2026 PRIMARY ElectionS Measures Across the State of California

 

IADC’s mission is to engage, educate, and empower the Iranian American community to be active participants in our democratic process. information provided below is intended to help voters make informed decisions.

We reviewed 100 measures for June 2026 general election.  We have issued the following voter guide for 33 out of 100.  On 7 ballot measures, we have issued no opinion because of the complex nature of measure and inadequate data available.

The remaining 67 measures across the state fall under two categories: 17 Sales Tax and 50 School Bond or Tax.  For these measures, below we have provided overall background information and consideration that we hope can help voters make their decision.

Below the voter’s guide you will find additional information about some of specific ballot measures and general recommendations regarding the remaining measures.

 

JUNE 2, 2026 is the LAST DAY to return mail-in-ballots  OR vote in-person AT

A COUNTY VOTING LOCATION.

To ensure your ballot is counted, drop ballots in designated ballots boxes in your county, mail them PRIOR TO MAY 25th, or bring them to one of the in-person voting locations. 

Be sure to sign and date the back of your envelope.

 

If you would like to look at your entire ballot and get additional information about candidates we have not endorsed or  on measures (such as who has endorsed it or who has advocated against it), we suggest you visit: https://bluevoterguide.org/

Blue Voter Guide helps you make quick, informed, pro-democracy choices of candidates and propositions by showing what’s on your ballot, with endorsements from trusted, forward-looking organizations.

WHAT TO WATCH OUT FOR ON THE BALLOTS FOR JUNE PRIMARIES?
SCHOOL BONDS	In June Primaries in California, 50 measures across 15 counties are Bond Measures to fund schools. IADC provides this overall statement for voters in California to consider as they cast their vote in their particular county. This year, similar to past election, there are also several measures across California pursuing school bonds to update the state’s waning school infrastructure. IADC strongly supports these measures. California’s school infrastructure is vastly in need of additional funding to update its infrastructure. Since taking office in January 2025, the Trump administration has withheld $800 million in California education funding and canceled $148 million in teacher training grants, forcing the cancellation of summer programs and professional development, while special education services face disruption as IDEA oversight shifts to other agencies, potentially affecting California’s 851,000 students with disabilities.  Districts are likely to see direct cuts of hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for homeless and migratory students, English learners, teacher recruitment and training grants, mental health clinicians, and money for tutors and counselors. In this environment, local bond measures have become one of the few reliable fiscal tools districts can control — but they come at a direct cost to property owners, land on top of the sales tax burden also being requested on the same ballot, and in lower-income communities like Compton, fall most heavily on residents least able to absorb compounding tax obligations. Voters should evaluate each district’s specific facilities plan, the binding accountability mechanisms attached to bond proceeds, and whether the stated need reflects genuine deferred investment or operational costs being reclassified as capital expenditures to qualify for bond financing.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL BONDS OR TAXES	The school district bond measures appearing on the June ballot — including Bonita Unified Measure A, Compton Unified Measure CPT, La Cañada Unified’s Measure LCF, Lawndale Elementary’s measure, and Little Lake City Elementary’s Measure LS — reflect a facilities and funding crisis that has been decades in the making and is now being sharply accelerated by federal disruption. Unlike the sales tax measures on the same ballot, these are general obligation bonds repaid through property taxes and do not compete for the sales tax cap; they require 55% voter approval rather than a simple majority or two-thirds. The underlying need is real and well-documented: LAUSD alone estimates that at least 60% of its facilities are 50 years old or older, and more than 100 schools are at least a century old, a condition replicated in varying degrees across smaller districts throughout the county. But the urgency of the June measures is driven not just by aging infrastructure — it is also driven by an increasingly unstable federal funding environment. IADC strongly supports these measures. California’s school infrastructure is vastly in need of additional funding to update its infrastructure.
SALES TAX MEASURES	In June Primaries in California, 17 measures across 8 counties are Sales Tax Measures to fund variety of projects. IADC provides this overall statement for voters in California to consider as they cast their vote in their particular county. California voters across the state will find local sales tax measures on their ballots in 2026, and the driver is largely the same everywhere: deep federal cuts to healthcare, social services, and transit funding have left counties and cities with significant budget shortfalls they cannot legally deficit-spend their way out of. In Los Angeles County alone, more than 25 municipal sales tax measures appear alongside the countywide Measure ER, which seeks a half-cent increase to replace lost Medi-Cal funding. Contra Costa County has placed a similar healthcare-driven measure on the June ballot, and Bay Area transit agencies are pursuing additional increases in November. All of these measures share a common legal constraint: California state law sets an effective combined sales tax ceiling of 10.25% for most jurisdictions. That ceiling is already being reached or exceeded in dozens of communities across the state, and a voter-approved measure that pushes a jurisdiction over the cap cannot actually be collected until the state Legislature grants specific authorizing legislation — meaning a yes vote at the ballot box does not guarantee the revenue will ever be received. Voters should read their local measures carefully, confirm whether their jurisdiction is at or near the cap, and evaluate whether the accountability provisions attached to each measure are legally binding or merely advisory.
SALES TAX MEASURES IN LA COUNTY	Los Angeles County voters face an unusually complex sales tax decision on June 2, with a countywide measure and 9 municipal measures on the ballot simultaneously — and a hard legal ceiling that may prevent some of them from ever being collected even if voters approve them. The county’s Measure ER, the Essential Services Restoration Act, would add a half-cent to the existing 9.75% countywide rate to generate roughly $1 billion annually to offset federal Medi-Cal cuts — but that half-cent directly consumes tax “headroom” that cities were counting on for their own local needs like public safety and basic services. Under California’s Revenue and Taxation Code section 7251.1, the combined rate of all local district taxes in any county cannot exceed 2% above the 7.25% statewide base without special authorization from the state Legislature — a ceiling LA County has already breached once before, when Measure A (homelessness services) required Sacramento to pass special legislation just to take effect. If both Measure ER and a city measure pass in the same jurisdiction, residents in some communities — particularly in the Antelope Valley — could face combined rates as high as 11.75%, which would exceed what state law permits; in those cases, the city tax could sit in legal limbo, voter-approved but uncollectable, until the Legislature acts again. This means a yes vote on a municipal measure is not simply a vote on a tax rate — it is also a bet on Sacramento’s willingness to intervene a second time. Voters should weigh not only the merits of each measure individually, but whether the county and their city should be competing for the same finite legal and economic space, and which level of government’s need is more urgent.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​