Welcome to the city council
>> special meeting this Monday evening,
» special meeting this Monday evening,
January 12th. Uh, city clerk, may you
please call the role?
>> Certainly. Mayor Lorraine, council
» Certainly. Mayor Lorraine, council
member Diaz Nash,
>> yes.
» yes.
>> Council member Frio Gditzky
» Council member Frio Gditzky
>> here.
» here.
>> Deputy Mayor Fernandez
» Deputy Mayor Fernandez
>> here.
» here.
>> Mayor Lorraine
» Mayor Lorraine
>> here.
» here.
>> And council member Newsome
» And council member Newsome
>> here.
» Thank you. I'll just ask uh city
colleagues and staff to please silence
and turn off uh your phones and devices
for the meeting going forward. Welcome.
We are excited to be here in person with
options for those who choose not to be
in person to still participate
virtually. This meeting is being held at
the Sanonteo Main Public Library due to
the construction at city hall.
I'd like to share a few logistical
reminders to help our meeting here run
smoothly. So, for those in the room,
please note that after 8:00, the library
closes. Staff asks that everyone exit
through the back doors behind the
seating here, located directly behind
the room. Uh, with regard to parking at
the library, after 8:00 p.m., the
stairwell to the parking garage is
locked. Attendees will need to use the
elevator and select level P1 or P2 to
access the garage
z and that would be outside. So you
still go out this way and there's an
elevator. Just know that the stairwell
is locked. Zoom attendees, please check
your microphone volume before
participating in public comment. We have
MCTV here tonight helping us out and
they will continue monitoring audio to
ensure that there is clear sound for all
participants. Thank you to MCTV
and thank you all for your cooperation
and for helping us maintain an efficient
and accessible meeting environment.
There are several ways to participate.
For those attending in person, you can
complete a yellow request to speak slip
and hand it to the city clerk.
If participating remotely, you can use
the raise your hand feature in Zoom and
you will be called on at the appropriate
time when we have public comment periods
for items. If you're calling in via
phone, uh please press star9 to raise
your hand and then when you're called
upon, you can press star six to unmute.
These options for public comment will
remain available until I close public
comment period for each specific item.
If you're joining us via YouTube, uh
members of the public watching on
YouTube, if you wish to provide live
comment, unfortunately, we don't
currently have that functionality within
YouTube. Uh we just have it through
Zoom. So, please join the meeting
through the Zoom webinar using the
access information listed on the agenda.
So, if you go to our website, city of
samonteo.org, and find our uh meeting
there, the Zoom link information is in
the agenda.
Thank you for your patience with that.
Now, we will move on to our study
session item for the special meeting,
potential ballot measures for November
2026, survey results and council
direction. Uh, we have a presentation
from Mr. Zachary Rita, senior management
analyst with the city manager's office.
Mr. Rita, please.
» Good evening, Mayor, City Council. My
name is Zach Raa, senior management
analyst, and we are joined virtually
tonight, but with by Timothy McCclar,
president of True North Research.
The purpose of our study session tonight
is uh staff is seeking direction from
council on whether to proceed with
education and outreach on a potential
ballot measure and also it's an
opportunity to receive a report from
true true north research and Timothy um
on a a survey that was conducted um and
it will help identify the features of
the measures that resonate with voters.
So, here are the four options for city
council consideration. Number one,
should the city proceed with education
and outreach on the sales tax measure
and return to council for decision
whether to place it on the November 2026
ballot? Number two, same language except
swap sales tax measure for general
obligation bond. Number three, both
sales tax measure and general obligation
bond. And number four is should the city
not proceed with education and outreach
on either the sales tax measure or the
general obligation bond.
So just quickly some background on how
we got to today. uh in June of 25 uh the
budget was approved with uh structural
deficit and uh to respond to that in
August of 2025 the city council met and
reviewed uh the revenue measure options
and provided direction to continue
exploring bond and sales tax feasibility
for the November 26 election.
uh that was the direction that staff and
True North Research needed to begin
designing and and ultimately conducting
a revenue measure feasibility study
which was conducted in November of 25.
Uh and that really focused on the the
bond and the sales tax measure. And then
just last week, the city council ad hoc
subcommittee met and recommended to
continue educating and informing the
community about the potential quarter
cent sales tax measure.
At this time, I'll pass it over to
Timothy uh to provide uh uh the results
of the revenue measure feasibility
study.
>> Great. Uh thank you, Zach. Can uh just
» Great. Uh thank you, Zach. Can uh just
want to make sure you've got my audio on
that end.
>> Yes, sir.
» Yes, sir.
>> Okay, great. Well, good evening, mayor
» Okay, great. Well, good evening, mayor
and members of council. Uh Tim McCclar,
president of True North Research. Um,
we're a firm that uh for about 25 years
has specialized in working with uh
cities as well as other public agencies
around the state and uh using surveys to
help them develop a statistically
reliable understanding of the
communities and the customers that they
serve. One of the areas we really
specialize in is a revenue measure
feasibility studies like what we're
going to be talking about here tonight
where the goal is to understand if it's
feasible to move forward with some type
of revenue measure. And if it is
feasible to use the research to help
guide how you might go about structuring
that measure in a way that's going to be
consistent with the type measures that
your community is uh interested in
supporting. Um so I I've got some slides
here I'm going to walk through. If you
have questions or comments along the
way, uh, feel free to jump in and I'll
also obviously be available to answer
questions on the back of the
presentation as well. So, uh, before we
get into the results, uh, helpful to
take a quick moment to review the
purpose of the study as well as the
methodology. Uh, as a revenue measure
feasibility study, we're really trying
to address the three bullets that you
see here. The first is to answer that
basic question of is it feasible? And
what I mean by that is if you as a
council were to take the um action of
placing a measure on an upcoming ballot,
does it have a reasonable chance of
success? Uh when we do find that it's
feasible, the second bullet kicks in
gear, which is to use the research to
help understand how might you go about
structuring a measure in a way that it's
consistent with the type of measure that
your community is interested in
supporting. There's a lot of components
to a revenue measure uh of any stripe.
Um whether it be a bond or a sales tax,
it's, you know, how much is this going
to cost me? uh what uh types of services
or improvements would be funded by the
measure, what types of accountability
provisions might be built into the
measure, etc. So, there's a lot of
important questions that you as a
council would ultimately need to answer
before you placed a measure on the
ballot, and the research can help guide
those uh those uh helping you with um
with those uh answers. And then thirdly,
uh the research is an opportunity for us
to understand how uh information
ultimately shapes voters's opinions
about your proposal and that in turn can
help guide uh city communications. Next
slide please. So in terms of the
methodology or how we went about
conducting the study, we use the same
methodology here that we always use when
we're doing revenue measure feasibility
studies. And the first thing we want to
ask ourselves is what election
environment do we anticipate that this
measure is going to be on? The reason
for that is different elections have
different turnouts and as you expand or
shrink turnout, you could get a somewhat
different profile to the participating
voters in that election. In this case,
we're looking at a potential November
2026 measure. And so, we identified all
of the individuals in the city that we
uh are known as likely November voters
based on when they register to vote uh
in the community as well as elections.
