November 3, 2026 General Election · Election night returns
Tulare County election results
Turnout as ballots are counted
Same point in the count (3 days after Election Day):
- 202634.2%so far
- 202226.0%(44.2% final)
- 202447.6%(63.9% final)
Show the data
| Year | County report | Hours after polls closed | Ballots counted | Turnout |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 2022-11-08 20:01 | 0.0 | 37,850 | 18.12% |
| 2022 | 2022-11-08 21:12 | 1.2 | 38,499 | 18.43% |
| 2022 | 2022-11-08 21:54 | 1.9 | 39,195 | 18.76% |
| 2022 | 2022-11-08 23:00 | 3.0 | 43,083 | 20.62% |
| 2022 | 2022-11-08 23:59 | 4.0 | 49,127 | 23.51% |
| 2022 | 2022-11-30 16:30 | 524.5 | 92,404 | 44.23% |
| 2024 | 2024-11-06 00:13 | 4.2 | 71,545 | 32.67% |
| 2024 | 2024-11-06 01:43 | 5.7 | 87,788 | 40.09% |
| 2024 | 2024-11-08 14:14 | 66.2 | 104,251 | 47.60% |
| 2024 | 2024-12-03 17:36 | 669.6 | 139,860 | 63.86% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-03 20:15 | 0.2 | 42,908 | 18.76% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-03 21:12 | 1.2 | 44,357 | 19.40% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-03 22:17 | 2.3 | 44,655 | 19.53% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-03 23:06 | 3.1 | 46,942 | 20.53% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-03 23:59 | 4.0 | 52,237 | 22.84% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-04 01:14 | 5.2 | 62,003 | 27.11% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-05 17:51 | 45.9 | 72,281 | 31.61% |
| 2026 | 2026-11-06 15:42 | 67.7 | 78,257 | 34.22% |
From the county’s results updates, timed from 8 p.m. on Election Day; earlier years are linear between updates.
No contests match that search.
D DemocraticR Republican* IncumbentLocal offices are nonpartisan.
Where available, statewide or districtwide totals from the California Secretary of State are shown first. Races that extend beyond this county offer “County only” for the county registrar’s count. Reports may update at different times.
Statewide offices 9
- California Governor2 candidates
Xavier BecerraD65.8%7,452,009
Steve HiltonR34.2%3,879,450
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Steve HiltonR51.1%44,168
Xavier BecerraD48.9%42,342
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Lieutenant Governor2 candidates
Fiona MaD65.7%7,338,351
Gloria RomeroR34.3%3,837,940
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Gloria RomeroR51.3%43,937
Fiona MaD48.7%41,767
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Secretary of State2 candidates
Shirley N. Weber* incumbentD66.6%7,438,318
Donald P. (Don) WagnerR33.4%3,723,960
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Donald P. (Don) WagnerR50.2%42,941
Shirley N. Weber* incumbentD49.8%42,618
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Controller2 candidates
Malia M. Cohen* incumbentD65.6%7,289,203
Herb W MorganR34.4%3,815,868
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Herb W MorganR50.5%43,327
Malia M. Cohen* incumbentD49.5%42,525
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Treasurer2 candidates
Eleni KounalakisD65.8%7,306,950
Jennifer HawksR34.2%3,793,642
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Jennifer HawksR51.2%43,847
Eleni KounalakisD48.8%41,750
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Attorney General2 candidates
Rob Bonta* incumbentD65.6%7,318,409
Michael E. GatesR34.4%3,834,583
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Michael E. GatesR51.4%44,134
Rob Bonta* incumbentD48.6%41,706
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Insurance Commissioner2 candidates
Jane KimD53.8%5,232,288
Ben AllenD46.2%4,494,855
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Jane KimD53.5%38,040
Ben AllenD46.5%33,125
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - Member, State Board of Equalization District 12 candidates
- SGShannon GroveR51.3%43,925
- NENelson EsparzaD48.7%41,661
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Superintendent of Public Instruction2 candidates
Richard Barrera59.1%5,680,564
Sonja Shaw40.9%3,937,566
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Sonja Shaw51.6%39,158
Richard Barrera48.4%36,661- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%106
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
State propositions 14
- California Proposition 1Yes/No questionProposition 1Ballot question
AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PROGRAMS. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE. Authorizes $11.25 billion in state general obligation bonds for housing affordability programs, including multifamily rental housing, mortgages for veterans, supportive housing, preservation of existing affordable housing, and downpayment assistance. Fiscal Impact: Increased state cost of $500 million to $600 million annually for about 25 years to repay the housing bond.
A yes vote meansThe state could borrow $11.25 billion through general obligation bonds to support veterans and affordable housing programs.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes61.0%6,733,027
- NoNo39.0%4,296,574
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes53.4%45,259
- NoNo46.6%39,454
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 2Yes/No questionProposition 2Ballot question
INCREASES STATE’S RAINY DAY FUND. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Increases California's Rainy Day Fund, approved by voters in 2014, to provide funding for education, health care, public safety, and other essential services during economic downturns. Fiscal Impact: State budget reserves would be higher.
