Don’t hurt our kids’ futures by continuing to delay meaningful solutions to climate change!
Measure GG is the most transformative climate action in Berkeley’s history. By offering climate-friendly building upgrades to all Berkeleyans, prioritizing residents in historically polluted neighborhoods, it will equitably and rapidly respond to the climate crisis and improve our air quality. We urgently need to raise money as a city to help all Berkeleyans adapt to new regional regulations, which require gas-powered water heaters and furnaces to be replaced by electric alternatives starting in 2027 and 2029. That means many Berkeleyans, especially low-income Berkeleyans, will be hit with huge bills to rewire their residences for electric appliances unless we raise money to help. Thankfully, we can raise that funding from tiny fractions of large building revenue from the owners of Berkeley’s largest 609 buildings (Berkeley has 35,432 total buildings).
You may have heard sensational claims from the opposition campaign (“No on Berkeley Measure GG”) that Measure GG will have catastrophic impacts. We want to debunk these outrageous and misleading ideas. Check out our fact-checking below!
Who is funding the opposition?

Screenshot from Opposition’s Website
Don’t be fooled: GG’s opponents are funded by big corporations and real estate interests. They claim they’re eager to reduce emissions, but City data show their emissions are increasing!
The deep-pocketed funders of the misleadingly-named “Berkeleyans for Effective Climate Action” are actually:
- National Association of Realtors
- Wareham Property Group, Inc
- California Hotel Issues PAC
- Read Investments
- California Association of Realtors Issues Mobilization PAC
- Rue Ell Enterprises, Inc.
- SG Real Estate
They have raised more than $370,000 dollars in an effort to defeat the most transformative climate policy in Berkeley’s history. They are manipulating Berkeley’s politics by spreading lies and engaging in climate denial.
Is the opposition actually serious about reducing emissions as they claim?
No! They are just greenwashing. According to reporting under the City’s Building Emissions Savings Ordinance, emissions from natural gas are actually increasing in large buildings. Only 60% of large buildings even report their emissions under this program. That means 40% of large buildings are scofflaws who are evading the City’s climate program.
Some of the leading organizations who oppose GG were involved in the effort to undermine the City’s groundbreaking natural gas prohibition ordinance.
Why does the opposition keep getting caught misrepresenting the impact of the tax?
Good question! Revival Bar and Kitchen said in Berkeleyside their bill would be $65k. They then revised it down to $27k after we fact checked them. The actual bill that city records show their whole building would pay is $3,343.
Boichik Bagels has repeatedly stated their bill would be $45,000 in the first year, and $250,000 by 2029. The actual amount that city records show they would pay is $10,189 in the first year and $47,000 by 2029. This is approximately 0.7% of their 2023 annualized profits.
Fieldwork states that they would pay $110,000 in tax in the first year. Fieldwork is located at 1160 Sixth Street. Its adjoining building, 1150 Sixth Street, would pay an estimated $6,847 in tax in its first year (2026). 1160 Sixth Street is not listed as a taxed address in city documents. There is not evidence to suggest the $110,000 claimed bill is accurate.
Alta Bates claims they would see a substantial increase in operating costs. Their bill is a tiny 0.05% of their revenue.
Does the technology exist to electrify Berkeley’s largest buildings?
Yes! Despite false claims from the opposition, the requisite and cost-effective technology exists now. The opponents are capitalizing on their own ignorance about all-electric technology to sow uncertainty and discord.
Electrification expert and Managing Principal of Redwood Energy, Sean Armstrong, has assembled various guides for single family, multi-family and commercial electrification retrofits. You can see that there are now heat pump and other technology available for every commercial, multi-family, and industrial need.
Note: for five successful years the City required all new buildings to be 100% electric without exception.
We are not going back!
Will GG force struggling nonprofits and small business “out of business completely?”
No! The GG tax represents a modest percentage of operating revenue. The vast majority of owners taxed and business tenants are for profit. Utilities are typically a small percentage of operating costs, and gas is only a fraction of total utility costs.
In the case that the tax would pose an undue burden to a struggling non-profit or business, the City Council could intervene and invest GG tax proceeds directly into those entities to electrify their buildings, and thus completely avoiding their tax.
