Nov 2026: Berkeley Measures

Here are my recommendations on Berkeley's ballot measures:

Berkeley Measures:

Measure U: YES for Fire, Emergency Response, Parks, + other Public Facilities

Measure V: YES to Support City's Budget

Measure W: YES  to Amend/Reform Public Campaign Financing

Measure X: YES to Amend Rent Stabilization + Just Cause Ordinance

Measure Y: YES to Parcel Tax for the Arts  

Measure Z: NOT YET CONVINCED for Public Bank

Measure AA: YES to Increase Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Tax

See other posts for recommendations on (1) state + regional propositions and (2) federal/state elected officials + judges, and (3) Berkeley elected officials. I'll update this page with links once I've written those other posts.

For details on Berkeley Measures, read on ..

Berkeley Measures

Measure U: YES for Fire, Emergency Response, Parks, + other Public Facilities

Measure U would allow the city to sell up to $300 million in bonds to improve the city's infrastructure: fire stations, emergency response facilities, parks and recreation facilities, and some others. There's no question we need it -- the latest city plan (Vision 2050) cited $1,500 million in infrastructure needs. The bond has a clear and detailed list of about three dozen projects it would fund. 

It would be paid for by property taxes, averaging $22 per $100,000 in assessed value (generally much lower than market value). It needs 2/3 support to pass. 

Measure U (and V) is endorsed by the League of Women Voters, Sierra Club, Berkeley Democratic Club, Berkeley Tenants Union, WalkBike Berkeley, and lots of labor unions. Plus City Auditor Jenny Wong,  Mayor Ishii and all eight city councilmembers. 

Opponents include a few individuals that have coalesced under the name "Affordable Berkeley." They say the project list isn't specific enough, they disagree with some of the projects on it, and they don't want taxes to go up. 

Learn more at this Berkeleyside article. 

Measure V: YES to Support City's Budget

Measure V would raise about $9-10 million/year for Berkeley's budget, paid for by an increase in sales tax of 1/2% ($0.01 for every $2.00 in taxable sales -- groceries + Rx are exempt). That would bring the sales tax to the same level as most other cities in Alameda County. The city is proposing this as a general tax, meaning it could be used for any purpose in the city's budget. The city needs this because it has a deficit in its operating costs, caused in part by federal and state funding cuts. This needs a majority to pass. 

Supporters include most of the same groups and people who support Measure U (Mayor + every councilmember, a slightly different set of groups, etc.). Opponents are also the same. 

Measure W: YES  to Amend/Reform Public Campaign Financing

Measure W would amend the city charter to make what appear to be reasonable and wise changes to the rules for public campaign financing in the city. It's supported by the Mayor and every Councilmember, and no argument was submitted against it. By the way, this is the sort of thing that every city would be allowed to do if statewide Proposition 5 passes. 

Measure X: YES to Amend Rent Stabilization + Just Cause Ordinance

Measure X would amend the Rent Stabilization and Eviction for Just Cause Ordinance to make what appear to be reasonable and wise changes to the rules for how rent control operates. It makes it a little easier for tenants to organize, sets a ceiling on the allowable rent hike in a single year, allows the Board to waive fees for nonprofits, clarifies rules on which units are covered and not covered by the ordinance, and makes other administrative changes. 

It's supported by the League of Women Voters, several housing groups (EBHO, NPH, BTU), plus the Mayor and three councilmembers. It's opposed by realtors and the head of the Berkeley Property Owners Association.

Supporters say Measure X was negotiated among interested parties (Rent Board, affordable housing providers, small landlords, tenant advocates) and placed on the ballot by a unanimous vote of the city council. They also claim BPOA participated actively in those negotiations, suggested several changes that were incorporated into the final measure, and committed in writing to not oppose the measure -- and are now opposing the measure they helped write. If true, that's bad behavior by BPOA. 

Measure Y: YES to Parcel Tax for the Arts  

Measure Y would provide about $85 million for the arts over a 12-year period, funded by a parcel tax of $0.07 per square foot, with exemptions for affordable housing and units occupied by low-income seniors or very low-income families. It needs a majority vote to pass. 

It's endorsed by the Mayor and 7 councilmembers, the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club and Berkeley Democratic Club, lotsa business and labor groups, a zillion arts groups. It's opposed by a guy (David Denton) who says Berkeley Rep is discouraging paying audiences by pursuing niche political narratives. 

Measure Z: NOT YET CONVINCED to Fund Regional Public Bank

Measure Z would raise $58 million and hold them until the city has accumulated enough money (I think $40 million-ish) to establish an East Bay regional public bank to fund affordable and workforce housing, green energy and infrastructure, and local small businesses. It would be paid for by a modest parcel tax ($0.06/square foot for residential, $0.09/sf for non-residential). 

That sounds like a great idea, and I'd love to see it happen. But the implementation is enough of a question mark that I'm not yet convinced. 

This is an idea that's been percolating for awhile, and no city has yet made a commitment. Richmond pledged less than a million, but only if Alameda County put up some money (they haven't). Oakland voters rejected a tax for their contribution. San Francisco is considering a measure for the logistics. Maybe Berkeley should be the first. 

But Measure Z's drafters don't seem to have planned for what would happen if Berkeley passes this measure, collects the money, and then the public bank never gets off the ground. Nor have they dealt with the problem that this regional bank doesn't yet have regional support. 

Endorsers include just two councilmembers (Tregub & Bartlett), and some other groups (Democrats, some labor, NPH, the San Francisco Foundation). Three other councilmembers (Humbert, Kesarwani, Taplin) wrote an op-ed against it, and Mayor Ishii reportedly isn't taking a position. The League of Women Voters took a neutral position. That doesn't sound like proponents have made their case. I'm still open to being convinced, because I like the idea, but I'm not there yet.

Measure AA: YES to Increase Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Tax

Measure AA would increase the existing tax on sugar-sweetened beverages from $0.01/ounce (passed in 2014) to $0.02/ounce. Funds would be used for BUSD gardening and nutrition programs and for grants to community-based nutrition education, health services, and water access programs. 

Endorsers include the League of Women Voters, lots of health and education groups, Mayor Ishii and all but one of the councilmembers, and the more progressive and moderate Berkeley democratic clubs. The American Beverage Association doesn't like it and sued the city when we first passed it. The only opposition this time around is someone (Damian Park) who says he's an economics professor. 

Berkeley Elected Officials