Fixing Berkeley's “Structural” Budget Deficit Starts with Transparency

By Paul Mathew, Geoff Lomax, Isabelle Gaston, Josh Glatt, Steve Kromer 

During the recent budget deliberations, the Mayor and Council reiterated the need to address the city’s “structural deficit.” We believe the new City Council and Mayor are committed problem solvers, and we would like to support their efforts to address this challenge. Moreover, as our report emphasizes, fiscal stewardship in municipal governance is the foundation upon which sustainable growth, public trust, and long-term civic stability are built.

After engaging with public officials for over a decade, we can attest that Berkeley’s budget transparency is woefully inadequate, particularly when compared to similarly-sized California cities, such as Pasadena, that provide a much clearer understanding of their budget.

Berkeley residents and taxpayers should be able to quickly and easily find  basic information about the city budget, such as:

• Itemized reports of dollars spent on city services, including vendor names, dollar amounts, and funding sources. (The City of Pasadena provides this information in downloadable files.)

• Revenue sources in sufficient detail to understand the impact of state and federal actions that can affect the city’s finances.

• Services delivered per unit of spending. e.g. $/shelter bed; $/mile for street paving, etc.   

• Benchmarks for the above metrics against comparably sized California cities, and where appropriate, against non-governmental organizations.

Too often, requests for such information are met with evasive answers: ‘hard to say’; ‘it depends’; ‘it’s complex’; ‘it’s a social justice issue.’ We cannot make good decisions and properly evaluate trade-offs under veils of obfuscation or piety. Yes, some budget questions are genuinely complex. But even in such cases, the city should be able to provide top-line numbers understandable to any Berkeley High School graduate, with appropriate caveats and footnotes, if needed.   

We especially need a clear understanding of marginal costs and benefits. For example, consider libraries. What’s the cost of each additional hour or day of library open hours?  Yes, we all care about libraries and want to maximize their availability and use. But in a budget crisis, library patrons could do their part and take the effort to access services within a more limited time window. That would provide cost savings with only minor inconvenience.

In a similar vein, our report notes that spending by the Mayor and City Council offices has ballooned in recent years and is projected to increase by 140% over four years. What are the marginal benefits of additional staff? Could those funds be better used elsewhere, or even eliminated entirely to help reduce the deficit? 

In addition, we need to define success using measurable outcomes and not just good intentions. At a time when there is a national conversation about the reputed dysfunction of government in blue cities and states, let’s show that progressive cities really can deliver, by providing government services cost-effectively, on schedule and on budget. That would be the best way for us to advance progressive values.