Arizona ballot measure · November 3, 2026

Arizona Proposition 320, explained

Minimum instructional spending for large school districts. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.

The official wording

REQUIRES CERTAIN SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO SPEND AT LEAST SIXTY PERCENT OF THEIR OPERATIONAL SPENDING ON DIRECT INSTRUCTIONAL EXPENSES AS DEFINED BY THE AUDITOR GENERAL; REDUCES CERTAIN STATE FUNDING FOR NON-COMPLIANT DISTRICTS. 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. A "no" vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current laws governing school district budgets.

This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.

What it actually means

Requires larger Arizona school districts, those with at least 7,500 students or in counties of 500,000 or more people, to spend at least 60% of operational spending on direct instruction as defined by the Auditor General. Districts below that must move up by at least half a percentage point a year or lose part of their Classroom Site Fund money.

If you vote YES

Covered districts would have to spend at least 60% of operational spending on direct instructional expenses, with both terms defined by the Auditor General.
Starting in 2027-28, districts below 60% would have to raise their instructional share by at least 0.5 percentage points each year until compliant.
Non-compliant districts would lose 25% of their Classroom Site Fund allocation for each year out of compliance, up to 100% after four or more years, unless the Superintendent grants a waiver; withheld money would go to compliant districts.

If you vote NO

School districts would continue to set budgets under current law, with no minimum share required for instruction.
The Auditor General would continue to report districts' instructional spending percentage, which statewide peaked at 58.6% in fiscal 2004.

The numbers that matter

Required instructional share: At least 60% of operational spending
Highest statewide instructional share since 2001: 58.6% (fiscal 2004)
Penalty for non-compliance: 25% of Classroom Site Fund per year, up to 100%

Why supporters say YES

The share of school funds reaching classroom instruction has fallen to about 52%; the Auditor General found teachers would earn $7,500 more a year if funds had not been diverted, and the measure puts teachers and students first in budgeting.
— Official argument for, by Victor Riches, President and CEO, The Goldwater Institute
Directing at least 60% of operational spending to instruction would give students more resources and teachers better pay and supplies, and ensure tax dollars are invested efficiently.
— Official argument for, by Kimberly Miller, President, Arizona Women of Action

Why opponents say NO

The measure adds no new money for classrooms; it imposes a rigid formula and threatens funding for districts that must also pay for transportation, maintenance, special education, counselors, nurses and safety.
— Official argument against, by Rich Nickel, President and CEO, Education Forward Arizona
Services such as school nurses, counselors and psychologists may fall outside a narrow definition of instruction, so districts could cut them to comply.
— Official argument against, by Will Graham, school nurse, Phoenix

What’s genuinely uncertain

The effect depends on how the Auditor General defines "direct instructional expenses" and "operational spending", which is not yet known.
How many districts would be out of compliance, and how much Classroom Site Fund money could be withheld, has not been officially estimated.
The 52% and $7,500 figures come from supporters' arguments citing the Auditor General.

The bottom line

More school money directed to classroom instruction, against penalties that could force cuts to support services districts say students need.

One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.

Sources:azsos.gov apps.azsos.gov apps.azsos.gov azleg.gov ballotpedia.org

Checking it against the official text

The Arizona Secretary of State publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.

Confirm this with the official source

Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at Arizona Secretary of State.

Other measures on the Arizona ballot

Candidates on the same ballot

Everything on the Arizona ballot →