Arizona · November 3, 2026

Know what your vote changes.

Proposition 141Constitutional amendment

Vehicle mileage taxes and monitoring

Official title: Taxation

A Yes vote

Add a constitutional ban on taxes or fees based on miles driven, and on rules that track or limit miles driven without consent.

A No vote

Keep the current constitutional rules on taxation.

Details that matter

The ban has exceptions for certain interstate commercial vehicles and vehicles owned by state or local governments.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 1

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to prohibit: (1) taxes or fees based on motor vehicle miles traveled; and (2) laws or rules that monitor or limit motor vehicle miles traveled without consent. These prohibitions do not apply in certain instances to interstate commercial vehicles or to vehicles owned by the state or local governments.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current constitutional language related to taxation.
Proposition 141 page
Proposition 142Constitutional amendment

State practices involving race and ethnicity

Official title: Prohibition of Preferential Treatment and Discrimination

A Yes vote

Expand the constitutional restrictions on state practices involving race or ethnicity, including certain statements, education jobs and disciplinary practices.

A No vote

Keep the existing constitutional ban on state preferential treatment or discrimination based on race, ethnicity or other protected classes.

Details that matter

The proposal covers compelled support as a condition of education, employment or contracts; public education spending on specified positions; and different discipline based on race or ethnicity. It also restricts certain requests for DEI statements or discussions of racial experience. Exceptions include health services and legal reasons.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 2

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution’s current prohibition against preferential treatment or discrimination by the state based on race, ethnicity, or other classes, to specifically prohibit: (1) compelling individuals to support preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity as a condition of education, employment, or contract opportunities; (2) spending public money on positions in public education responsible for promoting preferential treatment or discrimination based on race or ethnicity; and (3) implementing disciplinary practices that treat students or employees differently based on race or ethnicity. Prohibited conduct includes requiring or asking an applicant, employee, student, or contractor to provide a statement in support of race-based diversity, equity, and inclusion beyond upholding the federal Equal Protection Clause or asking such a person to discuss the person’s race or ethnicity or experience with others’ race or ethnicity. The amendment contains certain exceptions for health services, legal, and other reasons.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current prohibition in the Arizona Constitution against preferential treatment or discrimination by the state based on race, ethnicity, or other classes.
Proposition 142 page
Proposition 144Constitutional amendment

Voter identification, election administration, and campaign finance

Official title: Election Requirements

A Yes vote

Require government-issued voter ID in every election, including mail voting, and change ballot counting options, campaign finance rules and court review of election laws.

A No vote

Keep the current constitutional provisions governing elections.

Details that matter

Voters would have the option to have their ballot counted at their voting location on Election Day. The proposal adds state restrictions on foreign-national election spending similar to federal restrictions, sets a court-review standard that may make election laws harder to challenge, and requires funding to implement the changes.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 3

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to: (1) require voters to show proof of identity when voting in each election, including when voting by mail; (2) changing existing proof of identity requirements to limit acceptable documentation to government-issued ID; (3) require election officials to provide all voters the option to have their ballot tabulated at their voting location on election day; (4) prohibit foreign nationals from contributing or spending to influence elections in Arizona and prohibit anyone from knowingly accepting such contributions, similar to prohibitions that already exist in federal law; (5) create a new standard for judicial review of election laws under the Arizona Constitution, which may make it harder to challenge election laws; and (6) require the legislature to appropriate money necessary to implement these provisions.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining current constitutional provisions governing elections.
Proposition 144 page
Proposition 316State law change

Local grocery taxes

Official title: Municipal Transaction Privilege Tax

A Yes vote

Block new or increased local grocery taxes for a specified period, then require voter approval and a 2% cap on new or increased taxes.

A No vote

Keep the current laws on local government taxation.

Details that matter

The freeze would apply retroactively from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027. After that, the approval requirement and 2% limit apply to new or increased taxes. This is not a blanket repeal of every existing grocery tax.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 4

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of: (1) retroactively prohibiting local governments from adopting or increasing a tax on groceries from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027; and (2) after that time, prohibiting local governments from adopting or increasing a tax on groceries without voter approval and limiting any new or increased tax to a maximum rate of 2%.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws relating to local government taxation.
Proposition 316 page
Proposition 317State law change

Drug cartels and state homeland security duties

Official title: Arizona Department of Homeland Security

A Yes vote

Declare drug cartels terrorist organizations and direct Arizona’s homeland security department to address their threats using its existing authority.