A yes vote meansState budget reserve rules would change so the Rainy Day Fund holds more money, and the state would make extra debt payments for longer.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes61.3%6,759,767
- NoNo38.7%4,260,447
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- NoNo53.0%45,048
- YesYes47.0%39,943
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 3Yes/No questionProposition 3Ballot question
PROVIDES PERMANENT FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS AND HEALTH CARE BY EXTENDING EXISTING TAX ON HIGH INCOMES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Makes permanent existing voter-approved tax rates for individuals earning over $371,000 (adjusted annually for inflation). Allocates tax revenues to public education. Fiscal Impact: Maintains $5 billion to $15 billion of annual state income tax revenue by making a temporary tax increase on high-income earners permanent instead of letting it expire in 2031.
A yes vote meansAn income tax increase on high-income earners in place since 2012 would become permanent instead of expiring in 2031.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes60.6%6,733,849
- NoNo39.4%4,380,460
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes50.4%42,953
- NoNo49.6%42,265
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 4Yes/No questionProposition 4Ballot question
REPEALS PROHIBITION AGAINST PUBLIC FUNDING OF ELECTION CAMPAIGNS. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE. Repeals prohibition on state and local governments offering public funding of candidate election campaigns. Public funding programs may not use funds earmarked for education, transportation, or public safety. Fiscal Impact: Ongoing costs to the state of a few hundred thousand dollars each year for the Fair Political Practices Commission to answer questions from state and local governments about public campaign finance programs.
A yes vote meansState and local governments could create public campaign financing programs for candidates, subject to limits on which public funds could be used and how.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo50.3%5,474,047
- YesYes49.7%5,406,205
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- NoNo60.9%51,182
- YesYes39.1%32,827
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 5Yes/No questionProposition 5Ballot question
CHANGES RECALL ELECTION PROCESS FOR STATEWIDE OFFICERS. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Under current law, voters elect replacement candidates at the same time as the recall election. This measure instead fills recall vacancies by subsequent special election or appointment. Fiscal Impact: Net fiscal effect unknown. In the event of a recall, savings or costs of millions of dollars to administer the election depending on the office recalled.
A yes vote meansRecall elections would no longer ask who should fill the vacancy; vacancies typically would be filled by special election or appointment.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes52.0%5,562,022
- NoNo48.0%5,134,433
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- NoNo60.6%50,627
- YesYes39.4%32,886
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 37Yes/No questionProposition 37Ballot question
CREATES LOAN PROGRAM FOR MIDDLE-INCOME BUYERS OF QUALIFIED NEW HOMES. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Authorizes $25 billion in bonds to offer eligible buyers fixed-rate mortgages for up to 17% of purchase price of a newly constructed home priced below about $1.5 million. Borrowers must be California residents, occupy the home, meet income limits, and pay at least 3% down. Bonds repaid by mortgage payments, not State. Fiscal Impact: No direct state or local costs.
A yes vote meansThe state would create a homebuying assistance program funded by up to $25 billion in revenue bonds repaid by homeowners' loan payments.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes62.3%6,834,106
- NoNo37.7%4,132,590
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes55.8%47,042
- NoNo44.2%37,287
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 38Yes/No questionProposition 38Ballot question
AUTHORIZES BONDS FOR IMMUNOLOGY MEDICAL RESEARCH. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Authorizes $8.4 billion in general obligation bonds for immunology and immunotherapy research, half to a single University of California-affiliated nonprofit medical research institute, half to research grants. Fiscal Impact: Increased state cost of $500 million to $600 million annually for about 20 years to repay the research bond, with some or all of the cost offset if the funded research generates revenue.
A yes vote meansThe state could borrow $8.4 billion to support immunology and immunotherapy research by California research institutes and universities.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes54.2%5,963,079
- NoNo45.8%5,032,758
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes57.3%48,034
- NoNo42.7%35,809
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 39Yes/No questionProposition 39Ballot question
PROHIBITS CITIZENS FROM VOTING UNLESS THEY PRESENT GOVERNMENT-ISSUED IDENTIFICATION. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Invalidates mail ballots that do not have last four digits of designated government-issued identification number written on envelope. Prohibits in-person voting without presenting government-issued identification. Fiscal Impact: Costs of between tens of millions of dollars and low hundreds of millions of dollars each year to implement new voting requirements.
A yes vote meansVoters would be required to present additional identifying information, such as government-issued identification, to elections officials each time they vote.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo60.6%6,774,474
- YesYes39.4%4,407,227
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes55.1%46,713
- NoNo44.9%38,064
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 40Yes/No questionProposition 40Ballot question
IMPOSES ONE-TIME TAX ON CERTAIN TAXPAYERS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. Imposes 5% tax on certain taxpayers with assets over $1 billion; revenue primarily for health care. Exempts revenues from constitutional requirements for school funding and spending limit. Fiscal Impact: Temporary revenue increase of tens of billions of dollars spread over several years from wealth tax on billionaires. Possible ongoing decrease of less than $1 billion per year in income tax revenue from billionaires.
