Quick Take
Measure C, an affordable housing ballot measure backed by housing advocates and Santa Cruz officials, was narrowly winning its race, with about 52.5% of the vote as of early Wednesday. Measure B, a competing ballot measure sponsored by the local real estate industry, was poised for defeat, earning only about 12% of the votes in favor.
Measure C, an affordable housing ballot initiative backed by housing advocates and Santa Cruz officials, ended Tuesday night on track for a narrow victory, earning more than 52.5% of the vote in the city. Measure B, a competing ballot measure sponsored by the local real estate industry, was poised for defeat, earning only about 12% of the votes in favor.
The results reflect 18,032 ballots that were counted in the city of Santa Cruz as of 12:20 a.m. Wednesday. That represents about 47% of all 38,367 registered voters in the city. Santa Cruz County Clerk Tricia Webber’s office ended Tuesday night with about 22,625 ballots still left to tally across the county, or about 22% of all votes cast. However, it was unclear how many of those ballots were from voters in Santa Cruz. The next update on the vote is set for 4 p.m. on Thursday.
MORE ON SANTA CRUZ BALLOT MEASURES: Read Lookout’s previous news and Community Voices opinion coverage here
Earlier in the evening Tuesday, supporters of Measure C were treating the slim early lead with cautious optimism. “I’d rather be ahead than behind in any set of returns, but we have a long way to go this evening, I suspect,” said Santa Cruz Mayor Fred Keeley, who spearheaded the effort to get Measure C to the ballot box. He added that the outcome of the vote will likely be close either way and that it could take several days for the results to become clear.
With one year left on his four-year term as mayor, Keeley said that if Measure C falls short, he expects the city’s next mayor to continue his push to build more affordable housing in Santa Cruz. “I suspect the next mayor is going to pick this up very rapidly and move on with it,” he said.
He cast Measure C as one step in a broader push for housing affordability in the city. “I hope we’re successful tonight. But if not, it is literally not the end of the effort,” he said. “I think we’re getting closer all the time.”
Victor Gomez, government affairs director for the Santa Cruz County Association of Realtors, which backed Measure B, said in a text message to Lookout that the organization was “a bit disappointed about Measure B but happy we provided the voters an option.”
He pointed to the very narrow margin favoring Measure C as evidence that “our community is split on how to approach funding of affordable housing and housing overtaxation. We will remain optimistic as more votes are counted.”
Across the county, voters also strongly supported Proposition 50, which had received nearly 77.2% of the 80,056 local ballots counted by 12:20 a.m. Those ballots represent about 46% of total registered Santa Cruz County voters.
Statewide, several media outlets, including the Associated Press, reported almost immediately after polls closed at 8 p.m. Tuesday that Prop 50 had passed. The redistricting measure aimed at boosting the share of Democrats that California sends to Congress was leading with about 64% of the vote, with all 18,399 precincts partially reporting as of 4:20 a.m. Wednesday.
At the Santa Cruz County Democratic Party headquarters on Front Street in downtown Santa Cruz, local Assemblymember Gail Pellerin cheered Prop 50’s passage.
“I am feeling so proud of the voters of the state of California and proud of our election officials that pulled this election off in a truncated timeframe, and we have won,” she told Lookout. “We have delivered a message to [President Donald] Trump that you cannot take over California. You cannot send your ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] to raid our communities. You cannot send the Marines, you cannot send the National Guard. You cannot hurt our state, and we will not stand for it.”
The dueling housing initiatives took a two-year path to Tuesday’s special election faceoff. Measures B and C look largely similar, but support differs. The former is backed by the Santa Cruz County Association of Realtors, which made it no secret that it’s designed to derail the latter, which has the support of many local politicians and housing advocates.
Measure C, the Workforce Housing Affordability Act of 2025, proposes a $96 annual parcel tax and a graduated real estate transfer tax that starts at home sales above $1.8 million, with the total transfer tax capped at $200,000 per transaction. It aims to raise $4.5 million a year.
