Measure H: Parcel Tax to Fund Public Muni Operations

Muni is running out of money. Pandemic relief is gone, and the SFMTA projects a $307M deficit next year, growing to $434M within five years (https://www.sfmta.com/press-releases/press-release-facing-fiscal-cliff-sfmta-board-approves-balanced-two-year-budget-preserve-muni-service-and-keep-san-francisco-moving). The agency says that without new money it would cut up to 20 routes, run longer waits on the rest, and end regular service at 9 p.m. (https://www.kqed.org/news/12087755/san-francisco-voters-will-vote-on-munis-future-in-november)

Muni has done its part. Since 2020 the SFMTA has cut $246M in costs (https://www.sfmta.com/press-releases/press-release-facing-fiscal-cliff-sfmta-board-approves-balanced-two-year-budget-preserve-muni-service-and-keep-san-francisco-moving), mostly by eliminating more than 500 vacant positions, and its new two-year budget eliminates 89 more and trims $20M in non-labor spending. It also cut some service in summer 2025 (https://growsf.org/news/2026-04-22-muni-budget-buys-time/) to help close a $50M gap. Even so, the balanced budget leans on a $200M state loan (https://www.sfmta.com/press-releases/press-release-facing-fiscal-cliff-sfmta-board-approves-balanced-two-year-budget-preserve-muni-service-and-keep-san-francisco-moving) that only buys time.

We're skeptical of that collapse story. City Hall would never actually let Muni cut a third of its service; it would quietly backfill from a General Fund the Controller projects will be $741.7M short in FY 2028-29 (https://api.sf.gov/documents/61760/Proposition_I__Changes_to_Real_Property_Transfer_Tax_-_Signed.pdf), and the cuts would land on parks, street cleaning, and everything else instead. What Prop H really does is raise new revenue so City Hall can avoid that budget fight. That's fine, but we wish lawmakers were honest about it. The real choice is whether Muni gets its own funding or its deficit quietly eats the rest of the budget.

Funding it directly is the better deal, and the price is reasonable: most homeowners pay $129 per year, and a rent-controlled tenant pays at most $65 per year.

We don't love the senior exemption. Homeowners 65 and older pay nothing at all, and they are the same group that already pays the lowest property taxes in the city (https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3497), because Prop 13 froze their assessments decades ago. Renters, young families, and recent buyers, the people already carrying the biggest tax bills, will fund the buses while the most protected taxpayers in California are exempted again. That's backwards.

The tax is built to stay accountable: it sunsets in 2042 (https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election/measures/prop-h/legal-text/#prop-h-duration), an independent efficiency review (https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election/measures/prop-h/legal-text/#prop-h-efficiency) is due by April 2028, and the Board of Supervisors can amend or repeal it by majority vote (https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election/measures/prop-h/legal-text/#prop-h-amendment) if the SFMTA wastes the money. Prop H covers about half of Muni's gap (https://www.sfcta.org/blogs/updates-regional-transportation-revenue-measure-and-muni-parcel-tax); the Regional Transit Measure (https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election/measures/prop-rtm/) covers most of the rest.

Vote yes on Prop H.

Source (https://growsf.org/voter-guide/san-francisco-voter-guide-november-2026-election#prop-h)

Prop H would bring badly needed funds to Muni via a parcel tax on San Francisco properties. This would be the City’s first progressive parcel tax, meaning single family homeowners would pay less than small apartment buildings, which would pay less than big office towers. 

We’ll definitely vote yes on Prop H, but it isn't perfect: Landlords can pass through half of the tax bill to tenants, and the Mayor insisted on adding a $50k tax cap for giant multifamily apartment buildings, once again sparing the wealthy and leaving money on the table. We’re  frustrated that Muni is being held hostage by corporations that want to pass the cost of transit to regular people instead of paying increased transit sustainability fees, but we certainly can’t do without Muni, which Prop H will fund to the tune of $150 million a year. Vote Yes.

