As reported by CalMatters, Proposition 5 on California’s ballot proposes lowering the voting requirement for local bonds from a two-thirds majority to 55%.
This change could streamline funding for crucial emergency infrastructure, including fire stations and other public safety facilities.
Currently, local governments rely on general obligation bonds to finance large projects, which are paid off through property taxes.
These bonds cover essential infrastructure such as roads, libraries, and parks.
Supporters of Proposition 5 argue that the measure would help projects that support public safety, allowing communities to prioritize resources for their fire departments and emergency services.
For instance, Sacramento County could immediately benefit with a proposed $415 million bond for fire station improvements if the measure passes.
Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, who sponsored the legislation, has stated that Proposition 5 would give local governments an “opt-in” option to choose between the traditional two-thirds threshold and a new 55% majority vote.
She said: “They can either do a two-thirds bond with no guardrails on it, or they can have a bond at 55% threshold with guardrails – with accountability, transparency, citizens’ oversight, independent audits.”
This approach is designed to give communities greater control over funding decisions for emergency services, according to proponents.
Backers of the measure include labor and development organizations, which emphasize that Proposition 5 would bring additional flexibility to cities and special districts aiming to strengthen their fire and emergency response capacities.
Critics of Proposition 5, including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the California Chamber of Commerce, argue that the lowered threshold could lead to more frequent bond proposals, ultimately increasing property taxes over time.
Susan Shelley, vice president of the taxpayer group, argued that this would result in “higher property taxes over and over again.”
Law professor Darien Shanske from UC Davis challenged these concerns, suggesting that the financial impact of bonds is generally limited, especially with accountability measures in place.
He added: “Our norm as a democratic society is that every vote is equal,” questioning the fairness of a supermajority rule that allows a minority of voters to override the majority’s decision to support critical local services like fire and safety infrastructure.
Historically, California has maintained strict requirements for local bond approvals, a practice that dates back to the state constitution of 1879 and was reinforced with Proposition 13 in 1978, limiting property tax assessments.
However, in 2000, voters approved lowering the threshold for school bonds to 55%, allowing more school infrastructure projects to pass.
According to finance consultant Michael Coleman, the proposed change could result in 70 to 80% of general obligation bonds clearing the 55% threshold if Prop. 5 is approved.
Coleman emphasized that many bond initiatives, especially those aimed at funding fire and emergency services, fall short of the two-thirds majority but receive over 55% support.
This measure could increase the passage rate for these bonds, facilitating the completion of public safety projects.
Fire departments across California, especially in underserved rural areas, are among the strongest advocates for Proposition 5.
Many have struggled to pass bonds for essential upgrades due to the two-thirds voting requirement, despite majority support from their communities.
For instance, a 2023 fire protection bond in Santa Cruz County narrowly failed despite receiving 66% of votes, a reflection of the high threshold that currently limits such measures.
Emergency service providers in smaller, rural communities have highlighted the challenge of meeting state requirements with limited funding options.
These districts argue that Proposition 5 would provide a more achievable path to secure funds for critical upgrades, from modernizing fire stations to purchasing necessary equipment.
If passed, the measure could directly impact fire departments’ readiness to respond to emergencies across the state, including wildfire-prone regions that are particularly vulnerable.
Proposition 5 on California’s ballot proposes reducing the voting threshold for local bonds from two-thirds to 55%, potentially easing the way for fire stations and emergency service providers to secure funding.
General obligation bonds, funded through property taxes, are a common tool for financing local projects.
Supporters argue that the measure would help fire and emergency services obtain the funds needed for infrastructure upgrades and equipment.
While opponents express concern that the measure could lead to increased property taxes, proponents emphasize the importance of public safety investments.
This change could impact both urban and rural fire districts, providing a clearer path to funding for critical public safety needs.
