CA+SF 2026 Ballot Notes

The number of ballot measures is too damn high. With all the races and 25 measures, the ballot runs to four long, double-sided pages.

Some measures are there because the law requires a public vote. Others are there because the Legislature or the supervisors chose to send them to voters, or because someone wrote something up and collected enough signatures. As the Athenians discovered millennia ago, asking voters to make fine-grained decisions is a bad idea, but here we are.

Every election, I gather as much information as I can and send it to my friends along with my conclusions. This is the online version, with much more of the research behind it, so you can check my work and come to a different conclusion if you like.

If the measure passes, it's law, well written or not, and the supervisors can't change it without going back to voters unless the measure says they can. This year's Prop A asks voters to let the supervisors change eight voter-passed laws (one dates to 1932; these things are sticky!). Prop D would raise the ordinance threshold from 2% to 8% (~42K signatures).

Statewide it takes signatures equal to 5% of the votes in the last governor's race (~547K) for a law and 8% (~875K) to amend the state constitution.

Sources: SF Department of Elections initiative guide, CA Secretary of State

How each measure got on the ballot This can help us choose starting points for our votes.

Placed by law8Officials had to send these to voters. Start at Yes

Optional referral1Officials could have decided these themselves. Start at No

Signature initiative16Got here by petition: no legislative give-and-take, no amendments. Start at No

Not directly. Prop 1 and Prop 38 would be repaid from the state’s General Fund, so new debt competes with other spending instead of adding a line to your tax bill. Prop 37’s bonds are repaid by homebuyers’ loan payments, not taxpayers.

About $80B in state bonds is being repaid, and about $40B more is approved but not yet sold. Payments run about $6B a year, about 3% of the General Fund, below the historical average of about 4%. Props 1 and 38 together would add about 0.5 points.1

No rule says old debt must be retired first. A 1997 Treasurer's report called 6% a caution ceiling, not a target; the current report sets none.23

Borrowing costs more than paying cash: about 15% more for Prop 1 and 10% more for Prop 38, after inflation.1

Prop 37's $25B is different. Its revenue bonds are repaid by homebuyers' mortgages, so it adds nothing here.1

Legislative Analyst’s Office: Overview of state bond debt (Nov 2026 voter guide)

State Treasurer: 2026 Debt Affordability Report

State Treasurer: 1997 Debt Affordability Report

1Housing affordability bond ($11.25B)This has broad support in the Legislature, adds no new taxes (is paid from the General Fund, and only increases the share of bond payments in the fund by ~0.25% which keeps the total below historical averages) so it's an easy yes.Placed by lawState bondAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions10 yes · 1 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Lets the state borrow $11.25 billion for housing. Most of it, $10 billion, would be repaid from the state's main budget (the General Fund). The money would help pay for rental homes and help families buy or repair homes. The other $1.25 billion funds CalVet home loans for veterans, repaid by the veterans' own loan payments 1.

Required to go to voters. The state constitution requires voter approval for state borrowing. Source

Taxes and bonds. No new tax: the state borrows $11.25B and repays most of it from existing General Fund revenue, so that money is not available for other programs. The $1.25B for veterans' home loans is repaid by the veterans who borrow. Source

Support from progressives, the Democratic Party, urbanists, moderates and editorial boards; the left is split.

Veterans' loans are repaid by the veterans' loan payments; the other $10B is repaid from the General Fund

Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO): General Fund cost of $500 million to $600 million a year for about 25 years (about 0.25% of the General Fund budget). Total cost is about 15% more than paying up front, inflation-adjusted. The veterans portion has no direct state cost. Funds would subsidize up to 40,000 rental units, about 2,500 farmworker units and 1,200 student beds, and help up to 40,000 households buy or repair homes 1.

Placed by lawConstitutional amendmentSaves existing revenueAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions8 yes · 2 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Lets California save more in its rainy day fund, the state's savings account for bad years. The cap rises from 10% to 20% of the state's main tax revenue. The state must also save more when taxes on investment profits (capital gains) bring in unusually high revenue. Extra required payments on debts like pensions and retiree health, now set to end in 2030, would continue through 2040. Money put into savings would not count toward the state's spending cap until it is taken out 1.

Required to go to voters. It amends the state constitution, which only voters can do. Source

Taxes and bonds. No tax is raised or cut: the measure requires the state to save more of the tax revenue it already collects. Source

Support from progressives, the Democratic Party, urbanists and moderates; opposition from Republicans; the left is split.

LAO gives no dollar figure: state reserves would be higher, making budget-balancing somewhat easier in downturns, and the state might make more extra debt payments. For context, the state has about $20 billion in reserves that can be used for any public program 1.

