Berkeley property owners will decide next week whether to tax themselves to help launch a public bank, a six-year parcel tax measure that would start at 6 cents per square foot on homes and 9 cents per square foot on other buildings. Measure Z is projected to raise more than $9 million in its first year, money that would go toward capitalizing Public Bank East Bay, a nonprofit lender that backers say could finance affordable housing, clean energy projects and small businesses across the region.
Unlike a traditional bank, the proposed institution would skip personal checking accounts, ATMs and local branches entirely, according to Berkeleyside. Instead, it would lend to institutions rather than individuals, working through partner credit unions and community banks, the New York Times reported. The Daily Cal notes that the bank would be owned by the city of Berkeley but would serve the broader Bay Area, lending to and accepting deposits from local municipalities and institutions focused on three priorities: affordable housing, clean energy and small businesses, as the Daily Californian reported.
Berkeley Betting on a Regional Institution
Berkeley would be the one generating the bank's startup funds even though the capital would flow well beyond city limits, per the New York Times. Proponents envision a locally controlled bank that steers clear of fossil fuel and weapons manufacturer investments, while making capital available across the East Bay. Will Toaspern, chair of the Coalition to Keep East Bay Money Local, which supports Measure Z, told the Times the proposal would create a publicly funded institution with community leadership focused on community priorities.
The parcel tax is meant to be a short-term bridge rather than a permanent funding stream. The Daily Cal reports that in the long term, the bank is intended to be self-funded, with the tax revenue serving as seed capital rather than an ongoing subsidy. The New York Times reported that Berkeley could apply for F.D.I.C. insurance and state certification once it collects $40 million, a threshold the city expects would take more than four years to reach.
Opponents Call It a Risky Bet With Berkeley's Money
Not everyone is convinced the arithmetic works in Berkeley's favor. Paul Mathew, a longtime Berkeley resident and member of Affordable Berkeley, which opposes the measure, called the proposal a bad deal for the city, according to the Times. Opponents broadly argue that the measure would impose financial risk on Berkeley taxpayers while the benefits flow to the wider region, with some describing the plan as a high-risk experiment that could misuse public money.
Richmond has already pledged $750,000 toward the effort, but that commitment comes with strings attached. Per Berkeleyside, Richmond's pledge is contingent on state regulators approving the bank's charter and on Alameda County also contributing money. A city-commissioned poll conducted in April found that 58% of likely voters said they were inclined to support the parcel tax, a figure that has buoyed supporters heading into the final stretch of the campaign.
Fundraising Numbers Don't Quite Match Up
Money has flowed into the campaign from multiple directions, though the exact tally depends on which account you read. Berkeleyside reported that the Coalition to Keep Berkeley Money Local had raised more than $155,000 as of Aug. 17, while a more recent account from KALW put contributions from Friends of the Public Bank East Bay and the San Francisco Foundation at close to $150,000. The two figures don't fully reconcile, but both point to a campaign with real financial backing behind it.
Looking to North Dakota, With Caveats
Supporters frequently point to the Bank of North Dakota, which Berkeleyside describes as the only longstanding U.S. example alongside the Territorial Bank of American Samoa; the Daily Cal says the bank is more than a century old. That bank acted as a financial bulwark during the Great Recession, offering credit when conventional lenders could not, and made tens of millions of dollars in low-interest loans when droughts ravaged the state's ranches in 2017, Berkeleyside reported. The Daily Cal notes the Bank of North Dakota now serves about 800,000 people and reported more than $230 million in net income last year.
David Flynn, an economics professor at the University of North Dakota, has discussed public banking.
Walt McRee, president of the nonprofit Public Banking Institute, which advocates for public banks nationwide, framed the push in broader terms, telling the Times that banking should function as a public utility like water and electricity. The movement traces back to the 2008 financial crisis and the Occupy protests that followed, according to RichmondSide, and similar efforts have surfaced in Vermont, Philadelphia and Los Angeles. Public banks remain rare in the United States.
San Francisco Takes a Different Path
Berkeley isn't the only Bay Area city grappling with the public-banking question this fall. San Francisco voters will also consider a public bank measure in November, but that proposal would not raise money through a tax. Instead, per SPUR, it would authorize a nonprofit Municipal Financial Corporation as an interim step, one that could not accept deposits and would instead make most loans through community finance institutions and community development financial institutions. Public-bank efforts have also surfaced in Los Angeles.
The Daily Cal describes Berkeley's proposed bank as city-owned and intended to serve the broader Bay Area.
Oakland voters rejected their own parcel tax, Measure E, in June 2026. Measure Z will appear alongside other statewide questions on the November ballot, including proposals on a one-time billionaires' wealth tax, permanently extending higher taxes on upper-income earners, and a regional measure aimed at shoring up BART and other transportation agencies.
