Measure L–Scale Borrowing Is Back: Councilmember Taplin’s “Bonds Forever” Proposed Policy

Last August, we warned Berkeley residents about Councilmember Terry Taplin’s proposed Bonds Forever policy. Tomorrow at 5:00 PM, City Council will vote on whether to make this policy a top staff priority (Item #4). Bonds Forever would institutionalize a cycle of issuing $250–$300 million in general obligation bonds every six years—locking Berkeley into permanent, rolling debt.

For a typical 30-year municipal bond, taxpayers pay $1.60–$2.00 for every $1.00 borrowed once interest is included. At that rate, Taplin’s proposal could obligate Berkeley taxpayers  up to $1.2 billion in total repayment within just six years—a figure strikingly similar to the spending proposed in the failed Measure L, 2022.

This is not fiscal reform. It is deficit financing on autopilot that will overburden existing taxpayers and put middle-class housing opportunities further out of reach  Berkeleyans deserve better.

---

Call to Action: Contact Your Councilmember Today

council@berkeleyca.gov

Subject: Reject Item #4 – Taplin’s “Bonds Forever” Policy

Dear Councilmember,

I urge you to reject Item #4 (DMND0004232), Taplin’s “Bonds Forever” policy, from the list of prioritized staff referrals.

Institutionalizing massive, recurring debt is not a solution to Berkeley’s structural budget deficit. The City should first bring ongoing expenditures in line with recurring revenues before taking on new long-term obligations.

Normalizing deficit financing through permanent bond issuance is fiscally irresponsible and putting middle class housing further out of reach. Please vote no on referring this policy to staff.

Sincerely,

Tuesday, February 10, 2026

5:00 PM

Action Calendar – New Business

1.-2026 City Council Referral Prioritization Results Using Re-Weighted Range Voting (RRV)

Financial Implications: None

WOM 2026 Issue Focus: Berkeley's Fiscal Crisis and Reckoning

Our country is experiencing an indescribable period in its almost 250-year history.  But despite these profoundly difficult times, WOM Berkeley’s work continues.  We strongly believe our mission helps strengthen the bonds in our community by providing important and timely information on the City’s financial outlook that you can trust.

Another year has passed without meaningful action to address the city’s structural budget deficit. Instead, City Council continues to mischaracterize the situation as a “revenue problem” rather than an "expenditure problem."

After approving a record tax increase in 2025, Councilmembers and their allies are already lining up a new round of sales, parcel taxes and bond measures. This approach ignores a well-documented reality: Berkeley operates one of the largest and most expensive city governments in California.

Rather than confront this structural imbalance, City Council’s default response has been to impose ever-higher costs on residents—without reform, prioritization, or accountability. This path is unsustainable. The structural deficit for this fiscal year is approximately $30 million in direct costs and millions more in unfunded liabilities. 

Given this reality, in 2026 we will focus on three core areas:

1. Protect affordability for Berkeley residents by stabilizing property taxes. Parcel taxes in Berkeley have been rising at an alarming rate that threatens housing stability for all but the wealthiest homeowners. In 2024 alone, Council championed two new parcel taxes and substantial increases in two existing assessments, resulting in a tax increase of as much as 25-30% for some residents. These increases present a challenge for residents’ housing budgets that are already strained due to inflation and increases in costs for utilities, trash collection, etc. The City should live within its means, just as residents have to. Therefore, WOM Berkeley will advocate for:

1. Avoiding new taxes or fees for expansive programs and focus on essential services that are typically under the purview of local government. City council members have already endorsed new parcel taxes to extend public subsidies to private organizations. Others have suggested a sales tax increase and new borrowing.

2. Limit total cumulative annual increases to changes in the Consumer Price Index.

3. Document, with public input and comment, any annual percentage increases on existing taxes. 

4. Showing appreciation to Council members when they do something we support.

2. Increase the cost effectiveness and productivity of city programs and services. Berkeley spends more per resident on government services than other cities in the East Bay and is among the highest in the state.  Yet, Berkeley’s government performance, to the extend it can be evaluated, appears to be lagging given the excessive costs. This imbalance is especially evident in the long-term degradation of streets, vital infrastructure and failing homeless services. Furthermore, Berkeley has duplicative services e.g. the public health department duplicates the services provided by the county. WOM Berkeley will advocate for:

1. Performance metrics for city services and benchmarking against peer cities. 

2. Prioritizing services and identifying cuts to address the structural budget deficit. 

3. Reducing redundancy across city departments and also in contracts with non-profit organizations. 

4. Financial transparency and accountability of programs and services (see next item).

3. Increase transparency and public engagement on taxes and spending. For example, tax increases and other fees should never be passed on the Consent Calendar. Such increases should be considered as action items with the financial rationale for any increase provided. WOM Berkeley will advocate for:

1. New taxes or fees to be action items with the supporting rational and public input.

2. Publicly accessible dashboard and quarterly or semi-annual reporting of performance metrics for city services.

Call to Action & Our Promise to You:

• We will provide more frequent email calls to action on agenda items that impact the issues above.

• WOM will reach out to other like-minded community groups in Berkeley to develop relationships and collaborate on these issues.  

• We will invite more guest contributions to support our outreach and education efforts especially on important topics outside our core areas.

Finally, we would like to acknowledge the recent contributions of Councilmember Brent Blackaby (District 6) and City Auditor, Jenny Wong.  In December 2025, Councilmember Blackaby introduced an item entitled “Setting Measurable Goals and Metrics for Key City Priorities” and last week, Jenny Wong released an audit report on “Measuring Performance in the City of Berkeley.”  Such efforts are a step in the right direction for increasing transparency and enabling informed public engagement.