METRO board would formally oppose state Proposition 43

In plain English

METRO's board is asked to adopt a resolution formally opposing Proposition 43, a statewide measure on the November 3, 2026 ballot. As described in the resolution, Proposition 43 would require two-thirds voter approval — instead of the current simple majority — for new, increased, or extended local special taxes that are proposed by voters themselves (citizen initiatives), starting January 1, 2027. A yes vote would put METRO on record against the measure and in favor of keeping the majority-vote standard, and would direct the CEO/General Manager to send the resolution to METRO's state legislators and to local government and transit association partners.

Special taxes placed on the ballot by residents are one way local communities raise dedicated money for services such as bus service, so the approval threshold affects how easily such funding can be created or renewed in Santa Cruz County and statewide.

Key facts

Proposition 43 appears on the November 3, 2026 statewide ballot; the change would apply to voter-proposed local special taxes beginning January 1, 2027.
The measure would replace majority voter approval with a two-thirds requirement for new, increased, or extended voter-proposed local special taxes.
The resolution cites the Legislative Analyst's conclusion that Proposition 43 "could result in lower local government tax revenues in the future than would otherwise occur," with the actual impact depending on future decisions by local governments and voters.
The resolution states it "does not authorize expenditures for campaign activities" and that implementation must comply with law on the use of public resources.
The resolution would be signed by Board Chair Manu Koenig, attested by CEO/General Manager Corey Aldridge, and approved as to form by General Counsel Julie A. Sherman, and takes effect immediately upon adoption.
Elsewhere in the same board packet, a staff training presentation notes that a citizens' initiative proposing a 0.5% sales tax has officially qualified and that METRO must stay strictly neutral on it because METRO is not the sponsor.

Reasons to support

The resolution argues that a two-thirds threshold would make it harder for communities to create or extend dedicated funding for public services, including bus service that connects residents to jobs, school, and health care.
It points to the Legislative Analyst's finding that the measure could reduce future local tax revenues.
It states that local voters should keep the ability to approve citizen-initiated funding measures by majority vote to address needs they identify themselves.

Reasons to oppose or change it

The case for Proposition 43 is that raising the bar to two-thirds would require broader agreement among voters before any new, increased, or extended local special tax takes effect — a protection for taxpayers that this resolution would ask the board to oppose.
The Legislative Analyst's conclusion cited in the resolution is qualified: the revenue effect depends on future decisions by local governments and voters, so the financial harm to METRO is not established.
Taking a public position on a tax-approval measure sits uneasily beside the neutrality rules in the same packet, which bar METRO from advocating on the qualified local 0.5% sales tax initiative; adopting the resolution also commits staff time to transmitting it to legislators and partner agencies.

Official wording

APPROVE: RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SANTA CRUZ METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DISTRICT OPPOSING CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 43 ON THE NOVEMBER 3, 2026 GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT Corey Aldridge, CEO/General Manager

Official agenda

Summary written by claude-opus-5 from the agenda and the Staff report (agenda packet, pages 193-212). It can contain mistakes. The official documents govern.