Page One

Berkeley City Council, at its 5 p.m. working session tonight (Tuesday, Oct. 21), takes its second look at four proposed ballot measures designed to shore up the city’s projected $15 million budget deficit and change the way elections are held in the city. 

Council must approve the exact language of any measures by its Nov. 25 meeting in order for them to appear on the March, 2004 ballot. 

A $10 million parcel tax measure is almost certain to be presented to Berkeley voters next March. That was the recommendation of the Mayor’s Advisory Task Force on City Revenue, chaired by former Assemblymember Dion Aroner, in a bleak report issued last week. 

According to the report, despite Council’s institution of more than $6 million in cuts this year to balance the 2003-2004 budget, the city is looking at a budget deficit of more than $9 million next year. Unless there is a change in either the local or state economy, that deficit is currently projected to rise $1.5 million to $2 million each year if Council takes no corrective action. 

In addition, a likely reduction in the state’s Vehicle License Fee (either through action by Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger or through a proposed March, 2004 voter initiative ballot measure) will cost the city another $6 million a year in revenue received from the state. 

The city manager’s office has concurred with the call for a March tax measure, recommending that the money be earmarked for city fire services. Berkeley citizen support for a $10 million parcel tax measure was indicated in a telephone voter survey conducted last month by a San Francisco polling group and formally introduced to Council last week. 

In addition to the March parcel tax measure, Aroner’s committee recommended that Council explore a car tax and a payroll tax, as well as “aggressively pursue greater cost recovery from UC Berkeley, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and other major non-profit organizations” operating in the city. 

The tax force report noted that “unlike private entities, these institutions pay no property tax or other service fees.” Noting that such institutions “use a substantial amount of city services,” the task force recommended that Berkeley should “pursue greater cost recovery efforts from such institutions…as a matter of basic fairness to Berkeley taxpayers.” 

Less certain for the March ballot are the proposed election reform measures. 

At the request of Council, the city manager’s office recently released a report on proposed changes in the way elections are conducted in the city. If passed by voters, one proposal would alter the requirements for running for office in Berkeley, upping the number of signatures needed to qualify for the ballot and adding fees. 

The other two proposals would change the way runoff elections are held in the city, adding Instant Runoff Voting and lengthening the time between the initial vote and runoffs. The city manager’s office made no recommendation on the changes themselves, merely giving Council alternatives to consider. 

If the election proposals are put on the March, 2004 ballot and approved by Berkeley voters, they would go into effect for the November, 2004 election. If the proposals are not put on the March, 2004 ballot, they would not be able to go into effect until at least 2006. 

Council has scheduled no discussion time for any item on its agenda for its regular 7 p.m. meeting , instead placing all the items on its consent calendar. 

While any Councilmember can pull a consent item at the last minute for public discussion, consent items are normally voted on in block by the council, without debate. 

Among other things, Council is set to pass—without discussion—upping the penalty for graffiti by placing a lien on the graffiti writer’s (or their parents’) property; extending the notification period of no-parking signs from 24 hours to 72 hours; approving the formation of an East Bay Sports Field Recreation Authority to govern sports fields in the Eastshore Park and other East Bay locations; looking into an action plan for alleviating problems on Telegraph Avenue near the UC campus; and exploring the creation of homeless storage lockers in the city. 

Council is also scheduled to vote on a resolution in support of unionizing efforts by workers at Berkeley Bowl.