| ||||||
 |
|
|||||
|
Measure I Temporary Fiscal Emergency Parcel Tax City of Oakland 2/3 Approval Required
See Also:
Index of all Measures |
||||||
| ||||||
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Fail:
19011 /
37.7% Yes votes ......
31353 /
62.3% No votes
| Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Official Information | Impartial Analysis | Arguments | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shall the City of Oakland establish a five year temporary fiscal emergency parcel tax to preserve essential city services, including fire, police services, and police technology, youth violence prevention, library, services, parks and recreation, and street repair, by establishing an $80 parcel tax for single-family homes and specified amounts for multi-family and commercial properties with an exemption for low-income households?
An annual review is required to ensure the proper use of parcel tax revenue. The tax will be imposed through fiscal year 2015-2016. For each single family residential parcel, the parcel tax will be $80.00. For multiple unit residential parcels, the parcel tax will be $54.66 per unit. For non-residential parcels, the parcel tax will vary depending on the frontage and square footage of the parcel, based on the formula specified in Part 2, Section 2 (C) of the ordinance. An exemption from the parcel tax is available to qualifying low income households. Passage of this measure requires approval by two-thirds of the electorate. A "yes" vote will approve the parcel tax for the uses specified in the ordinance; a "no" vote will reject the parcel tax.
Barbara a. Parker
Under the proposed parcel tax increase, Single-Family Residential Parcels will incur an annual rate of $80 per parcel; Multiple-Family Residential Unit Parcels will incur an annual tax of $54.66 per unit; Non-Residential Parcels are calculated by multiplying the annual tax rate of $40.97 by the total number of Single Family Equivalents (determined by the frontage and square footage). Financial Impact Under the proposed new parcel tax, the City is projecting to receive $12,052,379 in parcel taxes for FY 2011-12, The parcel tax under each classification is shown below:
Office of the City Administrator's Analysis
The total amount in parcel tax revenue projected for all five years is $60,261,894. However, the projected net revenue after exemptions and fees is $55,590,793, as illustrated below.
Office of the City Administrator's Analysis
In its analysis, the City Administration did not factor in taxes imposed on Residential Hotels and tax exemptions for Affordable Housing Projects and Foreclosed Single Family Homes. The City Administration did factor in low income exemptions, delinquencies and the county collection fee. Based on our analysis of the data provided by City staff, the projected revenues appear accurate. We relied on the best data available at this time, however actual results may vary from City staff estimates.
s/COURTNEY A. RUBY, CPA, CFE
Purpose of Tax
The tax revenue may be used only to restore City:
The City Council is obligated to ensure that revenue generated by this special parcel tax is used only for the purposes specified above. The City Council has discretion to decide how to allocate the funds among the listed categories. Cost of Tax The tax will cost owner of a single family residential parcel $80.00 annually. Multiple unit residential parcels will be taxed at $54.66 per unit. The tax for nonresidential parcels will be based on frontage and square footage of the parcel, in accordance with the formula specified in Part 2, Section 2(C) of the ordinance. Hotels' taxes will depend upon the percentage of transient occupancy, in accordance with the formula specified in Part 2, Section 2(E) of the ordinance. The ordinance directs City Council to amend the Rent Adjustment Ordinance to allow owners of rental units to pass through one-half of the tax to their tenants in the form of a rent increase. Tax Exemptions and Reductions The measure exempts the following:
1) Low Income Households: An owner who lives on the parcel in question and whose income qualifies the owner for public housing under federal law as a "very low income" individual.
2) Undeveloped parcels: An, owner of an undeveloped parcel is exempt from the tax if the parcel was undeveloped for at least six months of the year. The measure reduces the tax as follows:
1) Affordable housing projects: Rental housing projects for senior, disabled and low-income households that are owned by nonprofits and exempt from ad valorem property tax are liable for only 50 % of the tax.
2) Rebates to tenants in foreclosed single family homes: The City will provide a rebate of one-half of the tax and any subsequent increases if a tenant (i) lived in the unit before foreclosure proceedings commenced; and (ii) is at or below the income considered "very low income" so that the tenant qualifies for public housing under federal law. Annual Review and Report This measure also requires an annual review by an independent firm. It further requires that the chief fiscal officer prepare an annual report stating the amount of funds the City has collected and expended. The measure authorizes the City to use tax proceeds pay the cost of the report.