A yes vote meansThe state would collect a one-time tax from billionaires equal to 5 percent of their wealth.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo52.8%5,909,899
- YesYes47.2%5,288,424
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- NoNo62.2%52,708
- YesYes37.8%31,989
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 41Yes/No questionProposition 41Ballot question
PROHIBITS NEW STATE TAXES THAT EXCLUDE REVENUES FROM STATE SPENDING LIMIT. REQUIRES AUDITS FOR NEW STATE SPECIAL TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Nullifies state taxes enacted after January 1, 2026 that exempt their revenues from voter-approved state spending limit. Requires pre-election and recurring audits of programs funded by new special taxes. Fiscal Impact: The net fiscal effect is unknown as it depends on future decisions by voters, the Legislature, and other policymakers.
A yes vote meansThe State Auditor would review programs funded by new special taxes, and the state might not be able to exclude new special tax spending from its spending limit.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo54.9%6,035,499
- YesYes45.1%4,961,912
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes57.4%48,162
- NoNo42.6%35,813
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 42Yes/No questionProposition 42Ballot question
PROHIBITS NEW STATE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES AND CERTAIN RETROACTIVE STATE TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Prohibits any new state tax (1) imposed on the ownership of personal property (all things people own other than real estate), or (2) that applies retroactively based on taxpayer’s past activities. Nullifies taxes enacted after January 1, 2026 that conflict with this measure. Fiscal Impact: Possibility that tax revenues will not go up as much in the future.
A yes vote meansThe state could not establish new taxes on the ownership of financial assets or other personal property.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- YesYes51.6%5,733,734
- NoNo48.4%5,371,123
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes64.6%55,079
- NoNo35.4%30,152
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 43Yes/No questionProposition 43Ballot question
LIMITS VOTERS’ ABILITY TO RAISE REVENUES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Limits voters’ ability to pass voter-proposed local special taxes by increasing percentage of votes needed to approve such ballot measures from a majority (over 50%) to two-thirds, beginning January 1, 2027. Fiscal Impact: Possibility that local government tax revenues will not go up as much in the future due to a higher vote threshold for certain taxes.
A yes vote meansCertain voter-proposed local special taxes would require two-thirds voter approval instead of a majority.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo57.3%6,257,179
- YesYes42.7%4,667,905
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes53.2%44,912
- NoNo46.8%39,541
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 44Yes/No questionProposition 44Ballot question
REQUIRES COMMUNITY HEALTH CLINICS SPEND 90% OF REVENUE ON PROGRAM SERVICES. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Imposes penalties on nonprofit Federally Qualified Health Centers (community clinics providing primary care to medically underserved areas and populations) that spend less than 90% of revenue on “program services” advancing their charitable purpose, including but not limited to patient services. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs in the low tens of millions of dollars per year, covered by fees.
A yes vote meansCertain private nonprofit health clinics would have to spend at least 90 percent of their revenue each year on providing health care services.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo82.1%8,946,122
- YesYes17.9%1,955,845
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- NoNo81.2%68,292
- YesYes18.8%15,822
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California Proposition 45Yes/No questionProposition 45Ballot question
MODIFIES ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Amends California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to expedite environmental review for certain projects (including most housing, transportation, water, and health projects) by setting deadlines to complete environmental review and resolve lawsuits challenging project approvals. Fiscal Impact: Initial costs for state and local governments, likely in the high tens of millions of dollars—potentially exceeding $100 million—annually, partly covered by fees. Uncertain, potentially more significant positive or negative longer-term fiscal effects.
A yes vote meansCertain public and private projects would be eligible for new environmental review and court challenge procedures with tighter time limits.
