California Proposition 28, Art and Music K-12 Education Funding Initiative (2022)

California Proposition 28
Election date November 8, 2022
Topic Education
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

California Proposition 28, the Art and Music K-12 Education Funding Initiative, was on the ballot in California as an initiated state statute on November 8, 2022. The ballot measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to: require an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98; distribute a portion of the additional funding based on a local education agency's share of economically disadvantaged students; and require schools with 500 or more students to use 80% of the funding for employing teachers and 20% to training and materials.

A "no" vote opposed requiring an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98.

Election results

California Proposition 28
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		6,924,613	64.40%
No		3,827,967	35.60%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What did Proposition 28 do?

See also: Measure design

Proposition 28 required a minimum source of annual funding for K-12 public schools, including charter schools, to fund arts education programs. The annual minimum amount established by the law was equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies received under Proposition 98 (1988) during the prior fiscal year. The minimum under the proposed law was in addition to the funding required by Proposition 98. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the ballot initiative would result in increased spending of $800 million to $1 billion each fiscal year.

How did Proposition 98 relate to school funding?

See also: California Proposition 98, Mandatory Education Spending Initiative (1988)

In 1988, Californians approved Proposition 98 by a margin of 50.7% to 49.3%. Proposition 98 amended the state constitution to require a minimum percentage of the state budget to be spent on K-14 education (kindergarten through two-year community college), which is referred to as the minimum guarantee. Proposition 98 established two formulas or tests to determine the minimum guarantee, which is the highest funding level produced by Test 1 or Test 2. Test 1 links the minimum guarantee to about 40% of the state General Fund, which is equal to California's 1986-87 funding level of public education. Test 2 calculates the minimum guarantee by adjusting the prior year's minimum guarantee by student attendance and changes in the cost of living.

Who supported and opposed Proposition 28?

See also: Support and Opposition

Yes on 28 - Californians for Arts and Music in Schools led the Vote Arts and Minds campaign in support of the initiative. The campaign received endorsements from former Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District Austin Beutner, former U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan (D), the California Teachers Association, and several celebrities and musicians. Beutner and Duncan said in a joint statement, "Only 1 in 5 public schools in California has a dedicated teacher for traditional arts programs like music, dance, theater and art, or newer forms of creative expression like computer graphics, animation, coding, costume design and filmmaking. ... This initiative is timely as our country seeks to create a more just and equitable future for all children. A boost in arts and music education will help ensure the future workforce in media and technology properly reflect the diversity of the children in our public schools." The campaign reported receiving over $10.6 million in contributions according to its latest campaign finance filings.

Ballotpedia has not identified any committees registered in opposition to the initiative.

Measure design

See also: Text of measure

Click on the arrows (▼) below for summaries of the different provisions of Proposition 28.

Funding minimum: Annual minimum appropriation for arts education

The title of the proposed law is The Arts and Music in Schools — Funding Guarantee and Accountability Act. The law required a minimum source of annual funding for K-12 public schools, including charter schools, to fund arts education programs. The annual minimum amount established by the law was equal to, at minimum, 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies received under Proposition 98 (1988) during the prior fiscal year. The minimum under the proposed law was in addition to the funding required by Proposition 98. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the ballot initiative would result in increased spending of $800 million to $1 billion each fiscal year.

The measure was designed to let the state legislature reduce the annual appropriation required by the law if the legislature suspends Proposition 98 through emergency law. The annual appropriation was reduced by the same percentage that the Proposition 98 funding guarantee is reduced by.

Proposition 98 was approved by voters in 1988 by a margin of 50.7% to 49.3%. Proposition 98 amended the California Constitution to guarantee an annual increase in education spending and to mandate a minimum level of education spending based on three formulas. The formulas take into account state General Fund revenue, per capita personal income, and K-12 student attendance. The state legislature can suspend the education spending guarantee with a two-thirds (66.67%) vote of each chamber. The spending guarantee is funded through the General Fund and local property taxes.

