A guide to all the ballot measures Arizona voters will decide in 2026

In less than five months, Arizona voters will head to the polls or mail in their ballots to cast votes in major state and local races. There will be several high-profile races to determine, including for governor, secretary of state and attorney general.

But that’s not all. For the second straight general election, voters will be asked to decide a number of ballot measures, many of which were put up for a vote by the Republican-controlled Arizona Legislature. So far, the ballot is set to feature at least 10 measures, with the possibility of more, should several citizen-backed initiatives gather enough signatures to qualify.

On the last day of the legislative session, GOP state lawmakers approved 10 concurrent resolutions, or ballot referrals. They are essentially a way for legislators to put their priorities directly in front of voters, bypassing Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs in the process. Hobbs can (and often does) veto Republican-passed bills, but ballot referrals skip her desk entirely.

The 10 measures headed to the ballot so far include proposed laws to bar transgender girls from girls’ sports, to limit the power of teachers’ unions and to require every voter to show identification when casting a ballot. Many of them are not as straightforward as lawmakers would like you to think, with far-ranging consequences if passed.

All it takes is a simple majority to pass each measure, all of which would amend the state constitution. Here’s what you need to know about the measures — which will be given official proposition numbers later this year — that will be on your November ballot.

The measure would also invalidate any law or measure approved by voters on or after Nov. 1 — Election Day is Nov. 3 — that would violate the measure’s “prohibition on confiscating scholarship account monies,” according to a bill memo. This appears to target a citizen-led initiative, backed by the Arizona Education Association and Save Our Schools, that would more stringently regulate ESAs and place an income cap on the benefit.

In a Save Our Schools Substack post, the group called it a “Trojan horse measure” that “uses military families as a pawn to cloak its true intent: to invalidate the Protect Education Act after voters approve it in November.”

Arizona’s controversial ESA program allows families to apply for state tax dollars for alternative education expenses in lieu of sending their children to public schools. However, the program has been rampant with fraud and abuse, with news reports revealing inappropriate purchases of diamond necklaces, iPhones, widescreen TVs and Kenmore appliances. Additionally, a recent report from the Arizona Auditor General’s Office found that nearly 2.3 million transactions, totaling more than $653 million in ESA purchases, were automatically approved without oversight.

The legislature-backed measure would allow the child of a military member to use the scholarship account funds toward tuition or fees at a postsecondary education institution, such as a public university, Arizona community college or accredited private institution. ESA monies are typically limited to K-12 education.

The prohibition on the confiscation of funds wouldn’t protect the account holder if they were found “personally responsible for illegal activity or wrongdoing,” failed to renew their account, or did not graduate or enroll in a postsecondary institution within four years of their high school graduation.

Specifically, the measure would prohibit a school district from using public funds or resources to support a labor organization’s operations or “perform labor organization activities” during the workday, according to the bill’s fact sheet. If passed, the measure would also prohibit any school district employee from “distributing any communications” on a labor organization’s behalf, outlaw paycheck deductions by unions and eliminate access to a school district’s internal communication systems to distribute information to current or potential union members. 

The union wouldn’t be able to have labor organizing meetings on campus, including with new hires. The school district would be barred from approving employee-paid leave for any business related to an employee’s labor organizing activity.

The state would also be barred from negotiating with the labor union for any type of labor collective bargaining agreement, including everything from an “exclusive representation agreement,” memorandum of understanding or “other agreement regarding the terms and conditions of employment.”

Public school advocates and teachers have decried the measure as an attempt to make it practically untenable to maintain a union.

“The Arizona Secure Elections Act puts the rules where they belong: in the Constitution,” resolution sponsor Rep. Alexander Kolodin — also a candidate for secretary of state — wrote in a press release.

Democrats argue that the bill’s vague language could cause significant confusion in the state’s election processes. The ACLU of Arizona said the bill would force voters to resubmit proof of ID every time they vote and would give the legislature “unchecked power to end voting by mail completely,” the group wrote in a social media post. 

Central to the issue is the question of how mail-in voters would provide ID. The identities of mail voters are already confirmed by comparing the signatures on ballot envelopes. Additionally, every Arizona voter must provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote. Arizona is the only state with such a law.

“Arizona’s strength in elections comes from giving eligible voters ample opportunity to cast their vote. Mail-in ballots, Election Day drop-offs, and early voting are essential parts of that equation,” wrote Katelynn Contreras, an ACLU of Arizona policy strategist, in a statement. “This is another senseless attempt by lawmakers to urge people to vote against their own best interests.”

Specifically, state institutions would be banned from requiring DEI statements in hiring, admissions, promotions, contracts or scholarships. It’d block public money from being used to fund public education jobs, programs or training regarding race-based preferential treatment and prohibit “requiring or soliciting an individual to confess race-based privilege or discuss the individual’s race or ethnicity.”

It’s the latest iteration of the willful conservative misunderstanding of what DEI initiatives are meant to achieve. Instead of giving preferential treatment based on minority status, as many MAGA types claim, DEI policies are intended to ensure that people from groups that have faced historic discrimination are given a fair shake.

In a statement, ACLU of Arizona policy director Darrell Hill wrote that the resolution could violate the First Amendment rights of students, teachers and administrators.

“Ideas are not illegal, and there is no ‘government-approved’ speech exception to the First Amendment,” Hill wrote. “The state cannot adopt a policy or rule that punishes faculty, administrators or students for expressing their beliefs or prohibits wide scopes of ideas from being debated at universities.” 

If the local authority doesn’t receive voter approval to operate its system, it must cease operations within 90 days of the November election. However, if the city does receive approval, it may continue its photo enforcement operation for 10 years, until the question must be placed before voters again for approval.

It’s a culture war bill that takes aim at the small population of trans youth athletes in Arizona who almost certainly are not having a deleterious effect on girls’ sports. A similar trans sports ban, passed in 2022, has already been struck down in federal court, though the U.S. Supreme Court is weighing whether to take up the issue. 

Notably, no one pushing such a ban has been able to say how many trans girls are actually playing girls’ youth sports.

In a statement, Hill wrote that “Arizona lawmakers continue to play cruel political games with the health, safety, and lives of Arizona children.”

“Too much of that money never reaches the classroom,” the resolution’s sponsor, GOP state Sen. Jake Hoffman, wrote in a press release. “This referral establishes a clear standard and finally holds districts accountable for putting bureaucracy ahead of students.” 

If a school district failed to meet this funding threshold, it’d lose 25% of its state funding. After four subsequent years of noncompliance, that penalty would increase to 100% of state funding.

Save Our Schools called the measure an “unreasonable benchmark” that school districts “have not met at any point since 2003.” School advocates have also criticized the measure for running the risk of preventing schools from affording counselors and specialists who work with needy students.

Hobbs previously vetoed a policy under a different bill over concerns about tasking a department, whose main job is administering federal grants, with law enforcement duties. Additionally, the measure states that the designation will do nothing to help an asylum seeker’s claim — even if they’re escaping violence from the same organization the state has designated as a terrorist organization. 

Specifically, the proposal is an attempt by sponsor Hoffman — the driver of a Tesla Cybertruck — to remove an option lawmakers have to ensure that electric-vehicle owners pay a share of future road construction and repair costs that would otherwise be funded by a gas tax. With the rise of electric vehicles, imposing a mileage tax would help offset declining revenue from the state’s 18-cent-per-gallon gasoline sales tax.