Source: California Secretary of State, Official Voter Information Guide ↗- NoNo56.1%6,103,353
- YesYes43.9%4,766,652
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes56.1%47,266
- NoNo43.9%36,927
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
Judicial retention 8
- Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Amy K. Guerra, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictBallot question (form set by state law)
Retention of Associate Justice Amy K. Guerra, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictYes/No questionShall Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Amy K. Guerra, Court of Appeal, 5th District be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Retention of Associate Justice Amy K. Guerra, Court of Appeal, 5th District on the Court of Appeal for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes62.9%43,813
- NoNo37.1%25,878
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Arlan L. Harrell, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictBallot question (form set by state law)
Retention of Associate Justice Arlan L. Harrell, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictYes/No questionShall Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Arlan L. Harrell, Court of Appeal, 5th District be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Retention of Associate Justice Arlan L. Harrell, Court of Appeal, 5th District on the Court of Appeal for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes61.5%42,971
- NoNo38.5%26,897
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
Retention of Associate Justice Joshua Groban, California Supreme CourtYes/No questionAssociate Justice Joshua GrobanBallot question (form set by state law)Shall Associate Justice Joshua Groban be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Joshua Groban on the California Supreme Court for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes71.5%6,320,411
- NoNo28.5%2,517,810
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes60.3%42,937
- NoNo39.7%28,287
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters- Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Kathleen A. Meehan, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictBallot question (form set by state law)
Retention of Associate Justice Kathleen A. Meehan, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictYes/No questionShall Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Kathleen A. Meehan, Court of Appeal, 5th District be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Retention of Associate Justice Kathleen A. Meehan, Court of Appeal, 5th District on the Court of Appeal for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes63.3%44,151
- NoNo36.7%25,578
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
Retention of Associate Justice Kelli M. Evans, California Supreme CourtYes/No questionAssociate Justice Kelli M. EvansBallot question (form set by state law)Shall Associate Justice Kelli M. Evans be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Kelli M. Evans on the California Supreme Court for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes72.5%6,401,321
- NoNo27.5%2,426,861
Statewide count23,860 of 23,860 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State- YesYes62.7%45,190
- NoNo37.3%26,894
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters- Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Mark W. Snauffer, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictBallot question (form set by state law)
Retention of Associate Justice Mark W. Snauffer, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictYes/No questionShall Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Mark W. Snauffer, Court of Appeal, 5th District be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Retention of Associate Justice Mark W. Snauffer, Court of Appeal, 5th District on the Court of Appeal for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes59.1%41,115
- NoNo40.9%28,425
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Sonny S. Sandhu, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictBallot question (form set by state law)
Retention of Associate Justice Sonny S. Sandhu, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictYes/No questionShall Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Sonny S. Sandhu, Court of Appeal, 5th District be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Retention of Associate Justice Sonny S. Sandhu, Court of Appeal, 5th District on the Court of Appeal for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes55.7%38,420
- NoNo44.3%30,586
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Thomas DeSantos, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictBallot question (form set by state law)
Retention of Associate Justice Thomas DeSantos, Court of Appeal, 5th DistrictYes/No questionShall Associate Justice Retention of Associate Justice Thomas DeSantos, Court of Appeal, 5th District be elected to the office for the term provided by law?
A yes vote meansA yes vote keeps Retention of Associate Justice Thomas DeSantos, Court of Appeal, 5th District on the Court of Appeal for a new term; a no vote removes the justice, and the Governor appoints a replacement.
Needed to passMajority
Source: California Elections Code § 13203 (retention ballot form) ↗- YesYes63.4%44,378
- NoNo36.6%25,636
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
U.S. House 3
- U.S. Representative District 202 candidates
- VFVince FongR59.4%30,658
- SVSandra Van ScotterD40.6%21,001
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - U.S. Representative District 212 candidates
- JCJim CostaD58.4%11,207
- KKKyle KirklandR41.6%7,991
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - U.S. Representative District 222 candidates
- RVRandy VillegasD65.6%9,799
- DGDavid G. ValadaoR34.4%5,135
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
State Legislature 5
- California State Assembly District 321 candidate1 candidate for 1 seat
David CouchR100.0%106,774
Districtwide count586 of 586 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
David CouchR100.0%26,998
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California State Assembly District 332 candidates
- HAHipolito Angel CerrosD53.1%24,958
- AMAlexandra (Ali) MacedoR46.9%22,004
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California State Senate District 122 candidates
Nathan MagsigR62.7%147,010- WBWilliam Brown Jr.L37.3%87,448
Districtwide count787 of 787 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Nathan MagsigR62.5%25,523- WBWilliam Brown Jr.L37.5%15,303
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California State Senate District 142 candidates
- ESEsmeralda SoriaD100.0%2
- DSDarin S. DuPontR0.0%0
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters - California State Senate District 162 candidates
Melissa HurtadoD62.4%98,702
Guillermo Asuncion GonzalezR37.6%59,459