Fund distribution requirements: Formulas to calculate fund distribution to local education agencies

Of the total amount guaranteed under the 1% additional minimum funding for arts education, 70% was allocated to local education agencies based on their share of the statewide enrollment of K-12 students in the prior fiscal year. The other 30% was allocated to local education agencies based on their share of economically disadvantaged students. The initiative defined an economically disadvantaged student as "a pupil who is eligible for the National School Lunch Program or any successor program."

Administration of funds: Regulation of annual minimum appropriation

The law required the director of finance to calculate the minimum funding amount and publish it by January 10 of each fiscal year. The principal or program director of the school was required to develop an expenditure plan for the funds. The measure was designed to have the funds be available for three fiscal years and any remaining funds after that time would then be refunded to the state's education department and reallocated to other local education agencies.

Every year, local education agencies was required to:

• certify that the funds were used for arts education programming;
• certify that 80% of the funds were used to employ arts education instructors at local education agencies with enrollment greater than 500 students and 20% of the funds were used for training and materials;
• certify that no more than 1% of the funds received by the local education agencies were used for the administration of the law;
• submit an annual report approved by the agencies' boards detailing the arts education program; and
• conduct annual audits of the funds.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Provides Additional Funding for Arts and Music Education in Public Schools. Initiative Statute.

”

Petition summary

The summary provided for inclusion on signature petition sheets was as follows:

“

Provides additional funding for arts and music education in all K-12 public schools (including charter schools) by annually allocating from state General Fund an amount equaling 1% of required state and local funding for public schools. Allocates greater proportion of the funds to schools serving more economically disadvantaged students. Schools with 500 or more students must spend at least 80% of funding to employ teachers and remainder on training, supplies, and education partnerships. Requires audits and limits administrative costs to 1% of funding.

”

Fiscal impact

The fiscal impact statement was as follows:

“

Increased spending likely in the range of $800 million to $1 billion annually, beginning in 2023-24, for arts education in schools.

”

Full text

The full text of the ballot initiative is below:

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2022

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 12, and the FRE is 25. The word count for the ballot title is 13.

The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 14, and the FRE is 34. The word count for the ballot summary is 79.

Support

Californians for Arts and Music Education in Public Schools led the Vote Arts and Minds campaign in support of Proposition 28.

Supporters

Californians for Arts and Music Education in Public Schools provided a list of endorsements on the campaign’s website, which is available here.

Former Officials

• Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District Austin Beutner
• U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan (D)

Political Parties

• Democratic Party of California
• Peace and Freedom Party of California

Corporations

• Universal Music Group

Unions

• California Teachers Association

Organizations

• California Dance Education Association
• California Educational Theater Association
• Los Angeles Unified School District

Individuals

• Steven Ballmer - Frmr. CEO of Microsoft
• Armalyn De La O - President, California Music Educators Association
• Antonia Hernández - President and CEO, California Community Foundation
• Michael Lawson - President and CEO, Los Angeles Urban League
• Andy Mooney - CEO, Fender Musical Instruments Corp
• Ravi Rajan - President, California Institute of the Arts

Arguments

• Issa Rae, an actress, writer, and producer: "This ballot measure will help define the promise of the next generation of storytellers by ensuring all California students get the high-quality arts and music education they deserve. It will especially benefit students from communities of color, who often experience a lack of access and equity in access to arts and music education."
• Austin Beutner, former Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District; and Arne Duncan, former U.S. Secretary of Education and former CEO of Chicago Public Schools: "Only 1 in 5 public schools in California has a dedicated teacher for traditional arts programs like music, dance, theater and art, or newer forms of creative expression like computer graphics, animation, coding, costume design and filmmaking. ... This initiative is timely as our country seeks to create a more just and equitable future for all children. A boost in arts and music education will help ensure the future workforce in media and technology properly reflect the diversity of the children in our public schools."
• Mónica Garcia, LAUSD Board Member: "Black and Latinx students comprise 61% of Pre-K-12 enrollment in California, 77% in low income communities. In LAUSD, the second largest school district in the country, 80% of our students are low-income. We know that an increase in access to the arts within our schools will open the door of opportunity for students to have careers in media and technology."
• Sir Lucian Grainge, chairman and chief executive officer of the Universal Music Group: "Music education supports all education – it fosters reasoning and skills that are the building block for learning other subjects. This measure is critical not only for education and learning, but also to mental well-being and even the state's economic health. Companies like ours, that moved to California to be at the nexus of entertainment and technology, rely on a skilled workforce to fill the high-quality jobs we create here. If enacted, this initiative will ensure a future job-ready workforce and secure California's position as the global epicenter of music and the arts."

