last-minute guide

There has been much debate about efforts in California to tax the rich. But almost all of it centers around Proposition 40, the heavily contested billionaire tax, and two countermeasures, Propositions 41 and 42.

But there is another ballot measure that also would tax California’s wealthiest citizens that is getting far less attention — and has even garnered support from some billionaires who oppose Proposition 40.

The basics

Proposition 3 would make an expiring state income tax on high earners permanent.

The impact

Tax rates for the top 2% of earners would remain as they are. Income brackets rise with inflation, but last year the top 2% of taxpayers earned at least $371,000 for single filers and $743,000 for joint filers. Money generated by Proposition 3, like the current tax, would flow to education, with 89% going to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.

Dig deeper

In 2012, California voters approved a temporary increase in the income tax rate for the top 2% of California earners. In 2016, voters approved another extension through 2030. Proposition 3 would make the additional levy permanent.

Backers say the measure is crucial to maintain education funding levels and predict there would be grave problems if the measure is not approved. The state could expect to lose $5 billion to $15 billion annually in tax revenue starting in 2031, according to estimates from the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Opponents say taxes are already too high and the state should focus on cutting waste.

More reading

What to know about Prop. 3 (L.A. Times)

How Prop. 3 fared in Berkeley poll (L.A. Times)

Prop. 3 ballot language (California secretary of state)

Inside the Prop. 3 campaign (EdSource)

The California Environmental Quality Act is one of the most consequential and controversial laws on the books.

CEQA, which dates to the 1970s, requires state and local agencies to consider the environmental effects of many proposed projects before approving them. If a project could cause significant environmental harm that can’t easily be avoided, it undergoes a more detailed environmental review to examine its potential effects and alternatives.

Backers say CEQA is a vital tool for environmental review and gives the community a voice in development. But critics say CEQA is too often used to slow down needed housing and has been exploited as a bureaucratic weapon.

Enter Proposition 45.

The basics

Proposition 45 would impose stricter deadlines on environmental reviews, permits and court challenges. Agencies would have to spell out application requirements up-front and could not make repeated requests for more information or project changes. The measure caps public comment periods, while current law only sets minimum lengths. It also limits what courts may consider in CEQA lawsuits.

The impact

The law clearly would change the CEQA process; whether that would be for better or worse is the subject of debate. Backers say it would make the process faster and easier. Critics say it would roll back important environmental protections.

Dig deeper

The fight over Proposition 45 comes as California struggles to build enough housing to meet demand, causing prices to skyrocket. Housing prices, polls show, are a major issue for California voters.

But the proposition also is touching on another hot-button issue: data centers. Supporters and foes are battling over whether the measure would make it easier to build more of those controversial facilities.

More reading

California’s Prop. 45 aims to speed construction projects. Opponents say data centers will benefit (L.A. Times)

CEQA overhaul outrages environmentalists (L.A. Times)

The history of CEQA and its future (L.A. Times)

Could Embracing Sprawl Ease California’s Housing Crunch? (New York Times)