California Proposition 2, Use Millionaire's Tax Revenue for Homelessness Prevention Housing Bonds Measure (2018)

Elections in California, 2018

• General election: Nov. 6
• Voter registration deadline: Oct. 22
• Early voting: Oct. 8 - Nov. 5
• Absentee voting deadline: Postmark Nov. 6

• Online registration: Yes
• Same-day registration: Yes
• Voter ID: No
• Poll times: 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

---

On the ballot: U.S. Senate • U.S. House • Governor • Lt. Gov • Attorney General • Secretary of State • State executive offices • State Senate • State Assembly • Special state legislative • Supreme court • Appellate courts • Local judges • State ballot measures • Local ballot measures • School boards • Municipal • Recalls • Primaries in California, 2018

California Proposition 2
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Taxes and Housing
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin State legislature
List of California measuresCalifornia Proposition 68 - JuneCalifornia Proposition 69 - JuneCalifornia Proposition 70 - JuneCalifornia Proposition 71 - JuneCalifornia Proposition 72 - JuneCalifornia Proposition 1California Proposition 2California Proposition 3California Proposition 4California Proposition 5California Proposition 6California Proposition 7California Proposition 8California Proposition 10California Proposition 11California Proposition 12Submit

California Proposition 2, the Use Millionaire's Tax Revenue for Homelessness Prevention Housing Bonds Measure, was on the ballot in California as a legislatively referred state statute on November 6, 2018. The measure was approved.

A yes vote supported authorizing the state to use revenue from Proposition 63 (2004)—a 1 percent tax on income above $1 million for mental health services—on $2 billion in revenue bonds for homelessness prevention housing for persons in need of mental health services.

A no vote opposed authorizing the state to use revenue from Proposition 63 (2004) on $2 billion in revenue bonds for homelessness prevention housing for persons in need of mental health services.

Election results

California Proposition 2
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		7,662,528	63.43%
No		4,417,327	36.57%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

Why was Proposition 2 on the ballot?

The California State Legislature passed legislation to spend revenue from Proposition 63 on revenue bonds for homelessness prevention housing in 2016. The legislation, however, did not go into effect because of pending litigation over whether revenue from the millionaire's tax could be spent on homelessness prevention housing. Unlike general obligation bonds, revenue bonds do not require a public vote in California. Proposition 2 was referred to the ballot because the revenue for the bond would come from a tax that was created through a ballot initiative, Proposition 63. In California, changes to ballot initiatives require a vote of the public.

What other ballot propositions address housing in California?

Voters in California decided four ballot propositions related to housing on November 6, 2018—the most ever to appear on a state's ballot in one year according to Ballotpedia’s catalog of housing-related ballot measures. Besides Proposition 2, voters decided the following three housing-related ballot propositions:

• Proposition 1 (a) authorized $4 billion in bonds for affordable housing programs, loans, grants, as well as housing loans for veterans.
• Proposition 5 (d) would have removed restrictions on allowing seniors (ages 55+) and persons with serve disabilities to transfer their tax assessments, with a possible adjustment, from their prior home to their new home.
• Proposition 10 (d) would have allowed local governments to adopt rent control on any type of housing.

Supporters of Propositions 1, 2, 5, and 10 all argued that their ballot measures would help address the housing situation, such as rent prices, real estate values, and available housing, in California.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The official ballot title was as follows:

“

Authorizes Bonds to Fund Existing Housing Program for Individuals With Mental Illness. Legislative Statute.

”

Ballot summary

The official ballot summary was as follows:

“

Ratifies existing law establishing the No Place Like Home Program, which finances permanent housing for individuals with mental illness who are homeless or at risk for chronic homelessness, as being consistent with the Mental Health Services Act approved by the electorate. Ratifies issuance of up to $2 billion in previously authorized bonds to finance the No Place Like Home Program. Amends the Mental Health Services Act to authorize transfers of up to $140 million annually from the existing Mental Health Services Fund to the No Place Like Home Program, with no increase in taxes.

”

Fiscal impact

The fiscal impact statement was as follows:

“

Allows the state to use up to $140 million per year of county mental health funds to repay up to $2 billion in bonds. These bonds would fund housing for those with mental illness who are homeless.

”

Full text

The measure amended state Welfare and Institutions Code, including Proposition 63 (2004). The following underlined text was added and struck-through text was deleted:

AB 1827, Committee on Budget. No Place Like Home Act of 2018. SECTION 1. The voters hereby find and declare that housing is a key factor for stabilization and recovery from mental illness and results in improved outcomes for individuals living with a mental illness. The Mental Health Services Act, an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, must therefore be amended to provide for the expenditure of funds from the Mental Health Services Fund to the No Place Like Home Program established pursuant to Part 3.9 (commencing with Section 5849.1) of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, which finances the acquisition, design, construction, rehabilitation, or preservation of permanent supportive housing for individuals living with a severe mental illness who are homeless or at risk of chronic homelessness. SEC. 2. Section 1, this section, and Sections 3 to 7, inclusive, shall be known, and may be cited, as the No Place Like Home Act of 2018. SEC. 3. Section 5849.35 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read: 5849.35. (a) The authority may do all of the following: (1) Consult with the commission and the State Department of Health Care Services concerning the implementation of the No Place Like Home Program, including the review of annual reports provided to the authority by the department pursuant to Section 5849.11. (2) Enter into one or more single-year or multiyear contracts with the department for the department to provide, and the authority to pay the department for providing, services described in Sections 5849.7, 5849.8, and 5849.9, related to permanent supportive housing for the target population. population and to provide for payments to the department from amounts on deposit in the Supportive Housing Program Subaccount created within the Mental Health Services Fund pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 5890. Before entering into any contract pursuant to this paragraph, the executive director of the authority shall transmit to the commission a copy of the contract in substantially final form. The contract shall be deemed approved by the commission unless it acts within 10 days to disapprove the contract. (3) On or before June 15 and December 15 of each year, the authority shall certify to the Controller the amounts the authority is required to pay as provided in Section 5890 for the following six-month period to the department pursuant to any service contract entered into pursuant to paragraph (2). (b) The department may do all of the following: (1) Enter into one or more single-year or multiyear contracts with the authority to provide services described in Sections 5849.7, 5849.8, and 5849.9, related to permanent supportive housing for the target population. population and to receive payments from amounts on deposit in the Supportive Housing Program Subaccount pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 5890. Payments received by the department under any service contract authorized by this paragraph shall be used, before any other allocation or distribution, to repay loans from the authority pursuant to Section 15463 of the Government Code. (2) Enter into one or more loan agreements with the authority as security for the repayment of the revenue bonds issued by the authority pursuant to Section 15463 of the Government Code. The department shall deposit the proceeds of these loans, excluding any refinancing loans to redeem, refund, or retire bonds, into the fund. The department’s obligations to make payments under these loan agreements shall be limited obligations payable solely from amounts received pursuant to its service contracts with the authority. (3) The department may pledge and assign its right to receive all or a portion of the payments under the service contracts entered into pursuant to paragraph (1) directly to the authority or its bond trustee for the payment of principal, premiums, if any, and interest under any loan agreement authorized by paragraph (2). (c) The Legislature hereby finds and declares both of the following: (1) The consideration to be paid by the authority to the department for the services provided pursuant to the contracts authorized by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) is fair and reasonable and in the public interest. (2) The service contracts and payments made by the authority to the department pursuant to a service contract authorized by paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) and the loan agreements and loan repayments made by the department to the authority pursuant to a loan agreement authorized by paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) shall not constitute a debt or liability, or a pledge of the faith and credit, of the state or any political subdivision. subdivision, except as approved by the voters at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election. (d) The state hereby covenants with the holders from time to time of any bonds issued by the authority pursuant to Section 15463 of the Government Code that it will not alter, amend, or restrict the provisions of this section, paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 5890, or subdivision (b) of Section 5891 in any manner adverse to the interests of those bondholders so long as any of those bonds remain outstanding. The authority may include this covenant in the resolution, indenture, or other documents governing the bonds. (e) Agreements under this section are not subject to, and need not comply with, the requirements of any other law applicable to the execution of those agreements, including, but not limited to, the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). (f) Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 10290) of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code shall not apply to any contract entered into between the authority and the department under this section. SEC. 4. Section 5849.4 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read: 5849.4. (a) The No Place Like Home Fund is hereby created within the State Treasury and, notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, continuously appropriated to the department, the authority, and the Treasurer for the purposes of this part. Accounts and subaccounts may be created within the fund as needed. Up to 5 percent of the amount deposited in the fund may be used for administrative expenses in implementing this part. (b) There shall be paid into the fund the following: (1) Any moneys from the receipt of loan proceeds by the department derived from the issuance of bonds by the authority under subdivision (b) of Section 15463 of the Government Code. (2) Any appropriation or transfer to the fund from the General Fund or other funds. (2) (3) Any other federal or state grant, or from any private donation or grant, for the purposes of this part. (3) (4) Any interest payment, loan repayments, or other return of funds. SEC. 5. Section 5849.15 is added to the Welfare and Institutions Code, to read: 5849.15. The voters ratify all of the following provisions as being consistent with and in furtherance of Proposition 63, enacted by the voters at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, and approve all of the following provisions for purposes of Section 1 of Article XVI of the California Constitution: (a) Chapter 43 of the Statutes of 2016, which amended Sections 5830, 5845, 5847, 5848, 5897, and 5899 and added this part. (b) Chapter 322 of the Statutes of 2016, which added Section 15463 to the Government Code, and amended Sections 5849.1, 5849.2, 5849.3, 5849.4, 5849.5, 5849.7, 5849.8, 5849.9, 5849.11, 5849.14, 5890, and 5891 of, added Section 5849.35 to, and repealed and added Section 5849.13 of, this code. (c) Those provisions of Chapter 561 of the Statutes of 2017 that amended any of the provisions referenced in subdivisions (a) and (b). (d) The amendments to Section 5849.35, 5849.4, and 5890 made by the act adding this section. (e) The issuance by the California Health Facilities Financing Authority of bonds in an amount not to exceed two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) for the purposes of financing permanent supportive housing pursuant to the No Place Like Home Program and related purposes as set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 15463 of the Government Code, the issuance of bonds for the purpose of redeeming, refunding, or retiring bonds as set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 15463 of the Government Code, and the process by which those bonds are issued, secured, and repaid, as set forth in the provisions referenced in subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive. SEC. 6. Section 5890 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is amended to read: 5890. (a) The Mental Health Services Fund is hereby created in the State Treasury. The fund shall be administered by the state. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, all moneys in the fund are, except as provided in subdivision (d) of Section 5892, continuously appropriated, without regard to fiscal years, for the purpose of funding the following programs and other related activities as designated by other provisions of this division: (1) Part 3 (commencing with Section 5800), the Adult and Older Adult Mental Health System of Care Act. (2) Part 3.2 (commencing with Section 5830), Innovative Programs. (3) Part 3.6 (commencing with Section 5840), Prevention and Early Intervention Programs. (4) Part 3.9 (commencing with Section 5849.1), No Place Like Home Program. (5) Part 4 (commencing with Section 5850), the Children’s Mental Health Services Act. (b) The establishment of this fund and any other provisions of the act establishing it or the programs funded shall not be construed to modify the obligation of health care service plans and disability insurance policies to provide coverage for mental health services, including those services required under Section 1374.72 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 10144.5 of the Insurance Code, related to mental health parity. This act shall not be construed to modify the oversight duties of the Department of Managed Health Care or the duties of the Department of Insurance with respect to enforcing these obligations of plans and insurance policies. (c) This act shall not be construed to modify or reduce the existing authority or responsibility of the State Department of Health Care Services. (d) The State Department of Health Care Services shall seek approval of all applicable federal Medicaid approvals to maximize the availability of federal funds and eligibility of participating children, adults, and seniors for medically necessary care. (e) Share of costs for services pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with Section 5800) and Part 4 (commencing with Section 5850) of this division, shall be determined in accordance with the Uniform Method of Determining Ability to Pay applicable to other publicly funded mental health services, unless this Uniform Method is replaced by another method of determining copayments, in which case the new method applicable to other mental health services shall be applicable to services pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with Section 5800) and Part 4 (commencing with Section 5850) of this division. (f)   (1) The Supportive Housing Program Subaccount is hereby created in the Mental Health Services Fund. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, all moneys in the subaccount are reserved and continuously appropriated, without regard to fiscal years, to the California Health Facilities Financing Authority to provide funds to meet its financial obligations pursuant to any service contracts entered into pursuant to Section 5849.35. Notwithstanding any other law, including any other provision of this section, no later than the last day of each month, the Controller shall, before any transfer or expenditure from the fund for any other purpose for the following month, transfer from the Mental Health Services Fund to the Supportive Housing Program Subaccount an amount that has been certified by the California Health Facilities Financing Authority pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 5849.35, but not to exceed an aggregate amount of one hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000) per year. If in any month the amounts in the Mental Health Services Fund are insufficient to fully transfer to the subaccount or the amounts in the subaccount are insufficient to fully pay the amount certified by the California Health Facilities Financing Authority, the shortfall shall be carried over to the next month. month, to be transferred by the Controller with any transfer required by the preceding sentence. Moneys in the Supportive Housing Program Subaccount shall not be loaned to the General Fund pursuant to Section 16310 or 16381 of the Government Code. (2) Prior to the issuance of any bonds pursuant to Section 15463 of the Government Code, the Legislature may appropriate for transfer funds in the Mental Health Services Fund to the Supportive Housing Program Subaccount in an amount up to one hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000) per year. Any amount appropriated for transfer pursuant to this paragraph and deposited in the No Place Like Home Fund shall reduce the authorized but unissued amount of bonds that the California Health Facilities Financing Authority may issue pursuant to Section 15463 of the Government Code by a corresponding amount. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, all moneys in the subaccount transferred pursuant to this paragraph are reserved and continuously appropriated, without regard to fiscal years, for transfer to the No Place Like Home Fund, to be used for purposes of Part 3.9 (commencing with Section 5849.1). The Controller shall, before any transfer or expenditure from the fund for any other purpose for the following month but after any transfer from the fund for purposes of paragraph (1), transfer moneys appropriated from the Mental Health Services Fund to the subaccount pursuant to this paragraph in equal amounts over the following 12-month period, beginning no later than 90 days after the effective date of the appropriation by the Legislature. If in any month the amounts in the Mental Health Services Fund are insufficient to fully transfer to the subaccount or the amounts in the subaccount are insufficient to fully pay the amount appropriated for transfer pursuant to this paragraph, the shortfall shall be carried over to the next month. (3) The sum of any transfers described in paragraphs (1) and (2) shall not exceed an aggregate of one hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000) per year. (4) Paragraph (2) shall become inoperative once any bonds authorized pursuant to Section 15463 of the Government Code are issued. SEC. 7. The provisions of this act may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature so long as such amendments are consistent with and further the intent of this act. SEC. 8. Sections 1 to 7, inclusive, of this act shall become operative upon the adoption by the voters of the No Place Like Home Act of 2018. SEC. 9. (a) (1) Notwithstanding Sections 9040, 9043, 9044, 9061, and 9082 of the Elections Code, or any other law, Sections 1 to 7, inclusive, of this act shall be submitted by the Secretary of State to the voters as a single measure, the No Place Like Home Act of 2018, at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election. (2) The requirement of Section 9040 of the Elections Code that a measure submitted to the people by the Legislature appear on the ballot of the first statewide election occurring at least 131 days after the adoption of the proposal by the Legislature shall not apply to the No Place Like Home Act of 2018. (b) The Secretary of State shall include in the ballot pamphlets mailed pursuant to Section 9094 of the Elections Code the information specified in Section 9084 of the Elections Code regarding the No Place Like Home Act of 2018. If that inclusion is not possible, the Secretary of State shall publish a supplemental ballot pamphlet regarding the No Place Like Home Act of 2018 to be mailed with the ballot pamphlet. If the supplemental ballot pamphlet cannot be mailed with the ballot pamphlet, the supplemental ballot pamphlet shall be mailed separately. (c) Notwithstanding Section 9054 of the Elections Code or any other law, the translations of the ballot title and the condensed statement of the ballot title required pursuant to Section 9054 of the Elections Code for the No Place Like Home Act of 2018 may be made available for public examination at a later date than the start of the public examination period for the ballot pamphlet. SEC. 10. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: In order to expeditiously provide necessary funding for the No Place Like Home Program, so as to ensure the efficient and timely development of supportive housing, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2018

