Breaking Down the 2024 Ballot Measures
The 2024 election is fast approaching, and while the top of the ticket has, justifiably, received most of the attention, there are a number of items on this year’s ballot in addition to the numerous federal and state races.
Every voter in Minnesota will be voting on the extension of a constitutional amendment, while St. Paul voters have two ballot measures before them that could dramatically reshape politics and young people in our city for years to come.
The constitutional amendment
On this year’s ballot is a renewal of the constitutional amendment for the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund. Established in 1988 and reauthorized in 1998, both times receiving overwhelming support, the fund calls for a portion of state lottery proceeds to be directed to natural resource projects.
Overseen by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources, they have funded $1 billion to over 1600 projects since 1991. The amendment is scheduled to sunset in 2025 without reauthorization.
As with any constitutional amendment in the state of Minnesota, failure to fill in an answer has the same effect as a “no” vote.
The full text of the question on the ballot reads:
“Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to protect drinking water sources and the water quality of lakes, rivers, and streams; conserve wildlife habitat and natural areas; improve air quality; and expand access to parks and trails by extending the transfer of proceeds from the state-operated lottery to the environment and natural resources trust fund, and to dedicate the proceeds for these purposes?”
Read more about the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund legacy.mn.gov/environment-natural-resources-trust-fund.
Dedicated funding for early learning
The first question on the ballot in St. Paul is a newly proposed tax levy to raise funds dedicated to early learning in the city. This would be a proposed property tax increase that would raise as much as $20 million annually to go toward early learning expenses in the next 10 years.
The proposal would provide low/no-cost childcare in St. Paul ubiquitous, but would come at the cost of potentially significant property tax increases over the next decade, raising about $2 million in the first year, with an additional $2 million each subsequent year.
Mayor Cater, for one, has come out against the plan, saying it doesn’t go far enough to meet the needs of St. Paul families. The St. Paul Federation of Teachers has expressed concerns that more funding will flow to private day cares in the city.
However, the proposed funding is designed to pay for childcare from birth to five-year-olds for families who make less than $55,000 per year, which makes up about half of the children in the city.
The full text of the questions reads:
“Should the City Levy Taxes to Provide Early Learning Subsidies?
In order to create a dedicated fund for children’s early care and education to be administered by a City department or office that provides subsidies to families and providers so that early care and education is no cost to low-income families and available on a sliding scale to other families, and so as to increase the number of child care slots and support the child care workforce, shall the City of Saint Paul be authorized to levy property taxes in the amount of $2,000,000 in the first year, to increase by the same amount each year following for the next nine years ($4,000,000 of property taxes levied in year two, $6,000,000 in year three, $8,000,000 in year four and so on until $20,000,000 of property taxes are levied in year ten)? BY VOTING “YES” ON THIS BALLOT QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING FOR A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE.”
Changing when we elect city officials in St. Paul
The final ballot question in St. Paul proposes to change when we elect our city leaders. This ballot measure, if approved, would amend the city charter from electing the mayor and city council on odd-numbered years to even years aligned with presidential elections – meaning if this measure passes, four years from now you’ll be voting for the City Council along with the President.
Supporters of the amendment to the city charter see this as a way to increase citizen participation, citing that only about one-third of voters turn out for local elections compared to presidential elections, and believe there would be a cost savings by reducing the number of lower-turnout elections on off years.
Opponents say that, while turnout may be greater, they fear that local issues will be drowned out in the noise of the presidential election.
Additionally, St. Paul’s ranked choice voting for local elections poses an additional challenge, since ranked choice is not allowed for state or federal elections, posing potential logistical and legal hurdles, even if the measure passes.
The full text of the question reads:
“Changing City Elections to Presidential Election years.
Shall Chapter 7 (Elections) of the City Charter be amended as follows: Sec. 7.01. – City elections. The election of city officers and such other officers as are required by law to be elected at a city election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in odd numbered presidential election years. Notwithstanding Section 2.02 of this Charter setting four-year terms, and to transition to presidential election years, councilmembers elected on November 7, 2023, shall serve a five-year term and a mayoral election shall occur on November 4, 2025, for a three-year term. Currently, city elections take place in odd years. A “yes” vote changes City elections to take place in presidential election years, which occur in even years. A “no” vote keeps City elections in odd years.”
Learn more
- See your sample ballot sos.state.mn.us/elections-voting/whats-on-my-ballot
- Find your polling place pollfinder.sos.state.mn.us
- Find other voting resources ramseycounty.us/residents/elections-voting
