Ballot Positions
November 3, 2026 State Propositions
Positions adopted by the CoCoTax Executive Committee as of July 20, 2026.
| Prop | Measure | Description | CoCoTax POSITION |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $11.25 billion affordable housing and veterans bond | Authorizes $11.25 billion in state general obligation bonds: $10 billion for affordable housing programs and $1.25 billion for veterans’ farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance. Housing funds would support programs such as multifamily rental housing, supportive housing, homeownership assistance, farmworker housing, tribal housing, student housing, infill infrastructure, and local housing trust funds. Bond repayment would come from the state General Fund with interest over time. | OPPOSE |
| 2 | Raises cap on state rainy day fund and changes reserve transfers | Constitutional amendment, the Save for California’s Future Act, that would strengthen state budget reserves beginning in 2027–28. It would raise the Budget Stabilization Account cap from 10% to 20% of General Fund tax revenues, modify formulas for reserve transfers tied to capital-gains revenue, allow some funds otherwise used for unfunded liabilities to repay federal unemployment-insurance loans, and exclude certain reserve transfers from the state appropriations limit until those funds are later spent. | OPPOSE |
| 3 | Makes existing high-income tax rates permanent | Makes permanent the voter-approved 2012 personal income tax rates on high-income Californians that are currently scheduled to expire in 2031. The rates apply to taxable income above about $360,000 for single filers, $721,000 for joint filers, and $490,000 for heads of household, adjusted annually for inflation. Revenues are allocated 89% to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges, with administrative uses barred. State fiscal estimate: maintains $5 billion to $15 billion in annual state income tax revenue. | OPPOSE |
| 4 | Allows limited public financing of candidate campaigns | The California Fair Elections Act of 2026 would amend the Political Reform Act to allow state or local public funds to support candidates seeking elective office, subject to expenditure limits and strict qualifying criteria such as small-dollar support or vouchers. Funds earmarked for education, transportation, or public safety could not be used. Public funds could not pay legal defense fees, fines, or personal campaign loans. It also increases penalties for foreign-government or foreign-principal campaign spending violations. | OPPOSE |
| 5 | Removes successor-candidate vote from state recall elections | Amends the California Constitution so a recall election for a state officer would ask only whether the officer should be removed. If voters approve the recall, the office would become vacant and be filled under existing vacancy procedures for that office, rather than using the current same-ballot successor election. The change would apply to state officers, including statewide officials and legislators. | OPPOSE |
| 37 | Creates $25 billion homebuyer loan program | Authorizes up to $25 billion in bonds to offer eligible buyers fixed-rate second mortgages for up to 17% of the purchase price of a qualified new home. Qualified homes include new construction or first sale of converted nonresidential property, generally below county price caps of about $1 million to $1.5 million. Borrowers must be California residents for one year, occupy the home, earn less than 200% of area median income, and pay at least 3% down. Bonds would be repaid by homeowners’ mortgage payments, not the state. | OPPOSE |
| 38 | $8.4 billion bond for immunology and immunotherapy research | Authorizes $8.4 billion in state general obligation bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research. Funds would be split equally between a University of California-affiliated nonprofit medical research institute selected by the California Department of Public Health and a grant program for public or nonprofit universities and institutions. Half of research funding must focus on cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s disease. Recipients must sell funded drugs or technologies in California at 20% below the national average price. State debt service is estimated at about $500 million annually for 25 years. | OPPOSE |
| 39 | Adds voter ID and citizenship-verification requirements | Constitutional amendment requiring voters to present government-issued identification at polling places or provide the last four digits of a government-issued ID number when voting by mail. Requires the state to provide voter ID cards upon request and elections officials to report annually the percentage of each county’s voters whose citizenship has been verified. State fiscal estimate: one-time state and local costs in the tens of millions of dollars and annual costs potentially from tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions. | SUPPORT |
