Citing a scarcity of vital voter support and an already crowded November ballot, the San Jose City Council decided to delay implementation of a proposed property tax to fund city parks.
“Obviously, this is not the feedback we were expecting, or at least many of us were, I think, but it's also very understandable given the concerns,” said San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. “I know we're all hearing from our constituents about the cost of living and other pressing issues like homelessness and public safety challenges.”
San Jose has a parks maintenance backlog that has grown to greater than $500 million and has spent the past few months exploring other potential revenue streams. However, several rounds of polls haven’t generated enough confidence to place the project on a vote, so the City Council has postponed the measure until a later date.
In addition to considering a property tax, city staff have also asked for input on how voters would react to a municipal bond on the ballot or an amendment to the town structure allowing business leasing of parking spaces for as much as 55 years.
However, each options didn’t generate enough interest in the course of the first round of voting in May, so city staff have now turned their attention entirely to the feasibility of a property tax, which requires 66.67% approval to pass.
The first round of polling in May found that almost two-thirds of respondents supported a property tax of 1 cent per square foot for residential properties and three cents per square foot for non-residential properties. If the tax had been placed on the ballot and passed, it will have cost the typical homeowner $69 annually.
However, some council members warned in June that putting a tax measure on the ballot may lead to “cannibalization” of other local and state initiatives since it left many residents feeling overwhelmed.
Officials have already placed a $10 billion climate bond and a $10 billion statewide school infrastructure measure on the November ballot. Locally, voters are being asked to fund a $20 billion inexpensive housing bond placed on the ballot by the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority. The San Jose Unified School District can also be asking voters for his or her assist in funding a $1.2 billion infrastructure bond.
Each individual bond measure alone, if successful, would impose additional costs of several hundred dollars on property owners.
During the second round of polling, it became clear that more residents were unwilling to pay the worth, as support for 3 different possible property tax options, including a half-cent per square foot option or a flat fee of $35, dropped to 59 percent.
A survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, which will not be limited to San Jose, also found growing pessimism in regards to the current economic situation across the state: 68% of respondents expect tougher times ahead.
“Many residents in our district are definitely feeling overwhelmed,” said tenth District Councilmember Arjun Batra. “They feel like money is running out, or they're looking at a future that isn't as bright as it may have seemed just a short while ago, given the layoffs that have been announced.”
While the dearth of voter support is a blow to parks funding, it might be easier to get the support needed when the City Council considers additional revenue opportunities later. This 12 months's ballot features a constitutional amendment that might lower the approval threshold for local bonds focused on public infrastructure from two-thirds to 55%.
Some City Council members have already expressed support for the constitutional amendment, drafting a joint memo this week advocating for its passage.
Regardless of whether this constitutional amendment passes or not, several council members recognized the necessity to improve the town's parks and proceed to search for potential revenue sources.
“My motivation has always been simple: to improve the quality of our parks for the residents who need them most,” said fifth District Councilmember Peter Ortiz. “In underfunded park districts like mine and Eastside San Jose, the quality of the park is the difference between being a gang hotspot and being used by families and young children. Still, I see the writing on the wall and recognize that today or this election cycle may not be the best time to put this on the ballot. But I'm really looking forward to future polls on this issue.”
Originally published:
image credit : www.mercurynews.com