California Nov 2026 Propositions p1
Oct 08 2026
There are 14 Propositions on the ballot, which is more than usual I think.
P1. Authorizes Bonds for Housing Affordability Programs.
"Authorizes $11.25 billion in state general obligation bonds for housing affordability programs, including for California veterans, and to finance housing development projects seeking federal tax credits."
No con argument.
Voting: NO. I think Prop 37 competes with this and Prop 37 is repaid by the people benefiting from home loans.
P2. Increases State's Rainy Day Fund.
"Doubles the budget reserve cap from 10% to 20% of General Fund revenues, requiring savings until Fund's balance equals 20% of General Fund."
I guess the main thing for me is
"The State Constitution requires the state to deposit 0.75 percent of General Fund tax revenues in the state’s main rainy day fund, which is called the Budget Stabilization Account, each year."
So it's not like increasing the cap to 20% really changes anything.
Voting: YES.
P3. Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes.
"Makes permanent the existing 2012 voter-approved tax rates for high-income Californians, currently set to expire in 2031."
Looking back, 2012 Prop 30 was termed temporary for 7 years. Then we must have extended it another 12 years by Prop 55 in 2016. So now we finally come to "let's make it permanent."
This article, Should Voters Approve Prop. 3? How Top Tax Rates Have Helped Californians, convinced me because the three tax brackets introduced in Prop 30 have had their income increase much more than the rest of the population so these taxes have never been a burden to them.
Voting: YES.
P4. Repeals Prohibition Against Public Funding of Election Campaigns.
"This measure repeals that prohibition and allows state and local governments to establish public campaign financing programs for candidates who agree to specified spending limits and meet eligibility criteria."
Seems reasonable as a way to cut down on special interest money. I don't think it works the higher up you go because special interest money gets so large public funding can't keep up. But for local governments should be good and they get to set the rules and it's probably not going to be that much money anyway.
Voting: YES.
Prop 5. Changes Recall Election Process for Statewide Officers.
"Under current law, voters decide at the same election whether (1) to recall a state officer, and (2) who will replace that officer if recalled."
"Under this measure, if the Governor is recalled, the Lieutenant Governor becomes Governor for the remainder of the term or until a successor is elected. For all other recalled officers, the office will remain vacant until filled by a subsequent special election or appointment as specified in existing law; and a recalled officer may be a candidate in a special election to fill the office."
I don't particularly like where a recalled officer is given an opportunity to run in the refill election. Also I've only seen recall being used once and it turned out fine.
Voting: NO.
Prop 37. Creates Loan Program for Middle-Income Buyers of Qualified New Homes.
"Authorizes up to $25 billion in bonds to offer eligible buyers fixed-rate mortgages for up to 17% of the purchase price of a “qualified new home” (new construction or first sale of converted nonresidential property, priced below about $1 million–$1.5 million, depending on county, adjusted annually)."
This is similar in intent to Prop 1 and like Prop 1 has no Con argument.
This one the bond is eventually repaid by the homeowners through their mortgage payments. So seems fine.
Voting: YES.
Prop 38. Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research.
"Authorizes $8.4 billion in state general obligation bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research (technologies that use body’s immune system to treat disease), with half dedicated to cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s disease."
Money goes the University of California system and public/non-profit universities and institutions. Technology and drugs derived from research must be sold in California for 20% below national average price. 10% of licensing royalties are used to repay bonds until fully repaid.
This one seems fine since they have a way to eventually repay outside of indirectly taxing people, even with an undefined savings for Californians. Though it might be years and years before there would be sold-able tech for royalties.
Voting: YES
P1. Authorizes Bonds for Housing Affordability Programs.
"Authorizes $11.25 billion in state general obligation bonds for housing affordability programs, including for California veterans, and to finance housing development projects seeking federal tax credits."
No con argument.
Voting: NO. I think Prop 37 competes with this and Prop 37 is repaid by the people benefiting from home loans.
P2. Increases State's Rainy Day Fund.
"Doubles the budget reserve cap from 10% to 20% of General Fund revenues, requiring savings until Fund's balance equals 20% of General Fund."
I guess the main thing for me is
"The State Constitution requires the state to deposit 0.75 percent of General Fund tax revenues in the state’s main rainy day fund, which is called the Budget Stabilization Account, each year."
So it's not like increasing the cap to 20% really changes anything.
Voting: YES.
P3. Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes.
"Makes permanent the existing 2012 voter-approved tax rates for high-income Californians, currently set to expire in 2031."
Looking back, 2012 Prop 30 was termed temporary for 7 years. Then we must have extended it another 12 years by Prop 55 in 2016. So now we finally come to "let's make it permanent."
This article, Should Voters Approve Prop. 3? How Top Tax Rates Have Helped Californians, convinced me because the three tax brackets introduced in Prop 30 have had their income increase much more than the rest of the population so these taxes have never been a burden to them.
Voting: YES.
P4. Repeals Prohibition Against Public Funding of Election Campaigns.
"This measure repeals that prohibition and allows state and local governments to establish public campaign financing programs for candidates who agree to specified spending limits and meet eligibility criteria."
Seems reasonable as a way to cut down on special interest money. I don't think it works the higher up you go because special interest money gets so large public funding can't keep up. But for local governments should be good and they get to set the rules and it's probably not going to be that much money anyway.
Voting: YES.
Prop 5. Changes Recall Election Process for Statewide Officers.
"Under current law, voters decide at the same election whether (1) to recall a state officer, and (2) who will replace that officer if recalled."
"Under this measure, if the Governor is recalled, the Lieutenant Governor becomes Governor for the remainder of the term or until a successor is elected. For all other recalled officers, the office will remain vacant until filled by a subsequent special election or appointment as specified in existing law; and a recalled officer may be a candidate in a special election to fill the office."
I don't particularly like where a recalled officer is given an opportunity to run in the refill election. Also I've only seen recall being used once and it turned out fine.
Voting: NO.
Prop 37. Creates Loan Program for Middle-Income Buyers of Qualified New Homes.
"Authorizes up to $25 billion in bonds to offer eligible buyers fixed-rate mortgages for up to 17% of the purchase price of a “qualified new home” (new construction or first sale of converted nonresidential property, priced below about $1 million–$1.5 million, depending on county, adjusted annually)."
This is similar in intent to Prop 1 and like Prop 1 has no Con argument.
This one the bond is eventually repaid by the homeowners through their mortgage payments. So seems fine.
Voting: YES.
Prop 38. Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research.
"Authorizes $8.4 billion in state general obligation bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research (technologies that use body’s immune system to treat disease), with half dedicated to cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s disease."
Money goes the University of California system and public/non-profit universities and institutions. Technology and drugs derived from research must be sold in California for 20% below national average price. 10% of licensing royalties are used to repay bonds until fully repaid.
This one seems fine since they have a way to eventually repay outside of indirectly taxing people, even with an undefined savings for Californians. Though it might be years and years before there would be sold-able tech for royalties.
Voting: YES