20,260 / 40.9% Yes votes ...... 29,250 / 59.1% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

The Council would be authorized to implement this measure to create a voluntary public financing program to fully fund election campaigns in general, special and runoff elections for the offices of mayor, city council, auditor and school board, administered by the Fair Campaign Practices Commission (FCPC). Upon the Council's decision to implement this measure, the Council must annually appropriate $498,000 (adjusted for inflation) from the General Fund to a new Fair Elections Fund (Fund). The Fund would be capped at $1.8 million, with excess revenue to be deposited into the General Fund. Current law provides no public funds for City election campaigns or mandates appropriations for specific purposes. Campaign contributions and expenditures are currently regulated by the BERA and enforced by the FCPC.

The Council may suspend the public financing program for up to one year for a fiscal emergency by a two-thirds vote. The program would become effective first for mayor and then on January 1 after the mayoral election for all remaining City offices. If the first election after Council implementation were not a mayoral election, Council offices would be funded first. Based upon the unavailability of funds, the Council could also defer funding the offices of city council member, school board director and auditor to a later election.

Grants for each general or special municipal election would be as follows: mayor ($160,000), city council and auditor ($20,000) and school board ($12,000). Candidates seeking public funds must raise $5 "qualifying contributions" from a specified number of persons per office, namely, mayor (500), auditor (200), city council and school board (100) in order to receive public funds. These grants would be reduced to 20% if all opposing candidates who had not received public funds failed to raise, spend or have cash on hand of at least 20% of such grant amount. In runoff elections, eligible candidates would receive 50% of the general election grant award. The FCPC would decrease grants proportionately, within specified priorities, in the event of insufficient funds.

The City grant would be increased by no more than twice the original grant to match expenditures of an opponent without public financing and/or certain independent expenditures. Expenditure of public funds would be restricted to defined direct campaign expenses, and would be adjusted to reflect changes in the cost of living. Publicly-funded candidates must limit spending to the amount of the City grant and forego other sources of funding except for the raising and spending of "seed money" in individual contributions of no more than $250 each during an initial exploratory period, capped at 10% of the City grant.

Financial Implications

Upon Council implementation, likely increases in taxes (subject to voter approval), fees, penalties or assessments or reductions in City services/programs in an amount corresponding to the required annual general fund appropriation of $498,000 plus an inflation adjustment.

s/MANUELA ALBUQUERQUE, Berkeley City Attorney

City of Berkeley PDF File of Full Text of Measure

Yes on H - Berkeley Fair Elections Coalition Homepage

No on H - Berkeleyans Against Soaring Taxes

Increase the Diversity of Candidates Without public financing, only those with personal wealth or access to wealthy contributors are able to run for public office. Our current mayor spent $236,000 to win election. The average cost of a winning city council campaign is $35,000. Winning a school board seat costs an average of $16,000.
Level the Playing Field With Measure H, all candidates will have the same amount of money to spend. Elections will be based on ideas, experience, and community support, not money!
Proven, Tested, and Sound Measure H is sensible and well-tested. It is currently in place in Arizona and Maine with more states considering the system each year. In Arizona, from 1998 to 2002:
Statewide voter turnout increased over 20%.
The number of minority candidates tripled.
There have been more candidates, more competition, and more voter choice in all elections!
Responsive Elected Officials When campaigns are paid for by voters, instead of special interests, elected officials are responsive to voters, not beholden to special interests! Since enacting their Clean Money, Fair Elections law, Maine passed universal health-care, as legislators have become independent of insurance industry campaign contributions.
Help Make History in Berkeley! Help make Berkeley the first city in the country to adopt full public financing of elections. Passing Measure H in Berkeley is an important step towards state and national reform.

Please support Measure H - because Democracy Matters!

s/TOM BATES, Mayor, City of Berkeley

s/GORDON WOZNIAK, Councilmember

s/KITTY McLEAN, individually and on behalf of, The Sierra Club

s/DARRYL G. MOORE, Trustee, Peralta Community College Board

s/SANTIAGO CASAL, Co-Chair, Latinos Unidos

The money isn't there.

On this very same ballot, the Mayor and Council ask for millions in new taxes to fund existing programs.
Their own Budget Review Commission predicts deficits rising from $10,000,000 to $21,000,000 over the next five years.
The last thing we need is a new $500,000/year program without an identified source of funding.

Programs we DO need will suffer.

