California Proposition 60A, Surplus Government Properties Revenue for Proposition 57 Bond Repayments Amendment (2004)
California Proposition 60A | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Election date November 2, 2004 | |
Topic State and local government budgets, spending and finance | |
Status![]() | |
Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
California Proposition 60A was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in California on November 2, 2004. It was approved.
A "yes" voted supported this constitutional amendment to dedicate revenue from government property surplus sales toward bond debt from Proposition 57, a $15 billion bond measure to finance budget deficits. |
A "no" voted opposed this constitutional amendment to dedicate revenue from government property surplus sales toward bond debt from Proposition 57. |
Overview
Proposition 60A dedicated revenue collected from the sale of surplus government properties toward repaying Proposition 57's $15.0 billion in general obligation bonds. Proposition 57 was approved in March 2004.
The ballot measure was a provision of Proposition 60, which was on the same ballot. Proposition 60 was challenged in court on the grounds that the proposal violated the state constitution's single-subject rule. In Californians for an Open Primary v. Shelley, petitioners asked the court to remove Proposition 60 from the ballot. On July 30, 2004, the California Third District Court of Appeal ruled that Proposition 60 could remain on the ballot, but that the proposal needed to be split into two separate ballot measures. The provision governing revenue from surplus properties was referred as Proposition 60A.
Election results
California Proposition 60A |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
7,776,374 | 73.23% | |||
No | 2,843,435 | 26.77% |
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 60A was as follows:
“ | Surplus Property. Legislative Constitutional Amendment. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
“ | Dedicates proceeds from sale of surplus state property purchased with General Fund monies to payment of principal, interest on Economic Recovery Bonds approved in March 2004. When those bonds are repaid, surplus property sales proceeds directed to Special Fund For Economic Uncertainties. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Constitutional changes
Proposition 60A added a Section 9 to Article III of the California Constitution. Section 9 read as follows:
The proceeds from the sale of surplus state property occurring on or after the effective date of this section, and any proceeds from the previous sale of surplus state property that have not been expended or encumbered as of that date, shall be used to pay the principal and interest on bonds issued pursuant to the Economic Recovery Bond Act authorized at the March 2, 2004, statewide primary election. Once the principal and interest on those bonds are fully paid, the proceeds from the sale of surplus state property shall be deposited into the Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties, or any successor fund. For purposes of this section, surplus state property does not include property purchased with revenues described in Article XIX or any other special fund moneys.[1]
Fiscal impact statement
The fiscal impact statement was as follows:
“ |
|
” |
Path to the ballot
A two-thirds vote was needed in each chamber of the California State Legislature to refer the constitutional amendment to the ballot for voter consideration.
Proposition 60A was voted onto the ballot by the California State Legislature via Senate Constitutional Amendment 18 of the 2003–2004 Regular Session (Resolution Chapter 103, Statutes of 2004).
Votes in legislature to refer to ballot | ||
---|---|---|
Chamber | Ayes | Noes |
Assembly | 55 | 21 |
Senate | 28 | 3 |
See also
External links
![]() |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |