San Francisco and California Ballot Backstory · Why is this on my ballot?
Prop I: summary
Changes to Real Property Transfer Tax
Mark your own choices here. You may bring this sheet into the voting booth.
A YES vote means
Half of the transfer tax on certain property sales over $10 million would go to a new fund for affordable housing and housing assistance only.
A NO vote means
Transfer tax money from sales over $10 million could still go to any City purpose. Supervisors could cut the tax without voter approval.
Both ovals are empty on purpose. The choice is yours.
If it fails
Timing: from July 2027
If Prop I fails, all of the tax keeps going to the General Fund, for any City purpose. If it passes, the Controller says $120 million a year moves to housing, adding that much to the deficit. This guide found no published service-cut plan tied to either outcome.
Why it’s on the ballot now
In November 2020, voters raised the transfer tax on property sales over $10 million. The Board of Supervisors resolved to commit that money to social housing and COVID rent help.
Under current law, that money is not set aside. Transfer tax money can be spent on any City purpose, and the Board can cut the tax without asking voters.
In February 2026, a City ordinance was introduced to cut transfer tax rates on sales over $10 million. City budget offices estimated it would lower revenue by $93.8 million in 2026-27.
Mission Local reported that Mayor Lurie and Supervisor Mahmood paused that plan. In March 2026, City budget offices projected a $642.8 million General Fund shortfall for the next two fiscal years.
Supporters say none of this tax money has gone to affordable housing in the past two years. They gathered signatures, and the measure qualified on July 23, 2026.
The money
The Controller says $120 million a year would move from the General Fund to a House SF Fund, raising the deficit that much. Total revenue drops about $1 million a year starting in FY 2027-28. Required minimums: 60% for affordable housing production programs (at least half of that for social housing), 25% to buy or preserve housing, 10% for tenant help. At most 5% for administration.
Needs a simple majority (50% + 1) to pass Some measures need 55% or two-thirds of votes to pass. This one needs only a simple majority.Who bears the cost
The City's General Fund (and the services it pays for)
The Controller says $120 million a year would move from the General Fund to the new House SF Fund. The General Fund can be spent on any purpose. The House SF Fund can be spent only on specific affordable housing programs.
Sellers of property for $10 million or moreNo new cost
| Example | Pays now | Added | % of current |
|---|---|---|---|
| Illustrative example: apartment building sold for $15 million (one-time tax at sale). | $825,000 once, at sale | No change | 0% |
| Illustrative example: office building sold for $60 million (one-time tax at sale). | $3,600,000 once, at sale | No change | 0% |
| Illustrative example: new apartment building, first sale within 5 years of completion, sold for $40 million (one-time tax at sale). | $2,400,000 once, at sale | $1,200,000 less once, at sale | −50% |
Sellers of property for under $10 million, including most homes and condosNo new cost
| Example | Pays now | Added | % of current |
|---|---|---|---|
| Condo sold for $1.2 million, which a 2024 Controller's economic report gave as the recent average for downtown condos (one-time tax at sale). | $9,000 once, at sale | No change | 0% |
Passing the cost on
The Controller's Office of Economic Analysis says sellers pay the transfer tax. A title company's closing-cost guide lists sellers as paying it, but says the split is by custom only and may be negotiated. This guide found no transfer tax among the Rent Board's rules for passing costs to tenants.
Example figures are calculated by code from the cited rates, not written by AI. How we calculate
The strongest case for and against
Strongest case for
Supporters include the Affordable Housing Alliance, the San Francisco Tenants Union, Small Business Forward, United Educators of San Francisco and SEIU 1021. They say voters approved the 2020 tax so its money could fund affordable housing and rent relief. They say it gave emergency rent relief to more than 10,000 households and helped preserve and build hundreds of affordable homes. But, they say, none of it has gone to affordable housing in the past two years. They say Prop I keeps that promise without raising taxes, cuts the tax for new housing construction, and requires yearly audits by the Controller. They note the state-required housing plan calls for 46,000 affordable homes by 2031.
Strongest case against
Opponents include Judge Quentin Kopp, the San Francisco Taxpayers Association and the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council. They say Prop I would lock about $120 million a year away from the General Fund, which pays for police, firefighters, street cleaning and parks. They say this would force severe service cuts in lean budget years. They say transfer tax revenue is unpredictable and a shaky base for long-term programs. They argue at least 70% of the money does not have to build new housing, and that no new homes are required. They add that less General Fund money also shrinks other required funding, including Muni's.