Does GG help businesses that pay the tax?
Yes!
Unfortunately, the opposition falsely claims that GG “does nothing to help.” The truth is that Measure GG provides funding for all Berkeley residents, non-profits and businesses! The measure specifies that priority be given to residents and restaurants, but that in no way disqualifies others from receiving significant funding.
What are the impacts to non-profit building owners?
Out of the 609 buildings taxed by GG, only 38 buildings are owned by non-profits. Seven of these buildings are eligible for a full exemption from the tax. Among the remaining Berkeley nonprofit building owners highlighted by the opposition, public data suggest they will pay fractions of a single percent of revenue:
Building name | What they’ll invest in Berkeley through GG (City’s estimate) | Revenue |
YMCA | 0.27% of revenue | $69.2 million/year |
Berkeley Playhouse | 0.51% of revenue | $3.2 million/year |
Berkeley Repertory Theater | 0.37% of revenue | $15.3 million/year |
While Berkeley nonprofits may pay the (very small) tax initially, they stand to greatly benefit from Measure GG funds. City of Berkeley staff have flexibility to direct Measure GG funds to non-profit buildings. Because buildings are charged based on their gas usage, any efforts taken to decarbonize (like improving insulation or transitioning some appliances to electric) will lower their bill. We strongly encourage staff to direct Measure GG funding to these non-profit owned buildings to decrease or hopefully eliminate their tax.
There was an alternative measure that the Yes on GG campaign was negotiating over the summer to totally exempt non-profit owned buildings. Every council member that opposes Measure GG voted against allowing negotiation of the alternative measure, thereby killing it.
What are the impacts to healthcare building owners?
The healthcare providers who operate in Berkeley are billion-dollar entities – Measure GG is extremely unlikely to impact patient care in any way. In conversations with professionals in the hospital administration space, we’ve learned that utilities are an extremely small portion of a hospital budget. What will impact patient care is unaddressed climate change: heat and extreme weather already result in massive negative health impacts to communities. The amounts of money Measure GG would direct towards air quality and climate mitigation are themselves an investment in regional wellbeing and health.
Building name | What they’ll invest in Berkeley through GG (City estimate) | Revenue |
Alta Bates Hospital | ~$3.3 million (0.05% of revenue) | $4.8 billion/year |
Kaiser Berkeley Medical Offices | ~$48,572 (0.00006% of revenue) | $70.8 billion/year |
You may notice that the Alta Bates bill is higher than Kaiser’s – that is because the Alta Bates building is very inefficient (it has had an Energy Star score between 10-17 over the last few years.) Alta Bates is not retrofitted for earthquakes, and the hospital will be leaving in 2030 regardless of Measure GG because of the cost of necessary seismic retrofits.
How will for-profit building owners and small businesses be impacted?

Among businesses highlighted by the opposition, we estimate very small impacts to their bottom lines.
Because for-profit entities don’t make their revenue public, we can only estimate their revenue. We welcome any revenue transparency that any business entity wants to share!
Building name | What they’ll invest in Berkeley through GG (City estimate) | Estimated revenue |
Berkeley Bowl | $47,760 (0.11-0.2% of estimated revenue, or what they make in less than a day of estimated sales) | $22.3 million – $40.9 million/year |
Berkeley Bowl West | $231,596 (~0.25-0.45% of estimated revenue, or what they make in about 1.5 days of estimated sales) | $51.2 million – $93.8 million/year |
We will also note that many businesses have adapted to other citywide ordinances, such as switching from plastic to compostable utensils. The scientific consensus shows that direct emissions reductions are urgently needed to stave off climate catastrophe for all of us – making an investment in sustainability is common business precedent in Berkeley. It is also possible, again, for City staff to direct Measure GG funding to small businesses to help them decarbonize. We believe that decarbonizing local businesses like Berkeley Bowl could be a huge success story that could really bring the community together.
Whoa, am I going to be taxed?
The opposition is falsely suggesting all Berkeleyans are taxed. Measure GG only taxes the owners of the 609 largest buildings in Berkeley. Unless you personally own a building over 15,000 sq ft in size (that’s three NBA basketball courts), you will not be taxed!
Does the tax takes effect next year?