Source (https://www.theleaguesf.org/#PropH)

Transit and housing supply are the same fight. Every unit of housing in this city only works if people can actually get around. SF YIMBY is proud to support this measure.

SPUR's Recommendation

High-quality public transit is not optional for San Francisco. SPUR recognizes that Prop. H imposes a new tax on residents at a time when the cost of living is very high, and on commercial property owners as they begin to recover from the pandemic and the shift to remote work. But the tax structure is built on fairness, and San Francisco’s affordability and economy both need Muni to thrive.

Life will get much harder and more expensive in San Francisco and the region if Prop. H does not pass, especially for people with the fewest options: when transit service is cut, riders with disabilities, seniors, students, and low-income workers are hit first and hardest.

Downtown San Francisco, the city’s economy, and Muni are inextricably linked. When Muni is safe, clean, and convenient, downtown benefits. Reduced service would have the opposite effect. Cutting special event service could dampen the city’s ability to host marquee events. Traffic congestion — which has already surpassed pre-pandemic levels — would inevitably worsen, impeding return to office and broader economic growth.

Muni has made financial management a top priority and proven to be a good steward of public funds and responsive to customers. SPUR is confident the funding generated by Prop. H will be well-used. Everyone benefits from safer, less congested roads, cleaner air, and a healthy economy when Muni can provide high-quality service that is clean, safe, reliable, and affordable.

What Prop. H Would Do

Proposition H would create an annual parcel tax on residential and commercial properties in San Francisco for 15 years to close the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s (SFMTA) annual deficit and avoid significant cuts to Muni service. The tax rate would scale with the property’s size and type to ensure fairness and affordability. As a result, larger residential, multi-family, and non-residential properties would contribute proportionally more based on parcel and building size.

Prop. H is expected to raise approximately $160 million per year. Revenue from the measure would fund only Muni’s public transit operations and the cost of administering the tax. It could not fund capital projects, bicycle lanes, or other non-transit initiatives. Tax rates would adjust annually to keep pace with inflation. Combined with the passage of the regional transit measure (Proposition RTM (https://www.spur.org/voter-guide/ba-prop-rtm-regional-transit-sales-tax)) and ongoing fiscal management and cost controls, Prop. H is expected to close Muni’s operating deficit.

Parcel Tax Structure and Rates

• Parcel Type: Single-Family Residential; Base Cost: $129; Additional Charges: * Parcels between 3,001 square feet and 5,000 square feet of building area add $0.42 per square foot over 3,000 * Parcels over 5,000 square feet of building area add $1.99 per square foot over 5,000; Maximum Annual Cost: No cap; most households will pay only $129.
• Parcel Type: Multi-Family Residential; Base Cost: $249; Additional Charges: * Parcels over 5,000 square feet of building area add $0.195 per square foot over 5,000; Maximum Annual Cost: $50,000
• Parcel Type: Non-Residential; Base Cost: $799; Additional Charges: * Parcels between 5,001 square feet and 50,000 square feet of building area add $0.76 per square foot over 5,000 * Parcels between 50,001 square feet and 250,000 square feet of building area add $0.84 per square foot over 50,000 * Parcels over 250,000 square feet of building area add $0.99 per square foot over 250,000 square feet; Maximum Annual Cost: $400,000
• Parcel Type: Rent-Controlled Units; Base Cost: NA; Additional Charges: NA; Maximum Annual Cost: $65

Source: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency via legal text of Prop. H (https://media.api.sf.gov/documents/Legal_Text_3X0F1JU.pdf)

The measure would include the following provisions:

• The city estimates that 95% of single-family residences would pay $129 annually.
• A typical mixed-use building on a neighborhood corridor, with ground-floor retail and two stories of apartments above, would pay less than $1,000 per year.
• Landlords may not charge rent-controlled tenants more than $65 per year.
• Seniors (65 and older) would be exempt from paying the parcel tax on their primary residences. However, seniors who own income-generating property, such as a multifamily rental or commercial building, must pay the parcel tax on that property.
• Owners of single-room-occupancy buildings would be exempt from paying the parcel tax to keep units affordable.

The Backstory

Muni’s operating funds come from three primary sources: fees from people who park in city-owned garages, a portion of the city’s General Fund, and fares that riders pay. The COVID-19 pandemic caused major, lasting changes to travel and mobility, leading to significant drops in fare and parking revenue. The city’s budget is also facing an unprecedented deficit and slower growth. One-time emergency funding from the federal and state government helped to backfill Muni’s lost fare revenues, but that funding runs out at the end of this calendar year. Even if fare revenues grew significantly, they would not fully offset declines in Muni’s two larger revenue sources: parking and the General Fund. Muni faces a severe economic deficit projected at $307 million in 2027 and growing to $398 million by 2030.

That deficit could trigger Muni to cut up to 20 routes entirely, cut the number of buses and trains per hour in half, and scale back the pass programs that make Muni free or low-cost to youth, seniors, and people with disabilities. Without new funding, Muni may be forced to end service at 9 p.m. and eliminate historic cable car service.

These service cuts would be devastating for San Francisco residents. Families that use Muni for at least some of their transportation needs have lower transportation costs. For many riders with disabilities, seniors, students, and low-income workers, Muni is the only way to reach a job, a medical appointment, or the grocery store.

The cuts would harm the city’s economy, particularly the sports, entertainment, tourism, hospitality, and food and beverage industries. In turn, this would damage the city’s budget, downtown’s recovery, and the city’s attractiveness for large events.

In the fall of 2024, SFMTA and the city Controller’s Office convened the Muni Funding Working Group, which included SPUR, to provide recommendations to address the near-term and medium-term funding gap. The group recommended a parcel tax package to provide stable operating funding, alongside strong fiscal management.

In addition to seeking new revenues, Muni has made strong financial management and efficiency a top priority, resulting in more than $250 million in savings since 2019. Fare compliance strategies, including increasing onboard fare inspectors, new educational campaigns, and changing fare tagging policies, as well as reliability, cleanliness and speed improvements, have led to customer satisfaction reaching an all-time high. Further, SPUR’s research brief Taking Muni’s Vitals found that Muni performs well in efficiency, productivity, and effectiveness compared to its peers. Despite significant cost-saving efforts, Prop. H alone would not be enough to fill the funding gap. Voters in San Francisco will see two measures on the November ballot for public transit: Prop. H and a regional sales tax increase (Prop. RTM) levied in San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties. Prop. H is projected to raise about $160 million annually, and Prop. RTM is projected to raise $155 million annually for Muni. Both measures must pass in order to prevent devastating service cuts to Muni.

This measure qualified for the ballot through a voter signature initiative and requires a simple majority (50% plus one vote) to pass.

Equity Impacts

The revenues from this measure would be used to maintain and improve Muni service. More than half a million trips are made on Muni every day. Muni riders are more likely to be low-income or to identify as a person of color, a person with a disability, a senior, or a youth relative to the city’s population. These populations will be the most disadvantaged if service cuts occur, and they are less able to switch to costlier alternatives such as driving or ride-hail services. If Prop. H does not pass, Muni will need to increase fares and cut service.

While Prop. H imposes a new tax, it uses a tiered rate structure to ensure fairness, as detailed above.

Pros

• Prop. H would avoid catastrophic service cuts that would otherwise leave San Francisco without reliable and affordable transportation, stall downtown’s recovery, worsen traffic, air quality, and respiratory illness, and undermine housing production.
• The measure includes protections for seniors, rent-controlled tenants, and single-room occupancy units to avoid overburdening vulnerable populations.
• Unlike other tax types whose revenues vary from year to year, a parcel tax provides stable funding, making it ideal for the ongoing nature of operating funds.
• The measure would support San Francisco’s economy. If the measure does not pass, Muni warns it would need to cut special event service, limiting the city’s ability to host marquee events that depend on transit.
• Prop. H would help reduce traffic congestion and related greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. If it and Measure RTM don’t pass, SPUR estimates traffic congestion would more than double on the Bay Bridge because of cuts to Muni, BART, and Caltrain.