They've taken advantage since that
point. And we used a process called
stratified and clustered random sampling
to choose a representative sample of
these likely November voters for our
survey. Um by using stratified and
clustered random sampling, what it
ensures is at the end of this process,
we have a sample that matches the
November universe on all the dimensions
that tend to drive how voters behave
when it comes to revenue measures. So
the balance by age and gender,
partisanship, household party type,
where they live within the community,
the balance in our sample matches the
balance in that likely November
universe. And that's really one of the
keys to making sure that this research
is reliable. Once we pulled our sample,
we used three different recruiting
methods, email, text, and telephone.
Everything's pin protected so that only
those individuals who were randomly slam
uh sampled and sent an invitation to
participate in the survey could do so.
They can complete the survey one time
only. they had the option of taking it
either online or by telephone as well as
in English or Spanish, whichever was
their preference. Um, we had actually
set out and were contracted to do 600
completed interviews. Uh, we walked back
in the door with over a thousand. Uh,
the reason for that is I always have to
make some estimates about what do I
think the productivity and response
rates going to be to the survey in a
community. I tend to air on the more
conservative side. Um, here we just got
a much better response to the
invitations than I was anticipating. And
uh the benefit of that is we have about
an extra 400 interviews to play with. Uh
which is great because one of the things
we're doing in this study is what's
called a split sample uh study where
because we're looking at a potential
bond measure as well as a potential
sales tax measure. Um research has shown
that you want to split your samples so
that half get one version, half get the
other. That's the best way to get a
clean read on uh the potential support
for each one of those measures. And so
we took our,2 interviews, split them in
half. And what that means is that for
questions that were answered by all uh
1,2 respondents, we have a margin of
error due to sampling of plus or minus
3% at the 95% confidence level. But even
when we split it in half and so those
questions that are specific to a bond or
specific to a sales tax, we still have a
margin of error that meets the academic
standard for statistical liability which
is plus or minus in this case 4.3% at
[clears throat] the 95% confidence
level. So what this basically means is
whether we're looking at a bond or a
sales tax related questions, we can be
95% confident that the results in our
survey are within 4.3% of what we would
have found had we spoken with all of
your likely November voters.
Okay, so with that, next slide, we jump
into the results. Um, we like to open up
the revenue measure feasibility studies
with a few warm-up questions that kind
of get folks thinking about their
community, uh, before we get to the the
issue of the revenue measure itself. And
so, uh, the first question this series
simply asks them to tell us how they
would rate the, uh, overall quality of
of life in the community. Would they say
it's excellent, good, fair, poor, or
very poor? Uh as you can see here on the
slide, we've got 86% of respondents who
rated the overall quality of life in the
city as excellent or good. Um this is
actually a really positive result when
it with respect to a revenue measure. We
tend to find that and I get to do this
work around the state for a lot of
different communities. We tend to find
that in the communities where voters
have a high opinion of the quality of
life in their community already that
they are more inclined to support
revenue measures that are geared around
maintaining that level of quality of
life, maintaining the services that
they've be been accustomed to receiving.
And so, um, good result there. On the
next slide, um, we presented an
open-ended question where we said, "If
the city could change one thing to make
Sonteo a better place to live, what
change would you like to see?" Um, this
was asked in an open-ended manner,
meaning we didn't provide them with the
list of options you see here on the
slide. They got to just tell us in their
own words. We went back and looked at
the verbatim responses and group them
into the categories you see here. So,
um, the number one response there is not
sure, can't think anything at 11%. And
if you look a little further down the
list, you also see about 5% of folks who
said no changes, everything is fine. So
you've got about 16% of voters who when
you hand them a soap box and say step up
on that soap box and tell us one thing
we can do to to make the quality of life
in the community better, they're kind of
stuck for an answer, right? And that in
some ways is the ideal um answer this
question because, you know, they really
just don't see any pressing need to to
make changes in the community. Among the
specific responses we did receive,
however, you had about 11% who requested
more affordable housing in the
community. You had another 11% who said
limiting growth and preserving open
space was the thing that they'd most
like to see. And then followed by
reducing traffic congestion at 10% and
on down.
And then on the next slide, u we ask our
last warm-up question where we simply
ask whether generally speaking they are
satisfied or dissatisfied with the job
the city of Sanonteo is doing and
providing municipal services. Because
we're asking them to speak about the
city's performance overall, right? We're
not diving into specific areas like
streets and roads or public safety. This
can be thought of as an overall
performance rating for the city. And you
see that you've got about three out
three out of four uh voters say that
they were satisfied with the city's
efforts to provide municipal services.
You've got about 18% who were uh
dissatisfied with the remainder being
not sure preferring not to answer. So to
give you a sense of of where this lands
in the range of possibilities um for
those cities that are getting the top
top scores um on this question it's kind
of high 80s these days and then I have
cities that are in the 40s. So to to be
at three quarters or 75% of voters
saying that, you know, they're satisfied
with your performance overall, that's a
that's a good solid score.
Okay, so next slide. So after those
warm-up questions, we get right down to
business with what we call the initial
ballot test. And the idea the idea
behind the initial ballot test is we
want to before we get any deeper into
this discussion with a respondent and
start talking about possible tax rates
or how the funds could be spent in more
detail or presenting arguments pro and
con related to this proposal. We wanted
to present to respondents a mockup of
what we think that 75word ballot
statement could look like and get their
reaction. The initial ballot test is a
really good gauge of where your voters
are at on the natural with respect to a
proposal because they haven't seen
anything at this point beyond what
you're seeing here on the slide. This is
the ballot language for the bond and it
takes the form of a legally compliant
bond ballot statement. Um and so you can
see in a bond bond is about bonds are
only for capital, right? So
[clears throat] they can do things like
pave and maintain local streets, fix
potholes, repair um you know public uh
buildings, things like that. they aren't
for services. Um, and we had set this
bond at a total authorized amount of
$323 million, which would have a tax
rate of $30 per 100,000 of assessed
valuation. So that's the bond ballot
language. On the next slide, same
exercise here, only this is for those
50% of respondents who received the
sales tax version. You can see the sales
tax version's a little different in
terms of the language. It can reference
both bonds as well as services. And this
takes the form of what we call a general
tax, meaning it is the funds are not
earmarked for any one particular
purpose. Uh they will go into the
general fund and it's up to council to
decide how you would spend those things.
But the bullets here give a good idea of
the things that you do fund out of the
general fund. This was set at a one
quarter cent sales tax. That is the
remaining increment that is below the
cap uh for your city. uh it would
provide about $7 million annually for
general government use. So those were
the two ballot statements we tested and
here are the results. You can see on the
left side there the bond we had 59%
support for that proposal 26% opposed
with the remainder being unsure. On the
right is the sales tax support initially
was a little softer for the sales tax.
We had 53% support, 38% opposed, and the
rem the rest unsure. Now, one of the
important things to keep in mind,
however, is that a bond and a sale a
general sales tax do not play on the
same playing field. A bond requires
twothird support from uh participating
voters to be successful or basically
66.6667%.
