News

Another sales tax hike proposed, and voters seem to like it

It's almost been five years since San Mateo County voters approved Measure A, a 10-year county-wide half-cent sales tax that generates about $80 million annually for the county's general fund. Then seven months ago, voters approved a 20-year extension of that tax.

How about another half-cent sales tax increase in 2018 to generate another $80 million annually, this time to address potholes, traffic congestion, better mass transit and other transportation matters? There is support out there – above 60 percent, Bryan Godbe of Godbe Research told the Board of Supervisors at a recent study session on a tax measure – but it's not enough.

To pass, this tax measure requires the approval of two-thirds of the voters. A recent poll by Godbe Research, a San Mateo-based market researcher, showed that more than two-thirds of voters polled are OK with higher sales taxes if the revenues are used to repair potholes and maintain streets, reduce congestion on U.S. 101 and double the capacity of Caltrain so as to remove vehicles from streets. But support was not as high for spending on bike lanes, senior transit, the county bus system and extending light rail around the southern end of the Bay.

As for opposition, the most well-received arguments were: that higher sales taxes punish older and low-income people, that local government should be spending its revenues more wisely rather than raising taxes, and that a higher sales tax will chase businesses away – a phenomenon shown to be untrue, but that people believe "intuitively," Mr. Godbe said.

In most of San Mateo County, including towns in the Almanac's service area, customers pay $8.75 in sales tax for every $100 spent, according to rates compiled by the state Board of Equalization.

Help sustain the local news you depend on.

Your contribution matters. Become a member today.

Join

Already at the limit

Included in that 8.75 percent is 1 percent for transportation-related projects: a half cent approved in forming the Transit District (in 1974, but not levied until 1982) and the another half cent since 1988.

Adding another half cent is complicated. By state law, no local jurisdiction can collect more than 2 percent in sales taxes, and jurisdictions in San Mateo County began bumping against that limit after voters in 2012 approved another half cent for the general fund.

The countywide sales taxes now add up to 1.5 percent, but four cities, including East Palo Alto and Belmont, have their own taxes on top. Any new countywide half-cent tax would push their rates above 2 percent, in violation of the law.

To go beyond the cap requires legislation, which is in the works. AB 1613, by Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, would allow San Mateo County to exceed the cap by half a percentage point. Another transportation-related half-cent tax would require the Transit District to develop a spending plan listing specific projects and programs that would benefit, including public transit, local streets and roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Stay informed

Get the latest local news and information sent straight to your inbox.

Stay informed

Get the latest local news and information sent straight to your inbox.

While Gov. Jerry Brown resists statewide tax increases, he tends to be agreeable when localities want to raise their own taxes, Supervisor Don Horsley said. "We're supportive of it," Mr. Horsley said of Mr. Mullin's bill.

It did not go unnoticed by voters in this poll that this measure would be the third in the county in five years. "What's interesting," Mr. Godbe said, "is we thought that that (concern) might be at the top of the list. It's actually at the bottom of the list (though) still influential."

The term "influential" applies when an opposition argument is supported by more than 33 percent of survey respondents, he said. Polling showed that all of the above opposition arguments easily met that threshold.

Godbe Research said the poll surveyed 937 of 180,353 registered voters likely to participate in the November 2018 general election, and 763 of 116,696 likely voters in the June 2018 primary election. Polling was done in late March via landline phones, cellphones and online interviews. The margins of error were less than 4 percent, according to Godbe Research.

Other taxes

In April, Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1, which raises the gasoline tax 12 cents per gallon starting Nov. 1, 2017. The law also sets an annual "transportation improvement fee" tied to the market value of a vehicle starting with the new year, and sets a $100 fee on zero-emission vehicles starting in 2020.

According to the new law, public funding for road maintenance over the next 10 years will face shortfalls of $59 billion for the state highway system and $78 billion for streets and roads maintained by cities and counties. Taxes and fees related to road maintenance have not gone up for more than 20 years, proponents of the new law say, and motorists are spending $17 billion every year on "extra maintenance and car repair" attributed to poorly maintained roads.

Click here for more information on SB 1.

Also in the works: Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, has authored a bill that would allow the three-county Joint Powers Board that oversees Caltrain to ask voters for a one-eighth-cent sales tax to fund railroad operation and capital improvements.

And any sales tax measure in November 2018 would likely share the ballot with Regional Measure 3, a bid by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to increase tolls on major Bay Area bridges by up to $3. Tolls were last raised in 2004.

Another Board of Supervisors study session on a county sales tax increase is tentatively set for Aug. 8.

"We've seen there is a base of support for a transportation measure," Mr. Godbe said in summing up his presentation to the Board of Supervisors. "(But) after people hear of the information, positive and negative, we're not where we need to be on a sales tax.

