West Sacramento residents will see a lengthy ballot when they cast votes in the Nov. 3 election. Photo designed by Magnific

WEST SACRAMENTO, CA (MPG) – West Sacramento residents will see a lengthy ballot when they cast votes in the Nov. 3 election.

In addition to choosing statewide offices such as governor, local offices including city council and school board, and other races such as U.S. House of Representatives and California Supreme Court, voters will consider 14 citizen- or legislature-initiated ballot measures this election cycle – the most since 1994.

Proposition topics this year include voter ID, the billionaire tax and limits to the California Environmental Quality Act. 

California has a long history with initiatives dating back to 1911. Since then, more than 400 have been placed on the ballot by citizen initiatives and the California State Legislature.

The initiative process offers California voters a means to amend the state constitution. The term proposition is used for any ballot measure to be voted on by the people and can be an initiative or a referendum. A simple majority of votes is required for an initiative to pass.

Populist Gov. Hiram Johnson, elected in 1910, led the fight for direct democracy in the state. In a bid to offset the Southern Pacific Railroad political machine, which controlled much of California state government, Johnson pushed through California’s initiative, referendum and recall processes to help bolster the power of citizens.

“And while I do not by any means believe the initiative, the referendum, and the recall are the panacea for all our political ills, yet they do give to the electorate the power of action when desired, and they do place in the hands of the people the means by which they may protect themselves,” Johnson said in his first inaugural address on Jan. 3, 1911.

Some 115 years later, the ballot initiative process continues to give California citizens a way to propose laws and constitutional amendments. It is not without criticism, however.

“California’s version of direct democracy has led to some of the Golden State’s most notable – and infamous – policies,” the Hoover Institution wrote in 2016. “While California’s initiative system is often romanticized, its inflexibility often leads California down a path ripe with unintended consequences and few options for fixing past mistakes.”

Notable ballot measures include Prop. 13, the 1978 initiative that capped property taxes and required local and state governments to get two-thirds of the vote to introduce new taxes, and Prop. 4 in 1911, which granted women the constitutional right to vote in California.

Among the oddball measures that have made their way onto California ballots over the decades was Prop. 15, sponsored by movie theater owners in 1966, which banned cable television, and 1982’s Prop. 12, which required the governor to send letters to members of the federal government proposing that governments halt nuclear weapon production.

Some of this year’s measures are just as high-profile as those of the past.

Prop. 39 would prohibit citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification. It would invalidate mail-in ballots without the last four digits of a designated government-issued identification number written on the ballot envelope, and it would prohibit in-person voting without presenting an ID issued by a government entity.

Prop. 40 would impose a 5 percent tax on California residents with more than $1 billion in assets. If passed, it would be the first such state tax enacted in U.S. history. Concerns about Prop. 40 include a provision allowing the Legislature to amend the tax after passage and changing the level of taxation and the income levels of those who would have to pay it.

Other measures may not be as prominent, but deal with critical issues such as taxes, housing and healthcare:

Prop. 1 would borrow more than $11 billion for an array of affordable housing projects. 

Prop. 2 would allow the state to deposit up to 20 percent of its general fund tax revenue in the state’s reserves, double the current ceiling. “The deposits would not count toward the voter-approved Gann Limit, which caps the amount state lawmakers can spend each year and requires excess funds to be returned to the people,” according to CalMatters, a nonprofit news organization covering state politics. 

Prop. 3 would make permanent tax increases on top earners, first passed as a “temporary” measure in 2012 to deal with a fiscal emergency.

Prop. 4 would authorize state and local governments to establish public campaign funds for candidates, reversing a 1988 ban that applies to most government entities.

Prop. 5 would take away voters’ ability to choose a replacement for a recalled candidate at the time of recall. Placed on the ballot by state lawmakers, it would enable a recalled official to run in the ensuing election.

Prop. 37 would allow the state’s housing finance agency to borrow up to $25 billion in revenue bonds to provide middle-income buyers with loans covering as much as 17 percent of a new home’s price. 

Prop. 38 would create an $8.4 billion bond to help fund medical research. Half the money would almost certainly go to the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, an entity begun by the billionaires Gary K. Michelson and Meyer Luskin, who got the proposition on the ballot. The remainder would be distributed to select public universities and other institutes.

Prop. 41 and Prop. 42 were placed on the ballot as countermeasures to Prop. 40, the billionaires’ tax. Prop. 41 would require audits of new tax programs before they go to voters. Prop. 42 would make it more difficult to create a wealth tax in the state by prohibiting new taxes on the ownership of assets such as personal property, investment accounts and business interests. If either Prop. 41 or Prop. 42 passes, it could nullify Prop. 40, should it be approved.

Prop. 43, called the “Save Prop. 13” initiative, would make it harder to impose or increase local taxes by raising the threshold for citizen-initiated special tax ballot initiatives from a simple majority to fully two-thirds. 

Prop. 44, placed on the ballot by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, would dictate how nonprofit community health clinics can spend their money.

Prop. 45 would streamline the California Environmental Quality Act review process for housing projects and other key developments.