Here we go again. Less than two years after Oakland voters approved a parcel tax increase to support police and fire services, residents are being asked to approve another one.

The last measure, in November 2024, promised a minimum of 700 sworn police. The mayor and City Council immediately reneged on that.

In fact, police staffing got worse, declining 12% in the year that followed. The 607 sworn personnel at the start of 2026 were the city’s lowest Jan. 1 total for any year in the 21st century, according to our review of city staffing reports.

After accounting for medical, administrative and military leaves, there are only about 530 sworn officers available today to patrol the streets and run the Police Department.

It’s yet another in a long string of broken ballot promises in a city where residents pay comparatively high property and sales taxes and city leaders fail to manage the money responsibly.

Now those leaders, and the public employee labor unions who help elect them, want more — a new parcel tax of $192 a year for single-family houses. Measure E on the June 2 ballot is promoted as funding for public safety. And Oakland needs far more cops. A city-commissioned study concluded that the number of sworn personnel should be 877.

But Measure E is structured so that the $34 million in new annual revenues could be used for any government purpose. It contains no provisions to ensure the money would bolster public safety, rather than replacing existing funding that could be diverted elsewhere.

Based on past behavior, it seems unlikely that any of the Measure E money would end up putting more cops on the street. Voters should reject this latest gambit.

Piling on taxes

Measure E also contains no requirements that the city’s leaders address Oakland’s troubled finances. “Just give us more money” is not a plan.

The city’s last five-year financial forecast, produced a year ago, shows an annual structural deficit of about $115 million-$130 million. A year later, the mayor and City Council have done nothing meaningful to address this unfunded spending.

Compared to a dozen California cities of similar size or similar services, Oakland collected the highest per-capita tax revenue in 2022-23, according to a study by the nonprofit San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association.

That should not be a surprise. For 12 years now, Oakland has piled on taxes in every election cycle.

All told now, in addition to the base property tax of 1% of assessed value, Oakland property owners pay about $1,100 annually for nine supplemental parcel taxes for city services such as police, firefighting, libraries, parks, homelessness, the zoo and early childhood education.

And they pay a separate assessment based on property value to retire debt from a public employee pension system and bonds for roads and public buildings maintenance. That assessment, $120 for every $100,000 this fiscal year, works out to $1,200 on a house assessed at $1 million. City officials did not provide an estimate for next year.

For rental properties, those taxes are eventually passed on to most tenants.

Broken promises

At the same time, city officials continue to break their promises to voters, and it’s not just with police staffing. Promised library services, homeless support, public campaign financing and programs to discourage consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages are also not being met. Officials estimate the city would need an additional $39 million annually just to comply with promises made to voters and labor.

To help balance the budget prepared for the current two-year 2025-27 budget cycle, city officials banked on a new parcel tax to raise about $40 million annually. But if the city had placed Measure E on the ballot, it would have required two-thirds approval.

To get around that, labor unions sponsored Measure E and collected signatures to qualify the initiative for the election. It’s another example of the long-standing symbiotic relationship between city officials and labor unions.

The solution to the city’s financial woes is not piling on more taxes. It’s realistic financial planning, something Mayor Barbara Lee, her predecessor and the City Council have failed miserably at.

Until there is a realistic plan to address the city’s long-range budget shortfalls, voters should reject more taxes. Vote no on Measure E.