Ideology
Prop43

Limits Voters’ Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.

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.

What the Legislative Analyst says

Requires Certain Local Taxes Receive Two-Thirds Approval by Voters. Under current law, local taxes that are used for a specific purpose require a two-thirds vote to be approved. These are called special taxes. However, recent court decisions have allowed special taxes that are proposed by voters to be approved with a majority vote. Under Proposition 43, beginning on January 1, 2027, any new, increased, or extended local special taxes proposed by voters would require a two-thirds vote.

Fiscal effect

Possibility that local government tax revenues will not go up as much in the future due to a higher vote threshold for certain taxes.

Campaign claims, checked

Each checked against the evidence listed with it

Supported

Official argument in favor of Proposition 43

“Prop. 43 closes these loopholes and restores the two-thirds vote requirement to pass local special taxes.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument in favor of Proposition 43

Verified · Oct 3, 2026

The Analyst says local special taxes currently need a two-thirds vote, that recent court decisions have allowed special taxes proposed by voters to pass by majority, and that beginning January 1, 2027 Proposition 43 would require two-thirds for any new, increased, or extended local special taxes proposed by voters. "Loopholes" is a characterization.

Supported

Official argument against Proposition 43

“Prop. 43 undermines the voice of voters and the majority vote by letting just one-third of voters (33.4%) block local voter decisions”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument against Proposition 43

Verified · Oct 3, 2026

With a two-thirds threshold, a bit over one-third voting no defeats a measure, which matches the claim's arithmetic. The Analyst says the new threshold applies to local special taxes proposed by voters, beginning January 1, 2027, not to every local decision.

Can’t verify

Official argument in favor of Proposition 43

“Local governments have imposed over 2,000 new or higher taxes in the past decade, including higher sales, property and utility taxes—using the loopholes courts created in Prop. 13 to impose some of the most costly and damaging tax increases Californians face today.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument in favor of Proposition 43

Verified · Oct 3, 2026

The guide does not document the count. Local tax and bond measure results compiled by CaliforniaCityFinance.com cover local tax and bond measures, including school bonds and measures placed on the ballot by local governments, one election at a time: 355 of 430 passed in November 2016, 313 of 386 in November 2018, and 208 of 302 in November 2022. They do not give a ten-year total and do not separate tax increases from bonds. No source for a total of more than 2,000 was found. The Analyst says the court decisions the argument calls loopholes affect only special taxes proposed by voters through signature gathering, which are a subset of local tax measures; local governments already needed a two-thirds vote for the special taxes they place on the ballot themselves.

Supported

Official argument against Proposition 43

“Even if 66% of voters say yes, Prop. 43 would prevent us from funding desperately needed local services.”

Seen in: Official Voter Information Guide, argument against Proposition 43

Verified · Oct 3, 2026

Two-thirds is about 66.7 percent, so a voter-proposed local special tax with 66 percent yes votes would fail under Proposition 43 and pass today by majority vote. The Analyst says the new threshold applies to local special taxes proposed by voters beginning January 1, 2027.

Before you begin

Please read this notice. By selecting “I understand and agree” you confirm that you have read it and accept it, together with the Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy.

  1. An independent experiment

    Ideology is an independent, experimental, non-commercial project, offered for information and education only. It may change, contain errors, or be withdrawn at any time without notice.

  2. No political affiliation

    The site is not affiliated with, endorsed by, funded by, or acting on behalf of any political party, candidate, campaign, list, government body, or interest group. Nothing on it is a recommendation on how to vote, nor support for or opposition to any party, candidate, or position.

  3. Prepared with artificial intelligence

    Content on the site, including summaries, translations, classifications, comparisons, verdicts, and match results, is gathered, processed, or generated in whole or in part with artificial intelligence (AI) tools. AI output may be inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, or biased. It is not verified fact and not professional, legal, or political advice. Always check the linked original sources.

  4. Your use, your responsibility

    You use the site at your own discretion and risk. It is provided “as is” and “as available”, without warranties of any kind, express or implied. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the operator is not liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential loss arising from use of, or reliance on, the site or its content. Any decision you make, including how to vote, is yours alone.

Full details: Terms · Privacy