Election Results Update [8 November 2006]

For updated results on all propositions, see the Secretary of State website.

Background

Flood control is currently administered through a variety of federal, state and local agencies. Private companies and agencies also operate some flood control facilities. California operates several programs responsible for flood management. Some of these programs are handled directly by the state. Other programs provide grants to local agencies for flood control. Restoration and construction of the system levees and other flood control facilities are funded directly by the state with operations and maintenance being handled by local flood control districts. The state general fund supplies most of these state flood programs with funds for their operating costs. Over the last decade, voters have passed several general obligation bonds which have supplied much of the general fund money for flood management. Experts say that much of these bond funds have already been spent.

Flood control in the Central Valley is funded and operated primarily by the state through the Central Valley Flood Control system. The state does not administer maintenance or construction in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta region, but it has given financial help to flood districts to maintain and improve Delta levees in the past. With bond funds depleted, the California legislature approved AB 142 (Núñez) in May 2006, a $500 million appropriation for emergency levee repairs and other flood management-related costs. The California Department of Water Resources estimates that it will cost $7 billion to $12 billion to renovate and improve upgrade the Central Valley flood control system and the levees in the Delta.

Proposition 1E originated as AB 140, which was introduced by Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez. The legislature passed the bill on 19 May 2006. The proposition was part of a larger infrastructure development bond targeting education, flood protection and housing. Negotiations in the legislature led to cutting the bond into separate bills, each aimed at different parts of infrastructure development. Proposition 1E would authorize the state to sell $4.1 billion in general obligation bonds for flood management programs targeting different areas and types of flood facilities upgrades and maintenance. According to the state Legislative Analyst's Office, the state would make payments on the bond debt from the general fund over a period of 30 years. The average interest rate for bonds is currently 5 percent. If the bonds are sold at that interest rate, the cost to pay off the principal and the interest of the bonds would amount to a total of $8 billion or $266 million per year.

• $3 billion would be spent on repair and restoration of levees in the Central Valley flood control system. In addition, funds would be spent on flood protection in urban areas within the Central Valley. Some of these funds would also be granted to local agencies for flood prevention in the Delta region.
• $500 million would be given to local governments for flood control projects outside the Central Valley system. These projects would have to meet federal guidelines.
• $300 million would be granted to local agencies to fund storm water flood management projects outside the Central Valley system.
• $290 million would be spent on flood protection corridors in the state. Enhancement, renovation and construction of new corridors would be covered by these funds.

Proposition 1E would allocate unspecified funds for land acquisition by the state for flood management. It also provides for independent audits to insure that funds are spent correctly.

Campaign Finance

Browse our webpage listing major contributors to all of the campaigns supporting and opposing the ballot measures here.

Proponents of Proposition 1E use 2005's Hurricane Katrina as an example of the what can go wrong when levees are not adequately built and maintained. They believe that Proposition 1E will fund urgently needed levee repair and upgrades to flood control systems. They also believe that the quality of California's oceans, streams, rivers and drinking water will be kept safe and clean with funding made available through this measure. Supporters cite the measure's safeguards like independent audits and oversight as reasons the proposition is safe for Californians. Proponents of the measure come from environmental groups, health and safety officials and state water officials.

Opponents of the proposition believe that it is the wrong solution to flood management concerns. They think that Proposition 1E makes the state responsible for flood management projects when local governments should finance projects. Opponents believe that California residents will pay more taxes to pay for the lingering bond debt. Finally, critics say that Proposition 1E provides inadequate financial oversight that will lead to mismanagement in Sacramento. Many opponents of Proposition 1E are members of the anti-tax community and business leaders.

Official Voter Guide
Includes title and summary, arguments for and against, and text of the initiative.

Disaster and Flood Preparedness Bond
Analysis by California Legislative Analyst, 2006.

Individual Campaign Committees
Total Contributions and Expenditures (select "Nov. 2006 election" and "Prop. 1E" in dropdown boxes)

League of Women Voters of Education Fund non-partisan analysis

Hope is Not a Plan
No on Proposition 1E

Rebuilding California
Yes on 1E

Analyzing the Vote for Selected Propositions, Los Angeles Times Exit Poll, Nov. 9, 2006.

Exit poll: Complete poll data, Los Angeles Times Exit Poll, Nov. 9, 2006.

Majorities of voters appear ready to approve the state's infrastructure bonds (Props. 1B, 1C, 1D and 1E). Field Poll, Release 2219, Nov. 4, 2006.

Baldassare, Mark.
PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and the Future, Public Policy Institute, October 2006.

Baldassare, Mark.
PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and the Future, Public Policy Institute, September 2006.

