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
Family businesses are the backbone of California’s economy, employing millions of people and anchoring communities around the state. Yet these businesses are being increasingly suffocated by a regulatory system that has grown far beyond reason.
When the Family Business Association of California (FBAC) surveys our members about their biggest problems, overregulation comes out on top. Now, a recent report from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California confirms how bad the situation is. On paper, California’s regulatory burden looks comparable to many other states. But when you dig into the details, it’s anything but.
The report found that California is by far the most regulated state in the nation in terms of occurrences of “shall,” “must,” “may not,” “required” and “prohibited” within the regulations. In total, California businesses must comply with 420,434 of these regulatory constraints – nearly three times the national median and far more than any state.
California doesn’t just have more constraints than any other state, we have an order of magnitude more. Even the states with the second- and third-highest number of constraints – New York and New Jersey, hardly models of business friendliness – impose “only” roughly 300,000 regulations each. California exceeds that level by about 40%.
The least-onerous state, by the way, is Idaho, which only has 31,000 regulations on the books, which really seems like it’s more than enough. We know of many businesses that have moved there, and it’s not surprising.
FBAC has proven that something can be done about excessive regulations, but it is costly and takes a lot of work. AMAROK, an FBAC sponsor, provides electrified security fences for industrial, manufacturing, and commercial companies along with public agencies that have open yards for equipment, supplies, vehicles and inventory.
These fences are safe, effective and commonly used, yet in California, getting a permit to install them took an average of over 370 days. In one city, it took five years!
Many of our members need security fences, so we sponsored legislation that basically said that if certain criteria were met, you could quickly obtain a permit and install your fence.
During the legislative committee hearings, a Salinas truck dealer testified that while in the fifth month of waiting for his permit, a criminal trespasser broke in and burned down the entire facility, putting 24 people out of work overnight.
After a great effort, the bill unanimously passed and was signed into law. And it worked. Since the law was changed a year ago, more than 800 electrified security fences have been installed statewide, in an average of just 19 days. Standardizing and streamlining these permit requirements have saved a lot of money that would have been lost to theft or vandalism.
If lawmakers and local governments relaxed more of their excessive regulatory demands, many more businesses could enjoy similar benefits. One legislator tried, introducing a bill each year requiring the state to review all regulations and eliminate those that are onerous, too costly, overlapping or out of date. The bill never got out of the first committee.
What is sorely needed is a commitment to eliminate overreaching regulations and be more cautious about adding new ones. The PPIC suggests that the state might examine old regulations or those that are contradictory or complex in order to begin streamlining.
This state needs to become more business-friendly or we will continue to lose more businesses. With more than 420,000 regulatory constraints, the state is not protecting Californians and supporting our family businesses but rather driving them away. If lawmakers are serious about preserving jobs and local economies, reducing overregulation must become their goal.
Robert Rivinius is president of the Family Business Association of California, which has members throughout the state. He lives in Sacramento. This op-ed originally appeared online in the Orange County Register and other papers in the Southern California News Group on March 12, 2026 and in print the following day.
At FBAC’s recent Annual Meeting of Members, Chairman Ken Monroe urged family business owners around the state to join the Association because “we need to be our own advocate” in Sacramento.
Here’s the good news: Our reputation and ability to participate in much of the legislative action impacting family business is very strong. Bob Rivinius, Dennis Albiani, and Annalee Augustine have put our name on the Legislature’s map. They are regularly asked to participate with many other advocacy groups that we share interests with, because the FBA name means something to our legislators. The FBA is visible and impactful.
Now for the we-need-some-help news. Our membership is lagging. It’s a challenge to get people to come on board and we do need to continually grow membership, to keep our name visible in the Legislature.
