Proposition 5 ballot measure to make it easier to fund affordable housing fails

A ballot measure that would have made it easier to finance affordable housing and other public projects in California has failed.

Proposition 5 was trailing 56% to 44% as of Friday afternoon, a 1.3-million vote margin, according to tallies from the Secretary of State's office.

The measure would have decreased the approval threshold for local bonds from two-thirds to 55%. Backers said it was necessary to help build low-income housing, expand roads and transit, renovate parks and construct other public infrastructure.

Read more: Prop. 5 could unleash a flood of new affordable housing, road repairs, fire stations — and tax hikes

Results from prior elections showed dozens of local bond measures that exceeded 55% support but failed to reach the required two-thirds majority, meaning that Proposition 5 could have led to a flood of new projects.

But opponents argued that the tax increases that would have resulted from easier approvals were too expensive.

"Proponents of Proposition 5 asserted repeatedly that their measure was not a tax increase, but simply 'asking the question' to see if voters wanted to ease the vote requirement for raising taxes," said the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., a main opponent of Proposition 5, in a statement. "That question has now been answered."

Read more: Your guide to Proposition 5: Making it easier to pass local housing, road bonds

Supporters of the measure, a group of housing, local government, union and other advocates, acknowledged its defeat Friday.

"The fight to address California’s housing crisis and infrastructure needs is far from over," the Yes on 5 campaign said in a statement. "California needs to take serious, transformative action to build more housing that is affordable and improve critical infrastructure in our communities."

Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.