Feinstein, Brown and Lockyer ahead, other statewide races close or tied; Support for infrastructure bonds and propositions 86 and 87 lukewarm.
Los Angeles Times Exit Poll, Sept.29, 2006.

Baldassare, Mark.
PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and the Future, Public Policy Institute, August 2006.

Voters are supporting four of the five bond proposals on the November ballot, although not by overwhelming margins. Field Poll, Release 2206, July 28, 2006.

Continuing negative job appraisals of the Governor and the legislature, despite initial support for infrastructure bonds. Field Poll, Release 2201, June 5, 2006.

Propositions 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E: The Public Works Bond Package. Oct. 2006, California Budget Project

Smith-Heisters, Skaidra; Summers, Adam B.
Analysis of California's Proposition 1E and 84: Funding the state's water and flood control infrastructure. Sept. 2006, Reason Institute.

The following citations include links to full-text articles online, when they are available. Some restrictions on use apply, due to licensing requirements. For more information, see Tips for Finding Full-Text Articles.

Kollars, Deb; Weiser, Matt.
"Levees to get a wave of cash: Passage of $4.1 billion state flood bond will boost repairs, safety," Sacramento Bee, Nov. 9, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Richards, Gary; de Sá, Karen; Hull, Dana.
"Home run for bonds: $43 billion to fix decades of neglect, needs," San Jose Mercury News, Nov. 9, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Rau, Jordan.
"With bonds approved, the line for billions forms," Los Angeles Times, Nov. 9, 2006.
Los Angeles Times

Abate, Tom.
"Welcome results for business: Passage of bonds should make it easier for firms to thrive in California," San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 9, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

Lucas, Greg.
"Infrastructure bonds: Voters backing governor's public works spending package," San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 8, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

Cabanatuan, Michael.
"Infrastructure bonds on course for victory: Voters set to invest in transit, schools, housing and water," San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 4, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

Mendel, Ed.
"Voters to decide how much debt state can afford: 5 bond measures total $43 billion," San Diego Union-Tribune, Nov. 3, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Richman, Josh.
"Governor: McClintock is 'wrong' on bonds," Oakland Tribune, November 3, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Marinucci, Carla.
"Public Policy Institute of California Poll: Governor bucks trend against GOP," San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 26, 2006.
[Includes poll information on Propositions 1B-1E, and 84.]
San Francisco Chronicle

Halper, Evan.
"Initiative Could Undermine State Bond Issues: A measure to restrict use of eminent domain would hinder construction under Props. 1A to 1E, critics say," Los Angeles Times, Oct. 18, 2006.
Los Angeles Times

Herdt, Timm.
"Backers hoping bond measures pay dividends," Ventura County Star, Oct. 16, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Schultz, E.J.
"Valley has big stake in $37b: Massive bond package on ballot affects levees, roads, schools, housing," Fresno Bee, Oct. 9, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Wildermuth, John.
"Bonds seen as the only way to get things built," San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 8, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

Wildermuth, John.
"Bond Measures: Governor, Dems chums once more," San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 5, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

Furillo, Andy
"Big push planned for bond issues," Sacramento Bee, Oct. 1, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

[Opinion].
"Yes on propositions 1B, 1E; No on propositions 1C, 1D," Alameda Times-Star, Oct 1, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Lucas, Greg.
"Bond measures have tenuous voter support," San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 29, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

[Opinion]
"Bonds, pro and con: 1A, 1B and 1E deliver, but others disappoint," San Diego Union-Tribune,
Sept. 29, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Sheppard, Harrison.
"State infrastructure gets C-minus as engineers issue report card," Daily News of Los Angeles, Sep. 27, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

[Opinion].
"Yes on 1E: What happened in New Orleans could happen in California," Press Democrat (Riverside), Sep. 14, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Dahlberg, Carrie Peyton
"Key to flood work: Voters Legislators fall short; hope rides on billions from bond measures," Sacramento Bee, Sep. 3, 2006
Access World News (UCB)

[Opinion].
"Fate of Arnold's bond package dicey," Oakland Tribune, July 29, 2006.
Access World News (UCB)

Yi, Matthew.
"Infrastructure bonds find general approval with voters, poll says:
Initiative to aid homeless housing, shelters is behind," San Francisco Chronicle, July 28, 2006.
San Francisco Chronicle

Hecht, Peter.
"Coming this fall: Big ballot bingo: Bonds, tax hike facing voters in November total $46 billion,
Sacramento Bee, July 1, 2006.
Access World News

Wisckil, Martin.
"Governor makes pitch: Schwarzenegger visits to drum up support for his $37.3 billion public works plan,"
Orange County Register, May 9, 2006
Access World News (UCB)

Nelson, Soraya Sarhaddi; Joseph, Brian.
"Billions in the works," Orange County Register, May 6, 2006
Access World News (UCB)