Con

• The city has no legal authority over how a parcel tax is passed on to commercial or other non-rent-controlled tenants, so the rates they are charged would depend on individual lease agreements between tenants and owners.

Source (https://www.spur.org/voter-guide/2026-11/sf-prop-h-muni-parcel-tax)

Prop H is a 15-year parcel tax to close Muni's post-pandemic operating deficit, which the SFMTA puts at $300M+ a year once pandemic era one-time relief funding runs out. Most homeowners pay about $129/year; a rent-controlled tenant can be charged at most $65/year. It sunsets after 15 years, is independently reviewed for efficiency and efficacy, and the Board can amend or repeal it by majority vote if SFMTA doesn't deliver. Transit and housing supply are the same fight. Every unit of housing in this city only works if people can actually get around. SF YIMBY is proud to support this measure. Source

Progressive parcel tax to fund Muni

Source (https://www.sfgreenparty.org/endorsements/123-november-2026-endorsements)

For healthier and well-connected communities, Greenbelt Alliance encourages voters in San Francisco to say YES to Proposition H to secure funds for Muni and keep light rail, buses, and cable cars running.

Proposition H, or Stronger Muni for All (https://www.strongermuniforall.com/), is focused on providing financial support for public transit in San Francisco and preventing a once-in-a-generation funding crisis. The proposition will address Muni’s major annual deficit of over $300 million and ensure that the agency is safe, reliable, and affordable. If it passes, Prop H would establish a fair tiered parcel tax that charges 95% of single-family residences a flat $129 annual fee. Larger homes would pay progressively more, and the largest commercial properties would pay up to $400,000 annually. This ensures that average San Franciscans are not burdened by higher taxes while the biggest properties are paying the most. 

Along with organizations such as Transform, SF Transit Riders, and the Sierra Club, we endorse Prop H because a healthy, resilient, interconnected, and sustainable future necessitates a strong public transit system. 

This ballot measure is complementary to the Regional Transit Measure (RTM) (https://www.greenbelt.org/blog/vote-yes-for-the-regional-transit-measure-rtm/)‘s goals and will support the region by significantly reducing traffic congestion, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and protecting downtown and citywide economic recovery. Vote YES to save Muni and protect our environment.

Source (https://www.greenbelt.org/blog/vote-yes-proposition-h-sf/)

YES on Prop H, the Muni funding measure, and YES on the Regional Transit Measure that would fund BART and Caltrain: Muni and BART are our City’s main arteries, but they’re now endangered by chronic underfunding. BART is notoriously fare-dependent, but doesn’t have enough fare revenues anymore to support it, while Muni is subsidized by parking revenues. Both systems are currently dependent on loans to stay afloat, and need tax revenue to become solvent. If these taxes don’t pass, we’ll face major service cuts across both systems, potentially up to the total shutdown and dismantlement of BART entirely. We must pass these two measures, both to keep Muni and BART alive in the short term and to demonstrate more broadly that the people want taxes to support our public transit and help them grow.

Source (https://indivisiblesf.org/endorsements)

Safe streets and a walkable San Francisco aren’t possible without frequent, reliable public transportation.

But you’ve heard the headlines: Muni, BART, and other transit agencies around the Bay Area face a fiscal crisis unlike any we’ve seen. The dramatic drop in fare revenues caused by the pandemic changed everything, and the emergency funding that’s kept transit afloat will soon end.

