California Proposition 19 (2020), also referred to as Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 11, is an amendment of the Constitution of California that was narrowly approved by voters in the general election on November 3, 2020, with just over 51% of the vote.[1][2] The legislation increases the property tax burden on owners of inherited property to provide expanded property tax benefits to homeowners ages 55 years and older, disabled homeowners, and victims of natural disasters, and fund wildfire response.[3] According to the California Legislative Analyst, Proposition 19 is a large net tax increase "of hundreds of millions of dollars per year."[4]
According to the ballot summary, Proposition 19:
Allows homeowners who are over 55 years of age (without regard to wealth), disabled, or victims of natural disasters to transfer their existing property tax assessed value under 1978 California Proposition 13 to a replacement home, including a more expensive home.
Significantly limits the existing property tax benefits under Proposition 13 for certain real estate transfers between family members, such as the transfer of property from a parent to a child following the death of the parent.
Expands property tax benefits for family farm transfers.
Allocates net state (but not local) revenues and savings (if any) to wildfire response and for reimbursing local governments. However, because the COVID-19 pandemic has created significant uncertainty for the state budget, the Legislative Analyst believes that the vast majority of the wildfire funding will not be available until 2025 at the earliest.[5]
The California Association of Realtors previously sponsored and financed an initiative measure known as 2018 California Proposition 5 on the November 2018 ballot that would have further expanded Proposition 13 property tax breaks for certain homeowners (primarily homeowners over age 55) by allowing them to transfer their lower property tax base to replacement property.[8] That ballot measure failed statewide with 40% support, and also failed to receive majority support in all 58 California counties.[9] Proposition 5 opponents successfully argued that the initiative measure was a "huge tax break to wealthy Californians" and a "huge windfall to the real estate industry."[10]
In 2019, the California Association of Realtors sponsored and financed another initiative measure that would have expanded Proposition 13 property tax breaks for certain homeowners like the 2018 California Proposition 5 ballot measure. However, to generate a net increase in property tax revenue, the initiative also significantly narrowed Proposition 13 property tax reassessment exclusion rules for inherited properties and expanded the scope of business entity ownership changes that would result in commercial property reassessment under Proposition 13.[11] This initiative measure received sufficient signatures to qualify for the November 2020 ballot.[12]
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 11 (ACA 11)
As allowed under California law,[13] the California Association of Realtors negotiated with various special interests to secure legislative approval of an alternative constitutional amendment known as Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 11 (ACA 11).[14] Proposition 19 was added to the ballot via ACA 11 which was authored by San Mateo Assemblymember Kevin Mullin.[15]
Significant controversy arose because the legislative approval of ACA 11 missed the regular legal deadline for placing measures on the November 2020 ballot, and the Legislature also had to enact a separate statute calling a special election for ACA 11 that was consolidated with the regular November 2020 election.[16] In response to the approval and qualification of ACA 11 for the November 2020 ballot, the California Association of Realtors withdrew its 2019 initiative measure that was previously eligible to appear on the November 2020 ballot.[17]
The primary differences between Proposition 19 and the 2019 initiative measure withdrawn by the California Association of Realtors are that Proposition 19 excluded the expanded business entity ownership provisions that would have resulted in commercial property reassessment under Proposition 13 (to appease major business interests who did not like the business tax increase component of the 2019 initiative) and that Proposition 19 added the partial firefighting revenue provisions as a political sweetener (to appease firefighting organizations that previously opposed 2018 California Proposition 5).[18][19]
Thus, compared to the 2019 initiative measure, Proposition 19 retained the expanded Proposition 13 property tax breaks for certain homeowners (primarily homeowners over age 55) like those contained in the defeated 2018 California Proposition 5 ballot measure, retained the property tax increase provisions by significantly narrowing Proposition 13 property tax reassessment exclusion rules for inherited properties, and added the partial firefighting revenue provisions as a political sweetener.[20]
Legislative Votes on ACA 11
In California, constitutional amendments proposed by the Legislature require approval from two-thirds of the membership of each house.[21]
The following are the votes by the Members of the California Legislature on ACA 11, along with how the voters within the corresponding legislative district subsequently voted on Proposition 19:
California Assembly
Assembly votes are from the California Assembly Daily Journal[22] and Proposition 19 outcomes are from the California Secretary of State.[23] The vote designation of "Abstain" is for those Legislators present on the day of the vote,[24] but who did not record a vote for or against ACA 11. The vote designation of "Absent" is for those Legislators who were absent on the day of the vote. Assembly districts are based on the applicable 2011 district.
