California Proposition 43 would not directly raise or lower your tax bill. It would change how many votes are needed to approve certain future local taxes.
Under current law, some local special taxes proposed by voters can be approved with a simple majority — more than 50% of voters. Proposition 43 would raise that threshold to two-thirds, or 66.67%, for new, increased or extended local special taxes proposed by voters beginning Jan. 1, 2027.
That means the central question for voters is straightforward:
Should a simple majority be enough to approve certain local taxes, or should two-thirds of voters have to agree?
Prop. 43 in 30 seconds
Think of the measure as a change in the number of votes required:
Current rule: More than 50%
Under Proposition 43: Two-thirds, or 66.67%
The measure applies to certain special taxes, local taxes dedicated to a specific purpose, when those taxes are proposed directly by voters through the ballot initiative process.
It does not impose a new statewide tax.
For the broader picture, readers can also consult Parriva’s California Voter Guide 2026, which puts Proposition 43 alongside the other measures appearing on the November ballot.
What is a local special tax?
California has many local governments, including cities, counties, special districts and school districts.
Some local taxes are designed to raise money for a specific purpose. These are known as special taxes.
For example, voters could be asked to approve a local tax dedicated to a particular community need. The important distinction is that Proposition 43 concerns certain special taxes proposed by voters, rather than every local tax.
Under current law, local governments generally need two-thirds voter approval for special taxes they place on the ballot. Recent court decisions, however, have allowed some special taxes proposed through voter initiatives to pass with a majority.
Proposition 43 would establish a two-thirds requirement for those voter-proposed measures as well.
The California Secretary of State’s official Proposition 43 voter guide provides the state’s formal title and summary of the measure.
What would actually change?
If Proposition 43 passes, a future voter-proposed local special tax could no longer pass with 51% of the vote.
It would need at least 66.67%.
That is the most important thing to understand about the measure.
It means that a proposal supported by 60% of voters, for example, could pass under the current majority standard but would fail under Proposition 43.
The change would apply to new, increased or extended voter-proposed local special taxes approved after Jan. 1, 2027.
What Proposition 43 would not do
Proposition 43 would not:
- create a new statewide tax;
- automatically increase your property-tax bill;
- automatically increase your sales-tax bill;
- automatically eliminate an existing local tax; or
- immediately cut funding for local services.
Instead, it changes the rules for certain future voter-proposed local special taxes.
That distinction matters because the measure’s eventual effect depends on what voters and local governments decide in the future.
The California Legislative Analyst’s official analysis explains that the measure’s future fiscal effect depends on decisions by local governments and voters.
Why supporters say YES
Supporters argue that voters should require broad support before approving local special taxes.
They describe Proposition 43 as restoring the two-thirds standard associated with Proposition 13 and closing what they consider court-created loopholes.
They also argue that making tax increases harder to approve would protect homeowners, renters and small businesses from additional local taxes.
The official voter guide lists the California Taxpayers Association, Family Business Association of California and California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce among the supporters.
Those are supporters’ arguments. They should not be confused with a prediction of how California voters, including Latino voters, will vote.
Why opponents say NO
Opponents argue that Proposition 43 gives a smaller minority of voters greater power to block a measure supported by a majority.
Their concern is what could happen when communities seek additional local revenue for services.
The official opposition points to fire and emergency response, roads, schools, parks, libraries, housing and healthcare as examples of services that could be affected if communities have a harder time approving certain local taxes.
The key word is could.
Proposition 43 does not itself cut funding for those services.
Rather, it would make certain future local tax measures harder to approve. Whether that ultimately affects a particular community would depend on future elections and decisions by local governments.
Could Proposition 43 reduce local government revenue?
Possibly, but nobody can know the amount today.
The Legislative Analyst says local government tax revenues could be lower in the future because some taxes would face a higher vote threshold.
But the state’s fiscal analysis also says the actual revenue effect is unknown.
It depends on what local governments propose, what voters support and whether proposed taxes receive enough votes under the new threshold.
What we do not know
Proposition 43 cannot tell us:
- how many future local tax measures would fail;
- how much revenue local governments might lose;
- which communities would be affected most;
- whether voters would approve proposed taxes even with the higher threshold; or
- how local governments would respond if a proposed tax failed.
Those are future decisions, not guaranteed consequences of the measure.
Why the 50% versus 66.67% difference matters
The practical effect of Proposition 43 comes down to consensus.
Under a majority system, a proposal can pass if just over half of voters support it.
Under a two-thirds system, supporters need substantially broader agreement.
That could make it harder to approve some local taxes.
Supporters see that as a safeguard against unwanted tax increases.
Opponents see it as giving a minority greater power to stop a measure supported by most voters.
Both sides are describing the same underlying change: the number of votes needed would increase.
The disagreement is over whether that change would better protect taxpayers or make it harder for communities to raise money for local priorities.
So what are California voters really deciding?
Proposition 43 is not simply a vote on whether taxes are good or bad.
It is a vote about how much voter support certain local taxes should require.
A YES vote would establish a two-thirds threshold for certain new, increased or extended special taxes proposed by voters.
A NO vote would leave the current majority-vote standard in place for those voter-proposed measures.
For voters, the central question is:
Should more than half of voters be enough to approve certain local special taxes, or should at least two-thirds agree?
That is the decision Proposition 43 puts before California voters on Nov. 3, 2026.
