San Diego, California, Measure A, Issue Vacant Homes Tax Measure (June 2026)

San Diego Measure A
Election date June 2, 2026
Topic Local property tax
Status On the ballot
Type Referral

San Diego Measure A is on the ballot as a referral in San Diego on June 2, 2026.

A "yes" vote supports levying a tax of $8,000 in 2027 and $10,000 plus inflation increases in each subsequent year on properties that are vacant for more than half the year.

A "no" vote opposes levying a tax of $8,000 in 2027 and $10,000 plus inflation increases in each subsequent year on properties that are vacant for more than half the year.

A simple majority vote is required to approve the measure.

Overview

What would the ballot measure do?

See also: Measure design

The measure would issue a flat tax on residential units that have been empty for more than half of a calendar year.

The tax would be levied annually on January 1 of each year. The tax would first be collected on January 1, 2027. The tax would be a flat rate of $8,000 for each home in 2027. In 2028, the tax would be a flat rate of $10,000.

Additionally, all homes that are owned by a corporation would be subject to an additional $4,000 charge in 2027. In 2028, all homes under corporate ownership would be subject to an additional $5,000 charge.

Have other California cities implemented a similar vacancy tax?

See also: Background

According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, as of 2025, four midsize and large cities have a vacancy tax: Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley. Additionally, between 2018 and 2025, voters have decided on seven vacancy tax ballot measures in six different jurisdictions in California. Four were approved, and three were defeated.

Of those seven measures, the one most similar to Measure A was approved in San Francisco in 2022. The measure allowed the city to levy a tax on owners of vacant residential units in buildings if they have been vacant for more than half the year. The tax ranged between $2,500–5,000 per vacant unit in 2024, with adjustments for inflation in future years. The revenue from the tax was dedicated to funding rent subsidies and affordable housing.

While voters approved the measure, the San Francisco Superior Court ruled in October 2024 that the tax violated both the federal and the California constitutions. The court issued an order prohibiting the city from enforcing or administering the tax. The City and County of San Francisco have announced their intent to repeal the decision.

What have opponents and supporters said about Measure A?

See also: Support and Opposition

City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera sponsored the measure. He said, "The overwhelming majority of San Diegans will never pay this tax. It does not require anyone to rent their home. Owners retain the full right to keep their homes vacant." Michael Zucchet, the general manager of the San Diego Municipal Employee Association, supports the measure. He said, "The elegance of this measure is that it causes one of two outcome. Either those units, many of which are owned by corporations, will pay their fair share—revenue will come to the city that will help our neighborhoods and services and infrastructure and your ability to produce housing—or a behavior will be changed where that housing becomes available for San Diego residents."

City Councilmember Raul Campillo voted against the measure and has referenced his concerns with how it would affect the income of San Diego residents. He said, "For the vast majority of people owning a short-term vacation rental, a home that they rent out, it’s not a luxury side hustle, it’s how they get by."

Stop Measure A is leading the campaign against the measure. A statement on their website says, "Measure A is a general tax, meaning the money is not legally required to go to housing. Funds can be spent at the discretion of City Hall. At the same time, public trust in how the City manages taxpayer dollars is low. Measure A asks voters to approve a permanent tax without clear safeguards or guaranteed results."

Measure design

See also: Text of measure

Click on the following sections for summaries of the different provisions of Measure A.

Expand All

Levy of an empty homes tax

Measure A would levy a flat annual tax on all empty homes. The measure describes an empty home as a residential unit that is not the owner's primary residence, and that is vacant for more than 182 days in a calendar year.

The vacant homes tax would be levied annually on January 1 of each year. The tax would first be collected on January 1, 2027. The tax would be a flat rate of $8,000 for each home in 2027. In 2028, the tax would be a flat rate of $10,000.

Additionally, all homes that are under corporate ownership would be subject to an additional $4,000 charge in 2027. In 2028, all homes under corporate ownership would be subject to an additional $5,000 charge.