The first year of the tax is actually due in February 2026. The opposition is misleadingly claiming that a bill is due in early 2025. Large building owners are not taxed at the beginning of 2025.
Will I have to pay higher rent?
Pass-throughs of the cost of the tax are explicitly prohibited in the measure text. It is extremely unlikely that residential tenants will experience rent increases. In a post on the Haas Energy Institute Blog, UC Berkeley economist Severin Borenstein agrees.
Since the tax doesn’t affect all buildings in Berkeley, and since any large buildings that are electrified don’t pay any tax, then there’s no reason there would be a blanket increase in rents city-wide. Buildings that would pay the tax can’t just directly increase rents because they still have to compete in the marketplace – if they do increase, tenants will move to electrified or untaxed buildings. Also, if it were possible to just increase rents to recoup the tax, then landlords who are funding the opposition would not feel as worried about their bottom line. Instead, they are extremely worried, and have donated huge sums of money to defeat Measure GG.
How does Measure GG help me as a renter?
Gas utility bills could increase as much as 900% in the coming decades, as Californians transition away from fossil fuels like gas and towards clean, electric alternatives. Without support, rental properties are likely to be the last buildings transitioned, making energy bills increasingly unaffordable.
Measure GG provides money and technical assistance to rental properties to improve the comfort and efficiency of their buildings and reduce utility bills and to make the transition off of gas so that renters aren’t stranded with massively escalating utility bills. It also provides funding for anti-displacement, so improving the quality and comfort of rental housing isn’t used as an excuse to raise rents or evict tenants.
Because of Measure GG’s flexible design, funding can also be directed towards renters themselves. Such programs can build on successful pilots in the Bay Area and New York City that distributed portable heat pump units (which provide cooling in addition to heating!), portable induction stoves, and air purifiers, so that renters can benefit from clean, healthy, and affordable appliances.
What kind of consultation went into this measure?
The City of Berkeley staff has already engaged in significant public outreach to create their climate recommendations, in 2005, 2009, 2018, and 2021. These City plans recommend a tax on gas use; Measure GG simply implements their recommendation.
Calling for more community input is often used as a delay tactic to stop climate initiatives. These are businesses who opposed the 2019 gas ban, opposed fair pay ordinances, and are successfully watering down other climate efforts underway in the city. The scientific evidence is clear: we need to take action now, not whenever businesses feel like getting around to it.
Is there sufficient generation and grid capacity to meet the demand if everyone’s homes switch to electric?
Yes, PG&E and Ava Energy enthusiastically support building electrification and offer electrification specific rate plans. They are also massively investing in the electric grid and renewable energy production to facilitate the transition.
Can landlords use GG to force force renters out of their homes?
No! The City’s report never said that Measure GG would force renters out of their homes. Rather, the City’s report stated that in general renters face “construction-as-harassment” burdens. The opposition took this out of context to sow misinformation and undermine the most transformative climate policy in Berkeley’s history.
What’s the deal with this City report about GG?
While the City’s report concluded GG “could…help achieve Berkeley’s goal of becoming a Fossil Fuel Free City and mitigate climate change impacts” it was also written in a highly biased manner. In fact, City officials held secret listening sessions with businesses and members of the opposition. These listening sessions arguably led to a lopsided report. These meetings could also be illegal under State law. Public officials are banned from providing public resources to political campaigns. Environmentalists and public health advocates were not invited to provide input.
I thought gas was cheaper than electricity?
This is a common misconception. Gas is a volatile commodity that is subject to massive cost spikes during emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, the California Energy Commission found that due to statewide trends towards electrification, “customers remaining on the natural gas system could face disproportionately high costs in the absence of a gas transition strategy.” The state currently has no gas transition strategy. Therefore it is critical to get customers off gas and onto clean electricity as quickly as possible.
In addition, the NRDC found that “[g]as utilities currently plan to spend an estimated $43 billion on fossil fuel infrastructure through 2045. Without intervention, these investments could raise households’ gas utility bills as much as 900% by 2050, as Californians transition away from fossil fuels like gas and towards clean, electric alternatives.”
We need GG to transition off gas now and prevent Berkeleyans from facing massive price spikes.