SUMMER SCHOOL

Published in the July 11, 2026 edition.

Enjoy your summer recess, dear voters, because come fall you will have to hit the books again to prepare to vote on 14 statewide ballot questions. 

I can’t address all 14 here – that would necessitate a seppuku sword. But here is an early cheat sheet outlining some of the questions you will face this fall. 

This batch of propositions highlighted today focuses on housing and its inescapable twins, affordable housing and the “missing middle,” along with one measure of legislative sleight of hand when it comes to current state spending limits. 

The big noisy, controversial ballot question about taxing billionaires and a couple counter questions seeking to derail that taxing effort will be discussed next week. 

Let’s tackle the “easy” ones first. 

Proposition 1: The Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026 

I know, I know, it seems like there is always some sort of housing bond question at every election. Get used to it. This one asks voters to approve issuing $11.25 billion in bonds for housing-related programs. A mere $1.25 billion will go to a veterans’ home loan program (opponents have cried foul about putting “veterans” in the title when only 10% of the funding will actually go to veterans. Marketing, friends, it’s all marketing). Farmworker, students, homeless, and Native American housing programs will get a combined total of $2.15 billon. That leaves more than $7 billion going to fund 40,000 “shovel ready” affordable housing projects and to preserve the affordable title on thousands of existing units.  

Proposition 37: Homeownership Loan Program 

 

The state has joined the search to unlock money and housing for the elusive, “missing middle.” This measure creates a program to provide loans for downpayments on homes being purchased by middle class residents making less than 200% of an area’s median income. Those loans would be funded using up to $25 billion in bonds issued by and then managed by the California Housing Finance Agency. If passed a qualified “missing middle” homebuyer could take out the state loan (second mortgage) for up to 17% of a home’s purchase price. 

Proposition 45: CEQA Reform

 

Another perennial ballot question. The legislature has been chipping away at the landmark California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in recent years, primarily to encourage more housing, and this ballot question takes another chip out of the law. If approved, it would amend CEQA to help speed up the review process for projects deemed “essential.” On that list are certain housing developments (the Legislature recently carved out some limited exceptions to some CEQA requirements for housing near mass transit, housing infill projects in towns and cities, and some affordable housing projects). Also getting a quicker review would be water, health, public safety, energy and transportation projects. Not on the list are jails, detention centers, and oil and gas production facilities. The measure, if approved would set deadlines for public agency reviews, allow expedited reviews of some projects (including limiting the range of mitigation measures to lesson environmental impacts), and set a deadline for filing and resolving CEQA lawsuits. 

Prop. 2: Save for California’s Future Act 

 

Another misleading title. This is a proposed constitutional amendment placed on the November ballot by the state legislature, which should set off alarm bells. 

If approved, it would allow the legislature to skirt the spending restrictions in the Gann Limit, which sets spending levels each year via a complex formula using population, tax revenue, and cost of living averages. Go over the limit and the state has to offer refunds to taxpayers or send the money to schools. If this measure is approved, the legislature would not have to include the money it puts in savings (rainy day fund) in the Gann Limit calculations. That, allegedly, would allow the state to sock away more savings.

-Klusmire