Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
California Remove Voter Approval Requirement for Public Low-Rent Housing Projects Amendment (2024)
California Remove Voter Approval Requirement for Public Low-Rent Housing Projects Amendment | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Election date November 5, 2024 | |
Topic Housing | |
Status Not on the ballot | |
Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
The California Remove Voter Approval Requirement for Public Low-Rent Housing Projects Amendment was not on the ballot in California as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024.
A "yes" vote would have supported amending the California Constitution to repeal Article 34, which required local voter approval via a ballot measure for federal and/or state government-funded housing projects classified as low rent. |
A "no" vote would have opposes this constitutional amendment, thereby maintaining the local voter approval requirement for publicly-funded housing projects classified as low rent. |
The measure was removed from the ballot by the state legislature with the passage of Senate Concurrent Resolution 157.
Overview
How would the amendment have affected public low-rent housing projects in California?
- See also: Text of measure
The ballot measure would have repealed Article 34 of the California Constitution, which was enacted in 1950 via Proposition 10. Article 34 requires local voter approval by a simple majority for rental housing projects that receive funding or assistance from the federal and/or state government and are intended for persons of low income. Therefore, the ballot measure would have allowed rental housing projects intended for persons of low income and receiving government funding or assistance to be developed, constructed, or acquired without a local referendum. The constitution defines a person of low income as "persons or families who lack the amount of income which is necessary (as determined by the state public body developing, constructing, or acquiring the housing project) to enable them, without financial assistance, to live in decent, safe and sanitary dwellings, without overcrowding." As of 2024, California is the only state with such a constitutional requirement.[1][2]
How does the state define low-rent housing projects?
As of 2024, the constitution defined low-rent housing project to mean "any development composed of urban or rural dwellings, apartments or other living accommodations for persons of low income, financed in whole or in part by the Federal Government or a state public body or to which the Federal Government or a state public body extends assistance by supplying all or part of the labor, by guaranteeing the payment of liens, or otherwise." Publicly funded projects where less than 50% of the units are for low-income households are exempt from Article 34's voter approval requirement.[1][3]
Have there been other ballot measures to repeal Article 34?
- See also: Efforts to repeal
Since its adoption, the state legislature has placed three constitutional amendments on the ballot to repeal it in 1974, 1980, and 1993. All three measures were defeated by voters with at least 58.93% or more of the vote.
Text of measure
Constitutional changes
- See also: Article 34, California Constitution
The measure would have repealed Article 34 of the California Constitution. The following text would have been deleted:[2]
Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.
Section 1
No low rent housing project shall hereafter be developed, constructed, or acquired in any manner by any state public body until, a majority of the qualified electors of the city, town or county, as the case may be, in which it is proposed to develop, construct, or acquire the same, voting upon such issue, approve such project by voting in favor thereof at an election to be held for that purpose, or at any general or special election.
For the purposes of this Article the term "low rent housing project" shall mean any development composed of urban or rural dwellings, apartments or other living accommodations for persons of low income, financed in whole or in part by the Federal Government or a state public body or to which the Federal Government or a state public body extends assistance by supplying all or part of the labor, by guaranteeing the payment of liens, or otherwise. For the purposes of this Article only there shall be excluded from the term "low rent housing project" any such project where there shall be in existence on the effective date hereof, a contract for financial assistance between any state public body and the Federal Government in respect to such project.
For the purposes of this Article only "persons of low income" shall mean persons or families who lack the amount of income which is necessary (as determined by the state public body developing, constructing, or acquiring the housing project) to enable them, without financial assistance, to live in decent, safe and sanitary dwellings, without overcrowding.
For the purposes of this Article the term "state public body" shall mean this State, or any city, city and county, county, district, authority, agency, or any other subdivision or public body of this State.
For the purposes of this Article the term "Federal Government" shall mean the United States of America, or any agency or instrumentality, corporate or otherwise, of the United States of America.
Section 2
The provisions of this Article shall be self-executing but legislation not in conflict herewith may be enacted to facilitate its operation.
Section 3
If any portion, section or clause of this article, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall for any reason be declared unconstitutional or held invalid, the remainder of this Article, or the application of such portion, section or clause to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.
Section 4
The provisions of this Article shall supersede all provisions of this Constitution and laws enacted thereunder in conflict therewith.
[4]
Support
Supporters
Officials
- State Sen. Ben Allen (D)
- State Sen. Scott Wiener (D)
Political Parties
Organizations
Arguments
Opposition
Ballotpedia did not locate a campaign in opposition to the ballot measure.
Campaign finance
If you are aware of a committee registered to support or oppose this amendment, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.
Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Support | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Total | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
Background
California Proposition 10 (1950)
In 1950, voters approved Proposition 10, an initiated constitutional amendment that enacted Article 34 of the California Constitution requiring voter approval of a ballot measure to authorize publicly funded low-rent housing projects. It was sponsored by the California Real Estate Association. It was approved by a margin of 50.78% to 49.22%.[5]
Efforts to repeal
Since its adoption, the state legislature has placed three constitutional amendments on the ballot to repeal it.
In November 1974, California voters defeated Proposition 15, which would have repealed the constitutional voter requirement. It was defeated by a vote of 61.28% to 38.72%.