Districtwide count680 of 680 precinctsUpdated November 9, 2026, 7:18 p.m. PTSource: California Secretary of State
Melissa HurtadoD59.3%25,616
Guillermo Asuncion GonzalezR40.7%17,580
Tulare County voters onlyUpdated November 9, 2026, 6:05 p.m. PTSource: Tulare County Registrar of Voters
County and Superior Court 1
- County Supervisor District 42 candidates
- EVEddie Valero56.1%8,178
- IBIan Bakke43.9%6,393
City offices 13
Dinuba
- Dinuba City Council Member Ward 21 candidate1 candidate for 1 seat
- MRMaribel Reynosa100.0%373
- WWrite-inWrite-in2.1%8
- Dinuba City Council Member Ward 31 candidate1 candidate for 1 seat
- BPBenjamin "Benny" Prado100.0%558
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.9%5
- Dinuba City Council Member Ward 41 candidate1 candidate for 1 seat
- LRLaura Rico100.0%667
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.6%4
Exeter
- Exeter City Council District C2 candidates
- FAFrankie Alves56.7%288
- BSBrittney Shull43.3%220
Farmersville
- Farmersville City Council Member5 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 5 win
- THTina Hernandez27.4%706
- DVDanny Valdovinos Jr.22.2%574
- CECarrie Elaine Ortiz18.1%468
- PBPaul Boyer17.4%448
- CJCrystal Johnson14.9%385
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%9
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.0%1
Lindsay
- Lindsay City Council Member4 candidates · vote for 2Top 2 of 4 win
- SVStephanie Velasquez33.3%632
- ASAdrian Solis26.8%509
- AGAnita Gustuson22.5%427
- DRDenyse Rodriguez17.4%331
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%4
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
Porterville
- Porterville City Council District 12 candidates
- PDPaul D. Vera54.4%835
- SBScott Bowler45.6%700
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.4%6
- Porterville City Council District 22 candidates
- TSTaha Saleh55.2%1,059
- GMGreg Meister44.8%859
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
Tulare
- Tulare City Council Member 21 candidate1 candidate for 1 seat
- JLJocelyn Limas100.0%1,580
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.6%9
- Tulare City Council Member 42 candidates
- SCSteve Celentano58.1%1,889
- FGFreddie Gonzalez41.9%1,362
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.0%1
Visalia
- Visalia City Council District 42 candidates
- EHEmmanuel Hernandez Soto63.4%2,618
- NKNick Kastle36.6%1,511
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.0%1
- Visalia City Council District 54 candidatesTop 1 of 4 wins
- EPEsther Perez43.1%1,912
- SNSteven Nelsen33.3%1,477
- JSJose Sosa Wences20.1%891
- JSJustin Stie3.5%153
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%8
Woodlake
- Woodlake City Council4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- FGFlorencio Guerra Jr.26.1%507
- FSFrances S. Ortiz24.6%479
- WVWilliam "Memo" Valero24.6%479
- JDJosh Diaz24.6%478
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%5
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
City measures 5
Dinuba
- Measure S City of DinubaYes/No questionMeasure SBallot question
Shall the measure maintaining 911 emergency response, crime investigation; retaining/ attracting well-trained firefighters/police/paramedics; repairing potholes/streets/alleys; addressing homelessness; keeping public areas/parks safe/clean/well-maintained; retaining/attracting local businesses; maintaining youth recreation programs and senior services, other general city services; establishing a ¾¢ sales tax, providing approximately $3,400,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring public spending disclosure, audits, all funds locally controlled, be adopted?
A yes vote meansA YES vote establishes a ¾-cent sales tax in Dinuba, providing about $3.4 million annually for general city services until ended by voters.
Needed to passMajority
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – City of Dinuba Transaction and Use Tax Measure Information ↗- YesYes62.9%2,205
- NoNo37.1%1,302
Farmersville
- Measure P City of FarmersvilleYes/No questionMeasure PBallot question
Shall the measure enacting a ten percent (10%) Transient Occupancy Tax to be paid by hotel guests in the City of Farmersville, providing funding for general purposes such as city services, programs, economic development, and capital improvements, which is expected to generate an estimated $250,000 annually per hotel and remain in effect until repealed by the voters, be adopted?
A yes vote meansA YES vote enacts a 10% transient occupancy (hotel) tax in Farmersville for general city purposes, estimated at $250,000 annually per hotel, until repealed by voters.
Needed to passMajority
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – City of Farmersville Transient Occupancy Tax Measure Information ↗- YesYes54.2%673
- NoNo45.8%568
Porterville
- Measure U City of PortervilleYes/No questionMeasure UBallot question
Shall the City Charter be amended to authorize the City Council to determine whether public works, maintenance, repair, improvement, and construction activities are performed by City forces, through contracts, or through agreements with other public agencies, and to authorize the City to establish purchasing and contracting procedures?
A yes vote meansA YES vote amends the Porterville City Charter to let the City Council decide whether public works are done by City forces, contracts or agreements with other agencies, and to set the City's purchasing and contracting procedures.
Needed to passMajority
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – City of Porterville Two Charter Amendments Measure Information ↗- YesYes60.0%5,378
- NoNo40.0%3,583
- Measure V City of PortervilleYes/No questionMeasure VBallot question
Shall the City Charter be amended to require that vacancies on the City Council be filled by appointment of the City Council when less than one year remains in the unexpired term, and by a special election when one year or more remains in the unexpired term?
A yes vote meansA YES vote amends the Porterville City Charter so City Council vacancies are filled by council appointment when less than one year remains in the term, and by special election when one year or more remains.
Needed to passMajority
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – City of Porterville Two Charter Amendments Measure Information ↗- YesYes62.3%5,558
- NoNo37.7%3,369
Tulare
- Measure A City of TulareYes/No questionMeasure ABallot question
Shall the measure funding City of Tulare general services, such as maintaining 911 emergency/fire/paramedic/police response; preventing crime and gang activity; recruiting/retaining police, firefighters, paramedics; keeping public areas/parks clean/safe; repairing roads/potholes; addressing homelessness; protecting local drinking water sources; retaining/attracting local businesses, by increasing the existing sales tax by 1¢, providing approximately $16,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring independent audits, public spending disclosure, all funds used locally, be adopted?
