Berkeley’s November 2026 ballot measures
I live on Telegraph and work as a medical health worker. Through East Bay Food Not Bombs and organizing around People’s Park, I have worked alongside neighbors who depend on affordable housing, public space, and city services that function every day.
On November 3, Berkeley voters will decide seven City measures. I support U, V, W, X, Y, Z, and AA. I reached those positions by looking at what each measure would actually do, who would carry its costs, and what would still depend on City Hall after the vote.
My standard is simple: public money must produce public results. A tax or bond can create a tool, but it does not repair a sidewalk, keep a tenant housed, support an artist, or make healthy food easier to reach by itself. Those results require priorities, public budgets, maintenance, and follow-through.
My Recommendations
-
I support Measure U because residents should be able to see and use the results of public investment. In Southside, that means accessible sidewalks, safer crossings around Telegraph, public restrooms, shade, better drainage, reliable facilities, and public spaces that can serve people every day and during an emergency.
Measure U would authorize up to $300 million in general obligation bonds for public infrastructure and facilities. Property taxes would repay the bonds with interest. The City estimates an average annual cost of $22.14 per $100,000 of assessed value over a projected 40 years, with a peak of approximately $35 beginning in 2040–41. These are estimates, and assessed value is different from market value. U is the only one of these seven City measures that requires two-thirds approval. [Read the City Attorney’s analysis, pages 1–2](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Nov%202026%20Impartial%20Analyses.pdf)
The bond can fund parks, accessibility, emergency facilities, seismic work, climate resilience, and other City infrastructure. It does not guarantee any particular project or a fair share for District 7. It also does not automatically provide the ongoing money needed to clean, staff, and maintain everything built with bond funds. [Read Measure U]
When elected, I will press to put Southside needs on the project list before every dollar is committed. Each project should have a public budget, schedule, maintenance plan, and explanation when deadlines move. The required annual reports and recurring audits should help residents determine what was promised, what was spent, and what was completed.
-
Yes on V: Fund services and show where the money goes
I support Measure V because Berkeley needs dependable revenue for the services residents use. A city cannot maintain sidewalks, clean public spaces, respond to emergencies, or keep facilities open through statements of support alone. Services need staff and stable funding.
Measure V would increase Berkeley’s sales tax by 0.5 percentage points, equal to an additional 50 cents on a $100 taxable purchase. The City estimates that it would raise $9 million to $10 million annually beginning April 1, 2027. The tax has no scheduled end date. [Read the City Attorney’s analysis, page 3](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Nov%202026%20Impartial%20Analyses.pdf)
I have a real concern about the way this measure raises money. Sales taxes take a larger share from people with less income, and this revenue would enter the General Fund without being reserved for a named service or neighborhood. That makes the annual budget choices as important as the measure itself. [Read Measure V](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Sales%20Tax%20-%20Full%20Text.pdf)
When elected, I will ask for spending reports that residents can understand and connect to actual services. I will also pursue fairer revenue options for future needs so Berkeley does not treat sales taxes as its default response. Supporting V means keeping services funded while remaining honest about who bears the cost.
-
Yes on W: Lower barriers to local democracy
I support Measure W because running for local office and participating in local government should be understandable and accessible. Election procedures shape who can enter public life, how residents place ideas on the ballot, and whether public campaign financing works as intended.
Measure W would replace Berkeley’s $150 candidate filing fee with the amount set under state election law, currently $25. It would also raise the ceiling for public-financing administration and enforcement from $250,000 to $400,000 per four-year election cycle, subject to cost-of-living adjustments. That is a ceiling for administration and enforcement, not an annual appropriation or a grant to one candidate. [Read Measure W](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Charter%20Amendment%20-Full%20Text.pdf)
The measure also changes procedures for recalls, vacancies, initiatives, referenda, and candidate statements. Because these provisions are bundled together, voters deserve more than a summary that says the rules were “updated.” They deserve to know how each procedure works after passage. [Read the City Attorney’s analysis, pages 4–5](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Nov%202026%20Impartial%20Analyses.pdf)
I will expect the City to publish plain-language instructions for residents and candidates, along with clear reports on public-financing administrative spending. Lower fees matter, but real access also requires rules people can find, understand, and use.