Without additional funding, transit service as we know it will be decimated:

• SFMTA/Muni will have to cut up to 20 routes entirely (https://www.sfmta.com/muni-and-street-safety-impacts-without-necessary-funding); double wait times on remaining routes; only run nighttime Owl service starting at 9PM; eliminate the F-train and cable cars; and even cut essential street safety maintenance work.
• BART will have to end service at 9pm seven days a week (https://www.bart.gov/about/financials/crisis) (previously midnight); run only 3-line service (previously 5-line); and run trains only every 30 minutes (previously 10-20 minutes). BART has said they might have to end service entirely after 1-2 years without new funding.
• Caltrain will have to close more than one third of stations (https://www.caltrain.com/news/caltrain-board-plans-potential-cuts); eliminate weekend service (previously every 30 minutes); reduce frequencies to once per hour (previously every 30 minutes or less); end service at 9PM; and cut segments of service entirely. This is after just investing billions of dollars to transition Caltrain to electric trains.

Beyond the profound impacts to everyone who relies on transit plus our regional economy, reducing public transit at this scale would send our traffic safety crisis into overdrive. Our streets would be flooded with tens of thousands more vehicles every day.

Advocates worked incredibly hard to get two measures on the ballot this November 3 that would provide the funding needed to save transit:

• Stronger Muni for All (https://www.strongermuniforall.com/) (Measure H) is a measure to fund Muni operations for 15 years through a parcel tax.
• Connect Bay Area (https://connectbayarea.com/) (Measure RTM) is a measure to fund transit agencies across five counties: San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara. It’s a sales tax (1 cent in San Francisco) set to last fourteen years, and it would fund transit operations, rider-focused investments like free transfers, accessibility improvements, and transit priority infrastructure.

Measure H requires a majority vote in San Francisco to pass. Measure RTM requires a combined majority across all five counties. This means a strong showing of support in San Francisco could help if any other county has lower support. San Francisco needs to pass both measures to save Muni because the funds in the regional measure would only partially fill its budget gap.

Source (https://walksf.org/2026/09/02/a-walkable-sf-depends-on-transit-vote-yes-on-measures-h-rtm/)

Creates a 15-year parcel tax projected to generate approximately $160 million annually for Muni operations, with different rates for residential and commercial properties and limited pass-throughs to some rent-controlled tenants. CADC opposes Prop. H because San Francisco voters are simultaneously being asked to approve a regional transit sales tax that would also provide substantial new funding to Muni. The committee believed SFMTA should demonstrate greater cost control and accountability before property owners and some renters are asked to shoulder another dedicated tax, particularly one that increases with inflation.

CADC 認為同一選舉已有區域交通銷售稅 (RTM) 為 MUNI 提供新收入，SFMTA 應先加強成本控制及財政問責，而非再向業主及部分租客徵收另一項長達 15 年的稅項，因此反對提案 H。

Source (https://www.sfcadc.org/11_2026_propositions)

This measure would create a new annual parcel tax dedicated to SFMTA transit operations, running from July 2027 through June 2042, with annual inflation adjustments. Tax amounts scale with property type and building size. Landlords of rent-controlled units can pass through up to 50% of the tax, capped at $65 per unit, but only on tenancies whose base rent was set before June 2027. The measure is estimated to raise $177 million annually beginning in Fiscal Year 2027-2028, increasing over time as the parcel tax adjusts to inflation.

We recommend voting No on H. Transit is important. But so is everything the city provides -that doesn’t mean we keep charging taxpayers more instead of fixing the city budget. SF residents already pay some of the highest taxes in the country and our city has a high cost of living. When we’re in the middle of a cost of living crisis, the last thing our residents need is a new tax that will heavily impact homeowners and renters. Additionally, this tax measure disappointingly does not require SFMTA to make structural financial changes to help address its financial deficit.

Source (https://www.sfblueprint.org/advocacy/november-2026-voter-guide)

A 15-year property tax to bail out an agency that refuses to reform itself. Fix SFMTA's management before asking homeowners for more money. Vote NO.

Source (https://sfgop.org/nov-2026-endorsements)

Prop H - SFMTA Parcel Tax

What it does: Locks San Franciscans into a 15-year parcel tax on residential and commercial buildings to fund SFMTA, with a pass-through to tenants.

