Hayward Election Guide Pt 2: MORE Propositions

Last week we covered the first seven of a whopping 14 different statewide propositions. If you missed it, please take a look. We use plain language and explain things so that everyone has the best chance of making informed decisions.

The seven from this week are likely the ones getting the most attention on social media. Ranging from changing CEQA to a tax on billionaires, join the Hayward Herald as we dive into the propositions that you'll be voting on this year and how they affect us here in Hayward.

Prop 39: Prohibits Citizens from Voting Unless They Present Government-Issued Identification

Proposition 39 is looking to require voters to present identification to prove that they're legal citizens of the United States. In the state of California, there has been no evidence of widespread voter fraud according to the California Secretary of State.

Prop 39 would not only require identification for voting in person, it would invalidate mail-in ballots unless the voter registers their identification number with the state. It would also require each county to annually report the percentage of voters whose citizenship status they have verified. Doing all this would cost tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars to implement and completely upend how we conduct elections in California.

How This Affects Hayward

This would likely have a chilling effect on voter turnout in Hayward. With high immigrant Latine and Asian populations, many people who are eligible to vote may decide not to. Things like this typically depress votes from communities of color, favoring White voters, who are a minority group in Hayward (estimated to be around 16% of the population).

Financial Supporters

Richard Uihlein, the owner of Uline, has contributed $17,000,000 to the measure. A man named Steven Bray, a Southern California businessman, contributed over $3,000,000, as did Reform California.

It is opposed by the California Democratic Party and unions.

Prop 40: Imposes One-Time Tax on Certain Taxpayers

Proposition 40 imposes a one-time tax on the estimated 200 Californians whose net worth exceeded $1,000,000,000 at the start of this year with a one-time 5% tax. 90% of the revenue collected would go toward healthcare, with 10% going to food assistance or education-related programs. The measure also prohibits the new money from replacing existing funding.

According to the text of Prop 40, although the tax is applied only once, payers will have the option of paying it over a 5-year period with additional fees. The money will also go into a fund, from which the Legislature will only be able to remove $22.5 billion per year for healthcare and $2.5 billion per year for food assistance and education-related programs. SEIU, who put forward the measure, estimates it will raise $100,000,000 over the next five years.

The state legislature will have the option of renewing the tax, if they so choose, after the funds run out.

Note: If either Proposition 41 or Proposition 42 pass, this Proposition will be invalidated, even if it passes.

How This Affects Hayward

If this measure passes, it could have substantial benefits for our local safety net hospital, St. Rose. Since the passage of HR 1, the so-called Big Beautiful Bill, millions of Californians became ineligible for Medi-Cal—the local Medicare plan. As a safety net hospital, St. Rose relies heavily on reimbursements for care from Medi-Cal patients, and despite fewer people being insured, they have continued to provide care.

If Prop 40 passes, there's a good chance that St. Rose, and the Alameda Health System which operates it, will receive additional funding. This would benefit everyone in our community who relies on St. Rose for their care, regardless of their coverage status.

Financial Supporters

Prop 40 has been heavily supported by SEIU United Healthcare Workers West, contributing over $30,000,000 to the campaign supporting it.

Meanwhile, Building A Better California, predominantly funded by tech billionaires, has spent over $88,000,000 to oppose it.

Prop 41: Prohibits New State Taxes That Exclude Revenues from State Spending Limit. Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes

Proposition 41 prohibits any new state taxes that exclude their revenue from the state spending limit. This could potentially trigger some refunds to taxpayers at the expense of funding for essential programming currently funded by specific tax measures.

For any new special tax, it would require a pre-election audit of the programs which would receive funding as well as ongoing audits of the programs to track spending. These audits would be paid for from the tax revenue, reducing the amount that could be spent on programming.

Note: approving Propulsion 41 would also invalidate any other voter-approved measure, like Proposition 40.

How This Affects Hayward

Many supportive programs run by Alameda County and the City of Hayward use money that comes from special state taxes. Money from fuel taxes, tire recycling taxes, and tobacco taxes, just to name a few fund programs that we rely on every day. This would prohibit any new ones from being proposed, potentially cutting revenue we may need to make up for continued defunding efforts at the Federal level.

Approval would also invalidate Proposition 40, which would leave St. Rose Hospital in a difficult financial position.

Financial Supporters

Proposition 41 is supported by Building A Better California, which has contributed over $58,000,000 to move this forward.

Prop 42: Prohibits New State Personal Property Taxes and Certain Retroactive State Taxes

Proposition 42 prohibits any new state tax on personal property, including business interest, intellectual property, and financial assets. These assets are typically only taxed when they are sold to generate income. It prohibits any new tax that is applied retroactively—like, for example, Proposition 40 which taxes income from the beginning of 2026. It would also void other voter-approved measures, like Proposition 40, if it is approved.

The proponents argue that such taxes could apply to pensions and retirements, though that has not happened.