And so at this initial ballot test,
we're sitting about 8% low uh below that
2/3 threshold, right, for the bond. So
we're underwater by about 8%. The
general sales tax, on the other hand,
plays on a simple majority playing
field. And so what that means is we need
50% plus one vote to be successful. So
even though the initial support for the
sales tax is softer, we're actually
operating about three points above the
threshold that's required for passage
for that option. So it's important to
keep in mind as we go through this
presentation the fact that the you know
the threshold for passage of the bond is
quite a bit higher 17 points higher than
the threshold required for the general
sales tax. Next slide please. So for the
bond um we wanted to also dig in to see
how tax rate sensitive voters are with
respect to this proposal. Um and so
naturally kind of the higher the price
tag um for a bond all the things being
equal the lower the level support you
can expect. And so we we did that in a
couple different ways. In this first
slide here we focused on the tax rate
that would be associated with the
measure. And we tested three different
tax rates. at the top was that $30 per
100,000 of assessed valuation tax rate
that was built into that initial ballot
test um 75word ballot statement. Um if
they were anything but a definitely yes
at the $30 per 100,000 assessed, we
asked 20 and 15. And you can see here a
couple of things. Number one, the moment
you kind of put the blinders on somebody
and you focus their attention on the tax
rate that could be associated with a
bond, it has a bit of a chilling effect
on support for the proposal. So, at that
initial ballot test, we had 59% support
with a $30 tax rate embedded in that
75word ballot statement. Here, when we
pull the $30 tax rate out and set it
aside and focus voters attention on it,
support drops dramatically, we're now at
45%. As you then lower that tax rate
from 30 to 20 and then 20 to 15, you can
see that we're getting incremental
adjustments in support. But even at the
$15 per 100,000 assessed valuation tax
rate, u we only had 55% of voters say
that they would support this proposal.
That's about 12 points south of the 2/3
threshold that's required for passage.
Now, one of the things we know about
this question is it tends to be a
conservative read on support for a bond.
The reason being when you talk about the
tax implications of a bond in terms of a
rate per 100,000 assessed valuation, not
everybody knows what you're talking
about, right? You have to know what
assessed valuation means. You have to
have some reasonable estimate of the AV
for your for your property. You've got
to do math pretty quickly in the space
of a poll to turn that rate into a
meaningful number. Not everybody's good
at that. And so we know that there's a
certain percentage of voters who when
you present it this way, they know
you're talking price tag. They don't
know what it adds up to and they'll
hedge. They'll say, "No, we're not
sure." So that's why on the next slide,
we come about a different way. You say,
"All right, let me put it another way.
If you knew that this measure would cost
the typical homeowner about $225 per
year, would you vote yes or no?" The
$225 per year is the $30 per 100,000 of
assessed valuation tax rate multiplied
times the median AV for residential
property in your community. So those two
numbers are comparable. And you can see
that when you go ahead and do the math,
you do tend to get a more positive
response to that amount. Right? When we
tested the $30 tax rate, we were sort of
in the mid-40s in support. When you go
ahead and uh do the math and translate
that into a $225 per year for the median
homeowner, support goes up to 53%. But
here again, we're still well below the
2/3 threshold that's required for a bond
to pass. Next slide, please.
So, at this point in the poll, we go
into what we call the projects and
services section. And the and the idea
here is really twofold. One is we're now
going to start to educate respondents
more about what these measures could
accomplish than we can possibly glean
from the 75word ballot statement. Right?
In the 75 words, only about half of
those words can be devoted to describing
what the measure will accomplish. Here
we get to unpack your measures into all
these various potential uses. And in
that way, voters are getting a better
idea about what the proposals are about.
The other thing it allows us to do is to
look at of all the ways you could
potentially spend the money, how do
voters feel about each of these ways and
which of these are ultimately their
priorities. And as you look at this
list, first thing that sort of jumps out
is every single item on this list has at
least twothirds of voters say they would
favor spending some of the money on that
item. So there's nothing on this list
that is what I would call unpopular,
right? Like they voters just don't see
the merit of the service and aren't
enthused about raising their taxes to
fund it. That said, you can kind of see
a natural break here where um you know
the top seven projects test higher uh
favorability overall and more intense
favorability. And what you do see here
is it's sort of a mix of public works
and public safety, right? Um and some of
these items, the ones that are flagged
sales tax. So the number one item, the
number three item, the number five item,
these are items that can be funded by a
sales tax. they can't be funded by a
bond because they're serviceoriented.
So overall, again, a a strong mix of
public safety and public works among the
the top rated projects.
So if you as a council ultimately choose
to move forward with a measure in 2026,
there's going to be an election cycle.
During that election cycle, there's
going to be a lot of discussion and
debate in the community about this
proposal, right? You'll have advocates
of the measure going out and talking to
their friends and neighbors and telling
them why this is needed and why they
should vote yes. You might also get some
opponents, right, who step up and say,
"This is a terrible idea. We shouldn't
be doing it. Here's why." For this
survey to be a reliable gauge of the
reli a reliable gauge of the feasibility
of a potential revenue measure. We need
to simulate that discussion and debate
in the space of the poll. So we
understand not only where are your
voters on the natural which was that
initial ballot test but what happens to
their support for these proposals once
they hear positive arguments and once
they hear negative arguments. So we do
that by uh first testing positive
arguments. You can see here on this
slide uh the nature of the question is
supporters of the measure say blank you
insert a positive argument. Do you think
this is a very convincing somewhat
convincing or not at all convincing
reason to support the [clears throat]
proposal?
Um, and what you see is, you know, a lot
of these positive arguments resonate.
Um, towards the top of the list though,
it's interesting. I've found in just the
last uh election cycle that if you can
just add a little specificity to some of
these arguments, it can make a big
difference. Right? So, to talk generally
about the fact that you need to maintain
roads and you have a lot of sewers and
storm drain pipes and parks to maintain
will get you a certain reaction. When
you can actually quantify and say the
city maintains 200 miles of streets, 300
m 90 miles of sewer and storm drain
pipes and 31 parks, suddenly it kind of
puts into perspective the scale and the
magnitude of what you as a city have to
maintain. And it really sort of
catapults this message from being kind
of a lukewarm positive argument into
being one of your stronger positive
arguments. So you can see here we got a
lot of positive arguments. as they get
traction. Now, at at this point in the
poll, voters have now heard more about
this proposal, these proposals than they
did initially, right? Subsequent to the
initial ballot test on the bond, we
talked about the possible tax rates that
could be associated with the bond. Um,
we in both cases had the chance to
convey more details about how the funds
could be spent. We've also conveyed
positive arguments. We have not conveyed
negatives. So, on the next slide, we
check in with what we call the interim
ballot test. We present the same 75
words and we ask now that you've heard a
bit more where do you stand? You can see
at this point we're in a dead heat
between these two measures. Uh the sales
tax I mean sorry the bond support for
the bond actually ticked down a point
right? So we're now at 58%. However,
support for the sales tax has increased
five points and we're now at 58%. So
even though we're tied in terms of the
level of support for the respective
measures here again the playing fields
aren't even. We're still about nine
points lower than the twothirds
threshold that's required for passing
for a bond. Meanwhile, we're eight
points north of the simple majority
threshold that's required for the sales
tax option. And then next slide and then
we get to the negatives. So the idea
behind the negatives is I want to
pressure test voter support for this
proposal by peppering them with a series
of negative arguments. the kind of
opposition arguments they might
encounter during an election cycle so
that we have an understanding of should
you get opposition, should they be vocal
and get their message out there, how
much impact would that have potentially
on voter support for your proposal. So,
we tested a series of negative
arguments. You can see here at the top
of the list, the top three all have to
do with what we think is probably going
to be the dominant theme of this
upcoming election, which is
affordability, right? Everyone's
sensitive cost of living and
affordability. uh uh issues and all the
top three here kind of focus on that
from one angle or another. So we see
that the negatives do get some traction.