A yes vote meansA YES vote increases Tulare's existing sales tax by 1 cent, providing about $16 million annually for general city services until ended by voters.
Needed to passMajority
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – City of Tulare Transaction and Use Tax Measure Information ↗- NoNo50.2%6,285
- YesYes49.8%6,229
School and college boards 33
Alpaugh Unified School
- Alpaugh Unified School Governing Board Member4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- DGDebra Gibbs30.0%73
- BLBrenda Leal26.3%64
- JAJames Atwell23.5%57
- KMKristy Mitchell20.2%49
Burton Elementary School
- Burton Elementary School Governing Board Member Area 12 candidates
- DCDawn Crater52.8%305
- EHEddie Hernandez47.2%273
College of the Sequoias
- College of the Sequoias Ward 12 candidates
- RARobert Aguilar62.0%11,342
- LLLouis Lyons38.0%6,964
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%28
- College of the Sequoias Ward 22 candidates
- KBKenneth B. Nunes60.1%10,411
- CKC. Kristina Roper39.9%6,910
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%31
- College of the Sequoias Ward 52 candidates
- SNSusie Nava56.1%800
- JLJohn Lehn43.9%627
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%4
Cutler-Orosi Unified
- Cutler-Orosi Unified Governing Board Member Area 1 Short Term2 candidates
- KGKaren Gonzalez71.0%315
- MSMargie Salazar29.1%129
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%1
- Cutler-Orosi Unified Governing Board Member Area 25 candidates · vote for 2Top 2 of 5 win
- JQJavier Quevedo45.0%208
- JZJulio Zapien Sr.18.4%85
- GCGloria Cachu16.9%78
- RJRebecca Jimenez12.6%58
- RMRaul Meraz7.1%33
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.4%2
- Cutler-Orosi Unified Governing Board Member Area 33 candidatesTop 1 of 3 wins
- SWSandra Williams53.5%198
- CMChris Mendonca27.0%100
- ILIbis Lopez19.5%72
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%1
Delano Joint Union High
- Delano Joint Union High Governing Board Member6 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 6 win
- MAMiguel A. Duran23.1%490
- AOAlexis Ortiz20.2%429
- VGValerie "Jasso" Gorospe18.8%398
- CMChad Martinez16.4%347
- ABArthur B. Armendariz11.8%250
- LSLarry Smith9.7%206
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%2
Earlimart Elementary
- Earlimart Elementary Governing Board Member6 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 6 win
- OBOnesimo Basurto21.7%382
- MEMaria Elena Ayon Valenzuela18.8%332
- YDYolanda Duran17.4%307
- JHJesus Hernandez Estrada16.2%286
- GBGloria Borunda13.7%242
- MFMike Fernandez12.1%213
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
Hot Springs Elementary
- Hot Springs Elementary Governing Board Member4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- RDRichard D. Howard29.8%71
- TMTom Masters29.0%69
- DMDaniel M. Bates27.7%66
- KHKattie Henson13.4%32
Kern Community College
- Kern Community College Area 52 candidates
- JFJuan Figueroa Jr.61.1%7,436
- JCJohn Corkins38.9%4,733
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%12
Kern County
- Kern County Board of Education Area 33 candidatesTop 1 of 3 wins
- MLMary Little63.1%41
- AHAnastasia Hopper30.8%20
- RVRegina Velasquez6.2%4
Kings Canyon Unified
- Kings Canyon Unified Governing Board Member Area 13 candidatesTop 1 of 3 wins
- LWLori Wolter55.6%165
- ETEfrain Tovar Jr.30.3%90
- HRHeather Rodriguez14.1%42
Liberty Elementary
- Liberty Elementary Governing Board Member4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- JWJill White35.6%509
- JBJohn Beaver28.4%405
- DTDiane Tanner22.8%325
- CGCandy Goy13.2%189
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
Lindsay Unified School
- Lindsay Unified School Governing Board Member Area 12 candidates
- BGBrenda Gonzalez-Ceja54.7%205
- AVA. Vahnn Blue45.3%170
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%1
Mon-Sul Joint Union Elementary School
- Mon-Sul Joint Union Elementary School Governing Board Member Area 22 candidates
- DQDelbert Quintana73.1%19
- MPMichael Prado Jr.26.9%7
- Mon-Sul Joint Union Elementary School Governing Board Member Area 52 candidates
- CLChaun Lopez52.4%22
- JSJustin Simmons47.6%20
Pixley Union Elementary School
- Pixley Union Elementary School Governing Board Member 12 candidates
- JRJuan Ruiz54.0%27
- DWDavid Williams46.0%23
Porterville Unified
- Porterville Unified Governing Board Member Area 32 candidates
- MCMarina Chavez51.7%1,136
- PLPete Lara Jr.48.3%1,061
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%4
- Porterville Unified Governing Board Member Area 42 candidates
- LMLillian M. Durbin57.8%1,331
- GAGreg A. Meister42.2%970
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.5%12
- Porterville Unified Governing Board Member Area 52 candidates
- FAFelipe A. Martinez69.9%1,163
- JTJose Tapia30.1%501
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%3
- Porterville Unified Governing Board Member Area 72 candidates
- JCJim Carson64.3%1,350
