In June, Oakland voters will get to decide whether property owners will pay a new parcel tax — or force the city to look somewhere else for tens of millions of dollars needed to maintain city services.

The City Council voted unanimously last week to approve the certification of a ballot measure for the June 2 primary election. The council’s vote was procedural; the measure’s supporters, including some residents and city unions, gathered the signatures needed to place the measure on the ballot.

If approved by voters in the June 2 primary election, the measure would impose a $192 annual parcel tax on single-family parcels and other real estate, with exemptions for certain low-income households, seniors, and others. The tax would raise about $34 million annually over the next nine years.

The city’s 2025-2027 budget, approved by the City Council last June, includes tens of millions of dollars in anticipated revenue from the tax. But because the measure could be rejected at the polls, city leaders are making contingency plans. Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee will introduce her proposed budget for the 2026-2027 fiscal year in May. It will include two scenarios: one where the tax is approved, and the other where it is not.

City unions are the driving force behind the ballot measure

A labor-sponsored political committee called “Oaklanders for a Safe, Clean & Healthy City” spent $440,000 last year to collect signatures to get the measure on the ballot. The bulk of that money was raised by SEIU Local 1021 and IFPTE Local 21. PG&E also chipped in $50,000.

Last week, organizers behind the campaign boasted that they collected signatures from nearly 30,000 Oakland residents for the initiative. As a so-called citizen initiative, the measure only requires a simple majority of votes for approval. 

Unions have a lot at stake in this measure passing. Last year, City Administrator Jestin Johnson announced that Oakland would cut scores of filled jobs to adjust Oakland’s budget after anticipated revenue from the sale of the Coliseum property failed to materialize. The budget introduced by the mayor last year cut hundreds of vacant positions, but through balancing actions, the city ultimately avoided many layoffs. Money was also found to maintain operations for the city’s 25 fire stations.  

“As firefighters, we see every day how seconds matter in an emergency,” Seth Olyer, president of the Oakland firefighters union, IAFF Local 55, said in a press statement. “Oakland firefighters support this measure because it keeps fire stations open and prevents cuts to fire protection services, so Oaklanders get help when they need it most.”

There is opposition emerging against the parcel tax measure. The Alameda County Taxpayers’ Association, an anti-tax group, sent a letter to the city attorney last Tuesday demanding amendments to the measure. The taxpayers’ association argued that the measure’s text fails to adequately describe the tax’s rates and that other language is misleading.

Some residents have raised concerns about the proposed tax measure paying for wage increases for the city’s unions. The Oakland Report, an online publication, has argued that a big share of the tax money would “go to union payouts.” 

Finance Department Director Bradley Johnson told reporters on March 4 that the passage or failure of the tax measure would have no impact on whether cost-of-living adjustments are triggered for the city’s unions. Money from the parcel tax wouldn’t be used to meet the revenue surplus threshold to trigger staff raises.

“They are independent items and should not be read together,” Johnson said.

Thanks to cost-cutting measures and PG&E closing on a major real estate purchase last year, Oakland managed to scrape together a $17 million surplus at the end of fiscal year 2024-2025, which ended last June. Oakland’s union members could receive a salary increase if revenue in the general purpose fund generates a surplus in the current fiscal year, 2025-2026. It’s unclear if that will happen; the city has not published reports tracking Oakland’s revenues and expenditures over the last nine months. Johnson said the finance department is constrained by limited staffing and is trying to ensure accuracy in its reports. 

“*” indicates required fields