure is estimated to result in minimal and absorbable one-time costs for the SOS for printing and mailing expenses associated with placing the measure on the ballot. There are no immediate anticipated fiscal impacts to local governments as a result of this measure.
Origin: Legislature (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8)
Summary: Slavery and involuntary servitude are currently prohibited under the California Constitution, except unless used as a punishment for a crime. If approved by voters, Proposition 6 would prohibit slavery and involuntary servitude beginning January 1, 2025. This measure also ensures that the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) shall not discipline an incarcerated person for refusing a work assignment but would allow CDCR to continue to award credits to those who voluntarily accept a work assignment. AB 628 (Wilson), a companion bill to this measure, would ensure that compensation levels for work conducted in state prison are set by regulations promulgated by the Secretary of CDCR, and for work conducted in county jails, set by local ordinance. AB 628 only becomes operative should this measure be approved by the voters in November.
Fiscal Analysis from Senate Appropriations Committee: This measure has unknown, but potentially significant ongoing state costs (General Fund) to CDCR as a result of prohibiting involuntary servitude in state prisons. This measure also has unknown, but potentially significant non-reimbursable ongoing local costs (local funds) for local correctional facilities as a result of prohibiting involuntary servitude in local jails.
Proposition 32 – Raises Minimum Wage
Origin: Citizen-led initiative
Proponents: Joe Sanberg, Blue Apron Founding Investor
Summary: If passed, this measure will make changes to the annual scheduled minimum wage increases. These increases would be extended until the minimum wage reaches $18.00 per hour.
Fiscal Analysis from the LAO: It is unclear what the change in annual state and local tax revenues would be, likely between a loss of a couple billion dollars and a gain of a few hundred million dollars. Increase in annual state and local government costs likely between half a billion dollars and a few billion dollars.
Proposition 33 – Expanding Local Government’s Authority to enact rent control
Origin: Citizen-led initiative
Proponents: AIDS Healthcare Foundation, UNITE Here Local 11
Summary: The Costa-Hawkin Rental Housing Act of 1995 limits cities and counties from enacting initial rental rate limits for new tenants in all types of housing. This measure would repeal this law, granting cities and counties the right to establish, maintain, enact or expand residential rent control ordinances.
Fiscal Analysis from the LAO: Overall, a potential reduction in state and local revenues in the high tens of millions of dollars per year over time. Depending on actions by local communities, revenue losses could vary.
Proposition 34 – Restricts spending by health care providers meeting specified criteria
Origin: Citizen-led initiative
Proponent: California Apartment Association
Summary: This measure will mandate certain health care providers spend 98% of revenues from federal discount prescription drug on direct patient care. Those not in compliance with the law will be penalized by revoking their license and tax-exempt status.
Fiscal Analysis from the LAO: This measure will result in increased costs to state, potentially up to the millions of dollars annually, to review entities’ compliance with the measure and enforce the measure’s provisions. These costs would be covered by fees created under the measure. Uncertain fiscal impacts to state and local government health programs, depending on how the affected entities respond to the measure’s requirements.
Proposition 35 – Provides permanent funding for Medi-Cal health care services
Origin: Citizen-led initiative
CSAC Position: This measure has been referred to CSAC’s Health and Human Services policy committee for consideration. The policy committee will meet on Monday, July 22 at 12:00pm via Zoom to consider this measure. Click here to register to attend.
Proponents: Coalition to Protect Access to Care, which includes but is not limited to California Medical Association, California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems, Global Medical Response, California Hospital Association, and Planned Parenthood
Summary: The Managed Care Organization (MCO) tax is a tax on managed care organizations based on health insurance enrollment in the Medi Cal program and in the commercial sector. The 2023 Budget Act, in addition to federal approval, authorized the MCO tax from April 2023 to December 2026. The MCO tax revenues offset General Fund spending in the existing Medi-Cal program and support program augmentations. This initiative would make the MCO tax permanent, subject to federal approval, and would limit the structure of the tax, and would establish specific uses for the tax revenue.
Fiscal Analysis from the LAO: This measure will have uncertain overall impact on state revenues and spending, including reduced legislative flexibility over the use of MCO tax funds. The extent of this impact depends on whether the measure would result in different state decisions around imposing, structuring, and spending proceeds from the managed care organization tax than in the absence of the measure.
Proposition 36 – Allows felony charges and increases sentences for certain drug and theft crimes
Origin: Citizen-led initiative
CSAC Position: This measure has been referred to CSAC’s Public Safety policy committee for consideration. The policy committee will meet in late July to consider this measure (date and time TBD).
Proponents: California District Attorneys Association, Target, and Home Depot USA
Summary: This measure attempts to make targeted reforms to Proposition 47 of 2014 which made possession of certain drugs and thefts under $950 chargeable only as misdemeanors. For those with two prior drug or two prior theft convictions, this would make those drug possessions and theft crimes eligible for felony classification.
Fiscal Analysis from the LAO: This measure will result in increased state criminal justice system costs potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually, primarily due to an increase in the state prison population. Some of these costs could be offset by reductions in state spending on local mental health and substance use services, truancy and dropout prevention, and victim services due to requirements in current law. Increased local criminal justice system costs potentially in the tens of millions of dollars annually, primarily due to increased court-related workload and a net increase in the number of people in county jail and under county community supervision.
