Blogs

By; @Kyle Packham

On April 21, 2026, the California Secretary of State determined Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1) is now eligible for the November 3, 2026 statewide ballot. The initiative, which is opposed by CSDA, would retroactively invalidate certain voter-approved special taxes as well as certain property transfer taxes representing a significant share of revenue for numerous charter cities.

Titled, “LIMITS ABILITY OF VOTERS TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT”, the initiative increases the approval threshold on voter-initiated ballot measures from a simple majority (over 50 percent) to two-thirds. In charter cities, it also prohibits voters from approving real estate transfer taxes other than the existing 0.11% transfer tax authorized by Revenue and Taxation Code section 11911.

Initiative 1983 attempts to apply its provisions retroactively and seeks to overturn all existing voter-approved property-related taxes, including real estate sales and transfer taxes, that do not comply with its requirements two years after the measure is enacted (December 31, 2028). Special taxes could be re-adopted only with two-thirds voter approval. Charter cities would remain prohibited from re-establishing charter-specific transfer taxes.

As an “eligible” statewide ballot measure, county election officials have verified the required number of signatures (at least 874,641) have been submitted. On June 25, 2026, the Secretary of State will certify the initiative as “qualified” for the November 3, 2026, General Election ballot, unless withdrawn by the proponent prior to certification pursuant to Elections Code section 9604(b). After that point, it will receive its official proposition number.

View the full text of Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1).

The Upland Decision

If approved, the initiative would effectively overturn the California Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, which established that special taxes placed on the ballot by voter-initiative may be approved by a simple majority vote, unlike special taxes put forward by a government body.

Local Government Revenue and Fiscal Outlook

Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1) is expected to cause a significant reduction in local government revenue—potentially totaling several billion dollars each year. Most of this loss would come from eliminating transfer taxes that are unique to charter cities. In addition, cities, counties, special districts, and school districts together could lose an estimated $300 million annually from parcel and other property-related taxes that were previously approved by less than a two-thirds vote and would become invalid under the measure.

Based on research to date, CSDA has identified one independent special district with a property-related special tax approved by a simple majority: Crocket Community Services District (Contra Costa County). In 2022, citizens of Crocket CSD put forward Measure L by way of a voter initiative and then approved it by 62.78 percent of the vote. Measure L generates about $63,000 a year and funds the entirety of Crocket CSD’s budget for lighting and landscape maintenance, which is a required governmental function for the agency.

Also noteworthy, in 2018 citizens in Del Norte County put forward Measure C by voter initiative to raise the local hotel tax from 8 percent to 10 percent to fund debt repayment for the USDA disaster loan issued following the 2006 and 2011 tsunamis and to fund further harbor repairs for the Crescent City Harbor District. This measure passed with 54.69 percent of the vote and withstood multiple lawsuits concerning the majority vote requirement for citizen initiatives proposing special taxes. 

It appears the initiative would preclude majority vote approval of special taxes like Measure C of Del Norte County (2018) prospectively. However, unlike Measure L of Contra Costa County (2022), Measure C is not property-related and thus would likely avoid the retroactive invalidation provision of the initiative.

In addition to these independent special districts, Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1) could impose major impacts on dependent special districts and other local governments, such as the Los Angeles County Fire Protection District, which stands to lose $152 million per year in funding approved by 55 percent of voters in November 2024, just weeks before the devastating January 2025 Los Angels Wildfires. Measure E, an annual parcel tax of $0.06 per square foot of certain parcel improvements, would be retroactively invalidated by Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1) because the local citizens’ initiative passed by a simple majority rather than two-thirds super-majority.

Over time, under Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1), local government revenues across California could further decline because the measure would make it more difficult to adopt or increase taxes. The exact fiscal impact would vary depending on local voter actions and future policy decisions.

ACA 13 Implications

It is worth noting that ACA 13 (Ward) of 2023, known as the Protect and Retain the Majority Vote Act, is currently qualified for California’s November 2026 statewide ballot and could affect the vote threshold of Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1). ACA 13, if passed by voters, would require that any initiative that seeks to increase the vote threshold on voters must pass by the same threshold to which it seeks to impose on others.

ACA 13 is written to take effect immediately, starting with any initiatives on the ballot for the election in which it is approved. Therefore, if ACA 13 passes, Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1) would itself be required to pass by the same two-thirds vote threshold it is attempting to establish for all special taxes.

Support and Opposition

Proponents of Initiative 1983 (25-0006A1) include the California Business Roundtable, California Business Properties Association, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and California Taxpayers Association. Opposition is anticipated from local governments, organized labor, and community organizations, among others.