Proposition 43: Limits Voters' Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.
Statewide — all of California
General election · Tuesday, November 3, 2026
- Placed on the ballot by the Legislature as ACA 22 (Chapter 132, Statutes of 2026). Final legislative votes: Senate 35 ayes, 1 no; Assembly 68 ayes, 2 noes.[1][4]
The question on the ballot
LIMITS VOTERS' ABILITY TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Currently, local governments must obtain two-thirds voter approval to impose, extend, or increase special taxes (taxes dedicated to a specific purpose) that they place on the ballot. However, this two-thirds vote requirement does not currently apply to special taxes put on ballot by voter signature gathering. This measure would limit voters' ability to pass voter-proposed local special taxes by raising the percentage of votes needed to approve such ballot measures from a majority (over 50%) to two-thirds. Applies to voter-proposed ballot measures approved after January 1, 2027.[1]
Under current law, local special taxes (taxes for a specific purpose) placed on the ballot by local governments need two-thirds voter approval, but recent court decisions have allowed special taxes proposed by voters through signature gathering to pass by majority vote. Beginning January 1, 2027, the measure would require two-thirds approval for any new, increased or extended local special tax proposed by voters. Fiscal impact per the Legislative Analyst: local government tax revenues could be lower in the future than otherwise; the actual impact is unknown and depends on future decisions by local governments and voters.[1][2]
A YES vote means
Certain local government taxes would require two-thirds approval by voters.
A NO vote means
Certain local government taxes could continue to be approved by voters with a majority vote.
The law today
The State Constitution lets local governments raise taxes with local voter approval. Taxes for a specific purpose (special taxes) require a two-thirds vote, but recent court decisions have allowed special taxes proposed by voters (rather than by a governing board) to pass with a majority vote.[2]
Official fiscal estimate
Per the Legislative Analyst: Proposition 43 makes it harder for local governments to pass certain taxes, so local tax revenues "could be lower in the future than they otherwise would be"; the actual impact is unknown and depends on future decisions by local governments and voters.[2]
Arguments made for
- Official argument in favor, signed by Robert Gutierrez (California Taxpayers Association), Robert Rivinius (Family Business Association of California) and Julian Canete (California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce): "Prop. 43 closes these loopholes and restores the two-thirds vote requirement to pass local special taxes."[3]
- Same argument: "Local governments have imposed over 2,000 new or higher taxes in the past decade" and Prop. 43 "requires governments to spend tax revenue for the specific purpose voters approved."[3]
Arguments made against
- Official argument against, signed by Darrell Roberts (California Professional Firefighters), Chris Harkins (Nurse Alliance of SEIU California) and Adam Weinberger (California School Employees Association): "Prop. 43 undermines the voice of voters and the majority vote by letting just one-third of voters (33.4%) block local voter decisions."[3]
- Same argument: "Prop. 43 makes it harder for you to fund critical services like police and fire departments, fix and repair local roads, staff our local schools or backfill federal healthcare cuts."[3]
On record in support
- California Taxpayers Association, signed by Robert Gutierrez (official argument in favor)[3]
- Family Business Association of California (signer of the official argument in favor)[3]
- California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, signed by Julian Canete (official argument in favor)[3]
- Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, signed by Jon Coupal (official rebuttal to the argument against)[3]
- California Small Business Association (signer of the official rebuttal)[3]
- Yes on Prop 43 - The Local Taxpayer Protection Act (registered support committee)[5]
On record in opposition
- California Professional Firefighters, signed by Darrell Roberts (official argument against)[3]
- Nurse Alliance of SEIU California (signer of the official argument against)[3]
- California School Employees Association (signer of the official argument against)[3]
- Californians Against Waste (signer of the official rebuttal; named in the argument against)[3]
- Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (signer of the official rebuttal; named in the argument against)[3]
- Sierra Business Council (signer of the official rebuttal; named in the argument against)[3]
Campaign money
Per the Secretary of State's ballot-measure contribution totals, through October 6, 2026: $10,005,010 reported in support (Yes on Prop 43 - The Local Taxpayer Protection Act: $9,295,143; Yes on Prop. 43, a project of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association: $709,867) and $7,958,020 in opposition (No on Prop 43: Stop the Local Taxpayer Deception Act, sponsored by labor organizations: $6,868,020; Communities for an Affordable California, Yes on 3, No on 39 and 43, sponsored by Million Voters Project Action Fund: $1,090,000; that committee also appears on other measures' pages).[5]
Research notes & limits
All text from the Official Voter Information Guide. Arguments are the authors' opinions and not checked by any agency.
Sources · 5
Researched 2026-10-19. Green citations are official government records.
- 1.Proposition 43: Official Title and Summary · California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide (Nov. 3, 2026) · 2026-10-05 Official record
- 2.Proposition 43: Analysis by the Legislative Analyst · California Legislative Analyst's Office, via Official Voter Information Guide · 2026-10-05 Official record
- 3.Proposition 43: Arguments and Rebuttals · California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide · 2026-10-05 Official record
- 4.Proposition 43: Summary and What Your Vote Means · California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide · 2026-10-05 Official record
- 5.Proposition 43: Ballot Measure Total Contributions (through 10/06/2026) · California Secretary of State · 2026-10-19 Official record