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 13, and the FRE is 12. The word count for the ballot title is 14, and the estimated reading time is 3 seconds. The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 17, and the FRE is 29.5. The word count for the ballot summary is 92, and the estimated reading time is 24 seconds. In 2018, for the 167 statewide measures on the ballot, the average ballot title or question was written at a level appropriate for those with between 19 and 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education), according to the FKGL formula. Read Ballotpedia's entire 2018 ballot language readability report here.

Support

Affordable Housing Now, also known as Yes on Prop 2, led the campaign in support of Proposition 2.

Supporters

Officials

• Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D)
• Treasurer John Chiang (D)
• U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters (D-43)
• Sen. Toni Atkins (D-39)
• Sen. Jim Beall (D-15)
• Asm. David Chiu (D-17)
• Asm. Jesse Gabriel (D-45)
• Asm. Todd Gloria (D-78)
• Mayor Eric Garcetti (D), Los Angeles
• Mayor Darrell Steinberg (D), Sacramento

Parties

• California Democratic Party
• California Republican Party
• Peace and Freedom Party
• Culver City Democratic Club
• Democratic Party of the San Fernando Valley
• Democratic Women’s Study Club
• Desert Stonewall Democrats
• San Diego County Democratic Party

Municipalities

The following local governments endorsed Proposition 2:

• County of Contra Costa
• County of Los Angeles
• County of Monterey
• County of Napa
• County of Santa Clara
• City of El Centro
• City of El Cerrito
• City of Fremont
• City of Half Moon Bay
• City of Livingston
• City of Los Angeles
• City of Pasadena
• City of Rancho Cordova
• City of Sacramento
• City of Santa Ana
• City of Santa Monica

Organizations

The following organizations endorsed Proposition 2:

