City Council votes down infrastructure bond measure, restricts City investment in fossil fuels and weapons.
Alameda’s City Council voted against placing a ballot measure for infrastructure bonds at their Tuesday, July 2, meeting. The proposed measure (link downloads PDF) would have addressed $150 million of infrastructure needs with a property tax. These include fixing potholes, adaptations for sea level rise, improving street safety, and meeting public safety standards.
After 40 minutes of debate, the resolution failed to obtain the two-thirds majority required to pass. Vice Mayor Tony Daysog and Councilmember Trish Herrera Spencer were the dissenting votes.
According to the City’s 2024 public opinion poll [PDF], 64% of respondents feel “there is a great or some need for infrastructure funding in the city,” and 68% of those who responded were supportive of a $150 million local infrastructure bond.
Daysog objected to the measure on grounds that the bond’s purpose was not specified clearly enough. “I don’t believe it’s ready for the vote of the people,” Daysog said. “The money has to be allocated to specific projects.”
Public commenter Shelby agreed with Daysog, declaring the proposed measure was too general and did not prioritize needs she thought were most important.
City Manager Jennifer Ott said the measure referred to broader categories rather than specific projects in order to allow flexibility. “We’re just trying to build in four specific categories with very specific improvements that allow council some flexibility in the future, as a representative democracy, to make some decisions about how specific or what projects to spend,” Ott said.
Mayor Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft referred to the vote outcome as “the tyranny of the minority,” stating, “I am stunned that we wouldn’t even let our voters vote on something they were already inclined to pass.”
The Mayor and Councilmembers Malia Vella and Tracy Jensen voted to move forward with the proposed measure.
“I think to not put the question to the voters is to remove options from our larger constituency,” Vella stated. She added that delaying addressing infrastructure needs could cost the city more in the long run. “The natural state of things is atrophy, and we’ve seen the impact of not being able to fix things. The cost goes up”
In other business, City Council also passed amendments to the City’s investment policy that would add restrictions in investments toward “fossil fuels and weapons of any kind.” These new restrictions stand in stark contrast to Alameda’s lengthy history as home to a Naval Air Station, which was closed in 1993.
The amendments to investment policy are annual; however, this year’s amendments attracted many public commenters who supported the proposed restrictions toward investments in military defense and carbon emitting industries. During public comment, most of the 16 speakers, including a remote speaker from Albany, California, were in favor of the new restrictions.
Dov Baum, Director of the American Friends Service Committee’s Action Center for Corporate Accountability, supported the restrictions on military defense. “It is an aspirational policy that allows you to lean into the idea that public money should be invested in the well-being of our own communities right here,” Baum said. “I want to join other speakers here and say it is not good to invest in weapons.”
Reverend Michael Yoshii of Buena Vista United Methodist Church, who attended the meeting with the Alameda Families & Friends for Ceasefire, also spoke in support of the restrictions. “We affirm that we are a community of peace. We invest in peace. We are not invested in profiting off weapons of war. We are invested in life, not death. We know weapons cause chaos to many families and result in numerous deaths. And finally, we are invested in the planet, for the sake and the future of our children in this community and all over the world as well.”
Councilmember Herrera Spencer expressed opposition to the restriction against military defense. “We are a Coast Guard city,” she said. “They do defend our country and provide for our defense. We also host Marines, and we also host the Navy.” Her daughter currently serves in the Coast Guard.
The Councilmember also indicated that some equipment used by Alameda Police Department is classified as military weapons. “I do vote for our police to have weapons, and we do count on our police to have the correct tools,” she elaborated.
The amendments also include a removal of restrictions on investing in alcoholic beverage companies. All Councilmembers other than Spencer voted in favor of the amendments, which passed in a 4-to-1 vote.
Vicky Nguyen is a contributing writer for the Alameda Post. Contact her via [email protected]. Her writing is collected at AlamedaPost.com/Vicky-Nguyen.
