Berkeley already has a $30 million budget deficit. Why add a new tax now?
Why should Berkeley pay for a bank that also lends money to Oakland, Richmond, and other cities?
This tax increases every year automatically. How is that fair to taxpayers?
The bank doesn't exist yet, and might never get approved. Why fund something that isn't real?
Don't programs like IBank, the SBA, and municipal bonds already do this?
Isn't a public bank too risky? The only real example is North Dakota, and Berkeley isn't North Dakota.
If Berkeley can't manage its own budget, why should we trust it to run a bank?
Won't this just let politicians play politics with our money?
This tax increases every year automatically. How is that fair to taxpayers?
Answer
The tax rate is designed to keep pace with inflation so that Berkeley's investment retains its real value over the life of the measure, rather than quietly eroding. And because the goal is a bank that becomes self-sustaining and profitable within its first few years of operation, the underlying intent is to reduce Berkeley's need for new taxes over time, not to lock in indefinite tax growth.