Official arguments

The following is the argument in support of Proposition 28 found in the Official Voter Information Guide:

Official Voter Information Guide: YES ON 28: ENSURE ACCESS TO ARTS AND MUSIC EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITHOUT RAISING TAXES Arts and music education plays a critical role in helping children learn, develop and achieve in school and later in life. With arts and music education, students: Do better in math, reading, and other subjects. Learn to think creatively and critically. Have better attendance, self-confidence and mental health. But in California's public schools, arts and music programs have often been the first to get cut. So that now, barely 1 in 5 public schools has a full-time arts or music teacher, which means millions of students don’t have an opportunity to participate. This deprives California students of a well-rounded science, technology, engineering, arts and math (STEAM) curriculum—and means it's harder to prepare them for well-paying jobs in California’s economy. Our kids deserve better. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR ARTS AND MUSIC EDUCATION WITHOUT RAISING TAXES Prop. 28, the Arts and Music in Public Schools measure, dedicates nearly $1 billion a year in additional funding for arts and music education in Pre-K—12 public schools—without raising taxes. Under Prop. 28: Every public school in every school district will receive increased funding for arts and music education—so every student benefits. Schools serving children in low-income communities are allocated additional needed funding. Funding must be spent on arts and music education—on teachers, supplies, arts partnerships, training and materials. The measure includes funding for traditional arts and music classes like theater, dance, band, painting and drawing, and for contemporary arts like graphic design, computer graphics, and film and video. Prop. 28 protects existing education funding—and does not raise taxes. STRICT ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS Prop. 28 contains important safeguards to ensure the funds are spent as intended: Prohibits the Legislature or school districts from using the funds for other purposes. Requires annual audits of the funding. Requires schools to publish annual reports on how they spend funds, including the specific programs and how students benefited. ARTS AND MUSIC EDUCATION IMPROVES MENTAL HEALTH AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT Research has shown that arts and music education benefit children's mental health and social development. Ensuring all children have access to arts and music education is especially important emerging from the pandemic, which isolated many children without access to social interaction. HELPS PREPARE STUDENTS FOR GOOD JOBS IN CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMY California's creative economy employs nearly 3 million people in movies, music, art, animation, TV, theater and more. Ensuring access to arts and music education provides children with critical skills they need to succeed and provides our economy with the well-trained workforce California needs to remain a world leader. "By investing in arts and music education for our children, we can create the well-rounded, diverse workforce of tomorrow."—Tracy Hernandez, CEO of LA County Business Federation A BRIGHTER FUTURE FOR OUR CHILDREN Please join teachers, parents, education and child development experts, mental health professionals, entrepreneurs and community leaders across the state and Vote Yes on 28. VoteYesonProp28.org ---Austin Beutner, Chairman, Californians for Arts and Music in Public Schools; E. Toby Boyd, President, California Teachers Association; and Carol Green, President, California State PTA

Opposition

If you are aware of any opponents or opposing arguments, please send an email with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Opponents

Organizations

• Reform California

Arguments

• Carl DeMaio, chairman of Reform California: "Prop 28 sounds good on the surface — more funding for arts and music — but the language is fatally flawed to allow diversion of funding from other education programs that are already not meeting the performance goals we’ve set. ... Instead of voting Yes on Prop 28, I’d encourage concerned voters to help us elect better school board members in every school district in the state."

Official arguments

No arguments in opposition to Proposition 28 were submitted for publication in the Official Voter Information Guide.

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for California ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through January 31, 2023.

One PAC, Yes on 28 - Californians for Arts and Music in Schools, was registered to support the ballot initiative. The committee reported over $10.6 million in contributions.

Ballotpedia had not identified committees registered to oppose the ballot initiative.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$9,559,585.01	$995,148.90	$10,554,733.91	$9,810,578.60	$10,805,727.50
Oppose	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$9,559,585.01	$995,148.90	$10,554,733.91	$9,810,578.60	$10,805,727.50

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the ballot initiative.