California American College of Emergency Physicians California Police Chiefs Association Habitat for Humanity League of California Cities League of Women Voters on California National Alliance on Mental Illness California Steinberg Institute A Community of Friends Abode Services ACT-LA (Alliance for Community Transit, Los Angeles) Advancement Project California Adventist Health AIA Los Angeles AIDS Project of the East Bay Alpha Vision Computers, Inc. Association of Bay Area Governments Association of Regional Center Agencies (ARCA) Bay Area Council Brilliant Corners Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation California Apartment Association California Association of REALTORS California Association of Veterans Services Agencies California Business Roundtable California Chamber of Commerce California Chapter of American College of Emergency Physicians California Coalition for Youth California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies (CBHA) California Forward California Housing Consortium California Housing Partnership California Primary Care Association California Professional Firefighters California Psychiatric Association California State Association of Counties California State Commanders Veterans Council Cardborigami, Inc. Central City Association of Los Angeles Cherryland Community Association Choices Person Centered Services Clifford Beers Housing CohnReznick, LLP Community Economics, Inc. Community Housing Improvement Program, Inc. Community HousingWorks Community Resources for Independent Living (CRIL) Corporation for Supportive Housing (CSH) Destination: Home Dignity Health Downtown Women's Center EAH Housing East Bay Housing Organizations East Bay Legislative Coalition East LA Community Corporation Enterprise Community Partners Equality California EveryOne Home First Congregational Church (UCC) Flexible PSH Solutions, Inc. Fontana Chamber of Commerce Friends Committee on Legislation of California Fund for Santa Barbara Funders Together to End Homelessness San Diego Gateway Chambers Alliance Good Seed Community Development Corp Gratitude Alliance Greater Riverside Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (GRHCC) Greenbelt Alliance Guild Mortgage Habitat for Humanity CA Harbor Recuperative Care LLC Highridge Costa Companies Hollywood Chamber of Commerce Hollywood Community Housing Corporation Homeless Health Care Los Angeles Homeward Bound of Marin Housing California Inclusive Homes, Inc. Inland Empire Economic Partnership Inner City Law Center Irvine For Everyone Koenig Consulting LA Voice LeadingAge California LifeSTEPS LINC Housing Little Tokyo Service Center Los Angeles Aging Advocacy Coalition Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce Los Angeles Mission Los Angeles Urban League Lutheran Office of Public Policy - CA Magnolia Prime MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund) Mental Health America of California Mental Health Association of Alameda County Merritt Community Capital Corp Metropolitan Transportation Commission MidPen Housing Corporation Multi-faith ACTION Coalition Mutual Housing California NAMI Los Angeles County NAMI Solano County NAMI South Bay Nancy Lewis Associates, Inc. National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter Neighborhood Works NeighborWorks Sacramento North Bay Leadership Council North Lake Tahoe Resort Association/Chamber of Commerce Olivia Loewy and Associates Organize Sacramento Pacific Clinics Palm Springs Tenants Union PATH Peoples' Self-Help Housing PICO-California Plumas County Community Development Commission Plumas Crisis Intervention and Resource Center (PCIRC) Proyecto Pastoral at Dolores Mission Public Advocates R4 Capital Safe Place for Youth San Diego Housing Federation San Francisco Community Land Trust Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce Santa Rosa Metro Chamber of Commerce Self-Help Enterprises Serving Seniors Shelter Partnership Sierra Business Council Sierra Vista Child & Family Services Silicon Valley Leadership Group Skid Row Housing Trust Solar-Tec Systems, Inc. Solari Enterprises, Inc. Southern California Association of NonProfit Housing (SCANPH) St. Barnabas Senior Services St. John the Baptist Catholic Church St. Joseph Center Stories from the Frontline Street Spirit The Architects Collective The Chamber of the Santa Barbara Region The Ingram Politic The Kennedy Commission The Reilly Group The South Bay Coalition to End Homelessness (LA County) United Way Monterey County Venice Community Housing Ventura County Housing Trust Fund Veterans Falconry Initiative Wakeland Housing & Development Corporation Walden Family Services Westside Council of Chambers of Commerce Women Organizing Resources, Knowledge and Services (WORKS) Workforcehomebuilders LLC Yes to Affordable Housing YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County Youth Spirit Artworks

Labor organizations

The following labor organizations and unions endorsed Proposition 2:

• California Labor Federation
• California State Firefighters’ Association
• Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California
• California Federation of Teachers
• California School Employees Association
• Fremont Unified School District Teachers Association
• Fresno Unified Teachers Association
• LA/OC Building & Construction Trades Council
• SEIU 521
• State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
• United Educators of San Francisco

Arguments

Zima Creason, CEO of Mental Health America (MHA) of California, David Swing, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, and Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola, a former member of the National Advisory Mental Health Council of the National Institute of Mental Health, wrote the official arguments in support of Proposition 2 that appeared in the state's voter guide:

YES on Prop. 2 delivers the proven solution to help the most vulnerable people experiencing homelessness in California. Prop. 2 builds housing and keeps mental health services in reach for people—the key to alleviating homelessness complicated by mental illness. More than 134,000 people are languishing on our streets, huddled on sidewalks, sleeping under freeways and along riverbanks. As many as a third of the people living in these unsafe conditions are living with an untreated mental illness. Each year, hundreds of people living with a serious mental illness die in pain and isolation. These deaths are preventable. Prop. 2 tackles this public health crisis that is straining our neighborhoods, our businesses, our firefighters and emergency supervisors. It renews our sense of community and focuses on helping the lives of the most vulnerable among us. NO PLACE LIKE HOME YES on Prop. 2 means building 20,000 permanent supportive housing units under the “No Place Like Home” Program. This allows coordinated care of mental health and substance use services, medical care, case managers, education and job training to help people get the treatment and housing stability they need. Decades of research shows providing people with a stable place to live along with mental health services promotes healthy, stable lives. The combination is known as permanent supportive housing. Studies show supportive housing significantly reduces public health costs and reduces blight. STRENGTHENING PARTNERSHIPS TO HELP PEOPLE IN NEED YES on 2 will help establish and strengthen partnerships between doctors, law enforcement, mental health and homeless service providers to help ensure care is coordinated and tailored to meet the needs of each person suffering from mental health illness and homelessness, or who is at great risk of becoming homeless. Without the foundation of a stable home connected to mental healthcare, people suffering from serious mental illness are unable to make it to doctors’ appointments and specialized counseling services, often showing up in emergency rooms as a last resort. “Mental illness does not have to be a life sentence of despair and dysfunction. Supportive housing provides the stability people need as they recover from untreated serious mental illness. It helps them stay off the street and live with dignity.” — Darrell Steinberg, Author, Mental Health Services Act PROP. 2 IS NOT A TAX Prop. 2 brings NO COST TO TAXPAYERS—we simply need voter approval to cut through red tape and focus on building supportive housing for people who are homeless and need mental health services. This state funding has long been earmarked for these specialized types of mental health and housing services. Helping people suffering from serious mental illness and homelessness is not easy. But together, we can help prevent more deaths on our streets and provide critical intervention by building supportive housing connected to mental health treatment and services.