| 40 | Imposes one-time wealth tax on billionaires | Imposes a one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers and trusts with covered assets valued over $1 billion. Covered assets include businesses, securities, art, collectibles, and intellectual property, but generally exclude real property and some retirement assets. Allocates 90% of revenues to health care and 10% to food-assistance or education-related programs; prevents the revenue from replacing existing funding for those purposes and exempts it from certain school-funding, budget-reserve, and state-spending-limit rules. State fiscal estimate: temporary revenues likely totaling tens of billions over several years, partly offset by ongoing income-tax revenue losses. | OPPOSE |
| 41 | Requires audits of programs funded by new state special taxes | Constitutional amendment requiring pre-election audits of programs that would receive funding from a statewide special-tax initiative and recurring audits of programs funded by special taxes enacted after January 1, 2026. It also prohibits new state taxes enacted after that date from excluding their revenues from the existing voter-approved state spending limit, including taxes on the same ballot. State fiscal effects are unknown and depend on future tax initiatives, voter-guide costs, and savings identified through audits. | SUPPORT |
| 42 | Prohibits new state personal-property and retroactive taxes | Constitutional amendment barring new state taxes that tax ownership or control of personal property, including retirement accounts, financial assets, investment accounts, business interests, and intellectual property. It also bars certain retroactive state taxes based on conduct, activities, or status that occurred before the tax’s effective date, with limited exceptions. Applies to taxes enacted or taking effect on or after January 1, 2026, including same-ballot measures. State fiscal estimate: possibility of lower future tax revenues. | SUPPORT |
| 43 | Requires two-thirds approval for local special taxes, including initiatives | Constitutional amendment beginning January 1, 2027, requiring local governments, including local electorates using the initiative power, to obtain two-thirds voter approval before imposing, extending, or increasing a special tax, subject to specified exceptions. It also prohibits local governments and local electorates from imposing ad valorem taxes on real property except as allowed by specified constitutional provisions. | SUPPORT |
| 44 | Requires community health clinics to spend 90% of revenue on program services | Requires nonprofit Federally Qualified Health Centers to spend at least 90% of revenue on program services advancing their charitable purpose, including patient services, rather than management and overhead. The Department of Public Health may waive the requirement in exceptional circumstances. Authorizes Attorney General guidance, monetary penalties for noncompliance with possible refunds if compliance is reached within five years, and criminal charges for false reports or schemes to artificially increase spending ratios. State enforcement costs are estimated at up to the low tens of millions annually, mostly covered by fees and penalties. | OPPOSE |
| 45 | Expedites CEQA review for certain major project categories | Amends the California Environmental Quality Act to speed review of specified project categories, including most housing, transportation, water, health, and clean-energy projects. It sets deadlines for public agencies to complete environmental review and required actions, allows expedited environmental analysis with narrower alternatives review, and limits court review by creating lawsuit deadlines and restricting evidence and relief. State and local implementation costs are estimated in the tens of millions annually for the first several years; long-term net effects are uncertain. | NO POSITION |
November 3, 2026 Regional Ballot Measure
| Measure | Measure Name | Description | CoCoTax POSITION |
|---|---|---|---|
| TBD | Connect Bay Area Act regional transit sales tax | Authorized by SB 63 (Wiener/Arreguín, 2025), this voter initiative would impose a half-cent sales tax in Contra Costa, Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties, and a full cent in San Francisco, for fourteen years. MTC estimates roughly $983 million a year after collection costs. About 60 percent would go to BART, Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit for operations; roughly a third is allocated by statutory formula to county transportation authorities and to VTA and SamTrans, which may also use it for transit capital and for paving roads served by regular bus service. Contra Costa Transportation Authority would receive about $25 million a year. Rationale: The allocation formula was written into state law before the size of today’s operating deficits was known, and it does not track them: VTA would receive about 2.6 times its projected FY2028 shortfall while the four largest operators receive roughly 73 percent of theirs. The measure’s deeper efficiency review, its maintenance-of-effort requirement, and its funding-withholding mechanism all take effect only if the tax passes. Sales taxes fall hardest on lower-income households, and this measure carries no low-income rebate. Reform should come before another fourteen years of revenue. | OPPOSE |
See our detailed analysis at transitaccountability.com.