-
Yes on X: Keep tenant rights with the tenancy
I support Measure X because a tenant should not lose established protections simply because a property later meets the terms of an exemption. Housing stability requires rights that stay understandable and enforceable when ownership or property circumstances change.
Measure X would preserve specified rent-control and just-cause protections when a tenancy began before a unit met certain exemption requirements. It would also lower the tenant-association threshold from ten units to five at properties without a management company, protect certain associations when management arrangements change, and allow fee relief for qualifying nonprofit subsidized housing. [Read Measure X](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Rent%20Ordinance%20-%20Full%20Text.pdf)
The protection for later exemptions expressly excludes units deemed exempt before November 3, 2026, and the measure does not eliminate all exemptions. Its 10% provision also does not create a routine right to raise rents by 10%. It limits increases based on accumulated Annual General Adjustments, while Berkeley’s ordinary formula remains 65% of the relevant Consumer Price Index increase with a 5% ceiling. [Read Measure X, pages 5 and 7–8](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Rent%20Ordinance%20-%20Full%20Text.pdf)
When elected, I will ask the independent Rent Stabilization Board to explain the new rules publicly and make outreach accessible to tenants in smaller buildings. A protection that exists only in ordinance language does not help someone who does not know it applies or cannot navigate enforcement.
-
Yes on Y: Fund the arts and open the door wider
I support Measure Y because art is part of public life. People need places to make things, hear music, see performances, and share culture without every gathering depending on private wealth or a commercial purchase. As a former reentry and transfer student at UC Berkeley, I also know students are part of this city’s cultural life.
Measure Y would establish a 12-year parcel tax of 7 cents per square foot of property improvements beginning January 1, 2027. It would direct 75% to qualifying performing arts organizations, 5% to individual artists and other arts organizations, 10% to capital projects, 5% to community festivals, and 5% to administration. The text contains no automatic inflation adjustment and includes several exemptions. [Read Measure Y](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Arts%20Tax%20-%20Full%20Text.pdf)
I disagree with excluding full-time students from individual artist grants. Other grant categories also limit activities aimed primarily at enrolled college or university students. Those exclusions do not prevent students from attending all funded public programs, but they leave a real access gap for people who live here, create here, and contribute to Berkeley. [Read the City Attorney’s analysis, pages 8–9](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Nov%202026%20Impartial%20Analyses.pdf)
The Council generally cannot promise to rewrite that eligibility rule after passage. I will advocate for separate City and UC opportunities for student artists, accessible grant outreach, and public reporting on who receives funding. Supporting Berkeley’s arts should include established institutions, working artists, small organizations, festivals, and people still finding their audience.
-
Yes on Z: Make public money serve public needs
I support Measure Z because public money should be able to finance public priorities. Affordable housing, green infrastructure, and small businesses often need patient financing that is not designed around the fastest private return.
Measure Z would create a six-year parcel tax to capitalize and support a public bank. Initial rates would be up to 6 cents per square foot of residential improvements and 9 cents for nonresidential improvements, with exemptions. Annual increases could reach the greater of Bay Area cost-of-living growth or statewide per-capita personal-income growth. [Read Measure Z](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Public%20Bank%20-%20Text.pdf)
A Yes vote would create a funding mechanism. It would not itself obtain state authorization for a bank, guarantee lower-cost loans, or eliminate financial risk. If authorization had not been secured by June 30, 2033, the fund could make qualifying loans until authorization was secured. That is a lending fallback, not an automatic refund. [Read the City Attorney’s analysis, pages 10–11](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Nov%202026%20Impartial%20Analyses.pdf)
Before funds are committed, I will press for transparent lending standards, governance rules, authorization milestones, and risk reporting. Annual reports should show how much was collected and spent, who received financing, and whether funded projects produced affordable housing, climate resilience, and stable local businesses.
-
Yes on AA: Put prevention and healthy food within reach
I support Measure AA because prevention should be part of public health. In my work as a medical health worker and through East Bay Food Not Bombs, I see how health is shaped by what people can afford, what food is available, and whether support reaches them before a preventable problem becomes a crisis.
