In short: This guide covers what is on a Salinas ballot for Nov. 3, 2026. For each race it lists every candidate the same way: name, party, job title as printed on the ballot, and up to three lines in their own words from the official state voter guide. For each proposition it gives what a yes and a no vote mean, in the state’s own words. We do not rate candidates or measures. Your county sample ballot is the final word on which races are yours.
Jump to: Statewide races U.S. House and Assembly Salinas races Propositions Salinas measures Words to know
Statewide races
Names, parties and ballot job titles: Secretary of State certified list of candidates (Aug. 27, 2026). Office duties and quotes: the official state voter guide link under each race. Candidate statements are written and paid for by the candidates and are not fact-checked by the state.
Governor
Xavier Becerra · Democratic · Voting Rights Attorney
No statement in the state voter guide. Check the guide
Steve Hilton · Republican · Small Business Owner
No statement in the state voter guide. Check the guide
Lieutenant Governor
Fiona Ma · Democratic · State Treasurer/CPA (Certified Public Accountant)
In their words
- “As Lieutenant Governor, I will make higher education more affordable, expand paid internships, and strengthen career pathways.”
- “I have the financial knowledge and experience to keep California an economic powerhouse while building a more affordable future.”
- “Owning a small business and obtaining permits are far too difficult.”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
Gloria Romero · Republican · Educator/Businesswoman
In their words
- “I will restore education standards, develop a bold economic plan that helps businesses thrive”
- “rein in politicized commissions that have failed to protect our water, farmland, and way of life”
- “defend Title IX for our daughters in sports, and fight antisemitism on our campuses.”
Secretary of State
Shirley N. Weber (incumbent) · Democratic · California Secretary of State
In their words
- “I will never give up on protecting your voting rights.”
- “Every eligible Californian should register to vote and cast their ballot whether we agree politically or not.”
- “I will continue to fight to make sure that nothing stands between you and the ballot box.”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
Donald P. (Don) Wagner · Republican · Orange County Supervisor
In their words
- “As Secretary of State, I pledge to speed up vote counting, secure our elections, and remove the chief elections officer from partisan politics.”
- “Thirty-six states and most democratic nations require photo ID at the polls. California does not”
- “I will be an umpire for fair elections, not a partisan player.”
Controller
Malia M. Cohen (incumbent) · Democratic · State Controller/Mother
In their words
- “She is running for re-election to ensure taxpayer dollars are managed with transparency, accountability, and fairness.”
- “Malia has strengthened fiscal transparency by expanding public access to financial and payroll data”
- “She has also advanced the long overdue modernization of California's payroll system”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
Herb W Morgan · Republican · Chief Investment Officer
In their words
- “The State Controller does not set policy.”
- “I will deliver for the people by placing all expenditures in an easy-to-use online database with transaction-level detail and near real-time reporting”
- “so every Californian can see exactly how public funds are used.”
Treasurer
Eleni Kounalakis · Democratic · Lieutenant Governor of California
In their words
- “I'm running for state Treasurer to responsibly manage California's finances, strengthen our economy, and make smart investments that create opportunity.”
- “As Treasurer, I will build more affordable housing through public finance”
- “invest in the financial future of children and families, defend health care and immigrant communities, and protect pensions”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
Jennifer Hawks · Republican · Retired Business Executive
In their words
- “As Treasurer, I will ask the tough questions others won't, insist on measurable results, and work to expose waste, fraud, and mismanagement”
- “I will advocate for responsible investing, greater accountability, and honest stewardship of the public's money.”
- “The Treasurer cannot rewrite the state budget or create new laws, but the office can demand transparency”
Attorney General
Rob Bonta (incumbent) · Democratic · California Attorney General
No statement in the state voter guide. Check the guide
Michael E. Gates · Republican · Deputy United States Attorney
In their words
- “I will fully enforce it [Proposition 36] and will prosecute the traffickers poisoning our communities”
- “protect victims, help people off the streets and into treatment”
- “make sure your tax dollars are spent honestly and effectively.”
Insurance Commissioner
Ben Allen · Democratic · California State Senator
In their words
- “As Insurance Commissioner, I'll increase competition to bring down costs, protect consumers who are unfairly dropped”
- “make insurers accountable and the process transparent, and expedite rebuilding.”