We visit with a lot of family businesses at events like this, even going out and try to recruit people. And without exception, they all have significant concerns about the challenges the state puts in front of us to operate a healthy family business. But this is our challenge – we’ve all been guilty of this – and say, “There’s not much I can do,” or “I got too much on my plate right now. Maybe this will all work out if I just kind of close my eyes.” And I think everybody here recognizes that’s not a good strategy, and we’re going to have to help grow those members.
Let me add to your concerns, though. We at Holt joined the FBA because, like most of you, we recognize that while there are many business organizations out there, they don’t really address the needs that family businesses require because of our generational approach to perpetuating the business. They’re really much more transactional than the way we look at how we’re going to survive. And it’s also apparent we need to be our own advocate.
We cannot rely on other business organizations. To give an example. I was recently at a Sac Chamber-sponsored political event. It was a panel discussion. One of the people on the panel was Cal Chamber’s senior vice president of political affairs. And the moderator asked the question, “What has Governor Newsom done for California businesses?” The right answer would have been, “He’s done nothing at all.” The answer she gave was, “Well, he reformed PAGA.”
This is the same PAGA that, after reform, we’re seeing more lawsuits with than before reform. So, you know, our old bastion of business, the Cal Chamber, I’m not sure we can count on to go fight our battles anymore. We need to be in it ourselves.
The other trend towards why we’re on our own is that public companies, companies owned by private equity, are drifting away from California. These companies are not growing in California. There’s a big argument whether they’re leaving or not, but I can tell you they’re not growing in California. They’re slowly drifting away.
On the other hand, California family businesses stay committed to our communities, our employees, and our customers here in California. But as the public companies drift out and we have this ever-increasing tax challenge, ever-increasing regulatory challenge, they don’t care. And we do. So we have to be engaged to go make a difference in this state. And we’re asking all of you to put that need on you.
If you’re a member, I’d ask this: You probably know other family businesses. Maybe a vendor, maybe customers, maybe just friends. You need to go out and talk to them about joining, and not just talk, but put some fear into them – let them know this is not going the way we want it to go and there isn’t somebody else who’s going to come pick up the ball for us. We have to take it in our own hands.
We have some guests here today. We’d ask you to join. Think hard about joining with us.
For our sponsors out there, we really appreciate what you do as a sponsor, but your opportunity to really provide value to your clients and your customers is to get them to join.
If anybody here has some names he’d like to give us, we’re all happy to take those names and get them on the mailing list and get that going. More importantly, we’re all happy to go meet those folks and have some one-on-ones and try to scare the hell out of them to get them to join. We’re happy to go do all of that.
We will make the difference in our future. We just need to crank it up another notch to keep it going. It is really us or them, and it’s to the point where I realize now I’m taking it personally.
I saw what my forefathers did to grow a business, to be successful. I know what I’d like to leave to my successors so they can be successful, and I’d like them to have the opportunity to build a thriving business, not just watch something die, or worse than that, get pulled away from them because of all the legislative and taxation issues we have to deal with.
It’s up to us to go fight that battle. So that’s my request of everyone here. Please bring some members with us, and we’ll continue to fight the good fight.
The Sacramento Business Journal has posted an op-ed by FBAC Chairman Ken Monroe highlighting the need to enact further reforms to the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). The piece is behind the SBJ’s paywall, but if you’re not a subscriber here’ are the first few paragraphs:
Last June, the business community, legislators, trial lawyers and Gov. Gavin Newsom reached an agreement to reform California’s onerous Private Attorneys General Act.
PAGA, as it is universally called, was signed into law by former Gov. Gray Davis after he was recalled in 2003. It allows individual employees to file suits on behalf of the state over allegations that labor laws have been violated.
Over the years, it became a gold mine for trial lawyers who file thousands of lawsuits against employers while providing little benefit to employees.
Unfortunately, while some of last year’s reforms have been positive — employees now receive more of any settlement, while employers have an expanded right to cure any violations — it hasn’t stopped the deluge of PAGA lawsuits. In fact, California is on pace to have more than 9,000 PAGA lawsuits this year, more than before the reforms went into effect.
