Funds raised would help convert buildings powered by gas to electricity, focusing on protecting tenants and concentrating on communities experiencing disproportionate pollution. And it would help Berkeley residents comply with costly rules set by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District requiring new water and space heaters to be zero-emission by 2027 and 2029, respectively. Some money would be spent on a workforce to accomplish this electrification.

The idea for Measure GG came after a federal appeals court struck down a prior effort by the city to chip away at pollution from buildings. Berkeley introduced a landmark ban on gas hookups in new construction in 2019, and more than 70 local and state jurisdictions followed suit before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said the regulation conflicted with federal law.

Daniel Tahara, a Berkeley resident, Tesla engineer, and climate activist, wrote it. He said the high cost of a carbon tax should come as a shock to people.

"It's a signal of how much we are underestimating the cost of the status quo," Tahara said. "That's how much damage we are doing to society. That's how much we are subsidizing the use of methane."

Tahara pointed to the city's own paper outlining the need for building electrification, which states, "UCLA researchers estimate that if we electrify all of the fossil fuel appliances in the Bay Area, we could avoid over 300 respiratory illnesses, save over 130 lives, and save $1.2 billion in healthcare costs -- every year."

Tahara responded to pushback on how quickly the tax would go into effect - in January 2025, with the first collection in 2026.

"The principle here is the climate's not really giving us a phase-in," Tahara said.

Additional proponents include environmental groups like 350 Bay Area and Citizens Climate Lobby of Alameda County, tenants rights organizations, and some labor unions.

But many of the city's political, business and nonprofit leaders don't think Measure GG is the policy to meet Berkeley, and California's, climate goals.

The policy "is a very well-intentioned effort to reduce our carbon footprint and move large buildings off of natural gas," said Maria Hassid, executive director of the Brower Center, which houses 25 nonprofits and businesses with like-minded missions. "Unfortunately, the people who wrote this well-intentioned measure didn't really think through all of the consequences, and it has some really concerning ones."

It will hit nonprofits like the Brower Center and the YMCA hard, Hassid said. While the measure exempts nonprofits with a revenue of under $1,000,000 from paying the tax, many will not make that cut-off.

She estimated the tax will cost the Brower Center $90,000 annually (the city report estimates a slightly lower $78,952), and would force her organization to cut their extensive public programming as a result.

Ric O'Connell, who heads a nonprofit working to create a low-carbon grid, called Measure GG a bad policy that would be neither effective nor durable. His organization, GridLab, is based at the Brower Center.

"Moving off of gas takes time and significant investment in new equipment. Large buildings can't simply install new, capital-intensive retrofits overnight, and PG&E often needs several years to install an upgraded power drop," O'Connell wrote in a letter to the city council. "It's like doubling the cost of gasoline at the pump and expecting people to switch to electric cars immediately. Businesses need time, and a tax that takes effect immediately and more than doubles costs will simply raise prices for everyone."

Multiple businesses and nonprofits also oppose the measure, like Berkeley Bowl and the Berkeley Repertory Theatre.

The tax would apply to buildings 15,000 square feet or larger, with certain exceptions, like for government buildings, single-family residences and residential buildings with at least 50% affordable units.