- “I'm not taking any insurance company money because my loyalty is to you.”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
Jane Kim · Democratic · Attorney/Consumer Advocate
In their words
- “I'll make claims fast and fair, cap excessive profits, and crack down on illegal price-fixing.”
- “I'll ensure our premiums are invested into making our communities safer through a public Disaster Insurance for All program.”
- “I will never take a dime from insurance companies.”
Superintendent of Public Instruction (nonpartisan office)
Richard Barrera · Nonpartisan · State Superintendent Advisor
In their words
- “As State Superintendent, Barrera will roll up his sleeves and work with the same energy and zeal to bring those reforms to every school in California.”
- “Barrera fought to protect students ... keeping ICE out of schools, standing up for LGBTQ students, and ensuring kids are vaccinated”
- “He will protect California from Trump/MAGA attacks on public education.”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
Sonja Shaw · Nonpartisan · School District President
In their words
- “My plan is simple: restore high academic standards in reading, writing, and math”
- “protect Title IX, ensuring fairness and safety for girls; cut wasteful bureaucracy”
- “demand fiscal transparency to ensure money reaches classrooms where it belongs”
Board of Equalization, District 2
Sally J. Lieber (incumbent) · Democratic · Incumbent
In their words
- “I will continue to work for accurate and equitable property tax assessments, expanded taxpayer assistance”
- “and policies that support housing affordability, rapid disaster recovery, and economic stability for working families.”
- “I do not accept contributions from corporate PACs (political action committees)”
Statement in the state voter guide · Campaign site
John Pimentel · Democratic · Member, Board of Trustees, San Mateo County Community College District
In their words
- “I'll reform the Board of Equalization so it works fairly and without corruption.”
- “I'll fight to end sales tax on restaurant and delivered food”
- “I'll fight to end loopholes so billionaires and corporations pay their taxes.”
U.S. House and State Assembly
Candidate statements for these races appear in the Monterey County sample ballot booklet, not the state guide. We have not yet copied them here.
U.S. House, District 19
Jimmy Panetta · Democratic · United States Representative
Peter Coe Verbica · Republican · Business Owner
State Assembly, District 29
Robert Rivas (incumbent) · Democratic · California Assembly Speaker
Dennis P. Sanchez · Republican · Small Businessman/Father
Salinas mayor and city council
Council districts 1, 4 and 6 are not on the 2026 ballot. Statements for these races are in the county sample ballot booklet and have not yet been copied here.
Mayor of Salinas
- Dennis Donohue (incumbent)
- Daniel Muñoz
- Peter Szalai
- Hezekiah Gonzalez
Source: Transparent Salinas election guide (independent, not official); confirm on your sample ballot
Salinas City Council, District 2
- Tony Barrera (incumbent)
- Jose Guerra
Source: Transparent Salinas election guide (independent, not official); confirm on your sample ballot
Salinas City Council, District 3
- Margaret D'Arrigo (incumbent)
- Cary Swensen
- Brent Bagley
Source: Transparent Salinas election guide (independent, not official); confirm on your sample ballot
Salinas City Council, District 5
- Andrew Sandoval (incumbent)
- Irma C. Lopez
Source: Transparent Salinas election guide (independent, not official); confirm on your sample ballot
Statewide propositions
All text below is from the official Quick Reference Guide. Yes/no lines and fiscal effects are written by the state’s nonpartisan analyst; the arguments are written by supporters and opponents.
Proposition 1: Housing bonds ($11.25 billion)
A yes vote means: The state could borrow $11.25 billion to support veterans and affordable housing.
A no vote means: The state could not borrow $11.25 billion to support veterans and affordable housing.
Cost to the state: Increased state cost of $500 million to $600 million a year for about 25 years to repay the bond.
Supporters say
“Builds affordable homes for veterans, seniors, people with disabilities, low- and middle-income working families... no new taxes.”
Opponents say
No argument against was submitted.
Proposition 2: Bigger state Rainy Day Fund
A yes vote means: Rules for building state budget reserves and paying down extra state debts would change. Reserves would be higher, and extra debt payments would last longer.
A no vote means: Rules for building state budget reserves and paying down extra state debts would not change.
Cost to the state: State budget reserves would be higher.
Supporters say
“Doubles the state's Rainy Day Fund, stops politicians from overspending when there is a budget surplus, and ensures education funding continues during economic downturns.”
