With ballot prop results taking shape, how much will they cost California?

Of the 10 statewide ballot propositions that Californians voted on Tuesday, five either passed outright or appeared headed to victory. Three measures — Propositions 6, 32 and 34 — were still up in the air as of Thursday.

The fiscal impact of the measures is starting to emerge. Some, like the proposition that enshrines the fundamental right to marriage, pose little additional cost to California. Others pose significant state costs in the form of bonds, like Prop. 2 (public education bonds) and Prop. 4 (natural resource bonds).

The money will help California leaders tackle a range of issues facing the state, from climate change to retail theft. And the fiscal impacts will be felt for decades to come, in the form of higher property taxes and a larger general fund budget.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, wanted to remind voters that ballot measures requiring state funds, particularly in the form of bonds, will mean higher taxes for future taxpayers.

“It’s a good way to really run up the credit card,” Coupal said.

It’s difficult, Coupal said, to determine just how expensive this year’s ballot will be for taxpayers, but he noted that some measures from previous elections had higher price tags. He pointed to 2020’s Prop. 15, which would have increased taxes on commercial properties, as a uniquely expensive ballot measure for those who pay property taxes.

He also noted that one reason California voters have not recently seen universal health care on their ballots is due to the enormous cost.

Below is a breakdown of how much each of the ballot measures that passed, or were still too close to call, are predicted to cost California taxpayers, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Prop. 2

The $10 billion school bond for community college and public school facilities will incur a sizable ongoing cost for California taxpayers. The LAO estimated that the Prop. 2 bond would require $500 million from the state’s general fund each year for 35 years to repay the borrowed money. That half a billion dollars represents less than 0.5% of the total general fund budget.

According to the Associated Press, the measure passed with 57% of voters approving the bonds in early returns.

Prop. 4

Like the other state bond on the ballot, Prop. 4 will incur an ongoing annual general fund payment. The $10 billion climate bond provides loans and grants to local governments and other groups to stave off the impacts of dwindling water supplies, wildfires, rising sea levels and other environmental issues. The analyst’s office estimates California’s general fund budget will increase $400 million a year for 40 years until it is completely repaid.

As of Thursday, results showed 58% of voters approving the measures.

Prop. 6

Abolishing involuntary servitude from state prisons and jails has the potential to increase or decrease criminal justice costs, the LAO projected, depending on several as-yet-unknown factors. One potential source for higher costs, for example, could be increased pay for incarcerated workers (which currently ranges from 16 to 74 cents per hour for most inmates). On the other hand, costs could go down if, say, California opts to give incarcerated workers credit for time served as a form of payment, decreasing the time some people spend in prisons. The state analysts estimated the change in costs up or down would be in the tens of millions of dollars each year, a small fraction of California’s general fund budget.

The race was too close to call Thursday, with early results showing 55% of voters rejecting the measure.

Prop. 32

On one hand, an $18 minimum wage in California will increase local and state costs to pay all employees this hourly rate, the LAO said. On the other hand, the state would simultaneously save money from having fewer Californians enrolled in health and human services programs, such as Medi-Cal, due to people’s increased incomes. The effect of these two forces, state analysts predicted, could result in higher or lower government costs in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars each year. The LAO predicted the change in cost would be less than 0.5% of the general fund budget.

The race was too close to call Thursday, with early results showing 52% of voters rejecting the measure.

Prop. 35

By permanently funding Medi-Cal health care services through an existing insurance tax, the LAO estimated voters have increased state costs by billions of dollars over the next two years. The state analysts said that the general fund’s budget will increase by $1 billion to $2 billion by the end of 2026 because Prop. 35 reduces the amount of tax revenue that can be used to pay for existing Medi-Cal costs. Additionally, the LAO estimated that the measure will result in an increase in funding for health programs of up to $5 billion each year.

Prop. 35 has won outright by a 3-to-2 margin.

Prop. 36

The increased penalties for retail theft and drug crimes will result in higher criminal just costs, the LAO said. The increase in prison population and state court workload could increase California’s budget annually by hundreds of millions of dollars, the state analysts estimated. The measure will also increase cost for local jurisdictions, according to state analysts, in the range of tens of millions of dollars.

Prop. 36 has won outright by a 7-to-3 margin, according to the Associated Press.