The real question though is what happens
afterwards and that is the next slide.
So after the negatives um what we see is
the bond cools down to 54% at this
point. So we are a full 13 points below
the 2/3 threshold. um whereas the sales
tax cools down less and we're landing at
56% which is six points north of the
simple majority that's required for
passage. And so one of the interesting
patterns in this poll is the bond starts
higher and the more people are learning
about the proposal, it tends to trail in
a downward direction. Meanwhile, support
for the sales tax winds up ending the
survey higher than it began.
Next slide, please. So, I've got a
couple wrap-up um slides on the uh
polling that I'll share and then I'll
kick it back over to Zach. So, what does
all this mean? Um yeah, I'm going to
circle back to that overarching question
I mentioned at the outset as the main
motivator for why we do this research,
which is to answer that question of is
it feasible? What I mean by that is if
you as a council choose to place a
measure on the ballot, does it have a
reasonable chance of success in
November? I think the answer to that
question really depends on which measure
we're talking about. Based on these
polling results, we do not see that a
bond is feasible. At no point do we have
enough support to where I felt
comfortable thinking that you're going
to be able to achieve a 2/3 uh threshold
in November. The general sales tax on
the other hand is a different story. I
think that is a feasible measure, right?
I think there's a path forward for a
winning measure. Why is that? What's all
the things that you see under the
bullets there for uh positive signs for
the sales tax? We saw that right out of
the gates with just that 75word ballot
statement, we had sufficient natural
support. We need simple majority. We had
53%. Um and we also saw that as the as
voters learned more about that sales tax
measure, support for that option grew.
Right? That wasn't the case with the
bond. It was the case with the sales
tax. All of the sort of projects and
services that you can fund with a sales
tax were popular. We've got positive
arguments that resonate. And
importantly, at each point in the poll
where we circled back to a respondent
and said, "Now that you've heard a bit
more, where do you stand on these
measures?" At every one of those ballot
tests for the sales tax, it was above
that simple majority required for
passage. And that was even after
opposition arguments. And so when we see
that sort of combination of things,
those pieces to the puzzle in place, um
that's what we want to see to be able to
feel comfortable that you've got a
measure that could be winnable on
election day. That said, there's also
some challenges that come out of this
poll that I think we really want to be
wide soberide about. Um one is the
receptiveness to potential opposition
arguments. We did see that um you know
should you get opposition we saw that
that was going to carve off a bit of the
support um for either proposal but um u
more so for the bond less so for the
sales tax but there was an impact there.
Um we want to be thoughtful about the
electoral environment in which we're
heading into. Um this coming election is
going to be hyperartisan like the last
few have been and that can have an
impact as you get closer to election
day. the campaigning, the partisan
campaigning sort of hits high gear, that
can cause a little bit of a a change in
how some voters might view your measure.
There might also and probably will be
competing measures on the ballot. So,
you won't be the only thing on the
ballot. And then finally, you know,
there are these unknowns and and they're
sort of unknown in the sense that, you
know, we are currently living with with
tariffs. It's having a certain impact on
inflation. It's having a certain impact
on the economy overall. We don't know
what the next nine months is going to
hold, right? But these are not totally
unknowns. I mean, we are living in this
environment now. The question is whether
things get a little better, a little
worse. Um, and obviously you have these
other measures that could be on the
ballot. So, all of these things are
things that depending on how they play
out can create a little adversity for
your measure. Um, I bring them up not
because I think these are insurmountable
challenges. They're just a reminder that
when we move forward with a measure, we
want to put a measure on the ballot that
can withstand some of these headwinds,
right? We want to put a a measure on the
ballot that we aren't crossing our
fingers and holding our breath and
hoping that we've got great weather on
election day. You know, we want to put a
measure up there that's squarely in the
sort of space that voters have said that
they'd want to see uh and this measure
be and and focused on particular
services and improvements. Um, and uh, I
think if we do that, we're in a good
position. Next slide, please.
So, although you've got promising
results with respect to the sales tax,
it's important to keep in mind that a
survey like this is not a crystal ball
looking forward to election day saying
you're going to get 53 or 59% on
election day. It's a snapshot in time,
right? It tells us where your voters are
today. It tells us how they are likely
to react to the types of information
they can encounter during the election
cycle. But ultimately what happens on
election day isn't what based on what
your poll says today. It's based on
everything that happens from this point
forward. Right? So it's a kind of a
reminder that we need to make smart
decisions about the measure that you put
in front of voters so that it's well
aligned with the kind of measure that
they've said that they are interested in
sporting and you got to put the work in
in terms of communications. So under the
category of smart decisions, I would
just point out a couple things. number
one as a general sales tax. Although
there are two elections in our near
future, we've got the primary in June as
well as the general election in
November. One of the conditions of
having a general tax is that it needs to
appear on that upcoming November ballot.
It's not an option for June. I also like
the November turnout being higher
anyways. And so I I think that's the the
date to be focusing on. From a tax rate
perspective on the sales tax, I would
keep it at the quarter cent. That keeps
you under the cap. it brings you up to
the cap uh of the the total combined
sales tax rate. Um and so I would stay
there. In terms of funding priorities,
everything you know that we tested was
popular. And it's important to keep in
mind that a a general tax does not
earmark the funds for any particular
purpose. But that said, from your
general fund, you fund all the things
you see there under that bullet. And
that's kind of the things that voters
indicated they are most interested in
supporting. That's combination of public
work, public works and public safety.
Um, and then from a moving forward
standpoint, there's really two paths of
communication to be thinking about.
There's the non-advocacy communications
that the city can do, right? Just
providing voters with basic information
that helps build awareness of what your
service needs are, your capital funding
needs, and start to build consensus on a
proposal. Ultimately, there would also
have to be an independent campaign,
private dollars not funded by the city,
um that could actually go out and
advocate for this measure during the
election cycle. And one more one more
thing I want to point out is when we
started this process, you know, we were
looking at potentially a bond as well as
a sales tax. One of the things that's
important to keep in mind about these
sales taxes, there's a cap, right, on
the rate that is allowed. Um there's a
max uh sales tax rate that's allowed in
any uh county. and there's only a
quarter% left uh in that within your
city. And so there's this 1/4 cent sales
tax that's there. Now you as a city can
go with a measure and claim that in
which case those dollars will stay
local, right? The sales tax revenue from
that from that measure would stay local
and it would be controlled by the city.