For each year after 2028, the tax rates would be adjusted annually based on increases documented in the Consumer Price Index.

Tax exemptions

Measure A provides for exemptions to the tax on empty homes.

Under the following time periods, the tax would not be levied on a residential unit:

• two years after a natural disaster or non-negligent catastrophic event that makes the unit uninhabitable;
• when the homeowner is using the residential unit as their principal residence;
• when the unit is under lease to a tenant;
• when the owner is experiencing financial hardship following the death of a prior owner or a person related to the owner who used the unit as their primary residence;
• when the unit is used as the primary residence for an owner's family member, and the amount of rent paid is less than the owner's expenses;
• two years after the residential unit is first granted a certificate of occupancy;
• when the most recent resident of a unit is in a medical or care facility; and
• when the owner or owner's family member who most recently occupied the unit is temporarily relocated due to military service.

Other exemptions:

• A residential unit with a Tier 3 or Tier 4 short-term residential occupancy license would not be considered an empty home. Click here to read the licensing requirements for Tier 3 or Tier 4 units.
• An owner that owns a property with four or less residential units and uses one of those units as their primary residency would not be subject to the empty homes tax.

Miscellaneous provisions

The levy of the tax could not be repealed except by voter approval. Revenue received from the empty home tax would be used to fund general city services.

An owner who fails to pay the empty home tax would be subject to a 10% penalty. Additionally, failure to pay the empty homes tax would be classified as a misdemeanor.

The city manager would be permitted to conduct an audit to ensure compliance with the empty home tax. They would also be responsible for publishing an annual report of revenue received from the tax.

Text of measure

On March 9, 2026, City Attorney Heather Ferbert issued the ballot title, ballot summary, and impartial analysis of the ballot measure. On March 26, 2026, Superior Court Judge Blaine Bowman ordered that the ballot title be rewritten as it was misleading. The information included below reflects the title as it was rewritten. Click here for more information on the lawsuit surrounding the text of the measure.

Ballot title

The official ballot title of Measure A is as follows:

“

City of San Diego Non-Primary Homes Tax.

”

Ballot question

The official ballot question of Measure A is as follows:

“

Shall a measure to preserve homes for San Diego residents, by taxing empty homes (residential properties vacant more than 182 days per year), excluding owner-occupied primary residences and long-term rentals, at $8,000 in 2027 and $10,000 in subsequent years with annual inflation adjustments, with higher rates for corporate-owned properties, generating up to $24 million annually for city services like housing and infrastructure, with annual independent audits, until ended by voters, be adopted?

”

Ballot summary

The official ballot summary of Measure A is as follows:

“

This measure would amend the San Diego Municipal Code by amending Chapter 3, Article 2, by adding Division 1, sections 32.0101 through 32.0123 relating to an Empty Homes Tax that will impose a new tax of $8,000 in the first year and starting at $10,000 in subsequent years on all non-primary residences left vacant for more than 182 days per calendar year (Empty Homes), plus an additional charge of $4,000 in the first year and starting at $5,000 in subsequent years for all Empty Homes owned by a corporate entity. The tax amount and additional charge will be subject to annual increases based upon Consumer Price Index: All Urban Consumers for the San Diego - Carlsbad Area for All Items beginning in calendar year 2029. The tax will not apply to owner-occupied primary residences, long-term residential leases, and other Empty Homes under certain exemptions, such as during periods of military service, certain natural disasters, and after an owner’s death. The Empty Homes Tax is intended to discourage extended vacancies and housing speculation and encourage long-term leases and property sales, increasing the housing available for occupancy. The new tax is also intended to raise funds for municipal services to be deposited into the City’s General Fund, which can be used for general City services such as housing and infrastructure projects. The Council of the City of San Diego (City Council) placed the measure on the ballot, and it will pass if it is approved by a majority vote of those qualified voters who vote on the measure. The amendments would take effect after the results of the election are certified by a resolution of the City Council. If adopted, collection of the tax is expected to commence January 1, 2027.

