FBAC takes positions on November 2026 ballot measures

by | Jul 26, 2026 | Ballot Initiatives, Blog, Top News

California voters will decide on 14 ballot measures this November — five put on the ballot by the Legislature and the remainder by outside groups. After careful consideration, the Family Business Association of California’s board of directors has taken positions on all but two based on the impact the measures would have on California’s family businesses.

  • Proposition 1. The Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026. This is an $11.75 billion general obligation bond to subsidize rental housing. While we need more housing in the state, we do not need more debt and who knows where the money will ultimately go. No position
  • Proposition 2. Save for California’s Future Act. This constitutional amendment from Democratic leaders would allow the state to deposit up to 20% of its general fund tax revenue into its rainy day fund each year, instead of the current 10%. The state could also spend some tax revenue to pay down its $20 billion federal unemployment insurance debt. Support
  • Proposition 3. The measure seeks to make permanent a temporary income tax up to 12% — on high earners that voters approved in 2012. The tax applies to household income over $721,000 for couples and over $360,000 for individuals. The tax generates between $5-15 billion each year for K-12 schools and community colleges. It is set to expire in 2031. Opposed
  • Proposition 4. This measure would give California governments the authority to set up public financing systems for state and local political candidates. Public campaign financing has been banned in California since 1988. State lawmakers approved the measure last year to send it to voters this November. Opposed
  • Proposition 5. Governs the recall of state officers. After a recall, this constitutional amendment would eliminate the election to pick a successor immediately, such as when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger replaced the recalled Gov. Gray Davis, instead leaving the post vacant until it’s filled in a separate election. It would also allow the recalled official to run for the office again. No position
  • Proposition 37. Creates a loan program for middle-income buyers of qualified new homes. This would create a $25 billion mortgage loan program for home buyers who make less than 200% of the area median income. The measure would offer fixed-rate mortgages for up to 17% of the purchase price on homes priced under $1.5 million. Home buyers must pay at least 3% of their down payment. As this is a revenue bond, not a general obligation bond, Support
  • Proposition 38. This would allow the state to borrow $8.4 billion in debt to research immune system-based technologies for treating conditions including cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s. The money would be divided between a University of California-affiliated nonprofit and a grant for public or nonprofit institutions. Any resulting technology and drugs from the research would be sold at 20% below the national average. Too expensive. Opposed
  • Proposition 39. This constitutional amendment would require voters to present government-issued ID when voting in person or the last four digits of their ID number when voting by mail. Support
  • Proposition 40. This measure would apply a one-time 5% wealth tax on the assets of roughly 200 California billionaires, to be paid over five years. Ninety percent of the revenue would go to pay for healthcare for low-income Californians and 10% toward education and food assistance programs. Opposed
  • Proposition 41. This measure in response to the billionaire tax proposal would require state audits of programs funded by new taxes. It would also apply revenue from new taxes to the state’s spending cap, which requires that spiking revenue go back to taxpayers or toward education. That would effectively cancel out the wealth tax proposal. If voters approve both measures, the one with more votes will prevail. Support
  • Proposition 42. This measure is also aimed at undercutting the wealth tax proposal. It would prevent new taxes on personal property, which would offset the wealth tax. If both pass, the one with more votes prevails. Support
  • Proposition 43. This would raise the threshold for citizen-driven special tax ballot initiatives to pass from a simple majority to two-thirds, making it harder to impose or increase taxes. The measure, placed on the ballot at the last minute by state lawmakers, reflects a deal state leaders struck with Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the Business Roundtable. Support 
  • Proposition 44. This measure would require federally qualified health centers to spend 90% of revenue on direct patient care and services that aid in providing care to low-income and underserved people. Clinics that don’t comply would be fined; the money would go into a state-operated account for worker training and staffing. While this only pertains to health centers, it is another invasion by government controlling how a business is run. Opposed
  • Proposition 45. This would amend the state’s landmark California Environmental Quality Act to create deadlines for environmental reviews of most housing, transportation, water, health and clean energy projects to speed up permitting and limit the court’s ability to stop or delay developments. Support

FBA takes positions on four November ballot measures

by | Sep 22, 2020 | Ballot Initiatives, Blog, Press Releases

FBA has taken positions on four ballot initiatives that will have an impact on family businesses.

  • No on Prop 15 — an $11-12 billion tax increase at the worst possible time. Public employee unions always want more money. The property tax on property owned 10 years or more could double or triple if Prop 15 passes.
  • No on Prop 19 — the California Association of Realtors want to see more people sell their homes and accomplish this with a $1-2 billion tax on parents transferring homes to their children.
  • No on Prop 21 — rent control is just bad public policy, period!
  • Yes on Prop 22 — FBA views any change to AB 5 as positive and many of our members use app- based delivery services. People should be free to decide if they want to be employees or contractors, not have the state decide for them.

If you would like more information on any of the 12 initiatives on the November ballot contact Robert Rivinius.

FBA Adopts Oppose Positions on Three Ballot Measures

by | Aug 12, 2020 | Ballot Initiatives

At the July 29 FBA Board of Directors meeting, “no” positions on three ballot propositions were adopted:

No on Proposition 15 – the infamous “split roll” initiative backed by public employee unions would remove Proposition 13 protections for commercial properties and create about $12 billion a year in new property taxes. The unions reportedly will spend $40-50 million to get the initiative passed by California voters. FBA is part of a coalition of over 2,000 associations, businesses, and individuals opposing the measure. The county assessors in California also oppose the initiative as unmanageable and extremely difficult to implement. The campaign has a very good website full of information at www.noonprop15.org. 

No on Proposition 19 – The assaults on California property owners and taxpayers never stop. And once again the California Legislature has advanced a massive tax increase at the last possible moment, sponsored by the California Association of Realtors. Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 11 (ACA11) takes away Proposition 13 protections that California families have under current law and replaces them with a billion-dollar tax increase. This is Proposition 19. Under Prop. 58, a home of any value and up to a million dollars of assessed value of other property may be transferred between parents and children without reassessment. Proposition 19 (2020) would repeal Proposition 58 (1986) and force the reassessment of inherited or transferred property within families. The only exception is if the property is used as the principal residence of the person to whom it was transferred, and even that exclusion is capped. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the repeal of the “intergenerational transfer protections” guaranteed by Props. 58 and 193 will result in 40,000 to 60,000 families getting hit with higher property taxes every year. Prop. 19’s massive tax increase has been included in this initiative to offset another proposed constitutional change: the expansion of the ability for older homeowners to move to a replacement home and transfer their base-year property tax assessment from their previous home to the new property. While this “portability” expansion has some merit, voters rejected this idea in 2018. The backers of the proposal think they can sell it again by adding a tax increase.

No on Proposition 21 – This would amend state law to allow local governments to establish rent control on residential properties over 15 years old. The potential reduction in state and local revenues is tens of millions of dollars per year in the long term. FBA has always opposed rent control efforts as bad public policy, for a variety of reasons. 

We also are considering support of Proposition 22, an initiative by the app-based driving industry. Many FBA members use app-based driving services to deliver food and the ill-conceived AB 5 of last year requires that such drivers become employees of the app-based company, rather than contracting with the company.