Would let the state borrow 11.25 billion dollars to build and preserve affordable housing, help veterans get home loans, and support housing for seniors, farmworkers, and first time buyers. It’s a general obligation bond, meaning taxpayers pay it back over time through the state budget, not a new tax.

💬 What supporters say: California is short millions of affordable homes and veterans need better access to home loans, so this bond puts real money behind fixing both.
Supporters: Self-Help for the Elderly (Anni Chung, President), California Federation of Teachers (Jeffery Freitas, President), US Vets (John H. Ing, CFO)
Argument also cites support from Habitat for Humanity California, California Alliance for Retired Americans, Housing California, California Housing Consortium, and California Alliance of Child and Family Services.

💬 What opponents say: The state is already carrying a lot of debt, and borrowing more may not be the most efficient way to solve the housing shortage.
Opponents: No official ballot argument against Proposition 1 was submitted.

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 1 Voter Guide

Would let state lawmakers save more tax revenue in California’s rainy day fund by exempting those deposits from the state’s existing spending limit, known as the Gann Limit. It doesn’t create a new tax, but it could mean less money flows back to taxpayers as refunds under current law.

💬 What supporters say: More saving flexibility helps the state build up reserves for the next downturn without deep cuts to schools or services.
Supporters: California Professional Firefighters (Darrell Roberts), California State Assembly Budget Committee (Jesse Gabriel, Chair), Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce (Maria S. Salinas, CEO)
Argument also cites support from small business organizations and former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra.

💬 What opponents say: This lets lawmakers hold onto money that would otherwise go back to taxpayers, with less accountability tied to the state’s spending limit.
Opponents: Assembly Budget Committee (David Tangipa, Vice Chair), Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendment Committee (Steven Choi, Vice Chair), Reform California (Carl DeMaio, Chairman)
Argument also cites opposition from the Transparency Foundation.

Read the Official Prop 2 Voter Guide

Would make permanent an existing tax on high income Californians that voters first approved in 2012 and extended in 2016, which is otherwise set to expire in 2031. It adds 1 to 3 percent to the income tax rate for single filers earning more than 360,000 dollars, joint filers earning more than 721,000 dollars, and heads of household earning more than 490,000 dollars, with the money going mainly to school districts and community colleges, plus some to the state’s rainy day reserves, and the state’s nonpartisan analyst expects it to raise between 5 and 15 billion dollars a year.

💬 What supporters say: This keeps a tax that’s already in place from disappearing, protecting billions in ongoing funding for schools and community colleges without asking most Californians to pay anything new.
Supporters: California Teachers Association (David Goldberg), California School Nurses Organization (Katie Nilsson, RN), Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California (Jodi Hicks)
Argument also cites support from California State PTA, California Federation of Teachers, California Nurses Association, California School Employees Association, Community College League of California, and Nurse Alliance of SEIU California.

💬 What opponents say: Making a temporary tax permanent removes the built in check that voters get by having to renew it, and high earners already carry a large share of the state’s tax burden.
Opponents: California Taxpayers Association (Robert Gutierrez), Family Business Association of California (Robert Rivinius), California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce (Julian Canete).

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 3 Voter Guide

Would let the state and local governments offer public funding to political candidates who agree to spending limits and show broad public support, like a minimum number of small dollar donations. That money cannot come from education, transportation, or public safety funds, and it cannot be used for legal costs, fines, or paying back a candidate’s personal loans.

💬 What supporters say: This could help underfunded candidates compete against well financed opponents and make elections more competitive, giving everyday people more say than wealthy donors.
Supporters: League of Women Voters of California (Lorrel Plimier, Co-President), California Nurses Association (Catherine Kennedy, President), State Sen. Tom Umberg
Argument also cites support from Mental Health Advocacy Services, Social Security Works, California Common Cause, Consumer Watchdog, and other organizations.

💬 What opponents say: People paying taxes want that money going to schools, fire departments, libraries, and roads, not funding political campaigns.
Opponents: Fair Political Practices Commission (Dan Schnur, Former Chair), Fair Political Practices Commission (Colleen McAndrews, Former Commissioner), California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce (Julian Canete, President)
Argument also cites opposition from California Taxpayers Association, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Family Business Association of California, and United Latinos Action.