Opponents say
“Guarantees more spending, not savings... excluding reserve deposits from California's constitutional spending limit. It provides no new funding for education, healthcare, or public safety.”
Proposition 3: Make the high-income tax permanent for schools and health care
A yes vote means: An income tax increase on high-income earners in place since 2012 would become permanent instead of expiring in 2031.
A no vote means: That income tax increase would expire in 2031.
Cost to the state: Keeps $5 billion to $15 billion a year of state income tax revenue that would otherwise end in 2031.
Supporters say
“Maintaining the current tax rates the wealthiest 2% have paid for 15 years and requires strict accountability and audits to ensure school funding gets to classrooms.”
Opponents say
“Makes temporary income taxes permanent while Sacramento wastes billions on failed programs... Fix spending first before making taxes permanent.”
Proposition 4: Allow public funding of election campaigns
A yes vote means: State and local governments could create public campaign financing programs for candidates, with limits on which funds are used and who gets them.
A no vote means: State and most local governments would still be unable to create public campaign financing programs.
Cost to the state: A few hundred thousand dollars a year for the Fair Political Practices Commission to answer questions.
Supporters say
“California is the ONLY state that bans public funding of campaigns... Strict taxpayer safeguards.”
Opponents say
“Allows politicians to use YOUR taxpayer money to fund their negative campaigns... NO LIMIT on how much taxpayer money they can get.”
Proposition 5: Change how recall vacancies are filled
A yes vote means: Recall elections would no longer ask who should replace the official. Vacancies would be filled by special election or appointment.
A no vote means: Voters would still choose a replacement as part of a recall election.
Cost to the state: Unknown; millions of dollars more or less per recall, depending on the office.
Supporters say
“Closes the loophole that allows replacements to win with a small fraction of the vote, reducing the politics and costs of future recalls.”
Opponents say
“Degrades California's century-old recall process by limiting voters' right to select a replacement for recalled officials.”
Proposition 37: Home loan help for middle-income buyers of new homes
A yes vote means: The state would create a new homebuying help program and could sell up to $25 billion in bonds, repaid by homeowners' loan payments.
A no vote means: The state would not be required to create the new program.
Cost to the state: No direct state or local costs.
Supporters say
“Low-interest mortgages funded by private bond investors, NOT TAXPAYERS. Must be CA resident to qualify, meet income requirements, occupy home.”
Opponents say
No argument against was submitted.
Proposition 38: Bonds for immunology medical research ($8.4 billion)
A yes vote means: The state could borrow $8.4 billion for immunology and immunotherapy research at California institutes and universities.
A no vote means: The state could not borrow that money.
Cost to the state: Increased state cost of $500 million to $600 million a year for about 20 years, possibly offset if the research earns money.
Supporters say
“Supports life-saving immunology research to cure and prevent diseases like cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer's... Mandates 20% Rx discount.”
Opponents say
“Would commit taxpayers to decades of new bond debt... Research funding should be guided through the normal budget process.”
Proposition 39: Require government identification to vote
A yes vote means: Voters would have to give extra identifying information each time they vote (identification in person; last four digits of an ID number on mail ballots).
A no vote means: A voter's identity would still be checked by signature.
Cost to the state: Tens of millions to low hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
Supporters say
“Gives California a BIPARTISAN solution for VOTER ID. Supported by a solid majority of Democratic, Independent and Republican voters.”
Opponents say
“Adding costly, unnecessary barriers that could block eligible California voters, expose personal information to identity theft.”
Proposition 40: One-time 5% tax on billionaires
A yes vote means: The state would collect a one-time tax from billionaires equal to 5 percent of their wealth.
A no vote means: The state would not collect that tax.
Cost to the state: Tens of billions of dollars spread over several years; possibly less than $1 billion a year lost in later income tax.
Supporters say
“Trump slashed healthcare funding to pay for billionaire tax breaks... make billionaires pay their fair share.”
Opponents say
“A flawed, one-time tax scheme that hurts our economy, damages our state budget... does nothing to lower healthcare costs.”
Proposition 41: Audits for new special taxes; limits on taxes outside the spending limit
A yes vote means: The State Auditor would review programs funded by new special taxes, and the state might not be able to leave new special tax spending out of its spending limit.
A no vote means: The State Auditor's duties and the spending limit rules would not change.
Cost to the state: Unknown; depends on future decisions.
