Voters in Philadelphia approved both ballot questions put before them on Tuesday, November 3, by wide margins, endorsing a change to the city’s Home Rule Charter that gives small businesses a stronger position in city contracting and making the city’s arts and culture office a permanent part of city government. The results were described as overwhelming, and the figures support that description. Both measures won more than three quarters of the vote, with turnout in the city at about 43 percent for the midterm election. The outcome was not a close contest between competing visions for the city. It was a broad endorsement of two proposals that had been presented to voters as practical improvements: one to help small and local businesses compete for city work, and one to give the arts a stable institutional home.
Philadelphia’s ballot questions often receive less attention than races for governor, Congress, or the state legislature, but they can have a lasting effect on how the city operates. A charter amendment changes the basic rules under which the city government works, and a decision to make an office permanent changes its standing within that government. The two questions on the 2026 ballot were therefore significant even though they were not the most prominent items on the ballot. Voters were asked to decide not only who should hold office, but also how the city should do business and how it should support culture. Their answers, delivered by large majorities, will shape city policy for years to come.
The election took place in a wider Pennsylvania context. Voters across the state elected the governor, 17 members of the United States House of Representatives, all 203 members of the state House, and half of the 50-member state Senate on November 3. Those races drew attention and turnout, and the ballot questions in Philadelphia were decided by the same electorate. The fact that both questions passed by such large margins, in an election in which voters were also making choices in many other contests, suggests that the proposals had broad support that crossed the usual lines of political disagreement. They were not presented as partisan measures, and the results do not suggest that voters treated them as such.
Philadelphia Question 1: Small-Business Contracting
Question 1, which concerned small-business contracting preferences and construction bond requirements, was approved with 78.8 percent of the vote. According to unofficial results from the Philadelphia City Commissioners, with 99 percent of divisions reporting, 344,912 voters supported the measure and 92,839 opposed it. That is a margin of more than 250,000 votes, and a level of support that leaves little doubt about the voters’ intention. The question amended the Home Rule Charter to allow bid preferences and set-asides for small businesses, to modify thresholds and standards for small and local business contracts, and to give the Procurement Department and the City Solicitor discretion over bond requirements for certain construction projects.
To understand what that means in practice, it helps to consider how city contracting works. When the city needs goods, services, or construction work, it invites bids from businesses. Larger firms often have advantages in that process: they may have more experience with government contracts, more capacity to meet bonding and insurance requirements, and more resources to prepare a bid. Small businesses, including many local firms, can find it difficult to compete on equal terms, even when they are capable of doing the work. Bid preferences and set-asides are tools intended to address that imbalance. A preference gives a small business an advantage in the evaluation of bids, while a set-aside reserves certain contracts for small businesses. The charter amendment allows the city to use those tools, and it changes the thresholds and standards that determine which businesses qualify.
The bond provision is also important. Construction projects often require a bond, which is a form of financial guarantee that the work will be completed. For a small business, the cost and difficulty of obtaining a bond can be a barrier to bidding at all. By giving the Procurement Department and the City Solicitor discretion over bond requirements for certain construction projects, the amendment allows the city to adjust those requirements where they would otherwise exclude capable small firms. That discretion is not unlimited, and it will need to be exercised carefully to protect the city’s interests. But it gives officials a tool to make contracting more accessible without removing the safeguards that ensure public money is spent responsibly.
Ballotpedia confirmed that Question 1 was on the November 3, 2026 ballot as a referral by the governing body, requiring a simple majority to pass. That detail matters because it explains how the question reached voters. It was not placed on the ballot by petition, but by the city’s governing body, which chose to ask voters to approve the change. The fact that the governing body referred the measure and that voters then approved it by a large margin suggests a shared view among city officials and voters that the contracting system should do more to support small and local businesses. One caution is necessary: Ballotpedia’s results table for Question 1 still showed zero votes at the time it was checked, so the figures in this article rely on PhillyVoice’s reporting of the City Commissioners’ unofficial results, not on Ballotpedia’s empty table.
Philadelphia Question 2: A Permanent Arts Office
Question 2, which asked voters to make Creative Philadelphia, the city’s arts and culture arm, a permanent office headed by a Chief Cultural Officer, was approved with 83.6 percent of the vote. According to the same unofficial results, 367,515 voters supported the measure and 71,993 opposed it. That margin was even larger than the margin for Question 1, and it showed that support for the arts as a permanent part of city government is broad and deep in Philadelphia. The city has a long cultural history, from its museums and theatres to its music, public art, and neighbourhood cultural organisations. The vote to make its arts office permanent reflects a view that culture is not a temporary programme or a discretionary extra, but a lasting part of what the city does.