Barbara J. Parker
|
Nonpartisan Information League of Women Voters EventsLeague of Women Voters Presentation of Pros & Cons of the Ballot Measures
Oakland Tribune
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Arguments For Measure I | Arguments Against Measure I | ||
| Fair Share Parcel Tax
Oakland is making progress, and we need to keep moving forward. We can't afford to go back. Over the past five years; Oakland has cut more than $170 million in urgently needed services, eliminated 528 positions, and cut its budget by 25%. Measure I, for 25 cents per day, will provide $11 million a year for the next five years, and give Oakland the ability to recover from the worst recession since the depression. Measure I will:
A coalition of community advocates, business leaders, seniors, library patrons, parks supporters and Oaklanders from every district support the Measure. Oakland is beginning to make progress in many areas. Let's help keep moving forward.
Jean Quan - Mayor
Here we are again facing another regressive property tax of $80 per parcel, being told that the City's budget has been cut by 25% and that's why we should pay more taxes. There's nothing indicating these funds will be handled any more wisely or efficiently than the last parcel tax we agreed to. To this day we don't get what we were promised in 2004 under Measure Y, yet we still pay that tax. Proponents claim that this measure will restore or support numerous services and programs but the measure DOES NOT require any improvements and has no accountability. The money could easily, and legally, be used to pay for pensions or salaries that are currently bankrupting the City. It does nothing to address the City's structural problems, including a $450 million pension debt that the City has no plan on how to repay. Proponents should focus their time addressing the debt associated with our current pension system rather than asking Oaklanders to pay higher taxes. $80 is a lot of money ($400 over five years), particularly for homeowners who are on the brink of foreclosure, and others who can barely make their monthly rent payments. This is another tax-grab without proof that our tax dollars will be spent wisely or efficiently. Demand real reform; don't give the City another blank check. Vote NO.
Frank Castro - Chair, Greater Rockridge NCPC
| This measure would add a new property tax of $80 per parcel in Oakland and has
no accountability. This would bring the current fixed taxes to $820 annually
representing a 27% increase on Oakland Specific Taxes. This tax doesn't take into
account your income level or property value; and it can be passed onto renters.
This is a regressive tax and should be defeated.
There's NO guarantee that more money will translate into increased service levels. This measure doesn't include specifics about how your tax dollars will be used; it only includes a laundry list of things the tax "may be used for." Oakland has the HIGHEST property tax rate in Alameda County. In 2008, Oakland homeowners paid $7,300 in property taxes on a home worth $500,000; the average in Alameda County was $6,300. Oakland's unemployment rate of 15% has led to thousands of foreclosures. In the last three years over 12,000 properties in Oakland have gone into foreclosure proceedings, with rates this high, it's unfathomable that homeowners be asked to pay more taxes. In fact, the authors of this tax themselves recognize the City of Oakland is being impacted by the Global, National, State, and Regional recession, yet they want to ask you to pay more taxes as if the recession has not impacted your checkbook. What Oakland needs is structural change, change that can be achieved without increasing taxes; Government needs to do more with less just like everyone else in this down economy. Let's not resort to quick fixes on the backs of struggling homeowners and renters. Let's, demand implementation of systems that show efficient use of resources, measure workloads and ensure accountability. We urge a NO Vote. This is another tax-grab without proof that our tax dollars are spent wisely or efficiently.
Ignacio De La Fuente - President Pro‐Tempore
Oakland is already doing more with less: the City has cut 25% from its general fund over the past five Years, eliminated 528 positions, and put major reforms in place. We are a diverse coalition of people who love Oakland. We don't agree on everything, but we agree that this crisis demands a balanced approach, not a Tea-Party style, all-cuts approach. Join us in Voting YES on Measure I to keep Oakland moving forward.
Laurence Reid - City Councilmember
|
Alameda Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: January 20, 2012 12:13 PST
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund http://cavotes.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.