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?
Isn't a public bank too risky? The only real example is North Dakota, and Berkeley isn't North Dakota.
Answer
Public banking isn't an experiment; it's a century-old, proven model. North Dakota's public bank has operated successfully for more than 100 years and remains highly profitable for the state. Public Bank East Bay's business plan, capital structure, and lending priorities have been independently vetted, and the same regulatory and capital requirements that apply to every FDIC-insured bank in the country will apply here too.