California Proposition 53, State and Local Infrastructure Investment Act (October 2003)
Proposition 53 would have increased the amount of California's General Fund revenue committed to pay-as-you-go capital outlay projects for both state and local governments.
Some of the specific provisions of Proposition 53 were:
- It would have required that specified percentages of General Fund revenues to be set-aside for acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, modernization, or renovation of infrastructure.
- Under Proposition 53, expenditures would have to be divided equally between state projects and local projects, other than school and community college district projects, including local street, transportation, water, park, and open space projects.
- The Proposition 98 school funding guarantee would have been unchanged by Proposition 53.
- The amount of first set-aside scheduled for 2006-07 would have been 1%; increasing 0.3% annually to 3% and then remaining fixed. Set-asides would have been subject to increase, decrease, or suspension with revenue increases and decreases.
If Proposition 53 had been enacted, it would have added an entirely new article (Article XVIA) to the California Constitution.
Text of measure
The ballot title was:
The question on the ballot was:
- "Should the state dedicate up to 3% of General Fund revenues annually to fund state and local (excluding school and community college) infrastructure projects?"
Proposition 53's ballot summary said:
- "Generally dedicates up to 3% of General Fund revenues annually to fund state and local (excluding school and community college) infrastructure projects. Fiscal Impact: Dedication of General Fund revenues for state and local infrastructure. Potential transfers of $850 million in 2006-07, increasing to several billions of dollars in future years, under specified conditions."
The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:
- "Requires dedication of state General Fund revenues for state and local "pay-as-you-go" infrastructure projects. Potential transfers of roughly $850 million in 2006-07, growing to several billions of dollars in future years. (Actual annual transfers could be less--or even zero--in some years due to various adjustments and triggers in the measure.)"
The campaign over Proposition 53 did not attract a great deal of spending; less than $30,000 was spent by both sides.
Path to the ballot
The California State Legislature voted to put Proposition 53 on the ballot with Assembly Constitutional Amendment 11, Resolution Chapter 185, Statutes of 2002) in accordance with the provisions of Article XVI of the California Constitution.
|Votes in legislature to refer to ballot|
- Official ballot proposition guide provided by the State of California
- Official declaration of vote results
- LAO's analysis
- Smart Voter guide to Proposition 53
- California Voter Foundation Guide to Proposition 53
- PDF of the 2003 mailed voter guide
- List of who endorsed Propositions 53 and 54 (dead link)
State of California
|Ballot measures by year||
1910 | 1911 | 1912 | 1914 | 1915 | 1916 | 1919 | 1920 | 1922 | 1924 | 1926 | 1928 | 1930 | 1932 | 1933 | 1934 | 1935 | 1936 | 1938 | 1939 | 1940 | 1942 | 1944 | 1946 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1952 | 1954 | 1956 | 1958 | 1960 | 1962 | 1964 | 1966 | 1968 | 1970 | 1972 | 1973 | 1974 | 1976 | 1978 | 1980 | 1982 | 1984 | 1986 | 1988 | 1990 | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1996 | 1998 | 2000 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2006 (local) | 2008 | 2008 (local) | 2009 | 2009 (local) | 2010 | 2010 (local) | 2011 (local) | 2012 | 2012 (local) | 2014 | 2016 |
|State executive offices||
Governor | Attorney General | Secretary of State | Controller | Treasurer | State Auditor | Superintendent of Public Instruction | Commissioner of Insurance | Secretary of Agriculture | Secretary for Natural Resources | Director of Industrial Relations | President of Public Utilities |