Read the Official Prop 4 Voter Guide

Would change California recall elections so voters decide only whether to remove an official from office, with the seat then filled through a separate election or appointment under existing law, instead of the current system where voters choose a replacement on the same ballot and the top vote getter wins even with far less than half the vote. It would also let a recalled official run in that later election to get their seat back, something the current rules don’t allow.

💬 What supporters say: The current system lets a small, motivated group target an official they disagree with and hand the seat to a replacement who never had majority support, so separating the removal question from the replacement question makes recalls fairer and less prone to political gamesmanship.
Supporters: League of Women Voters of California (Lorrel Plimier, Co-President), California Common Cause (Darius L. Kemp, MPA, Executive Director), Fair Political Practices Commission (Dan Schnur, Former Chair)

💬 What opponents say: This takes a crucial decision away from voters and hands it to political insiders, making it easier for the party already in power to protect itself from being challenged.
Opponents: State Sen. Brian W. Jones, Senate Minority Leader; Assemblymember Joe Patterson

Read the Official Prop 5 Voter Guide

Would create a state loan program letting middle class Californians, meaning anyone earning less than 200 percent of their area’s median income, borrow up to 17 percent of a new home’s price as a second mortgage, cutting the typical 20 percent down payment down to around 3 percent out of pocket. It’s funded through up to 25 billion dollars in revenue bonds that the Legislative Analyst’s Office expects to be paid back through homeowners’ mortgage payments rather than taxpayer money.

💬 What supporters say: High down payments are the real dealbreaker standing between working families and owning a home, and this gives the so called missing middle, people who earn too much to qualify for existing assistance but still can’t afford a typical down payment, a real path to buying.
Supporters: California Conference of Carpenters (Danny Curtin, Director), California Housing Finance Agency (Fiona Ma, Boardmember), California State Commanders Veterans Council (David West, Chair)
Argument also cites support from Democrats and Republicans, labor and businesses, construction workers, taxpayer and housing advocates, veterans, the California Teachers Association, and United Nurses Association of California.

💬 What opponents say: Making it easier to borrow more doesn’t guarantee homes actually become more affordable, since it could just as easily push prices higher if supply doesn’t keep pace with new buyers entering the market.
Opponents: No official ballot argument against Proposition 37 was submitted.

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 37 Voter Guide

Would let the state borrow 8.4 billion dollars for immunology and immunotherapy research, with roughly half going to grants for California universities and nonprofits studying cancer, Alzheimer’s, and heart disease. The other half is reserved for a single new research institute, and the eligibility rules are specific enough that currently only one Los Angeles based institute qualifies.

💬 What supporters say: This funding could help prevent and cure some of the most debilitating diseases people face, saving patients billions of dollars in future healthcare costs, especially as federal research funding has become unstable.
Supporters: Alzheimer’s Los Angeles (Susan Disney Lord, Board Chair), ALS Association (Eugene P. Brandon, Ph.D., Board of Trustees), Kidney Cancer Association (Dr. Brian Shuch, M.D., Board of Directors Member)
Argument also cites support from Alzheimer’s Association, American Nurses Association\California, Michael J. Fox Foundation, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and others.

💬 What opponents say: Roughly half the money is steered toward a single, unnamed nonprofit through eligibility rules specific enough that only one Los Angeles institute currently qualifies, and that institute’s own board chair is one of the measure’s two biggest financial backers.
Opponents: Robert M. Kaplan, Ph.D.

Read the Official Prop 38 Voter Guide

Would require Californians to show government issued ID every time they vote in person, or provide the last four digits of an ID number for mail ballots, and would require election officials to verify citizenship using government data. Free voter ID cards would be available on request, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office expects it to cost state and local governments tens of millions to low hundreds of millions of dollars a year to administer.

💬 What supporters say: Requiring ID at the polls is a common sense step to prevent fraud and restore public trust in elections, the same way ID is already required for things like boarding a flight or buying alcohol.
Supporters: Californians for Voter ID (Margit Whitlock, Democratic Coalition Chair), Californians for Voter ID (Tafa Jefferson, Republican Coalition Chair), Californians for Voter ID (Joe Green, Independent Coalition Chair)
Argument also cites support from Latino American Political Association, California Women’s Leadership Association, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the Transparency Foundation, and voting rights organizations.