- RRRudy Ruiz35.7%751
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%4
Rockford Elementary
- Rockford Elementary Governing Board Member3 candidates · vote for 2Top 2 of 3 win
- DEDavid E. Gisler41.9%95
- JWJacalyn Witzel36.6%83
- ESEsperanza Santizo21.6%49
Saucelito Elementary School
- Saucelito Elementary School Governing Board Member3 candidates · vote for 2Top 2 of 3 win
- JAJane A. Kisling42.9%15
- SLSherry L. Perry28.6%10
- CLChris Loflin28.6%10
Strathmore Union Elementary School
- Strathmore Union Elementary School Governing Board Member Area 22 candidates
- MCMaria C. Ceballos76.2%99
- MTMarivel Topete23.9%31
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.8%1
- Strathmore Union Elementary School Governing Board Member Area 52 candidates
- JSJim Shropshire54.4%111
- FBFidel Banuelos45.6%93
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.5%1
Terra Bella Union Elementary
- Terra Bella Union Elementary Governing Board Member9 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 9 win
- SSSherry Shannon16.9%239
- AHAdriana Hernandez14.4%204
- AMAnthony M. Giannetto12.8%182
- DRDiego Ramos11.7%166
- FRFernando Rios11.7%166
- CPCourtney Pace9.8%139
- DMDejah McDowell9.7%137
- MJMercedes Jimenez7.0%100
- ARAngel Ruiz6.0%85
Tulare County
- Tulare County Board of Education Area 12 candidates
- JAJuan Arzola67.6%6,268
- SRSandra R. Burnitzki32.4%2,999
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%16
Visalia Unified School
- Visalia Unified School Governing Board Member Area 12 candidates
- WSWalta S. Gamoian59.3%2,994
- SBStacy Boyce40.7%2,052
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%10
- Visalia Unified School Governing Board Member Area 42 candidates
- TLTodd L. Oto72.2%3,701
- EBEfrain Becerra27.8%1,425
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%8
Waukena Joint Union Elementary
- Waukena Joint Union Elementary Governing Board Member4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- MDMitchell Dawes38.1%94
- JSJacqueline Sanchez-Ramirez21.1%52
- CMCirila Mora21.1%52
- LSLeandro Sanchez19.8%49
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.4%1
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.4%1
Woodville Union Elementary
- Woodville Union Elementary Governing Board Member Short Term2 candidates
- PLPedro Luis Tapia59.7%117
- GMGus Morataya40.3%79
Special districts 14
Cutler Public Utility
- Cutler Public Utility Director Seat 32 candidates
- MAMiriam A. Sanchez58.4%170
- JFJose F. Guerrero41.6%121
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.7%2
Earlimart Public Utility
- Earlimart Public Utility Director Seat 12 candidates
- OOOzzi Orozco67.3%380
- DADavid Amaya32.7%185
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%1
Ivanhoe Irrigation
- Ivanhoe Irrigation Director4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- CJCasey J. Lawson27.6%89
- VDVito Deleonardis27.0%87
- SPSteven Paregien23.3%75
- GCGary Caviglia22.1%71
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%1
Kaweah Delta Health Care
- Kaweah Delta Health Care Director Zone 22 candidates
- JSJonna Schengel61.2%4,087
- TWThomas W. Friedberg38.8%2,587
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.2%11
- Kaweah Delta Health Care Director Zone 42 candidates
- DFDavid Francis53.9%3,317
- SMSara McHugh46.1%2,837
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.3%18
N Kern-S Tulare Health Care
- N Kern-S Tulare Health Care Director5 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 5 win
- RHRobert Herrera26.1%558
- JSJose "Garcia" Sandoval23.5%502
- SSSilvia Soto19.7%422
- JAJoe Aguirre18.4%393
- BEBrian E. Franks12.4%265
Pixley Irrigation District
- Pixley Irrigation District Director Div 22 candidates
- BDBill Degroot52.8%48
- SASeth A. Merritt47.2%43
Ponderosa CSD
- Ponderosa CSD Director5 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 5 win
- FOFrank Ohnesorgen23.4%15
- BBBeth Benton21.9%14
- MDMatt Doty18.8%12
- JNJohn Nickolas Bozanich18.8%12
- RKRobert K. Cope17.2%11
Poplar CSD
- Poplar CSD Director4 candidates · vote for 2Top 2 of 4 win
- AVAdriana Velez42.0%86
- ARArturo Rodriguez Leon24.9%51
- JGJohn G. Mallari22.4%46
- ALAlex Lucio10.7%22
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.5%1
Sierra View Local Health Care
- Sierra View Local Health Care Director Zone 2-Short Term2 candidates
- MAMartha A. Flores51.0%1,044
- DBDawn Bennett49.0%1,002
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%3
South Tulare County Memorial
- South Tulare County Memorial Director Seat 2 – Non-Veteran2 candidates
- RBRose B. Rodriguez60.7%1,007
- RDRuben Danilo Paniagua39.3%651
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
Three Rivers CSD
- Three Rivers CSD Director3 candidates · vote for 2Top 2 of 3 win
- VDVincent D. Andrus40.0%299
- RIRick Iger35.6%266
- MGMignon Gregg24.4%182
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.7%5
Tipton CSD
- Tipton CSD Director4 candidates · vote for 3Top 3 of 4 win