Supporters say
“Requires the independent State Auditor to conduct PUBLIC AUDITS of programs funded by new taxes.”
Opponents say
“A billionaire-funded trick designed to undo the California Billionaire Tax.”
Proposition 42: Ban new state taxes on personal property and retroactive taxes
A yes vote means: The state could not create new taxes on owning financial assets or other personal property.
A no vote means: The state would keep the option to create such taxes.
Cost to the state: Tax revenues may not grow as much in the future.
Supporters say
“Protects Californians from this double taxation, by prohibiting new and retroactive taxes on personal property, including retirement and savings.”
Opponents say
“Its only real purpose is to undo the California Billionaire Tax.”
Proposition 43: Two-thirds vote for voter-proposed local special taxes
A yes vote means: Certain local government taxes would need two-thirds approval by voters.
A no vote means: Those local taxes could still pass with a simple majority.
Cost to the state: Local tax revenues may not grow as much in the future.
Supporters say
“Restoring Proposition 13's two-thirds vote requirement to pass local special taxes.”
Opponents say
“Limits voters' ability to fund essential local services... lets just 33.4% of voters veto what nearly 67% want.”
Proposition 44: Community health clinics must spend 90% on services
A yes vote means: Certain private nonprofit clinics would have to spend at least 90 percent of revenue each year on health care services.
A no vote means: The new spending rule would not take effect.
Cost to the state: Low tens of millions of dollars a year in state costs, covered by fees.
Supporters say
“Requiring that 90% of clinic revenue be spent on clinics' charitable mission... reduces wasteful executive spending.”
Opponents say
“Will shut down hundreds of community health clinics and eliminate vital patient services for millions of Californians.”
Proposition 45: Faster environmental review for certain projects
A yes vote means: Certain projects (most housing, transportation, water and health projects) would get tighter time limits for environmental review and narrower court challenges.
A no vote means: Projects would keep today's review and court challenge rules.
Cost to the state: High tens of millions of dollars a year at first, possibly over $100 million, partly covered by fees; longer-term effects uncertain.
Supporters say
“Cutting red tape to build housing, water, schools, hospitals, clean energy, and wildfire prevention faster—while maintaining California's strong environmental protections.”
Opponents say
“Limits environmental and public review of projects built in your community... Prop. 45 won't lower your costs.”
Salinas measures
Measure G: Keep the 1-cent city sales tax
Ballot question: “Without raising taxes, shall the City of Salinas renew Measure G maintaining the existing 1¢ local sales tax providing approximately $30,000,000 annually until ended by the voters to continue funding street and sidewalk repairs and other long-term infrastructure projects, parks, youth and senior programs, police, fire, and emergency response, homeless reduction, and other general city services, with independent citizen oversight, annual audits, and all funds dedicated to and remaining in Salinas?”
A yes vote: keeps the existing 1-cent sales tax until voters end it.
A no vote: does not renew it. The independent Transparent Salinas guide reports the current tax is set to end in 2029.
Source: Monterey County Elections, list of local measures
Source: Transparent Salinas (end date)
Measure H: Repeal of four rental ordinances
Ballot question: “Shall Ordinance No. 2687, which repeals the Residential Rental Registration Ordinance, the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, the Tenant Protection and Just Cause Eviction Ordinance, and the Tenant Anti-Harassment Ordinance, be adopted?”
A yes vote: adopts the repeal, so the four rental ordinances would end.
A no vote: rejects the repeal, so the four rental ordinances stay in place.
The city council adopted the repeal on June 3, 2025. A referendum petition put it to voters, and the ordinances stay in effect until the vote.
Source: Monterey County Elections, list of local measures
Source: Transparent Salinas (timeline)
Words to know
- Ballot designation
- The short job title a candidate chooses, printed under their name on the ballot.
- Incumbent
- The person who holds the office now.
- Bond
- Money the state borrows and pays back with interest over many years.
- Constitutional amendment / statute
- An amendment changes the state constitution; a statute is an ordinary law.
- Initiative
- A measure put on the ballot by voter petition signatures.
- Referendum
- A vote on whether a law already passed by a government body should take effect.
- Special tax
- A tax whose money is set aside for a specific purpose.
- California Environmental Quality Act
- The state law that requires environmental review of many projects (Proposition 45).
- Title IX
- A federal law against sex discrimination in schools, including school sports.