District
Last Name
First Name
Party
ACA 11 Vote
Prop 19 Outcome
04
Aguiar-Curry
Cecilia
Dem
Yes
Pass
31
Arambula
Joaquin
Dem
Yes
Pass
16
Bauer-Kahan
Rebecca
Dem
Yes
Pass
24
Berman
Marc
Dem
Yes
Pass
05
Bigelow
Frank
Rep
Yes
Fail
50
Bloom
Richard
Dem
Abstain
Fail
76
Boerner-Horvath
Tasha
Dem
Abstain
Pass
18
Bonta
Rob
Dem
Yes
Pass
73
Brough
Bill
Rep
No
Fail
62
Burke
Autumn
Dem
Yes
Pass
57
Calderon
Ian
Dem
Yes
Fail
51
Carrillo
Wendy
Dem
Yes
Fail
60
Cervantes
Sabrina
Dem
Abstain
Fail
49
Chau
Ed
Dem
Yes
Fail
55
Chen
Phillip
Rep
Abstain
Fail
17
Chiu
David
Dem
Abstain
Pass
68
Choi
Steven
Rep
Abstain
Fail
25
Chu
Kansen
Dem
Yes
Pass
08
Cooley
Ken
Dem
No
Fail
09
Cooper
Jim
Dem
Yes
Pass
35
Cunningham
Jordan
Rep
Abstain
Fail
01
Dahle
Megan
Rep
Yes
Fail
69
Daly
Tom
Dem
Yes
Pass
72
Diep
Tyler
Rep
Absent
Fail
13
Eggman
Susan
Dem
Yes
Pass
12
Flora
Heath
Rep
Yes
Fail
34
Fong
Vince
Rep
No
Fail
11
Frazier
Jim
Dem
Absent
Pass
43
Friedman
Laura
Dem
Yes
Fail
45
Gabriel
Jesse
Dem
Yes
Fail
03
Gallagher
James
Rep
Yes
Fail
58
Garcia
Cristina
Dem
Yes
Pass
56
Garcia
Eduardo
Dem
Yes
Pass
64
Gipson
Mike
Dem
Yes
Pass
78
Gloria
Todd
Dem
Yes
Pass
80
Gonzalez
Lorena
Dem
Absent
Pass
21
Gray
Adam
Dem
Yes
Pass
14
Grayson
Tim
Dem
Yes
Pass
41
Holden
Chris
Dem
Yes
Fail
44
Irwin
Jacqui
Dem
Yes
Pass
59
Jones-Sawyer
Reggie
Dem
Yes
Pass
27
Kalra
Ash
Dem
Yes
Pass
54
Kamlager-Dove
Sydney
Dem
Yes
Pass
06
Kiley
Kevin
Rep
No
Fail
36
Lackey
Tom
Rep
Yes
Fail
10
Levine
Marc
Dem
No
Pass
37
Limón
Monique
Dem
Yes
Fail
28
Low
Evan
Dem
Yes
Pass
77
Maienschein
Brian
Dem
Yes
Pass
26
Mathis
Devon
Rep
Yes
Fail
42
Mayes
Chad
Ind
Yes
Fail
07
McCarty
Kevin
Dem
Yes
Pass
61
Medina
Jose
Dem
Yes
Pass
22
Mullin
Kevin
Dem
Yes
Pass
66
Muratsuchi
Al
Dem
Yes
Fail
46
Nazarian
Adrin
Dem
Abstain
Pass
70
O'Donnell
Patrick
Dem
Yes
Fail
33
Obernolte
Jay
Rep
Yes
Fail
23
Patterson
Jim
Rep
Abstain
Fail
74
Petrie-Norris
Cottie
Dem
Abstain
Fail
20
Quirk
Bill
Dem
Yes
Pass
65
Quirk-Silva
Sharon
Dem
Abstain
Fail
40
Ramos
James
Dem
Absent
Pass
63
Rendon
Anthony
Dem
Yes
Pass
47
Reyes
Eloise
Dem
Yes
Pass
39
Rivas
Luz
Dem
Yes
Pass
30
Rivas
Robert
Dem
Yes
Pass
52
Rodriguez
Freddie
Dem
Yes
Pass
48
Rubio
Blanca
Dem
Yes
Fail
32
Salas
Rudy
Dem
Abstain
Fail
53
Santiago
Miguel
Dem
Yes
Pass
38
Smith
Christy
Dem
Yes
Fail
29
Stone
Mark
Dem
Yes
Pass
19
Ting
Phil
Dem
Abstain
Pass
67
Vacant
Vacant
Vac
Vacant
Fail
71
Voepel
Randy
Rep
Yes
Fail
75
Waldron
Marie
Rep
Yes
Fail
79
Weber
Shirley
Dem
Yes
Pass
15
Wicks
Buffy
Dem
Yes
Pass
02
Wood
Jim
Dem
Abstain
Pass
California Senate
Senate votes are from the California Senate Daily Journal[25] and Proposition 19 outcomes are from the California Secretary of State.[26] The vote designation of "Abstain" is for those Legislators present on the day of the vote,[27] but who did not record a vote for or against ACA 11. Senate districts are based on the applicable 2011 district.
District
Last Name
First Name