”

Full text

The full text of the Measure A is available here.

Impartial analysis

The City Attorney of San Diego published an impartial analysis of Measure A, which can be read here.

Fiscal impact statement

The official fiscal impact statement of Measure A is as follows:

“

This measure would create a new tax on owners of vacant, residential homes who keep those properties vacant for 183 or more days in a calendar year. Certain exemptions would be provided, including but not limited to primary residences, properties leased to a tenant(s) or occupied by family, and owners unable to occupy or rent a property for specified reasons. If approved, the new tax would become effective January 1, 2027. Vacant properties in calendar year 2027 would be taxed at a rate of $8,000, which would increase to $10,000 in calendar year 2028. Corporate owned vacant properties would be taxed an additional $4,000 in calendar year 2027, which would increase to $5,000 in calendar year 2028. Thereafter, tax rates would be annually adjusted by regional inflation. If this measure passes, the City would receive estimated additional net revenue ranging between $9.2 million (conservative) to $21.4 million (optimistic) in the first year of implementation, which could increase to $10.5 million (conservative) to $24.3 million (optimistic) in the second year. This new revenue range varies based on assumptions about the number of taxable vacant properties. Based on currently available data, it is estimated that there are 5,140 properties potentially eligible for this tax. A notable share of these properties (between 45% to 70%) are assumed to be excluded from the tax in the first year, due to exemptions or properties becoming occupied. Should more properties be exempted, occupied, or otherwise untaxed, revenue would likely fall below the estimated range. Additionally, should this measure have the intended effect of reducing the number of vacant properties as more properties are occupied over time, tax revenue from this measure in future years will also decline. All revenue collected under this measure would be unrestricted and deposited into the City's General Fund. Revenue from this measure could be used to support rental assistance, affordable housing development, and infrastructure, but would not be restricted to those purposes and could also be used to support other City services including but not limited to neighborhood services (such as libraries and parks), public safety (such as police, fire, and 9-1-1 response services), and general infrastructure (such as streets, sidewalks, streetlights, and flood prevention).

”

Support

Supporters

Officials

• City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera (Nonpartisan)
• City Councilmember Kent Lee (Nonpartisan)

Arguments

• City Councilmember Kent Lee: "This is about fairness and a reasonable use of housing. If someone chooses to keep a home empty, they should contribute a little more."
• City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera: "The overwhelming majority of San Diegans will never pay this tax. It does not require anyone to rent their home. Owners retain the full right to keep their homes vacant."
• Stephen Russell, president and CEO of the San Diego Housing Federation: "San Diegans are being priced out while homes sit empty. Since 2000, we have lost more than 60,000 affordable homes in the city of San Diego—not because they were demolished, but because they were up-marketed. At a time when housing is scarce, leaving thousands of homes vacant only makes the crisis worse."
• Michael Zucchet, general manager of the San Diego Municipal Employees Association: "The elegance of this measure is that it causes one of two outcome. Either those units, many of which are owned by corporations, will pay their fair share—revenue will come to the city that will help our neighborhoods and services and infrastructure and your ability to produce housing—or a behavior will be changed where that housing becomes available for San Diego residents."

Opposition

Stop Measure A is leading the campaign against Measure A.

Opponents

Officials

• City Councilmember Raul Campillo (Nonpartisan)

Former Officials

• City Councilmember Scott Sherman

Organizations

• California Apartment Association
• California Association of Realtors
• San Diego County Taxpayers Association
• San Diego Regional Chamber Of Commerce