"We can't assume that just because it may be the right thing to do, that people are going to support it. Right now, they won't," he said. "We have work to do before this measure gets put on the ballot. We believe that public outreach efforts should begin as soon as possible in order to explain, really, the needs and the potential solutions that this kind of measure would present. ... We shouldn't wait for final details."

"The more transparency the better, to try to get as much buy-in as possible before this is formally put forward to the voters," Supervisor Dave Pine said. "We definitely have our work cut out for us. ... This is not going to be easy. I think transparency is really important."

Seamus Murphy, speaking for the San Mateo County Transit District, said that the public's concern about traffic congestion is "probably at an all time high" in the county. "We're really prepared to make a strong case that we can do a lot of the things that move the needle with the public," he said, including talking "in a very assertive way" to the public about what SamTrans is doing now and what it plans to do.

SamTrans should be at the Aug. 8 study session in force, Supervisor Horsley said. "Bring your whole staff," he told Mr. Murphy.

--

Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?

Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.

Sign up now

Follow AlmanacNews.com and The Almanac on Twitter @almanacnews, Facebook and on Instagram @almanacnews for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Another sales tax hike proposed, and voters seem to like it

by Dave Boyce / Almanac

Uploaded: Tue, Aug 1, 2017, 8:02 pm

It's almost been five years since San Mateo County voters approved Measure A, a 10-year county-wide half-cent sales tax that generates about $80 million annually for the county's general fund. Then seven months ago, voters approved a 20-year extension of that tax.

How about another half-cent sales tax increase in 2018 to generate another $80 million annually, this time to address potholes, traffic congestion, better mass transit and other transportation matters? There is support out there – above 60 percent, Bryan Godbe of Godbe Research told the Board of Supervisors at a recent study session on a tax measure – but it's not enough.

To pass, this tax measure requires the approval of two-thirds of the voters. A recent poll by Godbe Research, a San Mateo-based market researcher, showed that more than two-thirds of voters polled are OK with higher sales taxes if the revenues are used to repair potholes and maintain streets, reduce congestion on U.S. 101 and double the capacity of Caltrain so as to remove vehicles from streets. But support was not as high for spending on bike lanes, senior transit, the county bus system and extending light rail around the southern end of the Bay.

As for opposition, the most well-received arguments were: that higher sales taxes punish older and low-income people, that local government should be spending its revenues more wisely rather than raising taxes, and that a higher sales tax will chase businesses away – a phenomenon shown to be untrue, but that people believe "intuitively," Mr. Godbe said.

In most of San Mateo County, including towns in the Almanac's service area, customers pay $8.75 in sales tax for every $100 spent, according to rates compiled by the state Board of Equalization.

Already at the limit

Included in that 8.75 percent is 1 percent for transportation-related projects: a half cent approved in forming the Transit District (in 1974, but not levied until 1982) and the another half cent since 1988.

Adding another half cent is complicated. By state law, no local jurisdiction can collect more than 2 percent in sales taxes, and jurisdictions in San Mateo County began bumping against that limit after voters in 2012 approved another half cent for the general fund.

The countywide sales taxes now add up to 1.5 percent, but four cities, including East Palo Alto and Belmont, have their own taxes on top. Any new countywide half-cent tax would push their rates above 2 percent, in violation of the law.

To go beyond the cap requires legislation, which is in the works. AB 1613, by Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, would allow San Mateo County to exceed the cap by half a percentage point. Another transportation-related half-cent tax would require the Transit District to develop a spending plan listing specific projects and programs that would benefit, including public transit, local streets and roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

While Gov. Jerry Brown resists statewide tax increases, he tends to be agreeable when localities want to raise their own taxes, Supervisor Don Horsley said. "We're supportive of it," Mr. Horsley said of Mr. Mullin's bill.

It did not go unnoticed by voters in this poll that this measure would be the third in the county in five years. "What's interesting," Mr. Godbe said, "is we thought that that (concern) might be at the top of the list. It's actually at the bottom of the list (though) still influential."

The term "influential" applies when an opposition argument is supported by more than 33 percent of survey respondents, he said. Polling showed that all of the above opposition arguments easily met that threshold.

Godbe Research said the poll surveyed 937 of 180,353 registered voters likely to participate in the November 2018 general election, and 763 of 116,696 likely voters in the June 2018 primary election. Polling was done in late March via landline phones, cellphones and online interviews. The margins of error were less than 4 percent, according to Godbe Research.

Other taxes

In April, Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1, which raises the gasoline tax 12 cents per gallon starting Nov. 1, 2017. The law also sets an annual "transportation improvement fee" tied to the market value of a vehicle starting with the new year, and sets a $100 fee on zero-emission vehicles starting in 2020.