How This Affects Hayward

This would put a big limit on how the state can tax wealthy individuals and redistribute those funds to services that less-wealthy people may need. The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) says that it could make it "somewhat harder for the state to raise taxes" which could reduce future revenue. But how much is unclear.

Note: Approval would invalidate Proposition 40, which would leave St. Rose Hospital in a difficult financial position.

Financial Supporters

Proposition 42 is funded primarily by Building A Better California, which has contributed almost $98,000,000 to the campaign.

Editorial note: Building A Better California has spent around $244,000,000 against Proposition 40, which is almost the entire General Fund balance for the City of Hayward for one year.

Prop 43: Limits Voters' Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services

Proposition 43 will raise the threshold needed to pass special taxes—those dedicated to a specific purpose—that are put on the ballot via signature gathering. Right now, local government agencies like HUSD can put a tax on the ballot, but it needs a 2/3rds approval by voters in order to pass. But if a signature-gathering effort is used instead, it only needs a 50% approval. If Prop 43 is approved, the signature-gathering measures will also need a 2/3 threshold to pass. This could make it harder for local governments to pass certain taxes, potentially lowering revenue.

How This Affects Hayward

Hayward isn't a city with a history of signature-gathering for ballot measures. Most of them are enacted by either the city or HUSD or HARD, so they already need the 2/3rds approval for a special tax. But if a bunch of people got together and decided they wanted a special tax to fund some kind of program, this would make it harder for it to pass.

Hayward has, historically, used a different workaround by doing a general tax—which isn't earmarked for a special purpose and only requires a 50% approval—and then passing a resolution saying they promise to use it for certain projects.

Financial Supporters

Real estate and finance/insurance are mostly funding this measure, with almost $10,000,000 put forward by the California Business Roundtable Issues PAC. Unions like SEIU are the ones fundraising against it.

Prop 44: Requires Community Health Clinics Spend 90% of Revenue on Program Services

Proposition 44 requires community health clinics to spend 90% of their revenue on program services. It gives the discretion for what counts as "qualifying expenditures" to the Attorney General and imposes fines on clinics that don't meet the requirements. Right now, clinics spend on average around 80% of their revenue on care.

If approved, Prop 44 would cost the state tens of millions of dollars per year on enforcement. It's unclear what effect this will have on the budget as spending may increase on Medi-Cal, while other local clinics could close altogether.

How This Affects Hayward

St. Rose and other local community clinics in Hayward would be directly affected by this. According to Wikipedia, it is an independent non-profit hospital—it's difficult to verify that on the St. Rose website—which means it would be affected by Prop 44. It's unclear how much of their budget is already spent on care, but Supervisor Lena Tam said that other health care clinics like Tiburcio Vasquez Health Center—which also operates offices in Hayward—could be fined millions of dollars for non-compliance.

Financial Supporters

Proposition 44 is solely supported by SEIU United Health Care Workers West PAC to the tune of almost $17,000,000. Various healthcare agencies from across the state have also contributed over $32,000,000 in opposition.

Prop 45: Modifies Environmental Review for Certain Projects

Proposition 45 seeks to modify the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to make it easier for certain projects to be approved: Housing, water systems, clean energy (not nuclear), health facility clinic or medical office, fire, police, and sheriff stations, wildfire risk reduction, broadband internet access, educational facilities, and transportation (not High Speed Rail).

The process for approval for these projects will change in the following ways:

• All information that needs to be included is specified upfront (Agencies can currently request additional information)
• Requires agency to assess potential impacts based on standards at the time app is submitted (Currently they can consider new information as the process goes on)
• Applicant can develop one alternative (Currently the agency develops the alternative)
• Applicants only need to consult with Federally recognized native tribes (Currently requires a wider range of tribes)
• Limits how long public comment is accepted (Currently a minimum, not a maximum, number of days)

It also speeds up approval timelines to 365 days and requires courts to rule on lawsuits related to CEQA within 270 days—9 months. There is a possibility for negative environmental impacts and initially costs in the tens of millions of dollars in court battles.

Critics argue that some of the definitions are overly broad—what constitutes "wildfire risk reduction" for example is unclear—and could be used to push through development without sufficient community input.

How This Affects Hayward

This could speed up certain projects in Hayward that are held up by CEQA. Right now, that's likely not many as Hayward is pretty well developed in most areas. If you're redeveloping a plot that already had houses on it, for example, it tends to be exempt from CEQA anyway. But it might affect development on currently open land or bigger projects that may affect the shoreline, for example.

Financial Supporters

Building A Better California, as well as various real estate and construction interest groups, are supporting this measure to the tune of over $20,000,000. Meanwhile, environmental groups and the Building and Construction Trades Council of California are opposing it to the tune of over $15,000,000.

We're not even done yet! We still have local ballot measures to look at—the Regional Transit Measure (RTM) and Measure CC, the updated Business License Tax. We'll take a look at those soon!