In June 1980, California voters defeated Proposition 4, which would have repealed the local voter referendum requirement and replaced it with a referendum option on the project if 10% of voters signed a petition. It was defeated by a margin of 58.93% to 41.07%.
In November 1993, California voters defeated another attempt to repeal the requirement with the defeat of Proposition 168, which like the 1980 measure would have added a citizen-initiated referendum option on housing projects. It was defeated by a margin of 59.82% to 40.18%.
James v. Valtierra (1971)
In 1971, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 5-3 ruling that Article 34 was constitutional after a legal challenge was filed arguing that it violated the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The lawsuit was filed by citizens of San Jose and San Mateo County, California, where local referendums were defeated keeping local housing authorities from applying for federal funds for low-rent housing.
The majority opinion of the court written by Justice Hugo L. Black said, "This procedure ensures that all the people of a community will have a voice in a decision which may lead to large expenditures of local governmental funds for increased public services and to lower tax revenues. It gives them a voice in decisions that will affect the future development of their own community. This procedure for democratic decisionmaking does not violate the constitutional command that no State shall deny to any person 'the equal protection of the laws.'"[6]
The dissent argued it did violate the Equal Protection Clause writing, "It is far too late in the day to contend that the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits only racial discrimination; and to me, singling out the poor to bear a burden not placed on any other class of citizens tramples the values that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to protect."[6]
Local ballot measures for low-rent housing authorization, 2016-2022
Ballotpedia tracked 15 local ballot measures in 14 jurisdictions between 2016 and 2022 that authorized additional units for public low-rent housing projects. All 15 measures were approved. The average "yes" vote percentage for the measures was 68.17%.
Year | Jurisdiction | Title | Yes vote | No vote | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2022 | Los Angeles | Proposition LH | 70.45% | 29.55% | ![]() |
2022 | Berkeley | Measure N | 76.13% | 23.87% | ![]() |
2022 | Oakland | Measure Q | 80.07% | 19.93% | ![]() |
2022 | South San Francisco | Measure AA | 58.85% | 41.15% | ![]() |
2022 | Sacramento | Measure D | 60.90% | 39.10% | ![]() |
2020 | Arcata | Measure B | 74.19% | 25.81% | ![]() |
2020 | El Monte | Measure HN | 69.28% | 30.72% | ![]() |
2020 | Humboldt County | Measure I | 67.40% | 32.60% | ![]() |
2020 | San Francisco | Proposition K | 73.52% | 26.48% | ![]() |
2018 | Healdsburg | Measure P | 55.76% | 44.24% | ![]() |
2018 | Stockton | Measure K | 75.86% | 24.14% | ![]() |
2016 | Berkeley | Measure Z1 | 83.34% | 16.66% | ![]() |
2016 | Eureka | Measure O | 57.85% | 42.15% | ![]() |
2016 | San Diego | Measure M | 66.41% | 33.59% | ![]() |
2016 | Tuolumne County | Measure K | 52.56% | 47.44% | ![]() |
Path to the ballot
- See also: Amending the California Constitution
In California, a two-thirds vote is needed in each chamber of the California State Legislature to refer a constitutional amendment to the ballot for voter consideration.
Senators Ben Allen (D) and Scott Wiener (D) introduced the constitutional amendment as Senate Constitutional Amendment 2 (SCA 2) on December 7, 2020. On January 26, 2022, the California State Senate passed SCA 2 in a unanimous vote of 37-0 with three senators absent. On August 31, 2022, the California State Assembly passed SCA 2 in a unanimous vote of 73-0 with seven assembly members absent. On September 6, 2023, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 789 (SB 789) to move the amendment from the March 5 primary ballot to the November general election ballot.[2][7]
The amendment was removed from the ballot with the passage of Senate Concurrent Resolution 157. Sen. Ben Allen (D) explained the removal saying, "While (the repeal) was one of many efforts to help address the housing crisis, the November ballot will be very crowded and reaching voters will be difficult and expensive."[8][9]
|
|
How to cast a vote
- See also: Voting in California
See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in California.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 California Legislative Information, "Article XXXIV," accessed December 22, 2022
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 California State Legislature, "SCA 2," accessed January 27, 2022
- ↑ Mercury News, "California’s ‘racist’ Article 34 remains an obstacle to affordable housing," September 26, 2022
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>
tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Los Angeles Times, "California voters to decide on repeal of anti-public housing measure in 2024," accessed September 19, 2023
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 U.S. Supreme Court, James v. Valtierra, decided April 26, 1971
- ↑ California State Legislature, "Senate Bill 789," accessed September 7, 2023
- ↑ ABC News, "California lawmakers abandon attempt to repeal law requiring voter approval for some public housing," June 24, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "SCR 157," accessed June 24, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Section 3: Polling Place Hours," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Voter Registration," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 California Secretary of State, "Registering to Vote," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "Same Day Voter Registration (Conditional Voter Registration)," accessed August 13, 2024
- ↑ SF.gov, "Non-citizen voting rights in local Board of Education elections," accessed November 14, 2024
- ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
- ↑ California Secretary of State, "What to Bring to Your Polling Place," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, "Section 20107," accessed August 12, 2024
- ↑ Democracy Docket, "California Governor Signs Law to Ban Local Voter ID Requirements," September 30, 2024
![]() |
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 |