Committees in support of Proposition 28
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Yes on 28 - Californians for Arts and Music in Schools	$9,559,585.01	$995,148.90	$10,554,733.91	$9,810,578.60	$10,805,727.50
Total	$9,559,585.01	$995,148.90	$10,554,733.91	$9,810,578.60	$10,805,727.50

Donors

The following were the top donors to the support committee.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Austin Beutner	$4,266,000.00	$0.00	$4,266,000.00
California Teachers Association	$2,000,000.00	$0.00	$2,000,000.00
Steven A. Ballmer	$1,500,000.00	$0.00	$1,500,000.00
Fender Musical Instruments Corp	$1,050,000.00	$159,714.54	$1,209,714.54
Monica Rosenthal	$1,000,000.00	$0.00	$1,000,000.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Media editorials

See also: 2022 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia identified the following media editorial boards as taking positions on the initiative.

Ballotpedia lists the positions of media editorial boards that support or oppose ballot measures. This does not include opinion pieces from individuals or groups that do not represent the official position of a newspaper or media outlet. Ballotpedia includes editorials from newspapers and outlets based on circulation and readership, political coverage within a state, and length of publication. You can share media editorial board endorsements with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

• Bay Area Reporter Editorial Board: "Arts funding has declined in the state's public schools due to budget cuts and an emphasis on reading and math. This measure would put arts and music education on better financial footing for the benefit of students. Vote YES on Prop 28."
• Los Angeles Times Editorial Board: "Voters can take a meaningful step to help millions of California children by voting yes on Proposition 28 on the Nov. 8 ballot, which will guarantee an ongoing source of funding to support arts and music education in all public and charter schools, from preschool to 12th grade."
• San Francisco Chronicle Editorial Board: "Education spending isn’t capricious. Neither are the arts. California’s kids need and deserve a more robust commitment on both fronts from voters. That means saying 'yes' to Prop. 28 on Nov. 8."
• The Orange County Register Editorial Board: "Yes, it’s ballot-box budgeting, but if the state doesn’t spend this money on arts and music education, lawmakers will likely just waste it on something less valuable. Prop. 28 is an opportunity to enrich the lives of 6 million public school students. Vote yes."
• The Sacramento Bee Editorial Board: "Proposition 28 deserves support because arts and music programs are consistent casualties when school districts face budget cuts."

Opposition

• The Mercury News and East Bay Times Editorial Board: "Spending on California K-12 public education has reached record levels. Student enrollment is at the lowest point in two decades. The result: Per-student expenditures adjusted for inflation are the highest since at least 1988. Yet, for some, there’s never enough money. ... Voters should reject Proposition 28. It’s fiscally reckless to keep earmarking unpredictable state general fund money when we don’t know what the future needs of California will be as it confronts, for example, a housing shortage, climate change, inadequate water supplies and wildfires."
• Santa Cruz Sentinel Editorial Board: "If that money is taken from the general fund, there will be less for other vital state programs, or to pay down debt before the inevitable next economic downturn. And it’s why voters should reject Prop. 28. It is fiscally irresponsible to keep earmarking state general fund money, especially as the state confronts a worsening crisis in homelessness and a shortage of housing, climate change and wildfires, and an unstable water supply. ... The answer is not in ballot box budgeting, locking in even more of the state’s general fund for schools. The answer is for schools to better spend the money they have. Vote no on Prop. 28."
• The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board: "If Californians want arts and music education to be a priority, they can and should start by electing school board members and lawmakers who will prioritize it. The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board recommends a 'no' vote on Proposition 28."

Background

California K-12 public schools

California K-12 public schools are administered by local education agencies—school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education. For the 2020-2021 school year, K-12 public schools enrolled over 6 million students, of which 60% (3.6 million) were eligible to receive a free or reduced-price school meal under a federal nutrition program.

At the time of the election, the state did not require local education agencies to provide education in the arts or music in elementary and middle schools. However, the state did fund before/after school and summer programs—the After School Education and Safety program ($646 million annually) and the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program ($1.8 billion)—that included a required enrichment component that may contain either arts or music.