If the city doesn't take it and another
say regionwide or countywide um agency
does that effectively will lock the city
out of being able to go for that in the
future. Right? Once that once that
quarter cent is taken it is no longer
available. And so you have sort of a
limited time you know uh sort of
opportunity here to be able to go grab
that. Um I'm not sure what other
agencies are going to do but um
obviously at some point that would be
claimed. So, uh, I think with that I'll
hand it back to Zach.
>> Thank you. So, yeah, just quickly some
» Thank you. So, yeah, just quickly some
next steps. So, if the council, uh,
decides to move forward with option one,
two, or three, staff will engage in an
educational outreach effort to inform
the community about the potential ballot
measure. We'll work with True North
Research to conduct a tracking survey in
the spring or early summer of 2026 so we
can get more information about uh likely
voters and their feelings towards the
revenue measure. Uh we'll also develop
draft ballot language and then lastly
report back to the council on the survey
results and ask for final direction on
whether to place the measure on the
ballot. That would likely happen in July
of 2026. And it's important to note like
Timothy mentioned that uh u once once
the council if the council does decide
to put the uh measure on the ballot then
uh after that point the city can no
longer spend city resources or staff
time on community outreach.
So last slide here are the four options.
It's really move forward with uh
education and outreach on a sales tax
measure, a general obligation bond, both
or neither. And with that, I'll pass it
back to the mayor. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Raa and [clears throat]
» Thank you, Mr. Raa and [clears throat]
Mr. McCarnney.
At this point, I'd like to
open for public comment on this item. If
you are in the room and have a speaker
slip, you can hand it to the city clerk
at this time. If you're on Zoom, please
raise your hand.
Mr. City Clerk, uh, how many speakers do
we have?
>> Certainly, Mayor Lorraine, if you are in
» Certainly, Mayor Lorraine, if you are in
our virtual environment, please raise
your hand if you wish to speak on this
item. We will be calling the last
speaker. So, we'll give you just a few
moments to do so.
Mayor Lorraine, we have a total of three
requests to speak. We have two in
person, and our final speaker on this
item will be Thomas Morgan. We'll begin
with our in-person request to speak. If
you are participating in person, we have
a podium in the center of our room here.
Please speak in directly into the
microphone. And we will begin with
Michael Reagan and using council adopted
rules and procedures. We will set the
time limit at three minutes per speaker.
>> Is this working? Yes, working. Now, not
» Is this working? Yes, working. Now, not
often I speak have ever spoke down to
you. I guess we're speaking down.
Usually I'm looking up at you. Happy New
Year to all of you. Um that was a great
presentation. Um I'm not too thrilled
with um consult consultings. Uh the
amount of money that we spent on
consulting fees. Uh I've seen many of
those spent over the many years and uh
it seems to add up to a lot of things we
could do like we need a roof at our
library and our uh del and our senior
center. I think that money could be
better spent because I think a lot of
this stuff we already know and I think
what you should do is put this thing in
a binder and whenever you want to do a
bond or or sales tax I think this pretty
much tells you everything you're going
to know for the many years because I
don't think it's going to change too
much. Um my point uh I guess it from his
speech not wanting a bond measure I
think that's important. My big question
was not just the cost of a bond at $323
million but the actual pay repayment of
it. I think it's almost doubled. So, I
think we're looking at almost 600 $600
million to repay a bond. So, I think
that's a lot of money that should be
explained to people on the sales tax.
Um, as you I didn't know that before. If
we don't take it, it's gone. The problem
with that is we seem to be losing a lot
of our sales tax revenue in my
community.
We're losing them all. I see nothing but
businesses closing around a lot of the
development that we had that you
approved for u density and height
Safeway store lucky stores and those
sort of things for redevelopment we
could be losing a lot of a lot of the
money that would give us the ability to
to have a sales tax. So it seems to be
we're going in the wrong direction. want
a sales tax, but we're losing so much
revenue with with the loss of so many so
many retail um establishments.
Um, I guess my last point would be that
um
I do believe because of the um
what I've read that the school is
proposing a bond, our state has a $2
billion deficit and then your guys going
to put on either a bond or a sales tax.
I think it's the wrong time to try to
ask people because I think they're all
going to fail. I think there's going to
be quite a few of these either bonds or
taxes coming up in 26. I think we should
look hard before we start spending a lot
of time and money trying to get a tax
for this year. Um and uh thank you for
your time.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker will be Dana
» Thank you. Our next speaker will be Dana
Sahai.
» Hi council. Um,
I'm against asking uh taxpayers to pay
another tax. We've already been asked to
pass Measure CC, the flood and storm
protection fee, and now this. There
seems to be a pattern of asking for
money every two years, and I'm concerned
that a sales tax won't raise as much
money as anticipated since retail
continues to shrink in Sano. Just
because you can doesn't mean you should.
Thank you.
>> Thank you. Moving to our virtual
» Thank you. Moving to our virtual
environment where our first and only
speaker will be Thomas Morgan. Thomas,
please go ahead and unmute your mic.
» Hello. Can you hear me?
>> It's a little faint. If you wouldn't
» It's a little faint. If you wouldn't
mind speaking just a little bit louder.
» One second. Let me try to get on my
>> Sorry, Thomas. We're not hearing you
» Sorry, Thomas. We're not hearing you
quite well. If you wouldn't mind
speaking just a little bit louder.
Now, Thomas, we're not hearing you at
all at this time. If you're continuing
to speak, maybe having some technical
issues,
Mayor Lorraine, it looks like we're um
unable to hear our final public
commenter. Um so, at this time, we will
close public comment. Um before we go to
console comments, um we are experiencing
some technical difficulties at the
moment. So, uh some of our virtual
attendees are having some difficulty
hearing us. Um so, if you could please
speak directly into the microphone as
you are providing your comments, that
would be appreciated.
Okay, I will try my best to do that and
thank you for the update and I'm sorry
to Thomas, but uh at least I know that
Thomas uh frequently contributes and can
email us uh his thoughts for what it's
worth. Um
at this time, I would like to ask if any
of my council colleagues have any
questions members.
>> Thank you through the mayor. I'm
» Thank you through the mayor. I'm
wondering if we can call our um finance
director Abby up here to answer a few
questions.
>> Um primarily my question is if you could
» Um primarily my question is if you could
explain to the public
um about the current city deficit and
what the potential impacts would be if
we didn't have a sales tax measure or
bond measure.
Thank you.
Great. Sure. Um, and we will be talking
about that also when we come back for
the midyear budget adjustments in
February at the February 20th meeting.
So, we'll be going into depth more. Uh,
but at this time, we'll talk about the
kind of current deficit that we've been
talking about. Um, when we came to
adopter budget for fiscal year 2526, we
had a budget deficit of $12 million. Um,
with our revenue estimates and our
expenditures. Um after that we also
heard that we did not get the full VLF
shortfall that we were due for 2526. So
we that's another two million that right
now um will not be coming in in
revenues. So that increased our deficit
to 14 million. Um, so what we're looking
for is this is we do think that with
salary savings and some expenditure
savings, we can hopefully get that down
to a lower amount, but given that we're
seeing about 5 to 7 million in deficit
kind of on an annual basis, um, we're
looking to an ongoing revenue source to
kind of help meet that demand because
um, expenses are continuing as
everybody's been talking about and our
revenues are growing. They're just not
growing as fast um, as expenses are at
this point. Okay, great. Thank you so
much. Um,
» I think that's it for me. I just
appreciate the clarification.
