California’s 2026 Ballot Packed With Measures Affecting Local Communities

California voters will face one of the busiest statewide ballots in recent memory this November, with 14 propositions covering housing, taxes, elections, healthcare, environmental regulations and campaign finance. While many of the proposals have statewide implications, several could directly affect residents, local governments and businesses throughout Southeast Los Angeles County.

One of the largest proposals is Proposition 1, an $11.25 billion general obligation bond that would fund affordable housing projects across California. If approved, the measure would finance construction of affordable housing, supportive housing for homeless residents, veterans housing, student housing and farmworker housing. Local cities that continue to struggle with state housing mandates could benefit from additional funding opportunities.

Proposition 2 would change California’s budget rules by allowing lawmakers to place more money into the state’s rainy-day reserve without triggering taxpayer rebates under current spending limits. Supporters say the change would improve California’s long-term financial stability, while critics argue it could reduce future tax refunds.

Proposition 3 would permanently extend the additional state income tax paid by high-income earners. The revenue would continue supporting K-12 schools, community colleges and healthcare programs. Because local school districts receive funding through the state budget, the measure could provide continued financial support for area schools.

Homeownership is the focus of Proposition 37, which would establish a state-backed loan program helping middle-income Californians purchase homes by providing down-payment assistance. Supporters hope the program will help more families enter an increasingly expensive housing market.

Healthcare also dominates the ballot. Proposition 38 would authorize an $8.4 billion bond to fund immunology and medical research, including studies involving cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and heart disease.

One of the most closely watched measures is Proposition 39, which would require voters to present government-issued identification when casting ballots in person and require identifying information for mail-in ballots. Supporters argue the proposal would strengthen election integrity, while opponents say it could create barriers for eligible voters.

Tax policy returns to the ballot with Proposition 40, which would impose a one-time 5 percent tax on individuals and trusts with assets exceeding $1 billion. Revenue would primarily fund healthcare programs. The proposal has generated one of the state’s most expensive political campaigns, with supporters and opponents spending tens of millions of dollars.

Competing measures, Propositions 41 and 42, were placed on the ballot to limit or effectively block the billionaire tax if they receive more votes than Proposition 40.

Local governments are also closely watching Proposition 43, which would require two-thirds voter approval for new local special taxes, including citizen-sponsored tax initiatives. Cities throughout Southeast Los Angeles County frequently rely on local tax measures to finance public safety, infrastructure improvements and other municipal services, making the outcome particularly significant for local budgets.

Proposition 45 would streamline portions of the California Environmental Quality Act, commonly known as CEQA, by accelerating environmental review for qualifying housing, transportation, water and public infrastructure projects. Supporters argue the changes would reduce delays that often increase construction costs and slow development.

Other propositions would permit public financing of political campaigns, change California’s recall election process, and impose new spending requirements on federally qualified health clinics.

With campaign spending already exceeding $100 million months before Election Day, voters can expect a flood of television commercials, social media advertising and campaign mailers as both sides battle over what could become one of California’s most consequential ballots in years.

For local residents, the measures could influence housing affordability, taxes, schools, healthcare funding, election procedures and the financial health of cities throughout the region.