California Proposition 1A, Transportation Funding Protection (2006)

This page is about a 2006 California proposition labeled "Proposition 1A." Consult the Proposition 1A disambiguation page if you are looking for a different Proposition 1A.

---

California Proposition 1A was on the November 7, 2006 ballot in California as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved.

Proposition 1A amended the California Constitution in a way that limits the conditions under which the Proposition 42 transfer of gasoline sales tax revenues for transportation uses can be suspended.

With respect to the suspensions allowed under Proposition 42, Proposition 1A says:

• Such suspensions must be treated as loans to the state's General Fund that must be repaid in full, including interest, within three years of suspension.
• Proposition 42 suspensions can take place at most twice in ten consecutive fiscal years.
• A new suspension cannot be ordered until all prior suspensions have been repaid in full.

By the time of the vote on Proposition 1A, Proposition 42 suspensions had taken place in 2003-04 and 2004-05. Proposition 1A changed the repayment schedule of those suspensions, ordering that the suspended amounts must be repaid and dedicated to transportation uses not later than June 30, 2016.

Election results

Proposition 1A
Result		Votes	Percentage
a Yes		6,400,587	77.0%
No		1,916,925	23.0%

Constitutional changes

If Proposition 1A had been approved, it would have amended Section 1 of Article XIX B of the California Constitution.

Text of measure

Title

The ballot title was:

Transportation Funding Protection. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.

Question

The question on the ballot was:

"Should the California Constitution be amended to further protect transportation-related state sales tax revenues from general-purpose use and require that any funds borrowed be repaid to the transportation fund?"

Summary

The official summary provided to describe Proposition 1A said:

• Protects transportation funding for traffic congestion relief projects, safety improvements, and local streets and roads.
• Prohibits the state sales tax on motor vehicle fuels from being used for any purpose other than transportation improvements.
• Authorizes loans of these funds only in the case of severe state fiscal hardship. Requires loans of revenues from states sales tax on motor vehicle fuels to be fully repaid within the three years. Restricts loans to no more than twice in any 10-year period.

Fiscal impact

See also: Fiscal impact statement

The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:

"No direct revenue or cost effects. Increases stability of funding for state and local transportation uses in 2007 and thereafter; reduces somewhat the state’s authority to use these funds for other, nontransportation priorities."

Support

Voting on Transportation
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local transportation Red light cameras Registration tax

Supporters

The official voter guide arguments in favor of Proposition 1A were signed by:

• Thomas V. McKernan, President, Automobile Club of Southern California (AAA)
• Michael Brown, Commissioner, California Highway Patrol
• Marian Bergeson, chair, California Transportation Commission
• Steve Krull, President, California Police Chiefs Association
• Mark Watts, Interim Executive Director, Transportation California
• Allan Zaremberg, President, California Chamber of Commerce

Arguments in favor

Arguments in the official voter guide in favor of Proposition 1A emphasized:

• Proposition 1A stops gas taxes from being allocated to non-transportation related projects
• Improve highways resulting in less traffic congestion
• Part of the "Rebuild California" project that will improve California for future generations and provide the resources needed for the tremendous growth that the state continues to see

Donors

Donors to the campaign in favor of a "yes" vote on Proposition 1A included:

• Rebuilding California, Yes on Propositions 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D an 1E: $9,235,090

• Californians to Improve Traffic Now/Yes on 1A and 1B: $8,363,947

• Citizens for a More Liveable California: $596,000

• Citizens for Responsible Elections: $30,000

• CMTE for California's Future: $29,500

• Total: $18,254,537

Opposition

Opponents

The official voter guide arguments opposing Proposition 1A were signed by:

• Jackie Goldberg, Chair, California State Assembly Education Committee.

Arguments opposing

• Proposition 1A would reduce the amount of funding for k-12 public schools and would result in an increase in state college tuition fees.

Path to the ballot

The California State Legislature voted to put Proposition 1A on the ballot via Senate Constitutional Amendment 7 of the 2005–2006 Regular Session (Resolution Chapter 49, Statutes of 2006).

Votes in legislature to refer to ballot
Chamber	Ayes	Noes
Assembly	58	11
Senate	38	0

External links

Suggest a link

• Official Proposition 1A voter guide
• PDF of the mailed November 7, 2006 voter guide for Propositions 1A-1E and 83-90
• Proposition 1A on the Smart Voter Guide
• Analysis of Proposition 1A from the Institute of Governmental Studies
• Guide to Proposition 1A from the California Voter Foundation
• Summary of donors to and against 1A from Cal-Access
• Donors for and against Proposition 1A from Follow The Money
• Official November 7, 2006 California ballot proposition election results

Additional reading

• Political Review: California Proposition 1A
• Paying for our transportation needs, Martin Wachs, October 25, 2006