>> Very good, Council Member Nome
» Very good, Council Member Nome
through the mayor. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, these questions I'm going to
» Okay. Um, these questions I'm going to
direct towards True North and then if
need to we can ask the staff as well. Uh
the first question is of the,2
interviewees, do we know with certainty
or relative certainty that these are
Sano city residents that are um voters
within the city?
» You're on mute.
» Tim, you're on mute.
>> Yeah, I'm sorry. Uh can I right as you
» Yeah, I'm sorry. Uh can I right as you
were speaking I heard a sneeze and so I
missed part of what you had.
>> Well you you have a great turnout with
» Well you you have a great turnout with
a,2 interviewees and a city population
of about 110,000. So I was curious do we
know
>> just froze.
» just froze.
>> Can you hear me?
» Can you hear me?
>> I'm sorry it just froze now. Um one more
» I'm sorry it just froze now. Um one more
time.
>> Okay. Uh you have a great turnout with
» Okay. Uh you have a great turnout with
the number of interviewees you have with
12. I was curious, do we know if these
are voting Sato City residents or do we
just, you know, know that they're local?
>> Yeah. No, they they in order to even
» Yeah. No, they they in order to even
have a chance to be part of our sample,
you need to be a a registered voter
within the city and based on when you
register to vote as well as what
elections you've taken advantage of or
participated in since that point to
demonstrate a pattern of behavior that
we would expect would also uh result in
you casting a ballot in the upcoming
November election. And so and then once
we send out invitations, those
invitations, every one of those
invitations has a hyperlink in it. The
hyperlink is unique to that respondent.
And so that only people who were part of
our randomly selected sample
um and were uh sent that invitation can
can access the site and they can
complete it one time only. So we don't
have a situation where someone might
say, "Oh, this is a great survey and I
want, you know, my hundred best friends
to take it. let me forward my invitation
to them. It doesn't work that way. They
can't access the site. So, we're we're
confident that these individuals are
residents. They're vote registered
voters and they have demonstrated in the
past a pattern of participation that
would line up with them casting ballots
this November.
>> Thank you. That's fantastic. That makes
» Thank you. That's fantastic. That makes
me feel more confident in the the
results, too, just knowing that they
have been vetted. Uh, second question,
and I'm not leaning towards bond, but
the bond measure is only paid by
property owners. Is that accurate?
>> Yes. So, bond is a levy on property.
» Yes. So, bond is a levy on property.
>> So, does that mean that bond votes can
» So, does that mean that bond votes can
only be voted by property owners or is
it open to the general public?
>> Yeah. No, this is even though it's only
» Yeah. No, this is even though it's only
a a tax on property, same thing as a
parcel tax is, right? It's a tax on on
property. Uh it is voted on by anyone
who's a registered voter who cares to
participate in the election can cast
ballots on it, right? So you don't have
to be a property owner to vote on a
bond. You can. It's just like every
other u voterdeed measure. You just have
to be a registered voter. Makes sense.
Thank you. Uh and then I want to talk
about the use it or lose it question. So
if the sales tax, we go to the sales
tax, we have for the city of San Monteo
a quarter of a cent. If the county were
to put up a competing measure and go
after that quarter percent, would again
every voter in Sonteo County be able to
weigh in on if the cityo has to pay the
other quarter cent to the county or is
it still exclusive to the people who
would be paying the additional tax? So
any tax measure that's on the ballot
that would be for the city of Sonteo
like this quarter cent sales tax we just
discussed here that is only decided on
by voters in your city right so you get
to decide the fate of that measure. The
point of the lose it or use it use it or
lose it issue is that you know perhaps
in a future election the county of San
Monteo decides that they want to put a
quarter cent sales tax on the ballot for
some other regionwide purpose. If that
passes countywide, it doesn't matter if
it passes within the city of San Monteo,
but if countywide that measure passes,
that quarter cent is going to apply
across the board. And at that point,
there is no that quarter cent increment
has been taken up, right? It's been
used. You as a city would no longer have
the ability to go do your own quarter
cent because you're up against the cap.
>> Okay. And do we know how many of the
» Okay. And do we know how many of the
cities and towns in the county are not
at their fully capped sales tax rate?
>> I don't I don't know that off hand.
» I don't I don't know that off hand.
>> There there's probably, you know, I
» There there's probably, you know, I
don't want to guess, but I know that
there's from counting from my memory,
there's at least five or six that are
already at their ceiling. And so you're
seeing that, you know, there's potential
of a regional measure passage. they had
to get special legislation to go above
the ceiling for that. Um, and so that's
what preserves the opportunity for our
city to still be able to go after that
quarter cent. At some point down the
line though, it's like uh the county had
measure K pass. That was their sales
tax, right? If the county comes in the
future wanting a sales tax again, say a
quarter cent, then that will go that's,
you know, it's estimated that it would
generate about seven million annually,
that would go to the entire county, not
to San Monteo within the city limits
>> and county voters would be voting to
» and county voters would be voting to
take to tax on
>> from the city of San Mo.
» from the city of San Mo.
>> Well, sharing it amongst all the cities,
» Well, sharing it amongst all the cities,
right?
>> Yeah.
» Yeah.
>> Yeah. Thanks for clarifying. Um, and
» Yeah. Thanks for clarifying. Um, and
then I I did hear something which is
interesting, but have we accounted for
the idea that we may be losing 10 to 20%
of our sales tax with the loss of them
all? Is is that something we've
accounted for? And what would be the
offset of that? Do we know
>> Abby?
» Abby?
>> So, we're going to be doing an economic
» So, we're going to be doing an economic
analysis and study as part of the
project and it will analyze what that
means um overall for the city um with
the new project itself. And at that
point in time, we'll be able to better
understand. But just in general,
overall, if you look at cities across
California right now, uh sales tax is
remaining flat or slightly uh lower than
uh what has been typically on average.
And so we're experiencing the same thing
here. The city though is limited on what
revenue generating measures that we
have. And so that's why when we look at
just uh the different revenue measure
options, the sales tax or the geo bond
uh were the two that were the most
viable in terms of vehicles in order to
generate revenue in this uh for this
organization in order to provide um
essential services to our community. And
that's something that I, you know, want
to be able to speak to is that should we
not receive um additional revenue, we're
working on a financial sustainability
plan, but the result is is that we're
going to have to take a look at our city
services and how we provide those uh now
and into the future.
>> So, sorry, council member, would it be
» So, sorry, council member, would it be
all right if we asked other council
members?
>> Yeah. Can I just finish on one just my
» Yeah. Can I just finish on one just my
my last followup to that was the 7
million number that we forecasted is
that based on slight deviation or a
slight lowering of of last year's for
example or is it based on last year's
number? So, what we do is with the uh
structural deficit, what we do here is
to be financially prudent as a city
organization, we do a 10-year forecast.
