Skip to main content

BallotQuestions.vote is an independent, nonpartisan tracker. It is not a government website and not an election authority. For official ballot information, contact your state election authority.

Proposition 43

Limits Voters' Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services

On the ballot

California · November 2026 general election · Constitutional amendment · Election day November 3, 2026
Topics: Government structure, Taxes and revenue

In plain language

Proposition 43 would raise the share of votes needed to approve local special taxes that voters themselves place on the ballot by signature gathering, from a simple majority to two-thirds. Special taxes are taxes dedicated to a specific purpose. Local governments already need two-thirds voter approval for special taxes they place on the ballot, but recent court decisions allowed voter-proposed special taxes to pass with a majority. The change would apply to voter-proposed local ballot measures approved after January 1, 2027. The Legislature placed it on the ballot through Assembly Constitutional Amendment 22.

Fiscal impact

Legislative Analyst's Office summary of the estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: "Possibility that local government tax revenues will not go up as much in the future due to a higher vote threshold for certain taxes." The LAO states the actual revenue impact is unknown and would depend on future decisions by local governments and voters.

Summarized from the official fiscal analysis listed in the sources below. Figures are the state's, not this site's.

What supporters and opponents say

These are summaries of arguments made by the named organizations, drawn from the sources listed below. They are their claims, not this site's, and this site takes no position on the measure.

What supporters say

  • The ballot argument signed by Robert Gutierrez (California Taxpayers Association), Robert Rivinius (Family Business Association of California), and Julian Canete (California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce) says recent court decisions created a loophole that let special taxes pass with fewer votes, and that the measure would restore the longstanding two-thirds requirement.
  • Supporters state in the official argument that some cities charge real estate transfer taxes as high as 6 percent, which on a $900,000 median-priced home would cost a seller $54,000, and say the measure would protect homeowners, renters, and small businesses.
  • Supporters state that local governments have imposed about 2,000 new or higher taxes over the past decade and argue the measure would require that revenue be spent on the purposes voters approved.

Attributed to California Taxpayers Association, Family Business Association of California, California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce.

What opponents say

  • The ballot argument signed by Darrell Roberts (California Professional Firefighters), Chris Harkins (Nurse Alliance of SEIU California), and Adam Weinberger (California School Employees Association) says the measure would let 33.4 percent of voters block what nearly 67 percent support, making a "no" vote count twice as much as a "yes."
  • Opponents state in the official argument that the change would make it harder for communities to fund road repairs, schools, wildfire preparation, 911 response, and local hospitals and clinics, especially as federal health funding is cut.

Attributed to California Professional Firefighters, California School Employees Association.

Sources

Everything on this page traces to these sources. Follow them to read the original documents.

Last updated . How this page is sourced and corrected is described in the correction policy.