California's Proposition 13 has shaped property taxes in the state since voters passed it in 1978 — capping the tax rate at 1% of assessed value and limiting annual assessment increases to 2% for as long as a property isn't sold. It's one of the most consequential tax measures in state history, and it's about to be back on the ballot in a different form.
What Just Happened
Reform California, the group behind the effort, submitted more than 1.3 million signatures to qualify a new constitutional amendment — formally titled the Local Taxpayer Protection Act, and marketed to voters as "Save Prop 13" — for the November 3, 2026 general election ballot. The campaign, backed by Reform California and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (the same organization that helped pass the original Prop 13), frames the measure as closing loopholes that court decisions have opened up over the decades since 1978.
What the Measure Would Actually Change
The text doesn't touch Prop 13's core 1% rate cap or 2% annual assessment limit — those stay as they are. Instead, it targets three specific things:
- ›Requiring two-thirds voter approval for special local taxes, even when those taxes reach the ballot through a citizen initiative rather than a government-proposed measure.
- ›Closing the so-called "Upland" loophole — a court ruling that some local governments have read as allowing certain citizen-initiated special taxes to pass with a simple majority instead of the two-thirds threshold that applies to government-proposed special taxes.
- ›Capping city real estate transfer taxes at the 0.11% rate already set under Prop 13, repealing existing transfer taxes that exceed that cap two years after the measure passes (with an exception carved out for the standard documentary transfer tax).
Why the "Upland" Loophole Matters Here
The Upland decision is the crux of the whole measure. Prop 13 originally required a two-thirds vote for any special tax, government- or citizen-proposed. A California Supreme Court ruling was read by some local governments as opening the door for citizen initiatives to pass certain special taxes by simple majority instead, and several cities have since used that reading to pass local tax increases with less than two-thirds support. Supporters of this measure say that's a workaround Prop 13 was never meant to allow; opponents of tightening it argue those citizen-led measures reflect exactly the kind of direct democracy Prop 13's own campaign relied on.
What Happens Next
The measure needs a simple majority to pass as a constitutional amendment. If it passes, cities that have relied on the Upland reading to pass special taxes by simple majority — and cities with transfer taxes above the 0.11% cap — would be the most directly affected. For most homeowners, the day-to-day property tax bill calculation under Prop 13 doesn't change; what changes is how much harder it gets for local governments to add new special taxes and transfer taxes on top of it.