A No vote

Keep the current laws on terrorism and the Arizona Department of Homeland Security.

Details that matter

The definition includes ongoing groups involved in human smuggling, drug trafficking or acts defined as terrorism under Arizona law. The measure says it does not support an asylum claim.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 5

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of: (1) declaring drug cartels as terrorist organizations and directing the Arizona Department of Homeland Security to do everything in its authority to address threats posed by drug cartels; (2) defining “drug cartel” to mean an ongoing formal or informal association of persons engaged in human smuggling, drug trafficking, or any act defined as terrorism under Arizona law; and (3) clarifying that this measure does not support an alien’s asylum claim.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws relating to terrorism and the Arizona Department of Homeland Security.
Proposition 317 page
Proposition 318State law change

Athletic teams and private spaces at schools

Official title: Student Athletics

A Yes vote

Extend sex-based athletic team rules to all schools and athletic associations, restrict access to designated private spaces, and allow athletes to sue for knowing violations.

A No vote

Keep the current student athletics laws, which already cover public schools and schools competing against them.

Details that matter

The proposal defines sex using biological status recorded on the original birth certificate. It bars athletes classified as male from female teams and bars schools and associations from authorizing use of private spaces, such as restrooms, designated for the other sex.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 6

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of: (1) requiring private schools, public schools, and athletic associations to designate every athletic team as male, female, or coed/mixed based on sex and to prevent males from joining female teams; existing law imposes this requirement only on public schools and those competing against them; (2) prohibiting schools and athletic associations from authorizing anyone to use private spaces (such as restrooms) not designated for that individual’s sex; (3) defining “sex” as an individual’s biological status as male or female as recorded at birth on an original birth certificate; and (4) authorizing athletes to sue schools and athletic associations that knowingly violate this law.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws relating to student athletics.
Proposition 318 page
Proposition 319State law change

Traffic enforcement cameras

Official title: Photo Enforcement Systems

A Yes vote

Restrict traffic-camera enforcement to systems contracted by December 31, 2026, and require recurring local voter approval to continue existing systems.

A No vote

Keep the current laws governing traffic-camera enforcement.

Details that matter

Local governments would need approval at the next regular general election and every 10 years afterward. The proposal includes a contract exception, so it would not immediately ban every existing system.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 7

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of: (1) prohibiting state agencies and local governments from using photo enforcement systems to identify violators of traffic laws unless the agency or government contracts to use those systems by December 31, 2026; and (2) requiring local governments to obtain voter approval of existing photo enforcement systems at the next regular general election and every 10 years afterward to continue using photo enforcement systems.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws governing photo enforcement systems.
Proposition 319 page
Proposition 320State law change

Instructional spending requirements and school funding

Official title: School District Budgets

A Yes vote

Require covered school districts to put at least 60% of operational spending toward direct instruction, with funding reductions for noncompliance.

A No vote

Keep the current laws governing school district budgets.

Details that matter

It covers districts with at least 7,500 students anywhere, or districts operating in counties with at least 500,000 residents. The Auditor General defines the spending categories. Districts below the target must adjust each year and face a 25% annual reduction in Classroom Site Fund funding, subject to limited waivers. That reduction is not 25% of all district funding.

Read the official ballot wording

Arizona Secretary of State · Ballot language published August 19, 2026 · Page 8

Yes

A “yes” vote shall have the effect of: (1) requiring school districts with 7,500 or more students in any county or that operate in a county with 500,000 or more people to spend at least 60% of their operational spending on direct instructional expenses; (2) requiring the state Auditor General to define “operational spending” and “direct instructional expenses”; (3) requiring non-compliant school districts to gradually adjust their spending each year until they are in compliance; and (4) requiring the state Department of Education to reduce funding from the state Classroom Site Fund by 25% each year for non-compliant districts, subject to limited waivers that the state Superintendent of Public Instruction may authorize.

No

A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws governing school district budgets.
Proposition 320 page