- KPKenny Perryman30.8%115
- GLGary Leon Perryman26.0%97
- MLMichael Lynn McPhetridge23.9%89
- SHSteven Hunt Sr.19.3%72
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.5%2
Tulare Local Health District
- Tulare Local Health District Director 12 candidates
- KNKathy Nesper72.1%1,528
- RARick A. Gorham27.9%592
- WWrite-inWrite-in0.1%1
County, school and district measures 4
- Measure T Exeter Unified School DistrictYes/No questionNeeds 55% to passMeasure TBallot question
To improve the quality of education; modernize/renovate outdated classrooms, restrooms, and school facilities; make health, safety and security improvements; and repair or replace leaky roofs; shall Exeter Unified School District’s measure be adopted authorizing $23,000,000 of bonds at legal rates, with no tax rate increase, generating on average $1,425,000 annually while bonds are outstanding at rates of approximately $38.70 per $100,000 assessed value, with annual audits, citizens’ oversight, NO money for salaries and all money staying local?
A yes vote meansA YES vote authorizes Exeter Unified School District to issue $23 million in bonds, levied at about $38.70 per $100,000 of assessed value (about $1.4 million annually), to modernize and repair school facilities.
Needed to pass55%
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – Exeter Unified School District Bond Information ↗- YesYes53.8%1,992
- NoNo46.2%1,712
- Measure W Pixley Union Elementary School DistrictYes/No questionNeeds 55% to passMeasure WBallot question
To upgrade athletic fields and facilities for student and community use; improve local schools; enhance and modernize classrooms, restrooms and school facilities; and make health, safety and security improvements; shall Pixley Union Elementary School District’s measure be adopted to issue $6,900,000 of bonds at legal rates, generating on average $444,500 annually while bonds are outstanding at rates of approximately $30 per $100,000 assessed value, with annual audits, citizens’ oversight, NO money for salaries and all money staying local?
A yes vote meansA YES vote authorizes Pixley Union Elementary School District to issue $6.9 million in bonds, levied at about $30 per $100,000 of assessed value (about $444,500 annually), to upgrade athletic fields and school facilities.
Needed to pass55%
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – Pixley Union Elementary School District Special Bond Information ↗- YesYes66.8%310
- NoNo33.2%154
- Measure Y Three Rivers Union Elementary School DistrictYes/No questionNeeds two-thirds to passMeasure YBallot question
To offset inflation and limited state funding, shall the Three Rivers Union Elementary School District's measure to levy a $120 parcel tax for eight years (raising approximately $276,000 annually) to fund school operations and maintenance costs including utilities; facility/grounds upkeep/safety improvements, and a community garden, with no money used for teacher or administrative salaries and setting aside at least 25% for improvements to and maintenance of Three Rivers School's upper athletic fields for community use during non-school hours, be adopted?
A yes vote meansA YES vote levies a $120-per-parcel tax for eight years (about $276,000 annually) for Three Rivers Union Elementary School District operations and maintenance, with at least 25% set aside for the school's upper athletic fields.
Needed to passTwo-thirds
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – Three Rivers Union Elementary School District Parcel Tax Measure Information ↗- YesYes52.3%436
- NoNo47.7%398
- Measure Z Visalia Unified School DistrictYes/No questionNeeds 55% to passMeasure ZBallot question
To provide safe, modern schools by removing asbestos/lead pipes; continuing to provide safe drinking water; fixing deteriorating roofs, plumbing, HVAC, electrical systems; and repairing/upgrading aging classrooms, labs, career technology and facilities to support student achievement and college/career readiness; Shall Visalia Unified School District’s measure authorizing $158,000,000 in bonds at legal rates be adopted, levying 4 cents per $100 assessed value ($12,000,000 annually) while bonds are outstanding, with independent audits/oversight and all money locally controlled?
A yes vote meansA YES vote authorizes Visalia Unified School District to issue $158 million in bonds, levying 4 cents per $100 of assessed value (about $12 million annually), to repair and upgrade school facilities.
Needed to pass55%
Source: Tulare County Registrar of Voters, Nov. 3, 2026 General Election – Visalia Unified School District Special Bond Information ↗- YesYes53.4%18,706
- NoNo46.6%16,295
About this information
County results come from the Tulare County Registrar of Voters. Statewide and districtwide totals come from the California Secretary of State. See the source links on each result; counts are semi-official and will change until certification, and no winners are called here.