Opposition

Opponents

• California Libertarian Party

Arguments

Leaders of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Contra Costa—President Charles Madison, Executive Director Gigi R. Crowder, and Legislative Committee Chairperson Douglas W. Dunn—wrote the official argument against Proposition 2 that appeared in the state's voter guide:

Please vote “No” on the “No Place Like Home Act,” which should have been called the “Bureaucrat and Developer Enrichment Act,” because that is who we feel will most benefit at the expense of those suffering with the most severe mental illnesses. NAMI Contra Costa members are mostly family members with “skin in the game,” so therefore are strong advocates for people living with serious and persistent mental illnesses who oppose this bill. Particularly given looming federal cutbacks, NPLH is counterproductive because it spends billions in treatment funds that Voter Proposition 63 dedicated to the severely mentally ill fourteen years ago. If passed, we strongly feel NPLH will cause more homelessness by forcing more mentally ill people into severe symptoms that could increase the numbers living on the streets. Proposition 2 is: Costly—up to $5.6 Billion ($140 million x 40, for 40- year bonds) to raise $2 billion for housing projects. It won’t all go to housing, because housing bureaucrats have already guaranteed themselves $100 million (5% of the $2 Billion), admittedly far more than needed to run the program, and have also agreed between themselves to take the entire $140 million yearly as “administrative expenses,” whether or not they need that amount to pay off the bonds. Developer subsidies (low interest deferred loans that developers will use to build and purchase $2 Billion in valuable California housing, plus up to 50% operating subsidies) effectively cost the public even more. Unnecessary, because the Legislature authorized counties to pay for housing for their severely mentally ill Prop 63 clients in 2017, in AB 727. Counties, which can accumulate Mental Health Services Act capital funds for up to ten years, can now do “pay as you go” both to build housing and to pay rent subsidies for these clients. Counties do not need to pay out billions in interest on bonds, unnecessary state administrative expenses, and developer subsidies to do so. Counties know their mentally ill clients’ treatment and other needs as well as what housing is already available. Only they can determine whether their MHSA funds are best used to pay for treatment or to build housing in their localities. Does nothing to address systemic legal barriers, like limited state protection against restrictive local zoning, that make it very difficult to build supportive housing for groups like the severely mentally ill. Neighborhoods often fight hard to keep them out. It is senseless to pay out billions in interest and expenses to borrow money that may sit unspent because of local opposition to supportive housing projects with severely mentally ill tenants. The Voters dedicated Proposition 63 money to treatment, which prevents homelessness, in 2004. That is where it should go.

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for California ballot measures

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$7,239,732.07
Opposition:	$0.00

There were three ballot measure committees registered in support of Proposition 2—Affordable Housing Now, California Homeless and Housing Coalition Action Fund, and A Home for Everyone. The support committees were registered to support Proposition 1 and Proposition 2. The committees reported $7.24 million in contributions and $7.28 million in expenditures.

The Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy, a committee affiliated with the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, provided the largest contribution—$300,000—to the support committees. Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, and his spouse, Priscilla Chan, founded the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, which, as of 2018, focused on supporting and investing in projects that promote biomedical research, personalized learning, housing, and criminal justice policies.

There were no committees registered in opposition to Proposition 2.

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the initiative:

Committees in support of Proposition 2 Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Affordable Housing Now - Yes on Props 1 & 2 Coalition $5,899,065.00 $703,844.07 $5,936,394.51 California Homeless and Housing Coalition Action Fund, Yes on Props 1 & 2 $51,500.00 $0.00 $51,500.00 A Home for Everyone, Yes on Props 1 and 2 $584,494.00 $829.00 $584,544.00 Total $6,535,059.00 $704,673.07 $6,572,438.51

Totals in support Total raised: $7,239,732.07 Total spent: $7,277,111.58

Donors

The following were the top five donors who contributed to the support committees:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy	$300,000.00	$0.00	$300,000.00
Chevron Policy Government & Public Affairs	$250,000.00	$0.00	$250,000.00
KP Financial SVCS OPS	$250,000.00	$0.00	$250,000.00
PG&E Corporation	$250,000.00	$0.00	$250,000.00
California Apartment Association Issues Committee	$180,000.00	$0.00	$180,000.00