Signature initiativeConstitutional amendmentKeeps top income tax ratesAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions11 yes · 1 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Makes permanent a higher income tax on California's top earners that is set to expire after 2030. Voters first approved it in 2012 (Prop 30) and later extended it (Prop 55). The rates, 10.3% to 12.3%, apply to income above about $371,000 for single filers and $742,000 for couples filing jointly. Only the top 2% of taxpayers pay them. Revenue goes 89% to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges 1.

Taxes and bonds. These Prop 30 (2012) rates, extended by Prop 55 (2016), are already in effect; Yes keeps them permanently, No lets them drop to 9.3% starting in 2031. Only income above the thresholds is taxed at the higher rates, so most filers' taxes are the same either way. Source

Support from the left, progressives, the Democratic Party, urbanists, moderates and editorial boards; opposition from Republicans.

Per the measure's text; Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) says roughly 40% of total revenue goes to schools and community colleges, the rest to health care, reserves and other programs

LAO: maintains $5 billion to $15 billion of annual state income tax revenue, varying with the stock market. Roughly 40% goes to schools and community colleges; the rest goes to health care, reserves and other programs 1.

Placed by lawAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions8 yes · 4 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Lifts California's ban on using public money to pay for political campaigns. State and local governments could then set up programs that give candidates public funds. It does not create any program itself. Programs could not use money set aside for education, transportation or public safety, and candidates would have to show broad support and accept spending limits. Charter cities like San Francisco and Oakland are already exempt from the ban. It also triples the top fine for foreign campaign donations 1.

Required to go to voters. The ban came from Prop 73 (1988), a voter initiative, so only voters can repeal it. The Legislature tried without a vote in 2016, and a court struck that down in 2019. Source

Support from the left, progressives, the Democratic Party and urbanists; opposition from moderates, Republicans and editorial boards.

Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO): ongoing state cost of a few hundred thousand dollars a year for the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) to give guidance. Costs of any future program could be significant but depend on future decisions 1. Supporters claim as little as $1 per resident per year 1.

Placed by lawConstitutional amendmentAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions9 yes · 3 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Changes recalls of state officials. Today a recall ballot asks two questions: should the official be removed, and who should replace them? This drops the second question. If a Governor is recalled, the Lieutenant Governor takes over, either until voters elect a new Governor at a later statewide election (if the recall comes early in the term) or for the rest of the term. A recalled legislator would be replaced by special election, and other officials by the Governor's appointment. The recalled official could run in a special election 1.

Required to go to voters. Recall rules are in the state constitution (since 1911), so changing them takes a vote. Source

Support from progressives, the Democratic Party, urbanists and moderates; opposition from Republicans and editorial boards; the left is split.

Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO): net effect unknown, possibly savings or costs of millions of dollars per recall election, depending on the office recalled and how often recalls occur. A standalone special election to fill a seat would cost millions; a shorter ballot would save millions. Any net effect is under 0.1% of the General Fund budget 1.

Signature initiativeBond repaid by homebuyersAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions7 yes · 2 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Creates state loans to help middle-income Californians buy newly built homes. The state housing finance agency (CalHFA) could sell up to $25 billion in bonds, repaid by the homebuyers' loan payments. Loans cover up to 17% of the price; buyers put down at least 3%. Buyers must be state residents for a year, live in the home and earn no more than twice the area's median income. Home prices are capped at roughly $1 million to $1.5 million, depending on the county. Builders can opt into higher labor standards in exchange for different construction-defect rules 1.

Taxes and bonds. This is not a general obligation bond: the state housing finance agency would sell up to $25 billion in bonds and repay investors from the homebuyers' loan payments. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates no direct state or local costs. Source

Support from the Democratic Party, urbanists, moderates and editorial boards; opposition from the left.

LAO: no direct state or local costs, because homebuyers' payments repay the bonds. Unknowns include investor demand, how the loans compare with other down payment aid, and whether the program increases construction and homebuying 1. CalMatters adds that private lenders, not taxpayers, would bear default losses 2.

Signature initiativeState bondAnil’s voteYesNoOrg. positions4 yes · 6 noShow detailsHide detailsWhat it does

Lets the state borrow $8.4 billion, repaid from the state budget, for research on the immune system and immune-based treatments. At least $4.2 billion is for cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer's. Half goes to one UC-affiliated nonprofit institute, half to competitive grants. The measure doesn't name the institute, but only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy at UCLA, co-founded by Michelson and others, appears to qualify 3. Resulting treatments must generally sell in California at a 20% discount, and the state gets 10% of any revenue from discoveries, first to repay the bond's cost 1.

Taxes and bonds. Borrowing is repaid from existing state revenue, so no tax rate changes, but the repayments compete with other state spending. The state could recoup part or all of the cost if the research produces revenue, possibly over decades. Source

Support from the Democratic Party and Republica