Arguments

• City Councilmember Raul Campillo: "For the vast majority of people owning a short-term vacation rental, a home that they rent out, it’s not a luxury side hustle, it’s how they get by."
• Melanie Woods, VP of local public affairs, California Apartment Association: "Beyond its legal deficiencies, the proposed vacancy tax sends a troubling signal to housing providers at a time when San Diego urgently needs investment in new housing and the preservation of existing supply. Penalizing property owners with punitive taxation will not address the root causes of housing affordability challenges. Instead, it risks discouraging rehabilitation, redevelopment, and responsible property management which are essential to maintaining safe, quality housing."
• Christ Cate, President of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce: "Vacation rentals have been a part of the tourism industry in San Diego for decades. This is not a new phenomenon. And vacation rentals, short-term vacation rentals, supply tens of millions of dollars in revenue to the city of San Diego."
• Stop Measure A: "Measure A is a general tax, meaning the money is not legally required to go to housing. Funds can be spent at the discretion of City Hall. At the same time, public trust in how the City manages taxpayer dollars is low. Measure A asks voters to approve a permanent tax without clear safeguards or guaranteed results."
• Stop Measure A spokesperson Shane Harris: "San Diego families are already shouldering rising costs and increased fees. Adding a sweeping vacancy tax that starts with significant annual liabilities—potentially thousands of dollars per home—adds a burden our residents simply cannot afford. This proposal risks penalizing homeowners and small property owners while delivering minimal improvement to housing outcomes."
• San Diego County Taxpayers Association: "Other similar empty homes taxes have faced significant challenges, including Proposition M in San Francisco that was struck down by a judge as unconstitutional and unenforceable after being approved by voters in 2022. The City of San Diego has also not provided evidence or proposed outcome metrics that could be used to assess whether the tax will improve housing affordability as the proposal claims. Combined with the exclusion of a Sunset Clause and no guarantee of how revenues will be used, the proposal lacks the taxpayer protections that we expect, especially given the City’s structural budget deficit, excessive number of middle management hires over the last five years, and infrastructure funding deficit of $7.8 billion over the next five years."

Background

First version of the measure

See also: Path to the ballot

In October of 2025, City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera (Nonpartisan) introduced the first version of the measure to the San Diego City Council. The measure differed from the final version of the measure in that it would have levied an empty property tax per room; each room in an empty property would have been taxed at the flat rate of $5,000.

On January 28, 2025, the San Diego City Council Rules Committee voted to reject the measure in a vote of 2-3. Councilmembers Joe LaCava and Sean Elo-Rivera vote yes, and Kent Lee, Raul Campillo, and Vivian Moreno voted no.

Vacancy tax ballot measures in California

See also: City tax ballot measures

Between 2018 and 2025, voters have decided on seven ballot measures in six different jurisdictions in California. Four were approved, and three were defeated.

Vacancy tax ballot measures in California, 2018-2025

City	Year	Measure	Yes	No	Outcome
Avenal	2024	Measure B	43.9%	56.1%	d
South Lake Tahoe	2024	Measure N	29.3%	70.7%	d
Berkeley	2022	Measure M	64.9%	35.1%	a
San Francisco	2022	Proposition M	54.5%	45.5%	a
San Francisco	2020	Proposition D	70.1%	29.9%	a
Oakland	2018	Measure W	70.0%	30.0%	a
Richmond	2018	Measure T	60.2%	39.8%	d

Vacancy taxes in other U.S. jurisdictions

According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, as of 2025, four midsize and large cities have a vacancy tax: Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley.

In the U.S., vacancy taxes are a relatively new policy. In 2011, Washington D.C. became the first U.S. city to tax vacant properties at a rate higher than comparable occupied properties.

Office of the Independent Budget Analysis report on Measure A

On February 24, 2026, the City of San Diego's Office of the Independent Budget Analysis issued a report on the potential fiscal impact of Measure A.

The report stated that the tax would result in between $12.1 million and $23.8 million in revenue in the first year of implementation and between $15.3 million and $30 million in the second year. This is a slightly higher estimate than that included in the final fiscal impact statement provided by the mayor and city auditor. Their report stated that the measure would result in between $9.2 million and $21.4 million in the first year and between $10.5 million and $24.3 million in the second year.