Endorsement: HECK NO on Proposition H! Psst, pass it on!

Bottom line: What MUNI needs for long term stability is tough love, not another bailout.

Let’s start with a dose of reality: 1) this is a regressive tax and 2) SFMTA’s budget is $1.5B for a city of 830,000 people, 3) SFMTA takes approx $600M annually from the General Fund, is getting a $200M emergency loan, and still can’t make ends meet. We taxpayers are tapped out.

This prop is supposedly dedicated to boost MUNI operations. But dollars are fungible, and SFMTA has a history of re-categorizing buckets to label most things as MUNI - meaning more dollars could be spent on things like unnecessary “street redesigns.”

In 2025, ConnectedSF  identified at least $200 million in savings that would not impact service. SFMTA acknowledged our findings and then only proceeded to cut $15 million (from the $322 million deficit) (https://connectedsfinstitute.org/research/sf-fkr94). This nominal nod to cuts does not demonstrate that they were ever serious about addressing the budget deficit.

Instead of doing the hard work (like the rest of us have to do with our businesses and households) SFMTA just regularly sends MUNI bond measures to the ballot. Service was not transformed when federal money was sloshing. Why not?  Well, raises happened. And then SFMTA demanded a bailout in 2024; it was rejected and the City did not, in fact, vanish into a sinkhole.

You can reject this demand, as well.

Before another regressive tax is imposed (parcel taxes do not care about your income), the agency ought to cut non-service personnel, match service to actual demand, and treat farebox recovery as something other than a museum exhibit.

Simply put: this measure screams “no accountability!”

This measure and the RTM are part of a coordinated effort to scare voters for the umpteenth time into bailing out mismanaged systems. We reject this and instead call for accountability and a real plan for MUNI to get its house in order.

Vote NO, NO, NO. Transit is a public necessity, but blank checks to irresponsible agencies is how our public transit remains with second rate services and on a fiscal cliff.

Source (https://www.connectedsf.com/2026-voter-guide#prop-h)

What it does: Locks San Franciscans into a 15-year parcel tax on residential and commercial buildings to fund SFMTA, with a pass-through to tenants.

Endorsement: HECK NO on Proposition H! Psst, pass it on!

Bottom line: What MUNI needs for long term stability is tough love, not another bailout.

Let’s start with a dose of reality: 1) this is a regressive tax and 2) SFMTA’s budget is $1.5B for a city of 830,000 people, 3) SFMTA takes approx $600M annually from the General Fund, is getting a $200M emergency loan, and still can’t make ends meet. We taxpayers are tapped out.

This prop is supposedly dedicated to boost MUNI operations. But dollars are fungible, and SFMTA has a history of re-categorizing buckets to label most things as MUNI - meaning more dollars could be spent on things like unnecessary “street redesigns.”

In 2025, ConnectedSF identified at least $200 million in savings that would not impact service. SFMTA acknowledged our findings and then only proceeded to cut $15 million (from the $322 million deficit). This nominal nod to cuts does not demonstrate that they were ever serious about addressing the budget deficit.

Instead of doing the hard work (like the rest of us have to do with our businesses and households) SFMTA just regularly sends MUNI bond measures to the ballot. Service was not transformed when federal money was sloshing. Why not? Well, raises happened. And then SFMTA demanded a bailout in 2024; it was rejected and the City did not, in fact, vanish into a sinkhole.

You can reject this demand, as well.

Before another regressive tax is imposed (parcel taxes do not care about your income), the agency ought to cut non-service personnel, match service to actual demand, and treat farebox recovery as something other than a museum exhibit.

Simply put: this measure screams “no accountability!”

This measure and the RTM are part of a coordinated effort to scare voters for the umpteenth time into bailing out mismanaged systems. We reject this and instead call for accountability and a real plan for MUNI to get its house in order.

Vote NO, NO, NO . Transit is a public necessity, but blank checks to irresponsible agencies is how our public transit remains with second rate services and on a fiscal cliff.