Uh really taking a long-term look at our
future revenues. And every year for the
next 10 years, the city um is forecasted
to have the 5 to7 million structural
budget deficit with rising costs for
services just like um everybody's
experiencing um through throughout the
nation. and and you know cost of
services keep going up overall and so
that's something that we as a city
organization are having to um deal with
as well.
>> Thank you.
» Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr.
» Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr.
>> Thank you, sir.
» Thank you, sir.
>> Yes, Deputy Mayor Fernandez.
» Yes, Deputy Mayor Fernandez.
>> Um a couple of questions for uh Finance
» Um a couple of questions for uh Finance
Director Viser.
» Sorry about the back and forth, Abby.
I'm sorry.
Um my first question is usually in years
past when we've had deficits or gone
through um challenging budgetary times,
we have been able to count on backfill
through grants from the federal and
state government. Can you advise on the
chances of that occurring to sort of
backfill this deficit?
>> Um I guess in terms of I don't know
» Um I guess in terms of I don't know
that's been a large part of how we have
backfilled in the past. I think we have
done a lot of belt tightening.
>> Sure.
» Sure.
>> Um and kind of relied on special revenue
» Um and kind of relied on special revenue
sources, but I do know that's something
that we're working on now more
aggressively probably than we have in
the past. So um but I think the
>> So So I would just say that the grants
» So So I would just say that the grants
typically are utilized for one-time fund
funding sources. There may be um some
carveouts I would say with our police
department um where we are able to use
uh DOJ, Department of Justice grants uh
to be able to help us on an ongoing um
on an ongoing ongoing source of income.
What we have done uh previously or the
last two years is we're tapping into our
reserves in order to get us through uh
these lean times. And so with the city
of San Mateo, when you really look at
just the the revenues um overall as a
city when the economy as well and you
know we really rely on home sales here
in this in this community because we
have a real property transfer tax. We
are the only city in Sanonteo County who
has a real property transfer tax. But
you know we're seeing historic lows in
the volume of home sales in this
community. Well, we're seeing that in
the nation actually because of the high
cost of interest uh for homes. And so,
uh with that, when the interest rates
are lower and the housing market is hot,
the city then generates, uh more
revenue. And what we've had is, you
know, financially prudent city councils,
this current city council and management
overall to be able to store up reserves
so that we can get through a lot of
these lean times. But when we look at
the forecast, we're still 5 to7 million
uh looking down a structural deficit for
the next 10 years. And our reserves can
get us, you know, uh, you know, get us
by for the next few years, but we really
have to, you know, look at, um, how do
we get out of that structural deficit?
And so, um, what we've presented over
the past year, we're working on a
multi-prong financial sustainability
plan. And this is one of the many um
initiatives that we're looking at in
addition to like what you were saying
about grant funding sources looking at
our real property. Um we have a bunch of
mechanisms that we're looking at
generating revenue um overall.
>> Okay. And fully advising the fact that
» Okay. And fully advising the fact that
you are not psychic but um just given
the tenor of the situation of what we've
encountered with our CDBG funds, is it
unlikely that we would get any federal
supplements outside of law enforcement
funds?
So dependent on the grant terms, it's
really going to be, you know, it's
limited because of um what they have put
into the terms itself that the city
cannot align its work with what the
federal government's terms are. And so
um what we're actually looking at is
alternative funding sources right now to
support our most vulnerable CE members
of our community to provide essential
services to them as well. And so we're
not, you know, this this current year
right now, we have staff putting a
proposal together because we can't tap
into those federal funds this year um
where we're going to have to dip into
potentially our reserves in order to
float [snorts] because it is essential
services to our most vulnerable
community members.
>> Okay. And I believe that the state is
» Okay. And I believe that the state is
also suffering from a multi-billion
dollar deficit. Is that accurate?
>> That is correct.
» That is correct.
>> So is it unlikely that we'd be getting
» So is it unlikely that we'd be getting
any state funding beyond what we've
gotten recently?
>> So the state actually has taken funding
» So the state actually has taken funding
away. So, the vehicle license fee um is
one great example of that this year
where the city is owed by state law to
get at least its full recovery of its
VLF fee. And so, we were shorted by 2.25
million in this last fiscal year. And
now, in the governor's recently released
budget, I doubt that there's a line item
for VLF funding for this city. And
that's an additional $7 million deficit
that we would look at. We were receiving
those revenues over the last 20 years up
until last year. and that spot has
turned off now because they're not
meeting their legal obligations uh to
the 20 cities and the county of
Sanonteo.
>> And my last question, sorry to Abby or
» And my last question, sorry to Abby or
to Alex, have we taken any uh this is
beyond just the item on ahead of us
right now, but have we taken any action
with or discussions with any of our
legislative representatives about
increasing is that do we know the
process for increasing our our sales our
tax capacity?
So an overall ceiling, you're talking
about exceeding the ceiling itself. It
would it would take special legislation
and in talking with our legislative
consultant, it's a big deal to be able
to get above that cap.
>> Um right now we still have ceiling and
» Um right now we still have ceiling and
so we're still have a quarter cent here
and so that's why we're focused on that.
But I know other cities have looked into
like a good example is South San
Francisco was looking at options of how
um you could look at that in years past.
I don't know where they're at uh now,
but just overall that's the other, you
know, only other route in order to um
increase your ceiling sales tax here.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you, Abby.
» Thank you very much. Thank you, Abby.
Thank you, Alex.
>> Council member Diaz Nash.
» Council member Diaz Nash.
>> Thank you through the mayor. I'll try
» Thank you through the mayor. I'll try
and be quick. Uh these are largely for
Tim. And number one, as part of your
presentation,
was I clear in understanding that there
was a possibility to do a follow-on poll
so that when we know the real
environment closer to the summer of what
other sales taxes or bond measures may
be up, we can go back and take the
temperature then.
>> Yeah. Um, so the idea would be that uh
» Yeah. Um, so the idea would be that uh
probably [clears throat] springtime,
early summer before council would have
to make a an official decision about
whether to place a measure on the
ballot, you'd have a what's called a
tracking survey and that would give us
up-to-date information in that moment in
time in that climate. We would also at
that point have a much better idea about
what other measures might be sharing the
ballot with you. And so we can also
build in that into the poll so we have
some sense of what the sort of you know
to the extent that it's sort of a
competitive landscape how that would
play out in the poll. We could we could
build that into the study. So that is
the idea. So this wouldn't be the last
piece of information from your voters
that you'd be seeing in terms of the
their you know assessment of what a
sales tax might look like.
>> Great. Thank you. That's that's good
» Great. Thank you. That's that's good
news because it will be much more
realistic environment. My second
question is in reading through the uh
the cross of the research is it a very
very high level generalization to say
that the respondents tended to be more
positive about immediate services like
public safety or filling potholes and
they weren't as predisposed to putting
money up to fix buildings which were in
general not quite it is immediate to
their lives.
