This page contains a list of proposed initiative and referendum measures that during the last 60 days have been withdrawn by proponents or have failed to gather the required number of signatures during the circulation period.
1983. (25-0006A1)
LIMITS ABILITY OF VOTERS TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Summary Date: 08/29/25
Final Random Sample Count: 04/22/2026 (PDF)
ELIGIBLE: 04/21/2026 (PDF)
Withdrawn 06/25/2026 (PDF)
Signatures Required: 874,641
(25% of Signatures Reached 12/09/2025 (PDF))
Proponent(s): Jon Coupal
Limits voters’ ability to pass voter-proposed local special taxes by raising the vote approval threshold requirement for such ballot measures from a simple majority (over 50%) to two-thirds. In charter cities, prohibits voters from approving real estate transfer taxes other than the existing 0.11% transfer tax authorized by Revenue and Taxation Code section 11911. Overturns all existing voter-approved property-related taxes, including real estate sales and transfer taxes, that do not comply with these requirements two years after the measure is enacted. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Annual loss of revenues to local governments totaling up to a couple of billion dollars, predominantly affecting certain charter cities. Potential future reduction in what local governments would otherwise collect in revenues due to a higher vote threshold for certain taxes and fewer types of taxes that local governments can adopt. (25-0006A1.)
1985. (25-0009A1)
LIMITS COMPENSATION FOR HEALTH CARE EXECUTIVES, MANAGERS, AND ADMINISTRATORS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 10/07/25
Final Random Sample Count: 05/12/26 (PDF)
ELIGIBLE: 05/12/2026 (PDF)
Withdrawn 06/25/2026 (PDF)
Signatures Required: 546,651
(25% of Signatures Reached 11/12/2025 (PDF)
Proponent(s): Shelbi N. Augustus, Jonathan Everhart
Prohibits certain hospitals and medical entities from paying executives, managers, and administrators more than $450,000 in total annual compensation (salary, paid time off, bonuses, stock options, company vehicle, etc.) or severance payments; compensation limit increases up to 3.5% annually based on Consumer Price Index. Requires annual reporting of all executives, managers, and administrators receiving compensation or severance packages exceeding limit. Authorizes enforcement by Attorney General or taxpayer litigation. Penalties for violations include fines, revocation of tax-exempt status, and appointment of Attorney General representative to board of directors of nonprofit corporations. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: State cost as much as several million dollars annually to enforce the new limit on pay for administrators at affected hospitals and physician groups, mostly covered by fees charged to the affected entities. (25-0009A1.)
1996. (25-0019A1)
REPEALS STATE LAW THAT PROHIBITS BALLOT INITIATIVES AND REFERENDA FROM BEING SUBMITTED TO VOTERS AT PRIMARY ELECTIONS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 11/18/25 | Raw Count Deadline 05/29/26 | Signatures Required: 546,651
Failed 06/01/2026 (PDF)
Proponent(s): Gina Tse-Louie
Under current law, as amended by the Legislature in 2011, statewide ballot initiatives and referenda can only be submitted to voters at the statewide general election held in November of even-numbered years, or at a statewide special election. This measure repeals the 2011 law to allow statewide initiatives and referenda to be submitted to voters at any statewide election, including primary elections and general elections held in November of an odd-numbered year. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Likely increased costs to state and local governments, possibly up to the low tens of millions of dollars each statewide election cycle. The extent of the increased costs would depend on whether more citizen initiatives qualify for the ballot. (25-0019A1.)
1998. (25-0021A1)
RESTRICTS POLITICAL SPENDING BY HEALTH CARE UNIONS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 12/01/25
Final Random Sample Count: 06/05/2026 (PDF)
ELIGIBLE: 06/05/26 (PDF)
Withdrawn 06/25/2026 (PDF)
Signatures Required: 546,651
(25% of Signatures Reached 01/15/2026 (PDF))
Proponent(s): Carmela Coyle
Prohibits certain large health care unions from political spending over specified amounts regarding state or local ballot measures without following certain member consent requirements. Requires these unions to provide members annual notice describing prior-year political spending. Requirements apply only to unions, not employers. Imposes monetary penalties on unions as follows: (1) for violations of member consent requirements, the amount spent in violation of the requirements; and (2) for violations of member notice requirements, $1,000 per member (e.g., a $50,000,000 penalty if union does not provide notice to 50,000 members). Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased annual state costs, potentially in the range of millions of dollars, with some costs paid for by penalties created by the measure. (25-0021A1.)
1999. (25-0022A1)
LIMITS AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT VICTIMS' RECOVERY OF MEDICAL EXPENSES AND FEES THEIR ATTORNEYS MAY RECEIVE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Summary Date: 12/09/25
Final Random Sample Count: 06/17/2026 (PDF)
ELIGIBLE: 06/17/26 (PDF)
Withdrawn 06/25/2026 (PDF)
Signatures Required: 874,641
(25% of Signatures Reached 02/06/2026 (PDF))
Proponent(s): John Moffatt, Kurt R. Oneto
Automobile accident victims often hire an attorney on a contingency basis, meaning the attorney receives an agreed-upon percentage of the victim’s monetary recovery if the victim wins. This measure would:
- limit the fees such attorneys may receive so victims retain at least 75% of their monetary recovery, but does not restrict fee arrangements for defendants’ attorneys;
- for certain medical expenses, increase victims’ burden of proof and limit the amounts they may recover; and
- prohibit certain financial arrangements between attorneys and medical providers.
Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Likely net savings to the state trial courts ranging from the millions of dollars to the tens of millions of dollars annually. These effects would depend on the overall reduction in motor vehicle accident cases being filed as well as the degree to which remaining cases would take longer to resolve. Increased state Medi-Cal costs that could range from the millions to tens of millions of dollars annually due to various factors, including a reduction in compensation for some motor vehicle accidents used to offset Medi-Cal costs. (25-0022A1.)
2002. (25-0025A1)
CHILD SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PRODUCTS. PROHIBITS SMARTPHONES IN SCHOOLS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 12/26/25 | Raw Count Deadline 07/06/26 | Signatures Required: 546,651
Failed 07/07/2026 (PDF)
Proponent(s): James P. Steyer
Requires risk assessments and risk labels for artificial intelligence (AI) products likely to be used by children. Prohibits distribution to children of AI products that present an “unacceptable risk,” including certain “companion chatbots” (AI software that simulates humanlike relationships). Extends prohibition on selling or sharing personal data without consent to all children under 18 (up from 16). Authorizes new monetary penalties in lawsuits for actual harm to children caused by AI or social media products. Prohibits student use of personal smartphones, smartwatches, and tablets at school. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased state regulatory and enforcement costs potentially in the tens of millions of dollars annually to regulate certain AI products related to children and process court cases seeking monetary awards allowed by the measure for violation of its provisions. Some or all of these costs would be offset by regulatory fees or monetary awards received by the state. (25-0025A1.)
2003. (25-0027A1)
PROHIBITS NEW STATE LAWS THAT INTERFERE WITH RIGHT TO CONTRACT WITH AN ATTORNEY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Summary Date: 01/02/26 | Raw Count Deadline 07/13/26 | Signatures Required: 874,641
Failed 07/14/2026 (PDF)
(25% of Signatures Reached 02/25/2026 (PDF))
Proponent(s): James C. Harrison
Amends the California Constitution to prohibit new state laws that deny or interfere with a person’s ability to contract with an attorney of their choice. States that another measure appearing on the same ballot that would limit attorney contingency-fee contracts shall be deemed to conflict with this measure. Applies only to laws enacted on or after January 1, 2026; does not limit courts’ existing authority to regulate the practice of law or to prohibit illegal or excessive financial arrangements with attorneys. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: No direct fiscal effect on state or local government costs because the measure preserves existing laws and rules as of January 1, 2026 related to attorney contracts. (25-0027A1.)
2004. (25-0028A1)
EXPANDS RIDESHARE COMPANIES’ LIABILITY FOR PASSENGER INJURIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 01/02/26 | Raw Count Deadline 07/13/26 | Signatures Required: 546,651
Failed 07/14/2026 (PDF)
Proponent(s): James C. Harrison
Classifies rideshare companies as “common carriers” under California law (like taxis, buses, and trains), requiring those companies to exercise a heightened standard of care to avoid harm to passengers. Makes rideshare companies legally responsible for injuries to passengers or the public caused by a rideshare driver’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct, regardless of whether the driver is an independent contractor. Voids any contract between a rideshare company and a passenger or independent contractor that purports to waive any of these rights or obligations. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased state court costs ranging from the millions of dollars to the low tens of millions of dollars annually to process increased civil case workload. Increased costs to CPUC in the low millions of dollars annually to develop, implement, and enforce new regulations, to be covered by fees paid by rideshare companies. (25-0028A1.)
2005. (25-0029A1)
EXPANDS LIABILITY AND IMPOSES DUTIES ON RIDESHARE COMPANIES REGARDING SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 01/02/26
Final Random Sample Count: 06/17/2026 (PDF)
ELIGIBLE: 06/17/26 (PDF)
Withdrawn 06/25/2026 (PDF)
Signatures Required: 546,651
(25% of Signatures Reached 02/11/2026 (PDF))
Proponent(s): James C. Harrison
Classifies rideshare companies as “common carriers” under California law (like taxis, buses, and trains), requiring those companies to exercise a heightened standard of care to avoid harm to passengers. Makes rideshare companies legally responsible for sexual misconduct, including sexual assault, against riders or drivers, regardless of whether driver is an independent contractor. Requires rideshare companies to publish monthly report of sexual misconduct incidents and notify riders of known risks of sexual misconduct associated with a matched driver. Requires annual fingerprinting and background checks for rideshare drivers. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased state costs likely ranging from the low tens of millions of dollars to the mid-tens of millions of dollars annually to process driver fingerprint background checks, potentially to be covered by fees. Increased state court costs ranging from the millions of dollars to the low tens of millions of dollars annually to process increased civil case workload. Increased costs to CPUC in the low millions of dollars annually to develop, implement, and enforce new regulations, to be covered by fees paid by rideshare companies. (25-0029A1.)
2007. (25-0030A1)
REQUIRES STATE RESPONSE IF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES UNLAWFULLY RETAINS OFFICE BEYOND TWO-TERM LIMIT. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Summary Date: 01/05/26 | Raw Count Deadline 07/16/26 | Signatures Required: 874,641
Failed 07/17/2026 (PDF)
Proponent(s): Roberto Ramos
Requires the State of California to sue to prevent a President of the United States from remaining in office after two terms in violation of the Twenty-Second Amendment (“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice . . . .”). If a court decides that the President has unlawfully remained in office:
- the State of California must stop recognizing the individual as President;
- the Attorney General must take lawful steps to arrest and prosecute the individual; and
- the Legislature must enact laws disqualifying the individual from future state office.
Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Potential increase in one-time state costs, not likely to exceed the low millions of dollars, to address violations of the 22nd Amendment, in years in which such violations are attempted. State costs to create protections for state employees, veterans, and servicemembers who refuse unconstitutional orders. These costs would depend on what protections are adopted. (25-0030A1.)