💬 What opponents say: California’s elections are already secure, with voter impersonation and noncitizen voting both rare, and adding an ID requirement mainly makes it harder for eligible voters, especially those who’ve moved, changed their name, or lack stable housing, to cast a ballot.
Opponents: ACLU California Action (David Trujillo, Executive Director), Common Cause (Darius Kemp, California State Director), League of Women Voters of California (Lorrel Plimier, Co-President)

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 39 Voter Guide

Would impose a one time 5 percent tax on individuals and trusts with assets over 1 billion dollars, with 90 percent of the money going to healthcare and 10 percent to food assistance and education, and the wealthiest residents allowed to spread payments over five years. The state’s nonpartisan analyst expects it to raise tens of billions of dollars over several years, while also causing an annual drop of hundreds of millions or more in existing state income tax revenue.

💬 What supporters say: Billionaires can afford to pay more, and this money would fund real healthcare and food assistance without raising taxes on anyone else in the state.
Supporters: SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (Suzanne Jimenez, Chief of Staff), Planned Parenthood of Pacific Southwest (Victoria Barron, Patient Access Specialist), American Federation of Teachers Local 1521, Los Angeles College Faculty Guild (Denise Robb, Ph.D., Member)
Argument also cites support from teachers, Planned Parenthood workers, nurses, and union members generally.

💬 What opponents say: Taxing wealth this way risks pushing high net worth residents and their businesses out of California entirely, some of whom have already relocated ahead of the vote, which could shrink the state’s tax base and create bigger budget problems down the road.
Opponents: California Medical Association (René Bravo, M.D., President), California Primary Care Association (Francisco Silva, CEO), California School Boards Association (Dr. Debra Schade, President)
Argument also cites opposition from Gov. Gavin Newsom, the Democratic and Republican candidates for governor, California Teachers Association, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, California Children’s Hospital Association, State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, California Conference of Carpenters, California Professional Firefighters, California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce, California Council for Affordable Housing, California Taxpayers Association, California Chamber of Commerce, and California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce.

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 40 Voter Guide

Unlike Proposition 42, which targets retroactive taxes and personal assets, this measure focuses on auditing. Would require the state auditor to conduct financial and performance audits of ballot initiatives and the programs they fund, and would ban any new state tax from being exempt from California’s existing voter approved spending limit, something the proposed billionaire tax relies on. If this measure gets more votes than Proposition 40, the billionaire tax would be voided entirely, even if voters also approved it.

💬 What supporters say: New taxes and the programs they fund should be audited for efficiency and accountability before more government spending gets locked in, rather than trusting that money automatically gets used well.
Supporters: California Society of Certified Public Accountants (Denise LeDuc Froemming, CPA, President), Former California State Auditor Tom Hayes, California Taxpayers Association (Robert Gutierrez, President)
Argument also cites support from good government groups, small business owners, accountants, taxpayers, and public transparency advocates.

💬 What opponents say: This is bad policy dressed up as accountability, designed specifically to kill the billionaire tax before it can help fund healthcare for people who need it, and it lets some of the wealthiest people in the state, who’d personally benefit from the tax not passing, decide the outcome by outspending everyone else.
Opponents: SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (Suzanne Jimenez, Chief of Staff)

Read the Official Prop 41 Voter Guide

Unlike Proposition 41, which targets audits and spending limits, this measure focuses on retroactive taxes and personal assets. Would ban new taxes on personal property, intellectual property, retirement accounts, and similar assets, and would limit when a ballot measure or the legislature can apply a tax retroactively, both of which are core mechanics the billionaire tax relies on to work. If this measure gets more votes than Proposition 40, the billionaire tax would be voided entirely, even if voters also approved it.

💬 What supporters say: People shouldn’t have their retirement savings or personal property exposed to new taxes, and a tax applied retroactively, reaching back before it was even voted on, isn’t a fair way to change the rules.
Supporters: California Small Business Association (Michael Hedges, President), AMVETS Department of California (Shelley Huff, Commander), California Senior Alliance (Jennifer Yoder, Board Member)
Argument also cites support from California Professional Firefighters and Disabled American Veterans, Dept. of California.

💬 What opponents say: This is a second attempt to kill the billionaire tax without saying so directly, protecting the retirement accounts and assets of the ultra wealthy under the language of protecting everyday people’s savings.
Opponents: SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (Suzanne Jimenez, Chief of Staff)

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 42 Voter Guide

Would require local governments to get approval from two thirds of voters, instead of a simple majority, to pass new special taxes, and would apply that same higher threshold to citizen initiatives that raise local taxes, which currently only need a simple majority. Notably, the lawmaker who authored this measure, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, opposes it becoming law, saying she only introduced it as a bargaining chip to remove a more damaging tax measure from the ballot.

