California voters have crushed efforts by elected leaders to patch a gaping hole in the state budget with a package of ballot measures that included borrowing, extending $16 billion worth of taxes and promising to reform future budgets with a reserve fund and a spending cap.

With about a quarter of the state's precincts in as of 9:30 p.m., the Secretary of State's Office reported none of Propositions 1A through 1E were garnering more than 41 percent of the vote. Only Proposition F, which would freeze the salaries of state elected officials in bad budget years, was winning - and it was winning big.

"It appears this evening we can declare political victory," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which was part of a confederation of those who opposed the first five ballot measures. "The people have spoken. They don't like the status quo."

Proponents threw in the towel early, even echoing the opponents' assessment.

"Clearly the voters have spoken," said Bill Hauck, president of the Business Roundtable, who was speaking for the consortium of groups and individuals who supported the measures. "The voters are angry, they're frustrated, and they've concluded the politicians in Sacramento are not getting the job done."

The drubbing appeared to be statewide in scope. In Sacramento County, where residents are closest to state government, none of the first five measures on the ballot were doing much better than they were statewide. In vote-rich Los Angeles County, Propositions 1A through 1E were struggling - and failing - to crack the 40-percent-yes barrier. Even liberal-leaning San Francisco County voters were barely approving the measures.

Voter turnout was expected to be one of the lowest in state history, perhaps lower than the 36.4 percent of registered voters that cast ballots in the November 1993 special election.

The governor and legislative leaders were counting on voters to help fill a gaping hole in the state budgets for the current fiscal year and the one that begins July 1.

Defeat of the measures would mean a projected $15.4 billion gap in the state's budget would grow to $21.3 billion. The governor has proposed that if the propositions fail, the lost revenues would be made up by cutting an additional $2.3 billion from elementary and high schools and community colleges; borrowing $2 billion from cities and counties; transferring some state prison inmates to county jails and some illegal immigrant prisoners to federal custody, and slicing deeper into health, social services and other programs.

"To fix the system, I need the people's help," Schwarzenegger said last week while laying out where he would seek further budget cuts if the measures were rejected. "I know people are sick and tired of hearing about Sacramento's dysfunction ... but (the election) isn't about me, it isn't about the Legislature, it's about California's legacy."

More immediately, it was about six measures. Three of them proposed to raise money right away by shifting revenues from two special funds and the state lottery. One contained $16 billion in extensions of temporary tax increases, along with the promise of a rainy day reserve fund and a cap on spending in future years. One pledged to settle a dispute between the education industry and state officials by paying schools $9.3 billion over a four-to-five year period starting in 2011. And one promised to freeze the pay rates of legislators and constitutional officers in years the state's coffers were running low.

Only the last of these was being approved.

Registered voters who didn't participate today may have abstained more from fatigue than apathy. Today's election was the 13th time since 2000 that Californians have been asked to vote in a statewide plebiscite.

"We have voted on numerous bills that have passed, but they have not been (implemented) in the fashion that they've been designed," said Bob Givens, a 69-year-old retired police officer who was voting at the South Natomas Community Center on Truxel Road in the early afternoon. "We need to scream in (the legislators') ears."