The state also set minimum course completion requirements for high schools that include one year of visual or performing arts, a foreign language, or career technical education.

State education minimum funding guarantee

See also: California Proposition 98, Mandatory Education Spending Initiative (1988)

In 1988, Californians approved Proposition 98 by a margin of 50.7% to 49.3%. Proposition 98 amended the state constitution to require a minimum percentage of the state budget to be spent on K-14 education, which is referred to as the minimum guarantee. Proposition 98 established two formulas or tests to determine the minimum guarantee, which is the highest funding level produced by Test 1 or Test 2. Test 1 links the minimum guarantee to about 40% of the state General Fund, which is equal to California's 1986-87 funding level of public education. Test 2 calculates the minimum guarantee by adjusting the prior year's minimum guarantee by student attendance and changes in the cost of living.

In 1990, the state legislature referred Proposition 111 to the ballot where it was approved with 52% of the vote. Proposition 111 added a third formula, Test 3, which considers student attendance, the cost of living, and changes in the General Fund revenue.

The minimum guarantee for 2021-2022 was $93.7 billion, which was determined using Test 1. The minimum guarantee for 2020-2021, which was $70.9 billion, was the largest year-over-year percentage increase (31.8%) since Proposition 98 was adopted.

California ballot measures related to education funding

Ballotpedia tracked the following 16 California ballot measures related to education funding since the passage of Proposition 98 in 1988. Four measures were approved, and 12 measures were defeated. The approved measures related to changing the minimum funding guarantee, dedicating lottery revenue to instructional materials, reducing the vote requirements for local school bonds, and funding for before and after school programs.

Year	Measure	Purpose	Outcome
1990	Proposition 111	Changes the minimum education funding guarantee	a
1993	Proposition 170	Vote requirements for local school bond measures	d
1993	Proposition 174	School voucher program	d
1998	Proposition 8	Funds for class-size reductions	d
1998	Proposition 223	School budgets based on performance requirements	d
2000	Proposition 20	Lottery fund increases dedicated to school instructional materials	a
2000	Proposition 26	Vote requirements for local school bonds	d
2000	Proposition 38	Creates a school voucher program	d
2000	Proposition 39	Vote requirements for local school bonds	a
2002	Proposition 49	Funding for before and after school programs	a
2005	Proposition 76	Changes the minimum education funding guarantee	d
2006	Proposition 82	Free voluntary half-day public pre-school	d
2006	Proposition 88	Statewide parcel tax for education funding	d
2008	Proposition 92	Funding and governance changes for community colleges	d
2009	Proposition 1B	Requires supplemental appropriations for K-12 schools and community colleges	d
2012	Proposition 38	Income tax increase for education funding	d

Bonds for California public schools

In addition to the above ballot measures related to education funding, California voters decided on 19 bond measures totaling over $57 billion. Voters approved 14 of the bond measures totaling over $54 billion and defeated five bond measures.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in California

Process in California

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated state statute is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Petitions are allowed to circulate for 180 days from the date the attorney general prepares the petition language. Signatures need to be certified at least 131 days before the general election. As the verification process can take multiple months, the secretary of state provides suggested deadlines for ballot initiatives.

The requirements to get initiated state statutes certified for the 2022 ballot:

• Signatures: 623,212 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline for signature verification was 131 days before the general election, which was around June 30, 2022. However, the process of verifying signatures can take multiple months and proponents are recommended to file signatures at least two months before the verification deadline.

Signatures are first filed with local election officials, who determine the total number of signatures submitted. If the total number is equal to at least 100 percent of the required signatures, then local election officials perform a random check of signatures submitted in their counties. If the random sample estimates that more than 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, the initiative is eligible for the ballot. If the random sample estimates that between 95 and 110 percent of the required number of signatures are valid, a full check of signatures is done to determine the total number of valid signatures. If less than 95 percent are estimated to be valid, the initiative does not make the ballot.

Initiative #21-0036

Thomas W. Hiltachk filed the ballot initiative on November 1, 2021. The Attorney General of California issued ballot language for the initiative on January 5, 2022, allowing a signature drive to begin. Signatures were due on July 5, 2022. Proponents reported collecting 25% of the required signatures on February 3, 2022.