Clearly, further reforms are needed now.
Monroe said it was encouraging that the state’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency has caused a particularly egregious law firm to refile more than 130 suits, and said the best solution is for the state to finally provide funding to the agency to enforce labor laws in a timely fashion. Absent that, he suggested compensating private lawyers at the same rate as state attorneys to remove the windfall financial incentives.
PAGA is one of the biggest problems affecting family businesses in California and FBAC will continue its efforts to really reform the law once and for all.
FBAC is proud to announce BMO as the Central Valley Regional Sponsor, strengthening FBAC’s ability to support and advocate for family-owned businesses throughout the region.
With deep roots serving family-owned businesses, BMO brings a shared commitment to helping businesses thrive across generations. As a regional sponsor, BMO will play a key role in supporting FBAC’s mission to advance the long-term interests of family businesses in California through education, advocacy, and community engagement.
“BMO is committed to supporting family businesses in California to help build stronger communities and drive economic progress,” says Mauricio Romero, Managing Director and Sacramento and Central Valley Market Executive at BMO. “We’re excited to partner with the Family Business Association of California to do what BMO does best — providing the expertise, resources, and financial tools to help our customers, clients and the communities we serve grow and thrive.”
FBAC looks forward to working with BMO to create meaningful opportunities for engagement and support throughout 2025 and beyond.
“We are thrilled to welcome BMO as the newest Regional Sponsor of the Family Business Association of California,” said Ken Monroe, FBA Chair, and CEO at Holt of California. “BMO’s commitment to supporting family-owned businesses aligns perfectly with our mission to protect and promote the interests of family enterprises throughout the state. Their sponsorship enhances our ability to advocate for our members and provide valuable resources to help them thrive.”
For more information on FBAC and sponsorship opportunities, visit www.myfba.org.
About BMO Financial Group
BMO Financial Group is the eighth-largest bank in North America by assets, with total assets of $1.5 trillion as of January 31, 2025. Serving customers for 200 years and counting, BMO is a diverse team of highly engaged employees providing a broad range of personal and commercial banking, wealth management, global markets and investment banking products and services to 13 million customers across Canada, the United States, and in select markets globally. Driven by a single purpose, to Boldly Grow the Good in business and life, BMO is committed to driving positive change in the world, and making progress for a thriving economy, sustainable future, and inclusive society.
About Family Business Association of California
The Family Business Association of California (FBAC) is a nonprofit 501(c)(6) organization and the only association in the state dedicated exclusively to advocating for family-owned businesses at the California State Capitol. FBA champions pro-family business legislation, opposes harmful policies, and ensures that the voice of family enterprises is heard in Sacramento. As the backbone of California’s economy, family businesses benefit from FBA’s robust legislative advocacy, weekly news updates, economic insights, and peer-to-peer engagement opportunities.
Electric security fences like this one from AMAROK can now be permitted much more quickly.
FBAC, our Statewide Sponsor AMAROK, and other installers of electric fences won a great victory at the Capitol last year when our sponsored bill AB 2371 was signed into law. AMAROK installs 10-foot-high electric fences inside the fence of an outdoor storage facility. These electric fences aren’t lethal, but it is virtually impossible to get past them.
The bill was needed because the average time it took to get a permit in California for this simple concept was 372 days. Some local governments dragged the process out for as much as five years. Our bill provided that, if certain requirements were met, these fences could be installed without going through the permitting process.
With some good lobbying, the bill had unanimous support in both houses of the Legislature and was signed into law by the Governor on an urgency basis, so it went into effect on September 14, 2024. Since that time, in just five months, 450 fences have been installed and another 50 are in the pipeline. Approval times have dropped from that 372-day average to an average of just 16 days!
If this kind of reform could be done in more areas, it would really improve the business environment in our state. Kudos to AMAROK and our lobbying team for a job well done.