💬 What supporters say: Raising the bar for new local taxes protects taxpayers and preserves the spirit of Proposition 13, preventing local governments from passing new taxes without broad public buy-in.
Supporters: California Taxpayers Association (Robert Gutierrez, President), Family Business Association of California (Robert Rivinius, President), California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce (Julian Canete, President)

💬 What opponents say: Making it harder for local communities to raise their own taxes limits what cities and counties can fund, from schools to infrastructure to public services, based on local needs rather than a one size fits all statewide rule.
Opponents: California Professional Firefighters (Darrell Roberts, President), Nurse Alliance of SEIU California (Chris Harkins, Executive Director), California School Employees Association (Adam Weinberger, President)
Argument also cites opposition from Californians Against Waste, California Federation of Teachers, Communities for a Better Environment, AAPI Force, Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California, and Sierra Business Council.

Read the Official Prop 43 Voter Guide

Would require federally qualified health centers, meaning community clinics, to spend 90 percent of their revenue on direct patient care rather than administration or overhead, with clinics that don’t comply facing fines that go into a state fund for clinic workforce programs. The Legislative Analyst’s Office says the impact is uncertain and warns it could lead to some clinic closures, while enforcement is expected to cost the state up to the low tens of millions a year.

💬 What supporters say: Clinics spend too much on executive pay and administrative costs and not enough on actual patient care, so this measure holds them accountable for putting the money where it’s supposed to go.
Supporters: Shawna Brown, Initiative Proponent; Brisa J. Barrera, Community Clinic Worker

💬 What opponents say: This effectively lets a union dictate how independently run clinics spend their money, and it would stop clinics from keeping financial reserves or investing in new equipment and locations, which could ultimately mean less care, not more, if some are forced to close.
Opponents: American Academy of Pediatrics, California (Eric Ball, MD, FAAP, President), California School Nurses Organization (Katie Nilsson, RN, President), California Medical Association (René Bravo, M.D., President)
Argument also cites opposition from California Primary Care Association, American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists District IX, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, National Association of Social Workers California Chapter, American College of Emergency Physicians California, and California Academy of Family Physicians.

KBLA Ballot Brief Audio

Read the Official Prop 44 Voter Guide

Would speed up environmental review for projects deemed essential, including certain housing, water, health, energy, and transportation projects, by setting firm deadlines for reviews and lawsuits, and by allowing expedited review instead of the current requirement to weigh a full range of alternatives. Jails, detention facilities, and oil and gas production would not qualify as essential, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office expects tens of millions in implementation costs early on, with likely long term savings from less legal and administrative work.

💬 What supporters say: It takes years longer than necessary to build affordable housing, clean water infrastructure, and clean energy projects, and those delays get passed along to families already struggling with the cost of living, so cutting unnecessary review time gets essential projects built faster and cheaper.
Supporters:  California Children’s Hospital Association (Ann-Louise Kuhns, President), California Water Association (Jennifer Capitolo, Executive Director), California Council on Affordable Housing (Jenna Abbott, Executive Director)
Argument also cites support from American Clean Power—California, California League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), NAACP California/Hawaii State Conference, California Taxpayers Association, and Environmental Policy Innovation Center.

💬 What opponents say: This would also streamline some of the largest and most polluting projects in the state, making it easier for developers and corporate interests to build with little public ability to reduce harm to health or the climate, and it gives developers a new right to sue agencies that try to impose reasonable limits on a project, flipping who typically has the legal upper hand. Opponents also argue this shifts real costs onto cities, counties, and ultimately taxpayers, since local governments would have fewer tools to deny or attach conditions to hazardous projects and may end up spending public money to manage the pollution those projects create.
Opponents: Coalition for Clean Air (Joe Lyou, President), Clean Water Action (Jennifer Clary, California Director), California Environmental Voters (Matt Abularach-Macias, Political Director)
Argument also cites opposition from National Wildlife Federation, California Communities Against Toxics, California Environmental Justice Alliance, California Nurses for Environmental Health & Justice, and Physicians for Social Responsibility—Los Angeles.

Read the Official Prop 45 Voter Guide