Meanwhile, Measure B, the similarly named Workforce Housing and Climate Protection Act of 2025, has a comparable structure, but the parcel tax is set lower at $50 and it also imposes a transfer tax only on home sales above $4 million, with a $100,000 cap per transaction. It estimates it would raise much less annually than Measure C, at an estimated $1.1 million a year.
Measure C proponents argue that the city requires a steady stream of local funds to keep affordable housing developments moving forward and to improve homelessness prevention while exempting lower-income and older homeowners. They add that Measure B would both raise less money and confuse voters. On the other hand, realtors argue that Measure C is onerous and unfair to homeowners and that it’s a city-backed measure rather than a true grassroots initiative.
The formation of Measure C began over two years ago with Keeley and other politicos at the helm. The initiative was developed over the course of an 18-month process that included discussions and negotiations with a variety of people including landlords, renters, UC Santa Cruz students and real estate industry professionals, but was inspired by 2018’s Measure H, a countywide ballot measure to raise tax revenue for affordable housing. While that measure ultimately failed, it had strong voter support in the city of Santa Cruz.
Keeley made getting a measure on the ballot to finance affordable housing and homelessness solutions a key part of his 2022 mayoral campaign. By the following year, the idea had shifted from a bond into a special tax on local property owners, and Keeley eventually decided that the public should lead the process of getting the measure on the ballot rather than the mayor. That came with electoral advantages, too, as a measure initiated through a citizen-led petition drive would require only a simple majority to pass, while a city-sponsored measure would need two-thirds of voters to approve it.
In June 2023, the Santa Cruz City Council voted to officially hand the process to the public. Housing Santa Cruz County executive director Elaine Johnson led that process, who later selected a steering committee of about 10 people. Other political figures such as Housing Santa Cruz County board members Don Lane and Jane Barr, Democratic Central Committee chair Andrew Goldenkranz, Monterey Bay Economic Partnership community development director Matt Huerta, Community Bridges CEO Ray Cancino and Santa Cruz YIMBY lead Janine Roeth were closely involved, too.
Getting the measure onto a ballot was not a speedy process. The group hoped to get it on the March 2024 primary ballot, which then got pushed to a June special election. When that didn’t happen, either, the group began to aim for 2025, since the November 2024 ballot was crowded.
The initiative has evolved into a political battle since the local real estate industry launched its opposing measure in March. Measure C backers were blindsided by the move, which Keeley called “the dirtiest local political trick” he’d ever seen in the city.
As a watch party for Yes on Measure C began to die down at the Santa Cruz County Democratic Central Committee headquarters at around 10 p.m., the mood was cautious but upbeat.
“It’s going in the right direction, so I’m hopeful,” said Housing Santa Cruz County Executive Director Elaine Johnson.
Former Democratic Central Committee chair Andrew Goldenkranz said that his quick election math last week had the measure coming in below 50% in early voting. He based the estimates on early turnout demographics, since polling data showed little party adherence.
“As the turnout increased, my algebra was pushing us up by like half a point each day,” he said. “I’m not celebrating yet, because it’s still close, but for tonight we’re exceeding expectations.”
Both Johnson and Goldenkranz were involved in the formation of the measure from the beginning, and said they are glad to see it qualify for the ballot. Johnson said that, while she would not change the people that were at the table during the process, she would have moved it along faster in retrospect. Goldenkranz said he would have highlighted the realtors’ lack of participation more publicly.
“They got invited to every one of those meetings and they chose not to attend,” he said. “I would have gone harder calling them out and saying ‘no, you had a seat at the table and chose not to take it.’”
Johnson said she believes the real estate industry’s opposing measure caused confusion among voters, which remains C’s biggest challenge to overcome. However, she believes the Yes on C campaign was able to get through to the public.
“I don’t think it was people saying no, no, no [to affordable housing],” she said. “But we had to come out and remind people this is your kid, your babysitter, and your kid’s teacher that are impacted by this.”
Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.