|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
Inter-Departmental Correspondence
County Manager’s Office
|
|
|
|
DATE:
|
June 21, 2010
|
BOARD MEETING DATE:
|
June 29, 2010
|
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:
|
None
|
VOTE REQUIRED:
|
Majority
|
|
|
TO:
|
Honorable Board of Supervisors
|
FROM:
|
David S. Boesch, County Manager
|
SUBJECT:
|
Revenue Measure Feasibility – Godbe Research Survey Results
|
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS:
|
1)
|
Accept the Godbe Research report on focus group and survey results related to potential revenue enhancement measures; and
|
|
|
|
2)
|
Provide direction to County staff to prepare an ordinance or resolution, for presentation to the Board at its meeting of July 13, 2010, to place a measure before the voters.
|
|
|
BACKGROUND:
|
On January 26, the Board directed staff to begin exploring potential revenue enhancement measures as part of the County’s $100 million multi-year budget balancing plan to eliminate its structural deficit by Fiscal Year 2013. The plan includes $25 million from new revenues, $25 million from labor cost savings, and $50 million in program reductions and Countywide efficiencies. A Request for Information process was conducted and the team of Godbe Research, TBWB Strategies and McGovern & Associates was selected to assist in this effort. An internal team of County staff provided support during the development of the discussion guide for the focus groups and telephone survey questionnaire. A community advisor group was also assembled to assist the County Manager during the process.
|
|
|
Godbe Research conducted three focus groups on May 10 and 12, and conducted a telephone survey with 900 San Mateo County voters beginning May 21 through May 27. The survey was approximately 18-minutes in length. Residents were asked for their opinion about County services and how they would vote on specific revenue measures, such as a sales tax, gross receipts tax on vehicle rental businesses, and commercial parking businesses in unincorporated areas.
|
|
|
The Godbe/TBWB/McGovern team presented the focus group and telephone survey results to the Finance and Operations Committee at a special meeting on June 18. Based on the survey results, the team is recommending that the County proceed with a quarter-cent general sales tax, with a duration of five years, to be placed on the November 2, 2010 ballot.
|
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
Taxes levied for general purposes, known as “general taxes”, require approval by a majority vote of the electorate. The State Constitution requires, absent an emergency declared by a unanimous vote of the governing body that a general tax be voted on at a general election for members of the Board of Supervisors. Since such elections only occur every two years, this may be the only opportunity to consider such a tax until 2012. Further, placing a general tax on the November gubernatorial election ballot, when voter turnout is historically higher, should ensure that a larger proportion of the voting population will have the opportunity to vote on the measure.
|
|
|
A sales tax would be imposed countywide. In regard to timing, if the Board determines that a general sales tax measure will be placed on the ballot, the next potential election date is November 2, 2010. For the November 2, 2010 ballot, the Board would need to adopt a resolution calling for the election by August 6, 2010, in order to meet the 88-day requirement.
|
|
|
A measure can be proposed either by resolution or ordinance, at the Board’s discretion. If the Board directs that a measure be placed on the ballot by ordinance, staff will return with an ordinance for introduction, which can then be adopted at a subsequent meeting of the Board. If the Board directs that the measure be proposed by resolution, such resolution can be adopted in one meeting.
|
|
|
Consideration of focus group and survey results as part of the decision-making process to bring potential revenue enhancement measures to the voters contributes to the shared vision of a Collaborative Community, where leaders inform and engage residents and approach issues with fiscal accountability and concern for future impacts.
|
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
The following table provides information on the revenue types included in the survey:
|
|
|
Revenue Type
Rate
Estimated Annual Revenue
Sales Tax (Countywide)
0.25% (quarter-cent)
$30 million
Vehicle Rental - Business License Tax
2.5%
$7.5 million
Commercial Parking - Business License Tax
8%
$4 million
|
|
|
Because there will already be a county-wide supervisorial race on the November ballot, the incremental cost of conducting the election is predicated on the number of measures on the ballot. Each measure is estimated at $250,000, which includes translation, printing, and mailing costs. This cost could be lower on a per measure basis if more measures are added to the November ballot. This amount would not be recoverable if the measure fails.
|
|
|
ATTACHMENT – Godbe Research Presentation and Report
|