Party
ACA 11 Vote
Prop 19 Outcome
26
Allen
Ben
Dem
Abstain
Fail
32
Archuleta
Bob
Dem
Yes
Fail
39
Atkins
Toni
Dem
Yes
Pass
36
Bates
Patricia
Rep
No
Fail
15
Beall
Jim
Dem
Yes
Pass
08
Borgeas
Andreas
Rep
Abstain
Fail
35
Bradford
Steven
Dem
Yes
Pass
12
Caballero
Anna
Dem
Yes
Pass
29
Chang
Ling Ling
Rep
Abstain
Fail
01
Dahl
Brian
Rep
Yes
Fail
03
Dodd
Bill
Dem
Yes
Pass
24
Durazo
Maria Elena
Dem
Yes
Pass
05
Galgiani
Cathleen
Dem
Yes
Pass
07
Glazer
Steve
Dem
Yes
Pass
33
Gonzalez
Lena
Dem
Yes
Pass
16
Grove
Shannon
Rep
Abstain
Fail
18
Hertzberg
Robert
Dem
Yes
Pass
13
Hill
Jerry
Dem
Yes
Pass
40
Hueso
Ben
Dem
Yes
Pass
14
Hurtado
Melissa
Dem
Abstain
Pass
19
Jackson
Hannah-Beth
Dem
Yes
Fail
38
Jones
Brian
Rep
No
Fail
20
Leyva
Connie
Dem
Yes
Pass
02
McGuire
Mike
Dem
Yes
Pass
28
Melendez
Melissa
Rep
No
Fail
30
Mitchell
Holly
Dem
Yes
Pass
17
Monning
Bill
Dem
Yes
Pass
37
Moorlach
John
Rep
Abstain
Fail
23
Morrell
Mike
Rep
No
Fail
04
Nielsen
Jim
Rep
No
Fail
06
Pan
Richard
Dem
Yes
Pass
25
Portantino
Anthony
Dem
Yes
Fail
31
Roth
Richard
Dem
Yes
Pass
22
Rubio
Susan
Dem
Yes
Fail
09
Skinner
Nancy
Dem
Yes
Pass
27
Stern
Henry
Dem
Yes
Fail
34
Umberg
Tom
Dem
Yes
Fail
10
Wieckowski
Bob
Dem
Yes
Pass
11
Wiener
Scott
Dem
Yes
Pass
21
Wilk
Scott
Rep
Yes
Fail
Real estate industry sponsor and prior history
The California Association of Realtors sponsored the Proposition 19 constitutional amendment,[28] with the expectation of deriving significant profits from many more home sales under the ballot measure, including from both the expanded tax benefit portability provisions and from the significant narrowing of the inheritance exclusion provisions which will force more home sales.[29] The president of the California Association of Realtors has denied that Proposition 19 is about making money for the Realtors.[30]
Racial equity issues
In analyzing the Proposition 19 ballot measure, a September 2020 report by the California Budget & Policy Center stated that: "Housing policy and tax policy have historically benefited white households most, including through policies with explicitly racist design and implementation that have blocked Black and brown Californians from homeownership opportunities. By directing additional tax benefits largely to white homeowners, Prop. 19 reinforces racial inequity within California's tax system."[31]
The Greenlining Institute has also criticized Proposition 19 for not helping "first-time homeowners who are disproportionately Black, Indigenous and people of color."[32]
Campaign controversy
