Meeting Overview

The Special Berkeley City Council meeting on March 17, 2026 (called to order by Mayor Adena Ishii) focused on presentation and discussion of a Lake Street Partners likely‑voter survey and staff recommendations related to potential November 3, 2026 ballot measures: a general obligation (G.O.) infrastructure bond and a 0.5% sales/use tax. Staff outlined the city’s constrained capital picture (an estimated deferred capital backlog around $1.87 billion and limited ongoing general fund capital transfers), current spending well below needs, and strong past grant leverage. City staff, pollsters, department directors and members of the public participated; one councilmember (D3 Ben Bartlett) was absent.

Main Agenda Items

• Fiscal context and project framing: Staff presented a preliminary portfolio of 30+ candidate projects in three buckets — community facilities/parks, public safety (including fire stations and 9‑1‑1/dispatch), and critical infrastructure/accessibility (seismic upgrades, ADA, a 50/50 sidewalk program). Selection criteria emphasized equity, grant leverage, readiness and climate resilience.
• Survey methodology and topline results: A n=500 likely‑voter phone survey (±4.4% MOE) tested two bond levels ($200M, $300M) and a 0.5% sales/use tax. Initial combined bond support was ~70% (split‑sample: 70% for $200M; 71% for $300M). After balanced pro/con argument testing support fell to ~67% — roughly at the two‑thirds threshold required for a G.O. bond. The 0.5% sales/use tax tested at ~60% initially and ~58% after argument testing; staff estimate it would generate about $9M/year.
• Voter priorities: Top priorities were climate‑resilient critical infrastructure (35%) and improving sidewalks/curb ramps/pathways for safety and accessibility. Specific items rated “extremely important” included renovating the 9‑1‑1 dispatch center, replacing fire stations, repairing cracked/uneven sidewalks and upgrading curb ramps, and fixing park restrooms.
• Equity and accessibility concerns: The Commission on Disability urged guaranteed set‑asides for sidewalks/accessibility so they aren’t outcompeted by large seismic projects. Public commenters stressed equity of tax incidence, grant leverage, and transparency/oversight.
• Pollster caveats and next steps: Pollsters noted polls are snapshots, ballot wording and co‑measures matter, and suggested a second poll to test actual ballot language and likely ballot interactions. Staff emphasized refining the project list, updating cost/readiness estimates, and working with the City Attorney on flexible ballot language that still meets legal requirements.

Decisions Made

• The Council voted unanimously to direct the City Manager to prepare draft ballot language for a general obligation bond and to authorize a second, more ballot‑specific community survey to test exact language and measure interactions with other likely November measures.
  
• No final decisions were made on bond dollar amount, placement of a sales/use tax measure, or a final project list. Staff committed to return in late spring/early summer with a refined project list, updated cost estimates, options for set‑asides/allocations to address equity/accessibility, fiscal impact charts (including estimated tax impacts — e.g., roughly $22 per $100,000 assessed value for the new bond’s share), and recommendations on whether to advance one or both measures to the November ballot.