By: @Kyle Packham
At its August 25, 2026 meeting, the CSDA Board of Directors approved an Oppose position on Proposition 43, which would increase the vote threshold on certain local ballot measures. The Board also elected not to take a position on Proposition 45, an initiative to rework local planning and permitting requirements.
Propositions 43 and 45 are two of the 14 measures that will appear on the November 3, 2026 Statewide General Election ballot.
PROPOSITION 43: LIMITS VOTERS’ ABILITY TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Proposition 43 (or Prop 43) would increase the percentage of votes needed to approve voter-proposed local special taxes from a majority (over 50 percent) to two-thirds, beginning January 1, 2027.
Only a small number of communities have exercised majority-vote local special tax measures to date. Nonetheless, if a simple majority of statewide voters approve Prop 43 on November 3, they will prohibit local voters in any community from attempting this method of meeting their unique, local needs going forward.
Examples of majority-vote special taxes placed on the ballot by citizens-initiative and approved by local voters to fund services provided by independent special districts include:
- Crocket Community Services District (Measure L, November 2022)
- Passed: 62.8% Yes to 37.2% No
- Special tax of up to $50 annually with revenue dedicated to maintenance and landscaping activities.
- Los Osos Community Services District (Measure B-26, June 2026)
- Passed: 54.1% Yes to 45.9% No
- Parcel tax of $185 per parcel per year for 15 years, then $100 per parcel per year thereafter, adjusted for inflation, with revenue used for a new community park with sports fields.
- Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority (Measure D, June 2026)
- Passed: 55.4% Yes to 44.6% No
- Parcel tax of $0.02 per square foot of building area to fund open space preservation, wildfire and flood prevention, and trail expansion.
Fortunately, the State Legislature struck a deal with Prop 43 proponents back in June to narrow the application of the measure, which was originally drafted to retroactively invalidate previously approved local ballot measures that did not meet its new conditions.
Despite the removal of its retroactivity provision, Prop 43 will hamper local control by removing a legitimate avenue for communities to prudently and democratically fund their essential local services into the future.
Download CSDA’s full analysis of Prop 43
PROPOSITION 45: MODIFIES ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce and known by its proponents as the “Building an Affordable California Act” or “BACA,” Proposition 45 (or Prop 45) would establish updated California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review procedures and timelines for certain “essential projects” throughout California. Among other things, the measure would:
- Set deadlines for public agencies to complete environmental review and take required actions for projects;
- Allow expedited review of a project’s environmental impacts, limiting public agencies’ current obligation to consider a range of feasible project alternatives to reduce environmental impacts; and
- Limit court review of project approvals by establishing deadlines for filing and resolving lawsuits and limiting evidence a court may consider and relief it can order.
Prop 45 seeks to create a more streamlined and time-limited process for environmental review, permitting, and judicial review regarding a list of “essential projects” which are broadly defined infrastructure projects and those ancillary projects that support them. It is intended to be an “opt-in” for the project proponent and covers post-entitlement permitting.
All covered projects feature a wage, and/or skilled and trained workforce/project labor agreement requirement for contracted work.
Prop 45 addresses CEQA review and related legal timelines and administrative records that may benefit CSDA members, including those CEQA-related timelines that may be familiar to practitioners but previously lacked enforceability. Specifically, CSDA members who are the owners and lead agencies of an essential project may expedite their own projects, while giving them flexibility to manage their own timelines and narrow the filing period and administrative record for legal challenges against their project.
Some special districts may find the legal provisions to be harmful when their district wishes to oppose a project, as a whole or in part, by a different agency or applicant. Additionally, some may find that limiting the administrative record reduces the burden on agencies, but others may find that it also limits their agency’s input as well as the public’s input into the record.
The measure can be understood to be opt-in for applicants, and that opt-in by the applicant will obligate all public agencies associated with the applicant’s project to adhere to the relevant provisions of the measure, including the tribal consultations, timelines, and labor standards for contracted work for essential projects as well as different, largely existing statutory labor standards for essential housing projects. A special district in the position of a responsible agency may also be burdened by the truncated timelines of the lead agency and opportunities to intervene on a third party’s project.
If passed by voters, Prop 45 would provide a new option for special districts to potentially expedite their public works projects if they are willing to meet certain additional parameters. However, it would also impose new mandates on special districts obligated to provide infrastructure to other entities’ public or private development projects. Ultimately, the costs and benefits of Prop 45 will likely vary based on each respective special district and its unique fact-based circumstances, as well as pending the manner in which California’s judicial branch will ultimately interpret myriad novel terms and policies not previously litigated nor contemplated.
Download CSDA’s full analysis of Prop 45
#AdvocacyNews
#FeatureNews
#PropertyTaxes
#SpecialTaxes
#EnvironmentResources
#PublicWorksandFacilities
#CEQA
#Elections