Reporting dates

In California, ballot measure committees filed a total of five campaign finance reports in 2018. The filing dates for reports were as follows:

Campaign finance reporting dates for November 2018 ballot
Date	Report	Period
1/31/2018	Annual Report for 2017	1/01/2017 - 12/31/2017
4/30/2018	Report #1	1/01/2018 - 3/31/2018
7/31/2018	Report #2	4/01/2018 - 6/30/2018
9/27/2018	Report #3	7/01/2018 - 9/22/2018
10/25/2018	Report #4	9/23/2018 - 10/20/2018
1/31/2019	Annual Report for 2018	10/21/2018 - 12/31/2018

Media editorials

Support

• Bakersfield Californian: "The bonds would be paid off with a portion of the proceeds from Proposition 63, a ballot measure passed by voters in 2004 that imposes a 1 percent tax on incomes of $1 million and above to fund mental health services. For the money to be used for housing, which is essentially addressing the needs of homeless, mentally ill Californians, voters are being asked to give their approval."
• Los Angeles Times: "As with L.A. city’s homeless housing bond program, the funds provide only a portion of the financing, but they are a crucial piece of the puzzle. There are nearly 53,000 homeless people in Los Angeles County this year, about 31,000 of whom are in the city of L.A. About 27% are considered seriously mentally ill. Proposition 2 will help them get housed and treated."
• Marin Independent Journal: "An important partner measure to Proposition 1, this measure is a follow-up to the Proposition 63 mental-health tax measure approved by voters in 2004. This measure allows that money to be spent on providing housing for people who are homeless due to mental illness. Housing was not explicitly mentioned in Proposition 63 and approval of this measure would correct that. Drive through any urban area and you’ll see why Proposition 2 is sorely needed and could help reduce homelessness."
• San Francisco Chronicle: "Prop. 2 represents a modest slice of the revenue from the Mental Health Services Act, and it is entirely consistent with the vision California voters embraced 14 years ago. Vote yes on Prop. 2."
• Santa Cruz Sentinel: "A housing-first approach to address homelessness has proven effective – but it needs available housing. Proposition 2, properly administered, would help provide it for mentally ill homeless. We recommend a “yes” vote."
• The Desert Sun: "We endorsed the No Place Like Home Program idea when it was drawn up by the Legislature. Proposition 2 and its funding of housing for the mentally ill homeless is in line with the goal of the original purpose of 2004’s Proposition 63 income tax surcharge, which was to better the lot of the mentally ill. Getting them off the street is a key piece in that equation."
• The Fresno Bee: "For voters, approving this measure should be a no-brainer. Treatment for mental illness and addiction can only help so much when people are forced to return to the trauma of living on the streets. Far more effective are programs that include stable housing, and yet cities and counties across California don’t have the money to provide that. This is why voters should approve Proposition 2."
• The Mercury News: "An estimated 25 percent-33 percent of California’s homeless population have mental health problems. Authorizing funds to give them a stable living environment will take them off the streets. It’s the right thing to do. Vote yes on Prop. 2 on Nov. 6."
• The Modesto Bee: "Proposition 2 would put a stop to the legal maneuvering and allow the money to be used as voters originally decreed. It’s unfortunate that we need a new proposition to affirm our intent in an old one. But that’s California. Vote yes on Proposition 2 to help the homeless, and Proposition 1 to help build more homes."
• The Press Democrat: "A housing-first approach to homeless has proven effective, but it can only work if housing is available. Proposition 2 would help provide badly needed refuge for the mentally ill homeless, and The Press Democrat recommends a “yes” vote."
• The Sacramento Bee: "For voters, approving this measure should be a no-brainer. Treatment for mental illness and addiction can only help so much when people are forced to return to the trauma of living on the streets. Far more effective are programs that include stable housing, and yet cities and counties across California don’t have the money to provide that."
• The San Luis Obispo Tribune: "This proposition is supported by both the Republican and Democratic parties, making it the rare issue that every voter should be able to get behind. ... Bottom line: Prop. 2 creates additional housing for a vulnerable population — with an existing source of revenue."
• The San Diego Union-Tribune: "An argument can be made that it might have been wiser to have a ballot measure that revised Proposition 63 to both fund revenue bonds for homeless housing and to force smarter use of its tax proceeds on mental health needs. But on balance, this measure is constructive public policy with little apparent downside. Vote yes on Proposition 2."

Opposition

• The Orange County Register: "Bonds are not free money. Selling $2 billion in bonds requires the repayment of not only the $2 billion but interest as well. This means squandering over $1 billion that should have gone to mental health services on interest. Is that how Californians want MHSA money spent? We doubt that. We encourage voters to reject Prop. 2, not because we oppose the goals of the measure, but because we support them."