The report stated the following conclusion: "If the proposed Empty Homes Tax is placed on the ballot and approved by voters, it will generate additional net General Fund revenue and will likely add additional residential units to the rental market. However, the potential magnitude of the revenue and housing impact is highly dependent on owner behavior and City enforcement."

Additionally, the report said, "If the measure is successful in encouraging owners of vacant residential properties to rent or sell those properties to occupants, revenue from this measure would be expected to decline over time, though given the goal of adding additional housing to the City, this would not be a negative outcome. "

Path to the ballot

Stage of this ballot measure

Below is a timeline of the ballot measure:

• October 13, 2025: Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera introduced the measure to the San Diego City Council.
• January 12, 2026: The San Diego City Council approved O-22030, which scheduled the city's special municipal election, to include local ballot measures, on the same date as the state primary election on June 2, 2026.
• January 28, 2026: A vote to approve the measure in the City Council Rules Committee failed in a vote of 2-3.
• February 25, 2026: The City Council Rules Committee voted to approve a second version of the measure in a vote of 5-0.
• March 3, 2026: The San Diego City Council approved the measure (Ordinance O-22071) in a vote of 8-1. Only Raul A. Campillo voted against the measure. The measure was placed on the June 2, 2026 ballot.

Litigation

Scott Sherman vs. Diana Fuentes and Heather Ferbert

Ballot title ordered to be rewritten on March 26, 2026

Court Information
Issue	Are the ballot title, question, analysis, and argument misleading to voters?
Court	Superior Court of San Diego County, California
Participants
Plaintiff(s)	Scott Sherman
Defendant(s)	Diana Fuentes and Heather Ferbert

On March 23, 2026, Former City Councilmember Scott Sherman filed a writ of mandate stating that the ballot title and the measure's impartial analysis are false and misleading. The filing lists City Clerk Diana Fuentes and City Attorney Heather Ferbert in their official capacities as the defendants.

On March 26, 2026, Judge Blaine Bowman issued a ruling stating that the ballot title is misleading. He ordered that the ballot title be rewritten as they were misleading as there was no specific definition for empty homes. The new ballot title was to be "City of San Diego Non-Primary Homes Tax."

Judge Bowman also said that the impartial analysis could be misleading to voters, because they imply that revenue from the tax will fund housing and infrastructure projects when the revenue will fund the city's general fund with no allocation restrictions. However, he neglected to order that the analysis be rewritten, because they were protected as free speech.

In response to the ruling, Shane Harris, the spokesperson for the No on Measure A campaign, said, "This is a win for transparency and for the voters of San Diego. No matter where you stand on this measure, voters deserve clear, honest, and unbiased information when making their decision."

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. Anyone in line when the 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, not currently serving a state or federal prison term for the conviction of a felony, and not currently found mentally incompetent to vote by a court. 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

See also: Automatic voter 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

See also: Same-day voter 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 county elections office, polling place, or vote center 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 October 2025, 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. Eight states — Alabama, Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming — have laws requiring individuals provide proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. Three states, Florida, Georgia and Mississippi, require a person provide proof of citizenship if their citizenship status cannot be verified by other means. One state, Ohio, requires proof of citizenship only when registering to vote at a Bureau of Motor Vehicles facility. 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.

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 federal Help America Vote Act requires that individuals in all 50 states who register to vote by mail and who have not voted previously in a federal election in their state must provide either their driver's license or a paycheck, bank statement, current utility bill, or government document showing their name and address. Individuals voting by mail must include a copy of one of those documents with their absentee/mail-in ballot.

These requirements do not apply if an individual submitted a copy of their identification, their driver's license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number when registering to vote.

The following list of accepted ID to comply with HAVA requirements was current as of October 2025. 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; 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.

”

External sources

• San Diego 2026 Election Information
• Measure A Full Text

See also

Local measures

• Local measures in 2026
• Local property tax ballot measures

California

• California 2026 local measures
• Local ballot measures, California
• San Diego, California

News and analysis

• State and local preemption conflicts
• Measures advancing national agendas