This page contains a list of proposed initiative and referendum measures that during the last 60 days have been withdrawn by proponents or have failed to gather the required number of signatures during the circulation period.
1981. (25-0004A1)
LIMITS ABILITY OF VOTERS TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Summary Date: 07/16/25 | Circulation Deadline: 01/12/26 | Signatures Required: 874,641
Failed 01/26/2026 (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 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. (25-0004A1.)
1982. (25-0005A1)
LIMITS ABILITY OF VOTERS TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Summary Date: 07/16/25 | Circulation Deadline: 01/12/26 | Signatures Required: 874,641
Failed 01/26/2026 (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 that exceed the rate specified in Revenue and Taxation Code section 11911 (0.11%). Overturns all existing voter-approved property-related 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, limits on tax rates, and fewer types of taxes that local governments can adopt. (25-0005A1.)
1988. (25-0011)
PROHIBITS GOVERNMENT ENTITIES FROM RESTRICTING BOYCOTTS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES SUPPORTING PALESTINIAN RIGHTS OR OPPOSING ISRAEL’S ACTIONS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 10/15/25 | Circulation Deadline 04/13/26 | Signatures Required: 546,651
Withdrawn 01/29/26 (PDF)
Proponent(s): Hatem al-Bazian, Malak Afaneh
Prohibits policies by state and local governments and agencies, California State University, and University of California that: (1) restrict engagement in activities—including boycotts, divestments, and sanctions—that express support for Palestinian rights or opposition to Israel’s actions (“BDS activities”); or (2) condition eligibility for contracts, grants, or other funding on agreement not to participate in BDS activities. Prohibits high schools, colleges, and universities from disciplining students for certain BDS activities. Prohibits public investment and retirement funds from adopting policies that restrict support of BDS activities. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Net increase in state and local government costs, not likely to exceed the low millions of dollars annually, related to (1) developing new guidance and policies, (2) resolving alleged violations in the courts, and (3) responding to related public records requests. (25-0011.)
2010. (25-0033)
REGULATES CERTAIN PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATIONS AND NONPROFITS ENGAGED IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) DEVELOPMENT. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 02/04/26 | Circulation Deadline 08/03/26 | Signatures Required: 546,651
Withdrawn 02/26/26 (PDF)
Proponent(s): Alexander Oldham
Creates new California Public Benefit AI Accountability Commission within the California Department of Justice, comprised of seven appointed members with specified expertise, to regulate AI companies that were incorporated as “public benefit corporations” or nonprofits under California law. Regulated companies must: (1) demonstrate their public benefit; (2) assist workers displaced by AI; (3) mitigate potential risks of AI systems; and (4) obtain Commission approval before substantially expanding AI system capabilities. Authorizes Commission to set standards for companies’ public benefit plans and ensure they use assets for stated public benefit. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased state costs that would likely be in the tens of millions of dollars annually to establish and operate a new regulatory commission overseeing certain public benefit AI companies. These costs would generally be covered by new revenues from annual assessments paid by entities subject to the measure. (25-0033.)
2011. (25-0034A1)
REGULATES CERTAIN LARGE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) COMPANIES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Summary Date: 02/04/26 | Circulation Deadline 08/03/26 | Signatures Required: 546,651
Withdrawn 02/26/26 (PDF)
Proponent(s): Alexander Oldham
Creates new state agency, the California AI Safety Commission, comprised of seven appointed members with specified expertise, to regulate companies that develop or control advanced AI systems and meet other specified criteria. Regulated companies must: (1) submit safety plan to Commission addressing specified categories of potential harm, including workforce displacement, safety, and loss of human control; and (2) notify Commission before expanding AI system capabilities. Requires Commission to publish best practices for mitigating potential harms of AI; authorizes Commission to limit expansion of AI system capabilities if company’s safety plan is inadequate. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Increased state costs that would likely be in the tens of millions of dollars annually to establish and operate a new regulatory commission overseeing certain frontier AI companies. These costs would generally be covered by new revenues from registration fees, annual assessments, and civil penalties paid by entities subject to the measure. (25-0034A1.)