November 3, 2026 Local Ballot Measures
| Jurisdiction | Measure | Threshold | Description | CoCoTax POSITION |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| City of Clayton | M | 50% | To provide local funding to maintain City of Clayton programs, services, and facilities, including: police services, traffic enforcement and road safety, road and sidewalk improvements, enhance library and recreation opportunities, park maintenance, recruitment and retention of city employees and other city services, shall the City of Clayton levy a 1% sales tax until ended by voters generating approximately $1,000,000 annually, subject to public review, the annual audit and all funds benefiting Clayton? | OPPOSE |
| City of Clayton | N | 66.67% | Shall the measure to fund on-going trail system operations and maintenance, roadway landscaping, open space weed abatement, and related services of the Clayton Community Facility District No. 2007-1 (Citywide Landscape Maintenance) by extending the special tax for ten years and amending its rate and methodology to $354.45/year per residential parcel and $354.45/year per non-residential acre, including annual inflationary adjustments, subject to citizen's committee oversight, be approved? | YES |
| City of Concord | O | 50% | To protect City of Concord services/ensure smaller businesses pay less than larger businesses, shall the measure be adopted to: repair potholes on neighborhood and major streets; maintain 9-1-1 emergency response; keep parks/playgrounds safe/clean; relieve traffic congestion along major corridors; maintain senior/youth programs; for general government use; by updating Concord’s 37-year-old business license rates to 0.1% of gross receipts until ended by voters, providing an additional $2,900,000 annually, requiring independent citizen oversight? | OPPOSE |
| City of Hercules | P | 50% | Shall the measure providing Hercules with locally controlled funding to maintain financial stability/general city services, such as fast 911 response; neighborhood police patrols; water quality standards; keeping public areas/parks safe/ clean; repairing deteriorating streets/potholes; and retaining/attracting local businesses, by establishing a one-cent (1%) sales tax generating approximately $4,000,000 annually until ended by voters; requiring audits, public disclosure, and funds only for Hercules, be adopted? | OPPOSE |
| City of Richmond | Q | 66.67% | To support rapid, 911 emergency medical response, modernize and rehabilitate unsafe/deteriorating firefighter housing and facilities, including mold/asbestos abatement/removal, replace electrical systems, leaky pipes/roofs, and improve structure resiliency during disasters, shall the City of Richmond’s measure authorizing $120,000,000 in bonds at legal rates, levying an estimated average tax rate of $22.15/$100,000 of assessed valuation, averaging $7,568,158 annually while bonds are outstanding, requiring citizen oversight, audits, and spending only on approved projects, be adopted? | OPPOSE |
| City of San Pablo | R | 50% | To provide funding to maintain City services, including crime prevention, police protection, reducing illegal dumping, the City's daily senior meal program, youth scholarship programs, assisting the homeless, street maintenance, and other general services, shall San Pablo enact a temporary ½-cent sales tax for 5 years, generating approximately $2,000,000 annually, then reduced to ¼-cent for 5 years, generating approximately $1,000,000 annually, then terminate; with all funds staying in San Pablo, citizen oversight, and mandated annual audits? | OPPOSE |
| City of San Pablo | S | 50% | Shall the proposed ordinance, prohibiting residential real property rental rate increases for some rental units that exceed sixty percent of the Consumer Price Index increase or three percent, whichever is lower, establishing a process for consideration of additional rent increases, requiring City administration estimated to cost approximately $1,080,000 to $2,360,000 annually, funded by annual rental property owner fees, limiting the grounds for evicting tenants of some rental units, and enacting additional housing regulations, be adopted? | OPPOSE |
| City of Walnut Creek | T | 50% | Shall the office of the City Treasurer be appointive? | OPPOSE |
| City of Walnut Creek | U | 50% | Shall the measure amending the City of Walnut Creek General Plan, the North Downtown Specific Plan, and the Municipal Code to redesignate a 2.4 acre site at the northeast corner of North California Boulevard and Ygnacio Vallev Road from office uses to mixed use residential uses, and to create a new Mixed Use Residential Senior & Commercial zoning district to limit allowable uses on the site to multifamily senior housing (primarily 55 years of age or older) and commercial uses compatible with senior housing, be adopted? | NO POSITION |
| West Contra Costa Unified School District | V | 66.67% | Shall the measure supporting local quality education in West Contra Costa Unified School District, protecting core academics, science, music, arts, and career technical programs that prepare students for the changing economy; attracting and retaining qualified teachers; and maintaining mental health services and counselors to support student success; by renewing the parcel tax at the existing rate of 7.2¢/building square foot, raising approximately $10,238,737 annually for nine years, with senior exemptions, independent citizen oversight, audits, and local control, be adopted? | OPPOSE |
| Acalanes Union High School District | W | 66.67% | Shall the measure supporting high-quality education in local high schools by: • Attracting/retaining highly qualified teachers • continuing advanced academic programs in science, technology, engineering, math, and arts that prepare students for success in college and careers • maintaining manageable class sizes with Acalanes Union High School District levying a $168 parcel tax for eight years, with senior exemptions, citizens’ oversight and independent audits, providing $6,000,000 annually in local school funding that cannot be taken by the State, be adopted? | OPPOSE |
| Liberty Union High School District | X | 55% | In order to repair and improve aging classrooms, fix deteriorating roofs, plumbing, heating, ventilation and electrical systems, remove asbestos/ lead pipes, upgrade science labs, libraries, technology and other facilities to support college/ career readiness in math, science, health, engineering, arts and skilled trades; shall Liberty Union High School District’s measure be adopted authorizing $165,000,000 in bonds at legal rates, levying $20 per $100,000 assessed value (raising $11,300,000 annually) while bonds are outstanding and all funds benefiting local schools? | OPPOSE |
Measure letters for local and regional measures will be assigned by the Contra Costa County Elections Division and will be added here once available.
Sources: California Secretary of State, Qualified Statewide Ballot Measures; Attorney General initiative texts and summaries; and the legislative text of each measure.