It was reported[33] that the California Association of Realtors, the sponsor of Proposition 19, hired a former employee of a statewide taxpayer association for the sole purpose of using the former employer's job title to confuse voters to support Proposition 19. A radio ad was cited in the article as being deceptive because the former employee led listeners to believe he was advocating for the Proposition 19 tax increase in his capacity as the former legislative director of the statewide taxpayers association. The statewide taxpayers association received many calls from voters who said they were disgusted by the misleading radio ads and large direct mail pieces by the Yes on 19 campaign. The reporting article also cited a California Globe analysis that Proposition 19 is a billion dollar tax increase on California families and that Proposition 19 was in fact opposed by the statewide taxpayers association.[34]
Newspaper editorials
According to the California Initiative Editorial Scorecard, Proposition 19 was opposed by 16 major California newspapers and supported by 5 major California newspapers.[35]
The following major California newspapers opposed Proposition 19:[36]
Newspaper
Position
Los Angeles Times
Oppose
San Jose Mercury News
Oppose
Orange County Register
Oppose
East Bay Times
Oppose
San Francisco Chronicle
Oppose
The Press-Enterprise
Oppose
San Gabriel Valley Tribune
Oppose
The Daily Breeze
Oppose
Los Angeles Daily News
Oppose
The Santa Rosa Press Democrat
Oppose
Long Beach Press-Telegram
Oppose
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
Oppose
San Bernardino Sun
Oppose
The Desert Sun
Oppose
Chico Enterprise-Record
Oppose
Bakersfield Californian
Oppose
The following major California newspaper supported Proposition 19:[37]
Newspaper
Position
San Diego Union-Tribune
Support
Sacramento Bee
Support
San Luis Obispo Tribune
Support
Fresno Bee
Support
Modesto Bee
Support
Campaign contributions
According to campaign contribution data from the California Secretary of State, as of November 1, 2020, supporters of Proposition 19 raised $47.0 million, with $40.4 million from the California Association of Realtors and $4.9 million from the National Association of Realtors, for a combined total of $45.3 million (96.4% of all campaign contributions) coming from real estate interests. Opponents of Proposition 19 raised approximately $45,000.[38]
Polling
In order to pass, Proposition 19 needed simple majority (>50%) approval by the voters which it narrowly received.
^Changes Requirements for Certain Property Owners to Transfer Their Property Tax Base to Replacement Property. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. California Initiative AG No. 17-0013 Am. 1 (2017).
^California Secretary of State, Statement of Vote November 6, 2018 General Election, pp. 95–97.
^Ballot Pamphlet, California General Election (November 6, 2018), argument against Proposition 5, p. 39.
^Changes Requirements For Transferring Property Tax Base To Replacement Property. Expands Business Property Reassessment. Initiative Constitutional Amendment. California Initiative AG No. 19-0003 (2019).
^California Secretary of State AP 20:040, New Measure Eligible for California's November 2020 Ballot, April 23, 2020.