According to the new law, public funding for road maintenance over the next 10 years will face shortfalls of $59 billion for the state highway system and $78 billion for streets and roads maintained by cities and counties. Taxes and fees related to road maintenance have not gone up for more than 20 years, proponents of the new law say, and motorists are spending $17 billion every year on "extra maintenance and car repair" attributed to poorly maintained roads.

Click here for more information on SB 1.

Also in the works: Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, has authored a bill that would allow the three-county Joint Powers Board that oversees Caltrain to ask voters for a one-eighth-cent sales tax to fund railroad operation and capital improvements.

And any sales tax measure in November 2018 would likely share the ballot with Regional Measure 3, a bid by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to increase tolls on major Bay Area bridges by up to $3. Tolls were last raised in 2004.

Another Board of Supervisors study session on a county sales tax increase is tentatively set for Aug. 8.

"We've seen there is a base of support for a transportation measure," Mr. Godbe said in summing up his presentation to the Board of Supervisors. "(But) after people hear of the information, positive and negative, we're not where we need to be on a sales tax.

"We can't assume that just because it may be the right thing to do, that people are going to support it. Right now, they won't," he said. "We have work to do before this measure gets put on the ballot. We believe that public outreach efforts should begin as soon as possible in order to explain, really, the needs and the potential solutions that this kind of measure would present. ... We shouldn't wait for final details."

"The more transparency the better, to try to get as much buy-in as possible before this is formally put forward to the voters," Supervisor Dave Pine said. "We definitely have our work cut out for us. ... This is not going to be easy. I think transparency is really important."

Seamus Murphy, speaking for the San Mateo County Transit District, said that the public's concern about traffic congestion is "probably at an all time high" in the county. "We're really prepared to make a strong case that we can do a lot of the things that move the needle with the public," he said, including talking "in a very assertive way" to the public about what SamTrans is doing now and what it plans to do.

SamTrans should be at the Aug. 8 study session in force, Supervisor Horsley said. "Bring your whole staff," he told Mr. Murphy.

--

Comments

whatever
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 2, 2017 at 12:36 am
whatever, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 2, 2017 at 12:36 am

Enough already. It's already too expensive here. Time to rein in the current labor, benefits and pension expenses. It seems that once someone gets a local government job or position there's very little oversight. They become jobs for life protected by overzealous unions and power hungry administrators who have little concern for the residents they are supposed to be serving and protecting. Bring the labor issue under control and we'll have plenty of dollars for potholes etc without raising taxes and maybe even lower them. Time to stop feeding the voracious local gov't appetite.


James Cahill
Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 2, 2017 at 1:02 pm
James Cahill, Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Aug 2, 2017 at 1:02 pm

Another half cent tax for pot holes? We pay at the pump and some of the general budget must be allocated to road maintenance and we pay in other areas for our roads but still they seem to be in terrible shape. I'm certainly will to pay but i'll be relieved to see something being done in the area for which the money is actually being collected.


Atherton Taxpayer
Atherton: other
on Aug 2, 2017 at 1:11 pm
Atherton Taxpayer, Atherton: other
on Aug 2, 2017 at 1:11 pm

Yet another tax that promises better results! Our officials seem to believe that there is an endless ability to "dig deeper" to fund something that is either already funded, or should be paid by its actual usage.

If this tax is to subsidize Caltrans &/or Caltrain even further, we should have the riders pay for the service. Having been to many County meetings, I believe that we could easily pay for all the services that we need by having less highly paid consultants & Gov't Bureaucrats and very costly retirement plans for Gov't workers.

Please say no to more taxes - it is the only way to stop Bureaucratic waste!


johngslater
Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Aug 2, 2017 at 2:28 pm
johngslater, Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Aug 2, 2017 at 2:28 pm

COMPLETE BS:

'Taxes and fees related to road maintenance have not gone up for more than 20 years'

When the economy expands, a sales tax passed 20 years ago generates HIGHER taxes. Only the tax RATE remains constant.

Politicians are so poor at math that it is amazing they can claim they got a college education.


Bob
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 3, 2017 at 6:52 am
Bob, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 3, 2017 at 6:52 am

Enough already - every time you turn around some agency is asking for an increase to pay for something such as fixing pot holes. Didn't I just read a story that CalTrain and/or SamTrans are cutting some of their services and now they want an increase to fund what?

NO - enough already. Government needs to learn how to budget for improvement projects now just stick out their hand every time they want to pay for something. Sacramento added a tax several years ago to fix roads. Not sure where that money went (?!) and now they are raising our gas tax again come November to fix the potholes despite assurances that this time it will actually go to fix them.

It's like the frog and the frying pan -- if you turn up the heat slowly, the frog really won't feel it's getting baked.