Background

What is Proposition 63 (2004)?

In 2004, voters approved a ballot initiative, titled Proposition 63, to enact an additional 1 percent tax on incomes of $1.0 million or greater. Proposition 63 required that revenue from the tax, referred to as the millionaire's tax, be spent on mental health services and programs in California.

Proposition 63 was estimated to generate $2.23 billion in the fiscal year 2018-2019.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing legislative alteration in California

The California State Legislature's bill for this proposed measure is Assembly Bill 1827 (AB 1827). The Assembly Budget Committee introduced the bill. As the bill was written to amend a ballot initiative, legislators were required to refer the legislation to the ballot as a proposition.

Both chambers of the state legislature approved AB 1827 on June 25, 2018. In the state Senate, the vote was 35-0, with four members not voting. In the state Assembly the vote was 72-1, with seven members not voting. The one legislator to vote against referring the measure was Asm. Catharine Baker (R-16).

On June 27, 2018, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed AB 1827, certifying the measure to appear on the ballot for the election on November 6, 2018.

Vote in the California State Senate June 25, 2018
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 20  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	35	0	4
Total percent	89.74%	0.00%	10.25%
Democrat	26	0	0
Republican	9	0	4

Vote in the California State Assembly June 25, 2018
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 41  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	72	1	7
Total percent	90.00%	1.25%	8.75%
Democrat	53	0	2
Republican	19	1	5

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in California

Poll times

All polls in California are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

To vote in California, an individual must be a U.S. citizen and California resident. A voter must be at least 18 years of age on Election Day. Pre-registration is available at 16 years of age. Pre-registered voters are automatically registered to vote when they turn 18.

Automatic registration

California automatically registers eligible individuals to vote when they complete a driver's license, identification (ID) card, or change of address transaction through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Learn more by visiting this website.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

California has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

California allows same-day voter registration.

Californians must be registered to vote at least 15 days before Election Day. If the registration deadline has passed for an upcoming election, voters may visit a location designated by their county elections official during the 14 days prior to, and including Election Day to conditionally register to vote and vote a provisional ballot, which are counted once county election officials have completed the voter registration verification process. The state refers to this process as Same Day Voter Registration.

Residency requirements

To register to vote in California, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

California's constitution requires that voters be U.S. citizens. When registering to vote, proof of citizenship is not required. Individuals who become U.S. citizens less than 15 days before an election must bring proof of citizenship to their county elections office to register to vote in that election. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury.

As of November 2024, two jurisdictions in California had authorized noncitizen residents to vote for local board of education positions through local ballot measures. Only one of those jurisdictions, San Francisco, had implemented that law. Noncitizens voting for board of education positions must register to vote using a separate application from the state voter registration application.

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The secretary of state's My Voter Status website allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

California does not require voters to present identification before casting a ballot in most cases. However, some voters may be asked to show a form of identification when voting if they are voting for the first time after registering to vote by mail and did not provide a driver license number, California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number. On September 29, 2024, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed SB 1174 into law prohibiting any jurisdiction in the state from adopting a local law that requires voters to present ID before voting.

The following list of accepted ID was current as of October 2024. Click here for the California Secretary of State page to ensure you have the most current information.

“

Current and valid photo identification provided by a third party in the ordinary course of business that includes the name and photograph of the individual presenting it. Examples of photo identification include, but are not limited to, the following documents: driver's license or identification card of any state; passport; employee identification card; identification card provided by a commercial establishment; credit or debit card; military identification card; student identification card; health club identification card; insurance plan identification card; or public housing identification card. Any of the following documents, provided that the document includes the name and address of the individual presenting it, and is dated since the date of the last general election…: utility bill; bank statement; government check; government paycheck; document issued by a governmental agency; sample ballot or other official elections document issued by a governmental, agency dated for the election in which the individual is providing it as proof, of residency or identity; voter notification card issued by a governmental agency; public housing identification card issued by a governmental agency; lease or rental statement or agreement issued by a governmental agency; student identification card issued by a governmental agency; tuition statement or bill issued by a governmental agency; insurance plan card or drug discount card issued by a governmental agency; discharge certificates, pardons, or other official documents issued to the individual by a governmental agency in connection with the resolution of a criminal case, indictment, sentence, or other matter; public transportation authority senior citizen and disabled discount cards issued by a governmental agency; identification documents issued by governmental disability agencies; identification documents issued by government homeless shelters and other government temporary or transitional facilities; drug prescription issued by a government doctor or other governmental health care provider; (R) property tax statement issued by a governmental agency; vehicle registration issued by a governmental agency; or vehicle certificate of ownership issued by a governmental agency.

”

See also

2018 measures

• 2018 ballot measures
• Taxes on the ballot
• Housing on the ballot
• Bond issues on the ballot

California

• California ballot measures
• California ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

Information

• Assembly Bill 1827

Support

• Affordable Housing Now
• Affordable Housing Now Facebook
• Affordable Housing Now Twitter