Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
Streetsblog.net

Why California’s Two-Thirds Local Ballot Threshold May Be Worth Keeping

false

California lost a couple of transit heartbreakers at the ballot box last month.

Measure J in Los Angeles, which would have secured funding for transit projects by extending a local sales tax until 2069, fell short of the required two-thirds majority by less than 1 percentage point. Another closely watched ballot measure was Alameda County's Proposition B1, which would have provided $7.8 billion for road repairs, transit, and biking and walking. The measure failed by just 800 votes, or slightly more than one-tenth of 1 percent.

Since election day, some transit advocates have called for relaxing California's two-thirds rule, which requires a supermajority to pass local tax increases designated for a specific purpose. But Systemic Failure isn't convinced that would be a change for the better:

Bicycle and transit advocates were obviously disappointed that B1 failed. The measure would have increased bike/ped funding in the county, and prevented further cuts to the local bus system. So should they get on board with a lower 55% threshold? I think that may be ill-advised.

The advantage of the 66% threshold is that it ensures all constituencies have a seat at the table. That was not the case in 1986, when only a simple majority was needed. The result was that bike/ped advocates were completely shut out. Transit riders didn’t do so well either. [Above] is a comparison of the simple-majority 1986 and super-majority 2002 measures.

Note that Alameda county surpassed 80% approval. Other urban counties have also been generally successful with local measures, despite the 2/3 requirement.

So what went wrong this time? In the case of Alameda, the county over-reached. Unlike past measures, Proposition B1 had a controversial provision making the tax permanent. Many voters were concerned that once the existing expenditure plan was completed, the county would continue collecting the tax in perpetuity without input from the voters.

Elsewhere on the Network today: Bike Davis reports that cycling advocates in this bastion of bike-friendliness are already strategizing about how they can win the League of American Bicyclists' new "Diamond" standard. And Bike Delaware beautifully captures the absurdity of modern road design if you happen to be walking.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Opinion: Stop Asking If People Want to Ride Bikes

"We shouldn’t be aiming to nudge a few percentage points in public opinion. Our goal should be to make freedom of mobility so compelling that people demand it."

January 13, 2026

When the Government Says You’re ‘Weaponizing’ Your Car

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officers have been brutalizing and killing people who they perceive as threats. Is mass automobility multiplying their pretext to do it?

January 12, 2026

Should Monday’s Headlines Carry a Carrot or a Stick?

Human beings generally don't like being forced to do anything, so Grist wonders whether policies like car bans could actually be counterproductive?

January 12, 2026

Chicago Explores Black Perspectives on Public Transit

"We're not going to fix decades of inequitable investment in one year, and things like the high-frequency bus network and the Red Line Extension are really important, but the work isn't done."

January 9, 2026

Confirmed: Non-Driving Infrastructure Creates ‘Induced Demand,’ Too

Widening a highway to cure congestion is like losing weight by buying bigger pants — but thanks to the same principle of "induced demand," adding bike paths and train lines to cure climate actually works.

January 9, 2026

Friday’s Headlines Are Unsustainably Expensive

To paraphrase former New York City mayoral candidate Jimmy McMillan, the car payment is too damn high.

January 9, 2026
See all posts