Peter Carpenter
Registered user
Atherton: Lindenwood
on Aug 3, 2017 at 12:02 pm
Peter Carpenter, Atherton: Lindenwood
Registered user
on Aug 3, 2017 at 12:02 pm

Don't forget that a sales tax is regressive and it disproportionately impacts the poorest in our communities:

Web Link


Bob
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 3, 2017 at 1:01 pm
Bob, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 3, 2017 at 1:01 pm

I believe that Menlo Park Fire was able to rebuild and modernize some of its fire stations without asking residents for a subsidy. This is a good example of well managed and planned for projects.


Yes to building infrastructure
Menlo Park: other
on Aug 3, 2017 at 1:53 pm
Yes to building infrastructure, Menlo Park: other
on Aug 3, 2017 at 1:53 pm

Yes to building infrastructure.


Jack Hickey
Registered user
Woodside: Emerald Hills
on Aug 3, 2017 at 1:57 pm
Jack Hickey, Woodside: Emerald Hills
Registered user
on Aug 3, 2017 at 1:57 pm

Let the Supes know that they should not waste taxpayers money by holding an election which is doomed to fail.


Michael G. Stogner
another community
on Aug 3, 2017 at 2:47 pm
Michael G. Stogner, another community
on Aug 3, 2017 at 2:47 pm

Make sure you let the Supervisors know. Tell them DO NOT Place this on the ballot.

If it get on the ballot it passes with their Organized Voters.

Supervisors Information
http://bos.smcgov.org


Make Dan Mateo great again
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 3, 2017 at 4:12 pm
Make Dan Mateo great again, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 3, 2017 at 4:12 pm

Yeah. Let our county grind to a halt with all this new construction and the homes and jobs it will provide.

The traffic!

Don't listen to the stay-at-homes and retirees posting above. Guessing none are under 45.

Build America - make America great again.


Michael G. Stogner
another community
on Aug 3, 2017 at 4:23 pm
Michael G. Stogner, another community
on Aug 3, 2017 at 4:23 pm

Lets not forget History, This is how Measure A passed in the first place.

Web Link

An inconvenient truth about San Mateo County’s “structural deficit” is that ... there isn’t one!

The Board of Supervisors did not publicize the true condition of its finances as of the time tax Measures T, U, X, and A were voted on in 2012. In plain english they lied to the public to get measure A passed.

They also arranged for Seton Medical Center to fund and staff the Yes on A campaign.Look up how much Seton got in return for their investment.


Joe
Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
on Aug 4, 2017 at 7:44 am
Joe, Menlo Park: Suburban Park/Lorelei Manor/Flood Park Triangle
on Aug 4, 2017 at 7:44 am

I'm under 45, I believe and infrastructure and I have a family. But I'm also a realist and recognize that almost every government entity has its hand out wanting more. Schools leverage "it's for our students"; Sacramento wants to fix our potholes (again); we need to subsidize something.

I make a decent salary. But in addition to sending my kids to school, I have to subsidize the school foundation which financially supports the schools, and on it goes.

Now, the Supervisors want to yet again subsidize another project. What are my taxes paying for already and why wasn't this planned for in the budget.

Government needs to realize that residents have limited resources and income, and while they may have useful ideas, taxes aren't the only way to pay for these projects. Get a clue and plan for these projects -- it's called strategic planning.

I'm voting NO.


Marshall Tax
Atherton: other
on Aug 4, 2017 at 4:04 pm
Marshall Tax, Atherton: other
on Aug 4, 2017 at 4:04 pm

I'm voting yea. And I'm over 45.


Bob
Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 7, 2017 at 7:43 am
Bob, Menlo Park: Downtown
on Aug 7, 2017 at 7:43 am

I'm voting NO, and I'm over 45.


Michael G. Stogner
another community
on Aug 10, 2017 at 9:04 am
Michael G. Stogner, another community
on Aug 10, 2017 at 9:04 am

The Supervisors should give matching funds of $650,000 to the Unorganized residents who will be paying this tax.

Samtrans is investing $300,000 and the Supervisors just approved $350,000 for Education Campaign, all of this money is Taxpayer Money.

Jim Hartnett and Rosanne Foust with $650,000

Lets level the playing field


Michael G. Stogner
another community
on Aug 10, 2017 at 9:07 am
Michael G. Stogner, another community
on Aug 10, 2017 at 9:07 am

Taxpayer money used against Taxpayers

SamTrans has hired two consulting firms to help with outreach and creating a technical as well as stakeholder working groups leading up to the November 2018 election.


Name hidden
Atherton: West of Alameda

on Sep 26, 2017 at 8:25 am
Name hidden, Atherton: West of Alameda

on Sep 26, 2017 at 8:25 am

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.