Making an office permanent has practical consequences. A permanent office has a defined place in the city’s structure, a leader with a clear title and responsibility, and a basis for planning over more than a single budget year. A Chief Cultural Officer can develop long-term plans, build relationships with cultural organisations, and advocate for the arts within city government. That stability matters for artists and organisations that depend on city support, and for residents who benefit from cultural programmes. It also matters for the city’s identity. Philadelphia presents itself as a city of history and culture, and a permanent arts office gives that presentation an institutional foundation.
The vote also reflects a wider recognition that the arts contribute to the city’s economy and to its quality of life. Cultural organisations employ people, attract visitors, and contribute to neighbourhood vitality. Public art, festivals, and community programmes bring people together and give the city a sense of place. By voting to make Creative Philadelphia permanent, voters were endorsing not only a particular office, but also the idea that the city should invest in culture as a continuing responsibility. The size of the majority suggests that this view is shared across the city, and that it is not limited to those who work in the arts or who attend cultural events regularly.
Philadelphia Ballot Questions 2026: Turnout and the Meaning of Wide Margins
Voter turnout in Philadelphia was about 43 percent for the midterms. That figure is typical for a midterm election in a large city, where turnout is lower than in a presidential election but still represents a substantial share of registered voters. The fact that both ballot questions passed by such large margins within that electorate is significant. In a low-turnout election, a measure can pass with a narrow majority if only its supporters turn out. In this case, the majorities were so large that they cannot be explained by turnout alone. They point to a genuine consensus among those who voted, and they suggest that the proposals were understood and supported by voters who may have had different views on other contests on the same ballot.
It is also worth noting that ballot questions are often decided by voters who have not followed the details of the proposal as closely as they have followed a candidate race. That is not a criticism of voters, but a recognition that a ballot question is a different kind of decision. Voters are asked to approve or reject a specific change to the law, often described in formal language on the ballot itself. In Philadelphia, the descriptions of the two questions were clear enough for voters to understand the basic choice: should small businesses get more help in city contracting, and should the arts office become permanent? The answers were yes, by a large margin, in both cases. That clarity may have contributed to the size of the majorities.
The results also raise a question about implementation. Approving a charter amendment is only the first step. The city must now put the new contracting rules into practice, which will involve updating procurement procedures, setting the thresholds and standards for small and local businesses, and deciding how to use the discretion over bond requirements. That work will be done by the Procurement Department, the City Solicitor, and other officials, and it will need to be done transparently so that businesses and the public can see how the new rules are applied. Similarly, making Creative Philadelphia permanent will require the city to define the role of the Chief Cultural Officer, to provide the office with the resources it needs, and to set out its responsibilities. Voters have given the city a mandate, but the details of how that mandate is carried out will determine whether the changes achieve their intended effect.
What Comes Next for Philadelphia
For small businesses, the hope is that the new contracting rules will open doors that were previously closed. A small firm that can do the work but could not meet a bond requirement, or that lost out to a larger competitor despite offering good value, may now have a better chance. That could mean more city contracts for local firms, more jobs in the city, and more money circulating in neighbourhood economies. It could also mean a more diverse set of contractors, reflecting the diversity of the city’s business community. Those are the goals that supporters of the measure described, and they are the outcomes that will be watched in the years ahead. If the number of small businesses winning city contracts rises, and if those businesses are able to grow and employ more people, the amendment will be seen as a success.
For the arts, the hope is that a permanent office will provide stability and leadership. Cultural organisations in Philadelphia, like those in other cities, have faced funding pressures, changing audience patterns, and the challenge of reaching new communities. A Chief Cultural Officer who can plan for the long term, who can coordinate across city departments, and who can advocate for the arts in budget discussions may be able to help those organisations navigate those challenges. The office will also have a role in ensuring that cultural programmes reach all parts of the city, not only the centre. That is a long-term task, and its success will not be judged by a single event or a single budget, but by whether the city’s cultural life becomes more accessible and more sustainable over time.
The two ballot questions, taken together, tell a story about what Philadelphia voters value. They value a city government that supports small businesses and local enterprise, and they value a city that treats culture as a permanent responsibility rather than a temporary programme. Those values are not new, but the vote gave them a formal expression in the city’s charter and in its institutional structure. The results remain unofficial until they are certified, but the margins are large enough that the outcome is not in doubt. The work that follows, in procurement offices and in the new arts office, will determine how fully the voters’ intentions are realised. For now, Philadelphia has made a clear choice, and it has done so by a margin that few ballot measures achieve.
Sources
USN reviewed reporting from multiple outlets for this story. Read more from PhillyVoice, Ballotpedia and FOX 29.