On April 26, 2022, the campaign announced that it had submitted 1,030,221 signatures for verification.

On June 8, 2022, the secretary of state announced that 711,872 signatures were valid, meaning the number of signatures exceeded the requirement of 623,212.

Sponsors of the measure hired 2022 Campaigns Inc. to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $6,480,367.30 was spent to collect the 623,212 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $10.40.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in California

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in California.

How to vote in California

Poll times

All polls in California are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Pacific Time. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration

Check your voter registration status here.

To vote in California, an individual must be a U.S. citizen and California resident. A voter must be at least 18 years of age on Election Day. Pre-registration is available at 16 years of age. Pre-registered voters are automatically registered to vote when they turn 18.

Automatic registration

California automatically registers eligible individuals to vote when they complete a driver's license, identification (ID) card, or change of address transaction through the Department of Motor Vehicles. Learn more by visiting this website.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

California has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

California allows same-day voter registration.

Californians must be registered to vote at least 15 days before Election Day. If the registration deadline has passed for an upcoming election, voters may visit a location designated by their county elections official during the 14 days prior to, and including Election Day to conditionally register to vote and vote a provisional ballot, which are counted once county election officials have completed the voter registration verification process. The state refers to this process as Same Day Voter Registration.

Residency requirements

To register to vote in California, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

California's constitution requires that voters be U.S. citizens. When registering to vote, proof of citizenship is not required. Individuals who become U.S. citizens less than 15 days before an election must bring proof of citizenship to their county elections office to register to vote in that election. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury.

As of November 2024, two jurisdictions in California had authorized noncitizen residents to vote for local board of education positions through local ballot measures. Only one of those jurisdictions, San Francisco, had implemented that law. Noncitizens voting for board of education positions must register to vote using a separate application from the state voter registration application.

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The secretary of state's My Voter Status website allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

California does not require voters to present identification before casting a ballot in most cases. However, some voters may be asked to show a form of identification when voting if they are voting for the first time after registering to vote by mail and did not provide a driver license number, California identification number, or the last four digits of their social security number. On September 29, 2024, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed SB 1174 into law prohibiting any jurisdiction in the state from adopting a local law that requires voters to present ID before voting.

The following list of accepted ID was current as of October 2024. Click here for the California Secretary of State page to ensure you have the most current information.

“

Current and valid photo identification provided by a third party in the ordinary course of business that includes the name and photograph of the individual presenting it. Examples of photo identification include, but are not limited to, the following documents: driver's license or identification card of any state; passport; employee identification card; identification card provided by a commercial establishment; credit or debit card; military identification card; student identification card; health club identification card; insurance plan identification card; or public housing identification card. Any of the following documents, provided that the document includes the name and address of the individual presenting it, and is dated since the date of the last general election…: utility bill; bank statement; government check; government paycheck; document issued by a governmental agency; sample ballot or other official elections document issued by a governmental, agency dated for the election in which the individual is providing it as proof, of residency or identity; voter notification card issued by a governmental agency; public housing identification card issued by a governmental agency; lease or rental statement or agreement issued by a governmental agency; student identification card issued by a governmental agency; tuition statement or bill issued by a governmental agency; insurance plan card or drug discount card issued by a governmental agency; discharge certificates, pardons, or other official documents issued to the individual by a governmental agency in connection with the resolution of a criminal case, indictment, sentence, or other matter; public transportation authority senior citizen and disabled discount cards issued by a governmental agency; identification documents issued by governmental disability agencies; identification documents issued by government homeless shelters and other government temporary or transitional facilities; drug prescription issued by a government doctor or other governmental health care provider; (R) property tax statement issued by a governmental agency; vehicle registration issued by a governmental agency; or vehicle certificate of ownership issued by a governmental agency.

”

See also

2022 measures

• 2022 ballot measures
• Education on the ballot

California

• California ballot measures
• California ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Proposition 28 Full text

Support

• Yes on Prop 28 campaign website
• Yes on Prop 28 Facebook page
• Yes on Prop 28 Twitter page

Opposition

Submit links to editor@ballotpedia.org.