This election season, there are seven measures on the Berkeley ballot, all addressing a range of city issues. Berkeley residents will vote on different tax increases to revitalize Berkeley’s art scene and fund public health initiatives, as well as legislative amendments to improve democratic practices and increase tenant protections. On the ballot is also a sales tax increase, an especially important measure against recent budget cuts and Berkeley’s $30 million budget deficit.

Every election, The Daily Californian’s Editorial Board provides a guide on how to vote on city ballot measures after extensive discussion and research — endorsements based on our majority opinion. After much discussion, here’s what we decided on the seven Berkeley ballot measures.

Measure U: NO

Measure U will authorize $300 million in public obligation bonds to finance the development of city infrastructure, including climate resilience projects, parks and recreation, emergency response facilities, electrification and accessibility infrastructure. The city will repay the bonds through property taxes, meaning that residents will be taxed $22.14 per $100,000 of assessed value over the 40-year life of the bond.

Berkeley needs more funding for infrastructure development — that much is certain. But Measure U is not the solution. Taking interest rates into account, the bonds could cost residents twice as much as the $300 million maximum, and with nothing legally binding the city to the outlined infrastructure projects, there is a threat of the money going to waste.

Considering the $30 million deficit that the Berkeley has dug itself into due to prior inaccurate predictions of budget, the Editorial Board does not trust the city to responsibly finance these projects and would rather see Berkeley engage in more fiscally sustainable development.

Furthermore, a similar 2022 proposal, Measure L, was criticized for its lack of specificity in both project and action plan. Indeed, Measure U has outlined prospective projects, but it has the same lack of enforceability as Measure L: The measure promises improvements without guidance for how such promises will be carried out.

We ask, then, that the city of Berkeley try again next time, with an enforceable and actionable plan. Vote “no” on Measure U.

Measure V: YES

Measure V would effectively increase the city of Berkeley’s tax rate from 10.25% to 10.75%. This 0.5% increase matches our tax rate to that of Albany and Oakland, our neighboring cities. In the face of Berkeley’s $30 million general deficit, the estimated revenue of $9 million to $10 million yearly is much needed.

Should this measure fail, city officials warned that major funding loss within public services would lead to city wide layoffs and cuts to emergency and social services — cuts that Berkeley residents will feel immediately.

While Measure V does not guarantee an immediate fix to Berkeley’s financial shortcomings, it offers a necessary first step towards a balanced budget. The revenue will go to the city’s general fund, and while this doesn’t delegate the money to any particular department, a vote “yes” reduces the likelihood for departmental cuts.

Tax increases are never perfect. They hit lower-income residents harder than income-based taxes, falling short in terms of equity. But Berkeley cannot afford to sit around and wait for a perfect solution while our budget gap grows. Vote “yes” on Measure V.

Measure W: YES

Measure W will improve Berkeley’s democratic process through amendments to the Berkeley City Charter.

Measure W decreases the filing fee for candidates from $150 to $25, in alignment with the current California state filing fee. However, the lowered financial barrier will be offset by the measure’s removal of signatures-in-lieu-of-filing-fee allowance, which currently allows candidates to use signatures to alleviate campaign costs.

A bigger stride toward accessibility, campaign allowances will increase from $250,000 to $400,000 per four-year election cycle, leveling the playing field for prospective candidates who may be under-resourced. The measure also eliminates the requirement that candidates list certain personal information, mitigating discrimination, harassment and nativist prejudice.

Measure W is projected to have little to no impact on city finances and does not call for an increase or imposition of taxes. A pro-democracy move, Measure W will increase citizen access to public office and participation in the civic process. Vote “yes” on Measure W.

Measure X: YES

Measure X would increase tenant protections by amending the 2024 changes to the rent ordinance passed by Measure BB, patching up rare but significant loopholes.

Currently, landlords are allowed to raise the rent by 5% annually. If a landlord decides not to raise the rent, they are allowed to bank the 5%, allowing them to raise the rent 10% the next year. In extreme cases, landlords increased rent by up to 50% — a steep and drastic increase that allows little time for tenants to adapt.

