The Measure W debate

The courts found Alameda County's Measure W was a general tax. The pitch to voters was far more specific, and that's the debate between county and city officials for divvying up a growing pot of $700m

☕️MORNING BUZZ

—First, a history: Measure W was a half-cent sales tax narrowly approved by a simple majority of Alameda County voters in November 2020.

An estimated $150 million a year in new revenues began flowing to the county’s treasury until a lawsuit was filed asserting the ballot measure was a special tax requiring a more onerous two-thirds majority for passage.

In the meantime, the extra sales tax revenues piled up while the lawsuit proceeded through the courts.

The county successfully defended its position that Measure W was a general sales tax, not one specified only for housing and homelessness solutions, as was advertised in numerous campaign ads.

Earlier this year, the legal battle concluded in the county’s favor. Now nearly $700 million in Measure W funds have been freed up for allocation and several cities have been clamoring for their “fair share.”

County Counsel Donna Ziegler revisited the controversy on Monday, again asserting the court declared Measure W is a general tax. Ziegler went on to read the ballot statement from 2020.

—The county prefers to keep this debate in the courtroom. But the true debate about Measure W is in the court of public opinion.

In early 2020, Measure W was never marketed to Alameda County voters as a general tax, allowing the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to add revenues from the half-cent sales tax to the general fund.

Alameda County’s Measure W was written as a general fund sales tax increase, but was clearly promoted as a tax benefiting strategies for improving the housing and homelessness crisis.

Housing and homelessness was then, and remains one of the most pressing issues for county voters. Alleviating both issues was the singular pitch for why voters should approve Measure W. The campaign’s tagline was “Home Together.”

On Monday, Alameda County Supervisor Elisa Márquez acknowledged that many of the campaign mailers sent to voters in support of Measure W clearly focused on housing and homelessness issues. “A political promise was made,” Márquez said.

“A lot of the campaign material made a promise to voters and I think we need to recognize that,” Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Bas added.

The three others supervisors have suggested a inclination for using Measure W funds for other causes, in addition to housing and homelessness.

Despite the need, Measure W was a hard sell. It was supported by only 50.09 percent of Alameda County voters.

One of the reasons Measure W was not a special tax devoted to housing and homelessness is because it would have been trounced at the ballot box. A special tax requires a two-thirds majority.

This type of ballot measure kabuki dance happens all the time at every level of government. What makes the furor of Measure W unique is because of the enormous pot of money on the table, city leaders are making public pleas for their “fair share.”

Over the past few elections, passing revenue-generating ballot measures has become increasingly difficult in places other than Oakland.

The perception of a bait-and-switch involving Measure W funds, and general mistrust of local government, will make it even more difficult during an 2026 election cycle that could be brimming with revenue-generating ballot measures at the city and school board level.

—411 ON THE 510—Become an East Bay Insiders subscriber today and get FULL ACCESS to the inside scoop every weekday morning at 6 a.m. It’s what the insiders read.

—EBI PODCAST—Download and listen to the East Bay Insiders Podcast on Apple Podcasts and Spotify: