Nearly $1 Billion Collected, Almost Nothing to Show: The Measure W Accountability Failure

A Billion-Dollar Promise, Five Years of Nothing

In November 2020, Alameda County voters were asked to trust their government with something significant: a new half-cent sales tax, branded under the hopeful tagline “Home Together,” specifically designed to tackle the county’s worsening homelessness and housing crisis. The pitch was straightforward — pay a little more at the register, and county officials would put that money to work building homes and getting people off the streets.

Voters said yes. Barely — with just 50.09% of the vote — but yes.

Five years later, Alameda County has collected nearly $1 billion from its residents, and as of this week, more than $700 million of it is still sitting idle in the county’s coffers. The homelessness crisis, meanwhile, has barely budged. In Oakland — the county’s largest city — the unhoused population actually grew by 9%.

This is what government accountability failure looks like. And every Alameda County taxpayer deserves to know exactly how it happened.

What Voters Were Sold — and What They Actually Got

Measure W’s campaign materials were unambiguous. Ads, mailers, and public messaging all pointed toward one purpose: solving homelessness and building housing. “Home Together” wasn’t just a tagline — it was a commitment. Two supervisors, Elisa Márquez and Nikki Fortunato Bas, would later acknowledge that the campaign made a clear “political promise” to voters.

But here’s what those voters were never told: legally, Measure W was classified as a general tax — meaning county supervisors could spend the money on anything they pleased, with no binding obligation to direct it toward homelessness at all.

When the Alameda County Taxpayers Association filed a lawsuit challenging the measure, this distinction became central. The association rightly argued that Measure W functioned as a special tax — one with a dedicated purpose — and therefore required a two-thirds supermajority under California law to pass. Measure W cleared only a bare simple majority. The courts ultimately sided with the county, ruling it a general tax.

The legal outcome handed supervisors a blank check. Three of the five board members signaled openness to spending Measure W funds on causes beyond homelessness — from mental health services to immigration programs to violence prevention.

This is the definition of a bait-and-switch. Voters approved a tax to fix homelessness. Officials are now debating whether to spend that money on an entirely different set of priorities. And because of the “general tax” legal designation, there is nothing voters can do about it.

Five Years, $800 Million Collected — and the Crisis Got Worse

While the legal battle played out, the county held all Measure W revenues in escrow. The clock was ticking — both on the homeless crisis in the streets and on the measure’s 10-year lifespan. By the time courts cleared the funds in 2025, more than $800 million had accumulated, untouched.

During those same five years, Alameda County residents experienced some of the most crushing housing costs in the nation. A May 2025 assessment by the California Housing Partnership found that renters needed to earn $50.73 per hour just to afford the average monthly rent of $2,638. Encampments grew. Families were displaced. City mayors pleaded for action.

And the money sat.

Now, in early 2026, county officials are moving — slowly. The Board of Supervisors is voting this week on whether to commit $53 million to 10 affordable housing projects. But even if approved, developers won’t receive those funds until they first compete for state funding to get projects shovel-ready. The county has committed another $93 million to homeless service providers over the next five years — a figure that sounds substantial until you realize it represents just a fraction of the $1.8 billion the tax is projected to raise over its lifetime.

Meanwhile, County Housing Director Jonathan Russell described the initial spending pace as “really fast from our perspective.” Fast. By whose measure?

Bureaucracy Over Urgency: The Government’s Own Admission

Perhaps the most telling detail in this entire story is not the delay itself — it is the county’s explanation for it.

Michelle Starratt, director of the county’s Housing and Community Development department, stated plainly that her office is “not rushing to release those dollars.” She is waiting for the board to finalize its plans, and for clarity on potential changes in federal funding before making any commitments to construction projects.

County Housing Director Russell acknowledged a separate, equally damning problem: the county simply does not have enough staff to review and process funding applications. In other words, Alameda County collected a billion dollars from its residents and didn’t bother to build the administrative capacity needed to spend it.

Board President David Haubert offered this reassurance: “We’re still in the planning phase. We want to be extremely mindful.”

Mindful. After five years and $800 million.

Oakland Councilwoman Charlene Wang captured the frustration that many residents feel: “We really don’t have time to wait. We’ve got to move with some urgency here. We have a crisis on the streets.” Hayward Mayor Mark Salinas called for “less red tape” and a “transparent, fair, and equitable process.” Even Livermore Mayor John Marchand, who welcomed the funding, said he wants to see it distributed sooner.

City leaders across the county — including the very officials who championed Measure W — are now publicly criticizing the speed of the bureaucracy they helped build.

The Fiscal Reality: Who Actually Paid for This?

Sales taxes are not progressive. They do not scale with income. A half-cent increase at the register costs a working-class family buying groceries the same percentage as it costs a wealthy professional buying luxury goods — and as a share of income, the burden falls disproportionately on lower- and middle-income households.

Alameda County residents — many of them already stretched thin by the region’s staggering cost of living — have been paying this tax since 2021. They were told it would help fix homelessness. Instead, their money sat in a government escrow account for four years while lawyers argued over legal definitions.

Now that the funds are finally moving, five of the measure’s ten years are already gone. To secure voter renewal by 2030, the county will need to demonstrate meaningful results. So far, the most measurable outcome is this: the county’s overall unhoused population dropped just 3% in 2024 — the first decline in over a decade, yes, but a modest one — while Oakland’s homeless population grew. More people are still becoming homeless than are being housed.

That is not a success story. That is a system in need of serious reform.

Accountability Starts with Honesty

To be fair, some of the delay was genuinely outside the county’s control. The taxpayer lawsuit — while ultimately unsuccessful — created legitimate legal uncertainty that justified holding funds in escrow. No responsible government spends money while its legal authority to do so is in active dispute.

But the lawsuit does not explain the county’s lack of administrative preparation. It does not explain why officials are only now building the staffing capacity to process applications. It does not explain the “bait-and-switch” marketing strategy that sold a general tax as a dedicated homelessness solution. And it does not explain why three supervisors are still openly debating whether to honor the political promise that got this tax passed in the first place.

Conservatives have long argued that government’s first duty is to be honest with taxpayers about how their money will be used, and to deliver on that promise with efficiency and accountability. Measure W has failed on both counts — and the residents of Alameda County deserve better.

The path forward is clear: spend the money as promised, on housing and homelessness, with full transparency, independent auditing, and measurable outcomes reported publicly. The tax was sold on a commitment. That commitment must now be honored.

Conclusion: Trust Must Be Earned — and Re-Earned

The story of Measure W is ultimately a story about trust — and what happens when government treats it as optional. Alameda County voters trusted their supervisors with nearly a billion dollars. What they got in return was years of legal limbo, bureaucratic inertia, and a slow-motion debate about whether to honor the very promise that got the tax passed.

Homelessness in Alameda County is a real problem that deserves real solutions. But the answer is not blank-check government spending with no accountability and no urgency. It is disciplined, transparent, results-driven investment — where every dollar is tracked, every outcome is measured, and every official is held responsible for delivering on the commitments they made to voters.

The money is finally moving. Whether it will move with the speed, honesty, and accountability that taxpayers deserve — that remains to be seen.