Proposition · every Arizona voter

Proposition 141Ban taxes on miles driven, and tracking or limiting miles without consent

Constitutional amendment: Proposition 141, referred to voters by the Legislature as SCR 1004 (2025). Passes with a majority of the voters voting on it (Arizona Constitution, Article 21, Section 1).

INCOMPLETE. Still open on this page: (1) The official ballot wording below is copied word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language, but the YES and NO lines and the summary above it are ours, from the Legislative Council analysis and the pamphlet arguments read through a summary tool, which paraphrases. (2) The pass rule for a constitutional amendment is from Article 21, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution (azleg.gov), read through a summary tool. (3) The "Today" column is our reading of the official "no" statement ("keeps the current law"), not checked against the current statutes. (4) Cost to the state: no cost estimate found. (5) The reasons for and against are the named arguments printed in the pamphlet; statistics inside them are the writers' claims and we have not checked them. No claim check has been done. (6) Campaign committees and campaign money were not looked up. (7) We did not read the full text of the measure.

Official ballot language (PDF): Secretary of State ballot language (PDF)

In plain words

This adds a new section to Article IX (taxes) of the Arizona Constitution. It would bar the state and local governments from taxing or charging a fee based on the number of miles a person drives in a motor vehicle. It would also bar them from tracking or limiting those miles unless the person agrees. Two kinds of driving are left out: trucks that run in more than one state under an agreement about reporting fuel taxes or registration fees, and vehicles owned and run by the state or a local government. (azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature) )

Before and after

Question	Today (our reading of the official NO statement)	If YES wins
A tax or fee based on miles driven	No constitutional rule on it	Not allowed for the state, counties, cities and towns
Tracking or limiting the miles you drive	No constitutional rule on it	Not allowed unless you agree
What is left out	Not applicable	Trucks running in more than one state under a fuel-tax or registration agreement; vehicles owned and run by the state or a local government

From the ballot language, the Legislative Council analysis and the pamphlet: see (azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature) )

Example

Illustration only (our math, the rate is made up): a fee of 2 cents a mile on a driver who goes 12,000 miles a year would be $240 a year. This amendment would bar a fee like that. (azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature) )

Biggest change

The state and local governments could not tax or charge fees based on the miles you drive in a motor vehicle. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
They also could not monitor or limit your miles unless you agree. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)
Left out: trucks that run in more than one state under an interstate fuel-tax or registration agreement, and vehicles owned and run by the state or a local government. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)

Who it affects most: Every driver in the state, and the governments that pay for roads. Supporters say it protects privacy and household budgets. Opponents say it would block one way to pay for roads as gas tax money shrinks (see the reasons below).

Cost to the state: Unknown. The Legislative Council analysis we read has no cost estimate. An official argument against says the state's long-range transportation plan lists $231.4 billion of needs over 25 years against $69.1 billion of expected fuel-tax money (their figures, not checked).

Our plain-words summary. Every line points to its source.

What your vote means

YES

The state, counties, cities and towns could not tax you or charge a fee based on how many miles you drive, and could not track or limit your miles unless you agree.

Nothing changes: the constitution stays as it is now.

Our one-line summary of the official YES and NO statements in the Secretary of State's ballot language; the official statements, word for word, are under "Official ballot wording" below.

Why people want it, and why others object

Why this is on the ballot

The Legislature put this on the ballot. It changes the state constitution, so only another statewide vote can change it back. It passes with a majority of the voters voting on it.

The bill is Senate Concurrent Resolution 1004 (2025). The Secretary of State's ballot language calls it a "proposed amendment to the Constitution by the Legislature relating to taxation". source: azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Under Article 21, Section 1, a proposed amendment passes if a majority of the voters voting on it approve. The same section sets 60% for an amendment that approves a tax. source: azleg.gov (Arizona Legislature)

Why supporters want it

Scot Mussi, president of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club: mileage tracking is a privacy violation, and a constitutional amendment would be permanent. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Sydney Hay, AMIGOS: a mileage tax is intrusive, unfair and unworkable, raises GPS-tracking worries, and would burden rural drivers, commuters, farmers and workers who drive for their jobs. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Tony Bradley, Arizona Trucking Association: mileage taxes need tracking, auditing and enforcement that add cost, while fuel taxes are collected simply at the pump. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Jackson Moll, Home Builders Association of Central Arizona: tradespeople visit three or four job sites a day, so a per-mile tax would raise bids and home prices. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Jay Beeber, National Motorists Association: a mileage tax would be one more layer on top of existing charges and could allow mileage caps and rising rates. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
The pamphlet prints more than 20 arguments for; most repeat privacy and cost concerns. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Why opponents object

Michael Grandy, traffic engineer: fuel-tax money has shrunk; he says a mileage charge could assess vehicles more fairly for road wear, and that banning it before it is studied is premature. He cites the transportation plan's $231.4 billion of needs against $69.1 billion of expected revenue (his figures). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Civic Engagement Beyond Voting (Melinda Iyer and Catherine Sigmon): electric cars pay no gas tax while gas-car drivers pay 18 cents a gallon, and they support a miles-based option to even this out. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Ted Maxwell, Southern Arizona Leadership Council (also identified as chair of the State Transportation Board): the amendment would permanently bar even voluntary or pilot studies of new ways to pay for roads. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Tom Prezelski, Rural Arizona Action: rural drivers help pay for city roads under today's system, and he says the amendment would keep that unfair balance. source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

Who backs each side

For: the pamphlet's arguments for are signed by many people, most sponsored by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, plus AMIGOS, the National Motorists Association, the Arizona Trucking Association, the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona and the Maricopa County Libertarian Party. Campaign committees and campaign money for this proposition were not looked up (INCOMPLETE). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)
Against: Southern Arizona Leadership Council, Rural Arizona Action and Civic Engagement Beyond Voting, among the five arguments printed. Campaign committees and campaign money for this proposition were not looked up (INCOMPLETE). source: apps.azsos.gov (Arizona Secretary of State)

In each side's own words where we could find them, quoted or summarized with a link to the source. We don't endorse either side.

What you will see on your ballot

Official ballot wording, word for word (tap to open)

The official ballot title, word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language file .

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION BY THE LEGISLATURE RELATING TO TAXATION
OFFICIAL TITLE
AMENDING ARTICLE IX, CONSTITUTION OF ARIZONA, BY ADDING SECTION 26.
DESCRIPTIVE TITLE
PROHIBITS TAXES OR FEES BASED ON VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND LAWS MONITORING OR LIMITING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED WITHOUT CONSENT.

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.
A “no” vote shall have the effect of maintaining the current constitutional language related to taxation.

Copied word for word from the Secretary of State's ballot language PDF (2026-Ballot-Language-English-2026-0819.pdf), page 1. The Secretary of State's file has no separate question line; it prints the official title, the descriptive title, and a YES statement and a NO statement, shown here in that order.

Latest news

Recent reporting from a range of outlets, newest first. We link to it; we don't endorse it.

No articles collected yet for this measure.

Full text of the measure

The Secretary of State's ballot language file prints the descriptive title and the YES and NO statements. The full text of the resolution is on the Legislature's website (azleg.gov, SCR 1004, 2025 session); we have not read it. Read it in the Secretary of State ballot language (PDF) .

We link to analysis from several sources; we don't endorse it.