San Francisco Voter Guide: November 2026 Ballot Measures
Mail ballots have gone out! Before you fill yours in, check out the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce’s 2026 Voter Guide. The guide breaks down local and state measures on your ballot and what they mean for our businesses, jobs, and neighborhoods.
Proposition A – Charter Changes Affecting Various City Departments & Commissions
Prop A would allow for Supervisors to update the scope of duties for current advisory bodies, commissions and departments. The Controller estimates that savings from this ballot measure would be between $365,000 to $450,000 a year. The Chamber supports Prop A because it works to trim outdated bureaucratic language and modernizing operations to create a Charter that offers greater accountability.
Proposition B – Establishing a Municipal Finance Corporation & Public Bank
Prop B would allow for a Municipal Finance Corporation to be established in San Francisco. Once adequate funding exists, this could become a public bank. The Controller estimates that over $300M would be required to fund these institutions in the first 3 years. The Chamber opposes Prop B because it creates a rigid requirement within the charter and poses potential fiscal risk to the City.
Proposition C – Contributions to the Housing Trust Fund
Prop C would enable the city to increase its annual Housing Trust Fund contributions from $50 million to $125 million, and extends the Fund to 2058. The Chamber supports Prop C because it bolsters efforts to increase affordable housing stock and helps enable workers in San Francisco to stay in the city.
Proposition D – Changes to Ballot Measure Process
Prop D would raise the number of signatures needed for an initiative from 2% to 8% of registered votes, and would require a Board vote for the Mayor or Supervisors to place measures on the ballot. The Chamber supports Prop D because it would bring San Francisco in line with other jurisdictions across the state where signature qualification thresholds typically range from 5-10% of registered voters.
Proposition E – City Administrator’s Authority
Prop E would give the City Administrator near exclusive authority to propose contracting rules, raise the Board approval threshold for spending contracts from $10M to $25M, and extend the Administrator term to 10 years. The Chamber supports Prop E because simplifying procurement can save the city money and produce better outcomes.
Proposition F – Changes to Executive Branch Management
Prop F would enable the Mayor to reorganize most Charter departments, hire deputy mayors, and hire and remove select department heads. The Chamber supports Prop F because providing these mayoral powers will foster greater coordination between city departments and the executive branch.
Proposition G – Allowing Private Vehicles on the Great Highway
Prop G would partially re-open the Great Highway to private vehicles, which was closed under Prop K. The highway would remain closed from 6pm Friday to 4am Monday and holidays. The Controller estimates one-time capital costs for this project would amount to roughly $9.8M. The Chamber has abstained from taking a position on Prop G.
Proposition H – Parcel Tax to Fund Public Muni Operations
Prop H would introduce a parcel tax from 2027-2042 to assist in funding San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency operations. The anticipated revenue generated from this tax would be about $177 million. The Chamber supports Prop H as public transit is a critical driver of the San Francisco economy, helping workers, residents, and businesses stay connected.
Proposition I – Changes to Real Property Transfer Tax
Prop I would shift $120 million a year in transfer tax revenue from the General Fund to a dedicated affordable housing fund, and remove the ability for the Board to lower the tax without voter approval. The Chamber opposes Prop I because it carves out critical funding from the General Fund for narrow social housing programs without a requirement that any new affordable housing be built.
Proposition J – Removal of Foreclosure Exemption for Real Property Transfer Tax
Prop J would eliminate the existing transfer tax exemption for foreclosed properties or deeds in lieu of transactions, starting March 1, 2027. Residential and mixed use buildings under five units would keep this transfer tax. While highly dependent on conditions, the Controller estimates that the tax could bring in $100M to $150M over the first five years. The Chamber has abstained from taking a position on Prop J.
Regional Transit Measure (RTM) – Sales Tax for Transit Operations
The Regional Transit Measure would create a 14-year sales tax of 1% in San Francisco and 0.5% in four neighboring counties, generating an anticipated $980M in revenue to fund Muni, BART, and CalTrans operations. The Chamber supports this measure because Bay Area transit is an essential service, bringing workers and customers to businesses in San Francisco.
Proposition 40 – Billionaires Tax, State Measure
Prop 40 is a one-time 5% tax on the total wealth of billionaires living in California as of January 1, 2026, primarily funding Medi-Cal and other health coverage. The Chamber opposes Prop 40 due to the negative ripple effects this measure could have on state tax revenue and innovation. The one- time tax does not sufficiently address the long-term challenges of funding healthcare and creates concerns regarding future one-time taxes.
Proposition 41 – Special Tax Audits, State Measure
Prop 41 would require the State Auditor to review programs funded by voter-proposed statewide special taxes before those measures reach the ballot, including recommendations for how each program could achieve at least 10% annual savings. It would also bar new state taxes from exempting their revenue from the state spending limit. The Chamber supports Prop 41 because constitutional spending limits should apply consistently. It closes a loophole that lets new taxes sidestep the cap while leaving voters free to change the limit directly.
Proposition 42 – Ban New Taxes on Personal Property, State Measure
Prop 42 would prohibit new state taxes on owning financial assets or other personal property, and limit new taxes that reach back to past conduct or activity. Existing taxes would remain in place. The Chamber supports Prop 42 because Californians and businesses need predictable tax rules. The state should not impose new taxes on asset ownership or retroactively change the tax treatment of past activity.
Proposition 43 – Increased Threshold for Special Taxes, State Measure
Prop 43 would require a two-thirds vote to pass, extend or raise local special taxes proposed by citizen petition, and would ban new local property taxes based on a property’s value. The Chamber is in support of Prop 43 because the California Supreme Court’s Upland ruling has created an unevenly applied system where government qualified ballot measures require 3 voter approval but signature gathering efforts only require 50%. The Chamber believes this runs contrary to the intent of the California constitution’s requirement that special tax measures require 3 approval.
Proposition 45 – CEQA Reform, State Measure
Prop 45 would speed up California’s environmental review law (CEQA) for projects like housing, schools, roads and wildfire prevention. Reviews would be capped at one year, courts would rule on challenges within 270 days, and agencies would have to list application requirements upfront. The Chamber supports Prop 45 as a targeted solution to solving some of the key barriers preventing essential projects and infrastructure from construction, while maintaining environmental review.
For any questions, please contact our Public Policy Manager Callie McKenna.