This expense will be written into the Charter - our local equivalent of a Constitution.
Other critical programs - like fire, police, health, youth services - have no such protection. If money is tight (and they say it is now), paying for politicians will come first. Fire, police, and programs for the elderly will suffer.

Berkeley doesn't have a problem.

The problems cited by the national organizations sponsoring this very complicated measure simply don't exist here.
We already have the toughest campaign laws in the country.
We already have diverse candidates, funded by small contributions from interested citizens.

No other city anywhere has adopted such an ordinance. It's an experiment which Berkeley CAN'T afford. VOTE "NO" ON MEASURE H.

s/LAURIE BRIGHT, individually and on behalf of, President, Council of Neighborhood Associations

s/JIM HULTMAN, individually and on behalf of, Board Member, LeConte Neighborhood Association

s/BETTY J. HICKS, Treasurer, San Pablo Neighborhood Council, individually and on behalf of, Oregon Street Neighborhood Watch

s/ROBERT C. BAUM, individually and on behalf of, Co-Chair, Blake and California Streets Neighborhood Association

s/JOAN BURNETT, President, Dwight-Hillside Neighborhood Association

How can the Council square this new, expensive program with repeated promises not to incur new costs without a source of revenue? It can't.

Measures K, L, and M, would raise taxes on a typical $500,000 home to nearly $10,000 a year. Measure J would increase taxes on essential utility services to several hundred dollars a year.
The Council claims these taxes are needed for existing programs. They would not provide funds for the campaign financing proposal.
The Council's Budget Review Commission has found that the budget deficit is "structural" and will continue even with new taxes. It recommends "zero-based budgeting": existing programs must be reviewed and new programs barred unless there are revenues to support them.

This is a runaway Council which refuses to tighten its belt and looks to the voters to bail it out. If Measure H passes, it would be locked into the City Charter. Once put into effect, it would take precedence over all other programs. When deficits recur, candidates would have a legal right to campaign money while other essential programs suffer (like fire, police and senior programs).

Much may be said for public funding of political campaigns. But so far no other City has such a program. Indeed, Berkeley's existing laws on campaign financing are already the toughest in the nation.

Until we solve more pressing problems, public funding is a luxury we cannot afford.

Vote "No" on Measure H. Vote "No" on Measures K, L, and M.

s/LAURIE BRIGHT, individually and on behalf of, President, Council of Neighborhood Associations

s/DEAN METZGER, individually and on behalf of, President, Claremont Elmwood Neighborhood Association

s/ELEANOR PEPPLES, individually and on behalf of, President, North East Berkeley Association Board

s/GREGORY HARPER, individually and on behalf of, Block Captain, Neighbors of Stanton Street

s/MICHAEL WILSON, individually and on behalf of, President, Berkeley Property Owners Association

Voting Yes on Measure H means endorsing a process where candidates no longer have to spend their time dialing- for-dollars or depleting their retirement accounts. Instead, they can talk with voters and respond to the needs of their constituents.

Voting No would maintain the status quo where competitive mayoral candidates have to raise $150 daily for four years to run for office. This expense - which is paid for by wealthy candidates and their friends - is the expense our opponents should worry about.

Meanwhile, we pay a huge price by sacrificing many would-be candidates who can't afford to run for office. To ensure proper oversight over the city's budget, we must attract the best and broadest possible range of candidates. This will cost only about 0.1% percent of Berkeley's budget - and would help ensure that the other 99.9% is spent responsibly.

If the city faces a fiscal emergency, the program can be temporarily suspended. But if the proven systems in Arizona and Maine are an indication, fiscal emergencies will be less likely with Measure H than without it.

It is unfortunate that the opponents of Measure H are so concerned with its meager cost that they are willing to overlook the price we pay when talented people can't afford to run.

Increase the Diversity of Candidates.

Level the Playing Field.

Make Our Elected Officials More Responsive

Help Make History in Berkeley!

Vote Yes on Measure H - Because Democracy Matters!

s/TOM BATES, Mayor, City of Berkeley

s/DONA SPRING, Councilmember

s/NANCY CARLETON, Co-Chair, Halcyon Neighborhood Association; Former Chair, Zoning Adjustments Board

s/AMIRA JESSICA DIAMOND, individually and on behalf of, West Coast Director, Democracy Matters

s/ALAN ROSS, individually and on behalf of California Common Cause