Measure X would amend this, capping the annual rent increase to 10% when banked increases are used. If a property owner has more banked increases, they are free to use them in the following years so long as the increase is below the 10% ceiling, preventing sharp rent increases to slam tenants all at once.

Ratification would also decrease the minimum number of units in a building required for tenant associations to be recognized, decreasing the number from 10 to five. This is especially helpful for residents living in buildings that don’t have on-site managers, easing the process to address maintenance and other issues.

Other minor changes include added protections to tenant rights in the case of ownership changes, as well as a realignment of annual registration fee due dates with the fiscal calendar, which would provide renters with clarity that wasn’t there before.

Measure X also aligns with California’s goal to build more affordable units. If passed, the rent board would have the authority to waive or reduce registration fees for nonprofit organizations, decreasing the financial barriers to affordable housing initiatives.

These administrative changes will further the positive, community-oriented sentiments of Measure BB by preemptively closing gaps revealed in its first operative year. Vote “yes” on Measure X.

Measure Y: YES

Measure Y aims to revitalize Berkeley’s art scene through the imposition of an annual parcel tax of 7 cents per square foot on improvements on commercial and noncommercial properties. Excluded from the tax are low-income residents, senior residents and properties with affordable housing units. All revenue will go towards grants to fund artistic endeavors in Berkeley.

COVID-19 pandemic debilitated Berkeley’s art scene. Known for its many murals, music festivals, open-mic nights and local artists, Berkeley now struggles to keep its artistic legacy afloat. Theaters once full have now shuttered its gates. Streets alive with live music now ring empty. Measure Y would change this.

The initiative, prioritizing nonprofit organizations and individual artists, creates more funding opportunities that allow local organizations to plan beyond their next donation cycle. Additionally, theater productions send diners to local restaurants, music festivals create bustling sidewalks and vibrant murals draw visitors from all over.

A vote for Measure Y is a vote for Berkeley. Vote “yes” on Measure Y.

Measure Z: YES

With Measure Z, Berkeley will have the opportunity to serve the East Bay community through the establishment of a public bank.

The funds are raised through taxing residential improvements at a rate of 6 cents per square foot and nonresidential improvements at a rate of 9 cents per square foot. The tax will last six years, after which the city hopes to establish the bank with the estimated $40 million raised. Then, Berkeley will approach the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. for insurance and California’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation for a certificate to conduct business. If the city doesn’t receive the authorization from either the state or federal level, the money raised will be held in a special fund that supports affordable housing, green energy and infrastructure and small businesses.

Many critics of the measure object to Berkeley subsidizing the entire East Bay. While a valid concern, a rising tide lifts all boats. Berkeley’s problems are not geographically contained, and the establishment of a bank attuned to local economic issues throughout the East Bay will improve daily life for all residents.

The bank will undeniably take time to bear the fruit of this investment. But it is a worthwhile cause that will ultimately deliver long-term prosperity for Berkeley and the broader East Bay. Vote “yes” on Measure Z.

Measure AA: YES

Measure AA would replace Berkeley’s existing 1-cent-per-fluid-ounce general tax on sugary-beverage distributors, also referred to as the soda tax, with a 2-cent special tax. Exempted from the measure are small businesses, milk-based products and baby formula. The measure requires at least 42.5% of revenue go to grants for community-based organizations or city departments, while at least another 42.5% must fund Berkeley Unified School District programs in nutrition initiatives.

Berkeley’s original soda tax was the first in the nation and has since supported about 80,000 health and dental screenings and 30,000 community events. Simultaneously, studies found that the tax reduced sugary-drink consumption and increased water consumption in Berkeley.

Beginning in 2028, the rate will adjust with Bay Area regional inflation, capped at 5% annually. The city estimates the measure to generate about $2.2 million annually — roughly $1 million more than the existing tax.

The measure sustains and updates a longstanding and effective public health strategy, directly investing in local health needs while preserving a financial incentive to reduce excess sugar consumption. Vote “yes” on Measure AA.

Editorials, including endorsements, represent solely the majority opinion of the student editorial board of The Daily Californian and not those of the University of California or any non-student party.