Measure AA would replace Berkeley’s existing 1-cent-per-fluid-ounce general tax on sugar-sweetened beverage distribution with a 2-cent special tax. It would dedicate revenue to specified health, nutrition, and drinking-water programs. The City estimates approximately $2.2 million in total annual revenue, with collection beginning April 1, 2027. [Read the City Attorney’s analysis, pages 12–13](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Nov%202026%20Impartial%20Analyses.pdf)
The tax is imposed on distributors, though costs may appear in consumer prices. At least 42.5% of revenue is designated for eligible community organizations or City departments. Another 42.5% may be allocated as grants to Berkeley Unified School District, and up to 15% may support administration. The expert panel recommends grants, while the Council approves them. [Read Measure AA](https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/Berkeley_Soda%20Tax%20-%20Full%20Text.pdf)
I will ask for reports that go beyond dollars awarded. Residents should be able to see which neighborhoods and schools gained access, whether healthy food and drinking water became easier to reach, and what measurable health results followed. Prevention works when programs are accessible and the public can see their effect.
How I reached these recommendations
Why I support all seven measures
Berkeley needs long-term infrastructure, dependable services, enforceable tenant protections, accessible arts and public-health programs, and election rules that let more residents participate. These measures address different parts of that work.
I also see them through the daily conditions of Southside. Our neighborhood is asked to absorb tremendous density and institutional pressure while residents still encounter damaged sidewalks, too few public restrooms, limited public space, and basic services that do not keep pace. I support these measures because they can help Berkeley invest in what people use and depend on.
Where I have concerns
My support is not a blank check. Measure U does not guarantee that Southside projects will be selected. Measure V is a sales tax, falls more heavily on people with less income, has no service earmark, and has no scheduled end date. Measure W bundles several election changes. Measure X strengthens important protections but does not cover every rental unit. Measure Y excludes full-time students from individual artist grants. Measure Z cannot guarantee that a public bank will receive authorization or succeed. Measure AA’s distributor tax may be reflected in consumer prices.
Those limits belong in a voter guide because governing means being honest about the tradeoffs. A Yes vote creates responsibilities for the Council, City staff, commissions, and independent bodies that administer these programs.
What I will do when elected
In my first 100 days, I will ask for a public implementation calendar for every measure that passes, including responsible departments, decision dates, expected revenue, and the first public report.
I will seek a costed Southside infrastructure list covering sidewalks, safe crossings, restrooms, shade, lighting, drainage, and maintenance. I will request clear General Fund reports for Measure V. I will ask the Rent Stabilization Board for a public briefing on Measure X implementation and tenant outreach. I will press for fair arts-grant outreach, including separate City and UC opportunities for student artists. I will press for clear authorization milestones, lending standards, and risk reports before public-bank funds are committed. I will ask that Measure AA reports show which communities received funding and what health results the programs produced.
I cannot promise how every councilmember, commission, the independent Rent Board, or a state banking regulator will act. I can introduce requests, ask hard questions in public, make budget priorities clear, and report back on what was decided, funded, delayed, and completed.
What success should look like
Success is not seven measures passing and then disappearing into separate departments. It is sidewalks people can use, services that stay available, tenants who understand their rights, artists who can find support, public-purpose financing that reaches public needs, and health programs that people can access.
The public record should show each stage: what voters authorized, what the Council appropriated, what departments spent, what was delivered, and what results followed. When something is delayed, residents should know why, who is responsible, and what happens next.
When elected, I will work with residents, fellow councilmembers, City staff, commissions, the Rent Stabilization Board, and community organizations to make that progress visible. Passing a measure is the beginning of the responsibility.
Learn more about my governing priorities and help bring this voter guide to your neighbors
Aidan Hill
Official Sources
The City’s November 2026 ballot-measure directory links the full text of U, V, W, X, Y, Z, and AA, along with the City Attorney’s impartial analyses
Election dates and voting information are available from the Alameda County Registrar of Voters
This voter-information page is provided by Aidan Hill’s campaign. It is not an official government election website.