UNDER CONSTRUCTION – DO NOT SHARE!
Protect your vote and majority rule!
What’s the Background? California’s Constitution lets local governments raise taxes only with local voter approval. A local tax dedicated to a specific purpose – a special tax – normally needs a two-thirds vote. But in its 2017 ruling in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, the California Supreme Court held that the two-thirds rule DOES NOT apply when voters themselves put a special tax on the ballot by gathering signatures Those citizen-proposed measures pass with a simple majority. Proposition 43 would erase that distinction
How did this get on the ballot? Not by citizen signatures. Proposition 43 is Assembly Constitutional Amendment 22, which the Legislature placed on the ballot in June 2026 as an eleventh-hour deal with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association – Jarvis agreed to pull an even more damaging initiative in exchange. Even its own author, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) opposes it, and says she wrote it only to get the more dangerous measure off the ballot in time. No one is arguing that Proposition 43 is good policy. Special Interests want to control how and when we spend our money. They are not interested in improving the quality of life in our communities. They ARE interested in keeping money in their own pockets.
What would Proposition 43 do?
- Raise the bar on citizen-proposed local special taxes from a simple majority (over 50%) to a two-thirds vote, beginning January 1, 2027.
- Put the losing side in charge: a measure backed by 66% of voters – nearly two out of three – would be defeated by the 34% who voted no.
- Make big money far more powerful: opponents would no longer need a majority, only one-third of the vote plus one – a much cheaper target to buy.
- Make it harder to fund police and fire protection, road repairs, school staffing, and local hospitals and clinics – just as federal cuts to health care and other essential funding squeeze California hardest.
- Bar local governments – and voters using the initiative – from imposing any new tax based on the assessed value of real property, apart from those the Constitution already allows.
| Myths | Facts |
| Proposition 43 restores protections originally approved under Proposition 13. | This is a scare tactic meant to make voters think Proposition 43 protects their property taxes. It does not – taxes on the value of real property are a separate category from special taxes. Prop 43 does not change Prop 13 or your current property tax bill. It raises the approval threshold for certain local taxes and applies only to future measures. What it does do is take away your right to settle these questions by majority vote. |
| Proposition 43 lowers taxes and affirms your right to vote on local taxes. | Proposition 43 DOES NOT cut taxes. It DOES limit the power of your vote. You already have the right to vote on every new or higher local tax. Proposition 43 simply raises the bar – letting 34% of voters veto what 66% of their neighbors want. |
| Proposition 43 is a new requirement for governments to spend tax revenue for the specific purpose voters approved. | This is NOT a new requirement – it already existed. Special taxes are already legally restricted to the purpose voters approved – that is what makes them “special” taxes. Prop 43 adds no new spending safeguard at all. The only thing it changes is how many votes it takes to approve one. |
Opposed by: the California Democratic Party, California Professional Firefighters, California Federation of Teachers, California School Employees Association, Communities for a Better Environment, AAPI Force, Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California, Nurses Alliance of SEIU California, and Sierra Business Council