>> Yeah, you kind of have a mix of things
» Yeah, you kind of have a mix of things
with the results here, but you are
correct that what we normally find when
we're doing these types of studies is
that voters will gravitate towards
services more so than facilities
themselves. That said, streets and
roads, which everyone drives on and gets
to experience every day, you know, if
you have needs there, those tend to be
kind of high level. And then the other
is there is a growing awareness in the
public about infrastructure right in
general and the importance of taking
care of that. And so when I looked at
these the one of the nice things about
the sales tax option is it allows you to
address both services as well as capital
needs and infrastructure whereas a bond
is strictly infrastructure and so you
can't really deal with some of those
service priorities that your voters had.
>> Thank you. And my last question in
» Thank you. And my last question in
looking at the key objections, the first
was taxes are already too high. Number
two, a fear of money being mismanaged.
And number three, I need more
information. That last one, needing more
information. Could I interpret that as
an opportunity that with appropriate
public education on this this um
potential measure that there could be
opportunity to increase the uh the
support?
>> Yeah, certainly. I mean um what that is
» Yeah, certainly. I mean um what that is
is often times you know that question of
for those who were no or not sure on the
measure at the initial ballot test we
ask them why. Um, and when somebody
says, "Well, I'm just not ready to vote
yes because I I just need more
information and I want to know more
about what the needs are, how this money
is going to be used, etc., etc." That is
an opportunity. Certainly.
>> Great. Thank you. Those are all my
» Great. Thank you. Those are all my
questions.
>> Thank you very much.
» Thank you very much.
And, uh, I appreciate the questions that
have been asked so far. I did just want
to check to see if there were any more.
Okay. Uh, great. I I feel like I've
heard
uh some concerns over
trying to raise funds when it may not be
uh completely necessary, when there may
be additional costs related to the
raising of those funds. Um and concerns
about sales tax uh as it exists in our
city today and perhaps in our future.
But I I heard also uh some
uh facts being shared through uh our
city staff about
the current uh deficit we're
experiencing and um some of the
volatility uh in our budget and what we
can expect in our future. Um,
given this, I just wanted to go around
the room and ask uh
folks to let me know and the folks the
community know what they uh would like
to consider among these options. I think
the good news about having four options
is that you can pick one and uh you can
maybe give a brief comment uh or two as
to as to your your reasoning and uh
would anyone like to go first?
Yes, council members for your quick
dates.
>> I'm in favor of supporting option one,
» I'm in favor of supporting option one,
um, which is the sales tax measure. Um,
you know, I think it's critical that we
keep essential services. Um, and it
sounds like we're going to continue to
be in a structural deficit where that's
at risk. Um, and if we want to keep the
status quo, that means we have to invest
back in the community. Um I would like
us to kind of explore for the broader
infrastructure needs that 323 million on
um deficit that we have for capital
infrastructure perhaps coming back in
2028 with something. Um but for now I
think we should focus on closing the
existing deficit. So I'm in favor of
option one.
>> Thank you.
» Thank you.
>> Council member Newsome. I am also in
» Council member Newsome. I am also in
favor of of a measure of option one. I
think as council member Kadiki said that
we could look at a bond measure for the
future but I think for the 2026 we
should move forward with um outreach and
education for one.
>> Thank you
» Thank you
deput uh deputy mayor Fernandez.
>> Um I am also in favor of option one as
» Um I am also in favor of option one as
someone who's serving on the ballot
measure committee um with council member
Gaditzki. um we got to see all of these
um options and in real time as the
polling was happening with the different
options and I don't think that any
elected official wants to tax the people
especially during an economic downturn
but this is a really challenging time
and there are basic services that many
folks need in the city. So unfortunately
we have to occasionally choose um
that option and so I will be continuing
to support option one.
>> Thank you. Council member Diaz Nash.
» Thank you. Council member Diaz Nash.
>> I also will support option one and
» I also will support option one and
agreeing with my other council members
but also adding the fact that sales tax
gives us an opportunity to get revenue
from visitors and people who are not
just members of the city. So it helps to
spread the burden a little bit more.
>> Thank you very much.
» Thank you very much.
>> Yes.
» Yes.
>> To the mayor. I also just want to make
» To the mayor. I also just want to make
one comment. Sales tax does not include
certain things like medications.
>> So prescription drugs and groceries or
» So prescription drugs and groceries or
carveouts.
>> Thank you.
» Thank you.
>> Thank you. I too will join uh the other
» Thank you. I too will join uh the other
council members in uh supporting option
one at this time. Um
and I I do agree with those who uh have
shared interest in
reconsidering revenue options in the
future. Um I I do appreciate the public
comment uh you know indicating that each
time we do this it does cost some money.
Um but I I do believe that uh
the situation can change uh and and each
time we look at it uh though some of the
metrics may may appear similar uh it's
it's important whenever we consider
going ahead with a ballot measure of
course which would require more expense
uh to to make sure we have the the best
knowledge and information available. And
so it may just be uh a a necessary cost
to make sure we're making the best
decisions we can. Um as others have
mentioned,
uh I I do think it's it's important to
uh shore up our budget when uh in an
environment with significant volatility.
uh we we have an opportunity here to ask
our community and again I just want to
uh
you know reiterate that we're we're
exploring something that will go before
the public and the voters will decide
what happens here. But um we can ask our
community for something that helps us
ensure that we can weather future
budgetary storms and continue to provide
highquality services and maintain them
properly uh properly in good times and
in lean. Uh the city manager mentioned
having a 10-year forecast
and uh I I think this helps this has the
potential to give us a better chance to
plan our budgets for multiple years at a
time without feeling as though we may be
in an emergency uh every year. And uh
the use it or lose it uh phrase I I I
think is is
just another reason to consider that
because uh this may be a limited
opportunity to to focus money that we
may find ourselves spending anyway um in
the future toward more local services.
And
another uh comment
>> just adding on what you're saying,
» just adding on what you're saying,
Mayor. I think the public needs to know
that we're not just uh sitting here
moaning the fact that we're losing money
from the state, but that we are part of
an active lawsuit with all the other
cities in the county suing to get our
VLF funds. So, we are fighting very
proactively for that money as a
long-term foundation for our city. And
also I think it would be very important
to address concerns that the public has
raised that this if any sales tax
measure were to pass, there would be a
very strong oversight component of it
like with measure S where there would be
a committee that would look and see how
is the money being spent so that it
aligns with what if voters do vote for
it positively where that money aligns
with what they want.
>> Thank you for that. um Mr. Raa
» Thank you for that. um Mr. Raa
>> of the direction we need.
» of the direction we need.
>> Thank you very much.
» Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
» Thank you.
>> Uh and thank you all
» Uh and thank you all
>> Mr. Mayor recess till next meeting.
» Mr. Mayor recess till next meeting.
>> Uh yes. Well,
» Uh yes. Well,
>> thank you Tim.
» thank you Tim.
>> That that is our one item from the study
» That that is our one item from the study
session. And uh city clerk, I think you
noted that we may need a little extra
time given our venue.
>> Yeah, we we might need about 10 minutes
» Yeah, we we might need about 10 minutes
just to switch over. We have a couple
extra hoops to jump through to prepare
ourselves for the regular meeting. So,
if we could resume in 10 minutes, that
would be greatly appreciated. Very good.
In that case, uh let us do that.
Thank you.