Sorry, this page has moved! Please click here to go to the new location.
2009 General Election - Ballot Measure Information
There will be two measures proposed by the City Council of the City of San Carlos on the November ballot. They are as follows:
[Arguments in support or opposition of the proposed laws are the opinions of the authors.]
Measure "U"
City of San Carlos Vital Services Measure
"To prevent further cuts and preserve funding for general city services, including fire protection, paramedics and 9-1-1 emergency response; police protection and crime prevention; street repair and maintenance; and avoiding closure of parks and sports fields, shall the City of San Carlos adopt an ordinance enacting a one-half cent transactions and use tax (sales tax), a general tax, for six years with independent annual audits and all funds staying local?"Yes|No
Impartial Analysis of Measure U The measure proposes a local one-half cent Transactions and Use tax (sales tax) on purchases made in the City of San Carlos or assessed as allowed by law in addition to existing sales taxes. The additional one-half cent sales tax would commence April 1, 2010 and continue for six (6) consecutive years. An extension of this tax would require City Council action and a new vote of the public.
The proposed one-half cent sales tax is a general tax and as such, the funds received from the tax will be placed in the general fund of the City of San Carlos for City programs, general City functions, or in any manner allowed by law as directed by the City Council. Examples of such general fund expenditures could include police, fire services, street maintenance, parks and recreation programs and capital improvements. This initiative requires a majority vote (fifty percent plus one) to pass.
Argument in Favor of Measure U
Keep the “City of Good Living” a great place to live! Vote YES on Measure U.
Here’s the situation. Since 2000, San Carlos has:
Realized minimal revenue growth and a growing demand for services
Slashed its budget by reducing staff, benefits, and pension costs
Deferred most capital and infrastructure projects
Complied with, and paid for, all mandated state and federal programs
While we’ll continue to be very diligent about expense control, we face deficits that budget cutting can’t solve. And to make a bad situation worse, the state will be dipping into our city coffers to the tune of $2.4 million this year alone.
It’s important to note that when compared to local cities of similar size (Belmont, Menlo Park, Burlingame, Foster City), San Carlos:
Has the lowest city staffing level
Receives only 13% of your property taxes (the average of the four other cities is 20.2%)
Has not enacted a revenue measure for 10 years
This initiative will add one half percent to the sales tax for 6 years. It will produce approximately $2.2 million in yearly revenue for San Carlos that cannot be shared by the state. And non-San Carlos residents will generate income for us as they shop and dine in town.
We all value our neighborhood parks, recreation programs, and police and fire departments. Without the revenue produced by Measure U, our emergency services, park quality, and recreation resources will be severely reduced. These facilities and services are critical contributors to our safety, quality of life, and property values.
Please keep our “City of Good Living” a great place to live.Vote for good! Vote YES on Measure U.
/s/ Seth Rosenblatt, Member, San Carlos School Board
/s/ Scot Marsters, Past President, GESC (Greater East San Carlos)
/s/ Barbara Billings, San Carlos Community Volunteer
/s/ Thomas Davids, Past Mayor and City Councilmember, City of San Carlos
/s/ Linda Teutschel, Chairperson, San Carlos Hometown Days, and Community Volunteer
Argument Against Measure U
Taxes have outpaced inflation, decade after decade. We must draw a line in the sand, now.
No tax increase is affordable, when added to the other taxes we pay:
Property Taxes (plus special assessments)
Sales Taxes (county and state)
Income Taxes (state and federal)
Vehicle License fees & taxes
Gas taxes (state and federal)
Telecommunications taxes
additional excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, gasoline, tires, etc.
How much is enough?
In 1960 the sales tax was only 3%.
Today it is 9.25% in all cities in San Mateo County.
Increasing that to nearly 10% in San Carlos would be crazy!
Raising taxes never stopped politicians from claiming they need more money. But higher taxes always make it harder for regular people to make ends meet. And some can’t.
Retailers struggle to survive on razor-thin profit margins. Higher taxes won’t help anybody, including city governments, if local businesses are forced to close their doors, due to unprofitability.
Please vote ‘NO’ on the San Carlos sales tax increase.
/s/ Kevin Dempsey Peterson, Treasurer, Libertarian Party of San Mateo County
/s/ John J. Hickey
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Measure U The City of San Carlos’ Mission Statement reads that they provide “high quality services and facilities in a fiscally sustainable manner.” According to proponents of Measure U, that’s how the City has been managed. “Since 2000, San Carlos has slashed its budget by reducing staff, benefits and pension costs.”
But over those nine years, while revenues have increased 3 percent annually on average, and operational costs have grown the same, salary and benefit costs have grown at 7 percent. Spending this way is not sustainable and the problem is obvious.
Now they want us to pay more so that we can pay more? Pay more in taxes to pay more in salaries and benefits?
Increasing the sales tax rate in San Carlos is not the solution. It is more likely to exacerbate the problem. Neighboring cities are not pursuing higher sales taxes, therefore, a higher tax in San Carlos may lead to fewer customers, fewer purchases, closed businesses and reduced revenue.
The ongoing recession has had a negative impact on our local businesses, especially retailers and restaurants. We should be supporting this vital sector of our economy, not punishing it by imposing higher taxes on their sales.
We know the City has made budget cuts; cuts to a plan. But have city administrators or elected officials cut expenses where it’s really needed? We don’t believe so and placing a burden on our local businesses isn't the solution. Please Vote NO on Measure U.
/s/ Matt Grocott /s/ Janice Raymond /s/ Dennis Werkmeister /s/ Gary Young /s/ Horst Jung
Rebuttal to Argument Against Measure U No one likes to pay taxes, but we all use the services they support -- fire and police protection, parks, sewers, streets, maintenance, and the Youth and Adult Community Centers.
San Carlos has not realized a revenue increase in 10 years, while our state funding and property tax revenue have dropped significantly. In 1978, San Carlos received 13 cents from the state for every dollar of property tax collected, but we now receive only 11cents. The status of our revenue stream is dire, and essential services and programs are seriously at risk.
To be fiscally responsible, any tax increase must be preceded by assertive and sustained efforts to reduce expenses. The City has already cut over 30% of administrative costs and reduced public works by 19%, and City Council’s commitment to reducing expenses is ongoing and aggressive.
Measure U is a responsible and conservative request for funding to protect our services and maintain our safety and property values. It represents only a 50 cent assessment on a $100 purchase, generates revenue from non-residents who shop and dine in town, and expires in six years.
Economic times like these require us to come together and protect what we’ve worked hard to create. Measure U is endorsed by a diverse group of residents, small businesses, and the San Carlos Chamber of Commerce. It deserves your thoughtful consideration, not a knee-jerk reaction to taxes in general. Please support your community by voting “YES” on MeasureU.
/s/ Mary Jo Hoffman, Vice Chair, General Plan Advisory Committee /s/ Ronald Collins, Board Member, San Carlos Chamber of Commerce /s/ Mike Aydelott, Past Chair, San Carlos Arts and Culture Commission
Measure "V"
"Shall the office of City Clerk be appointive?" Yes|No
Impartial Analysis of Measure V The California Government Code requires each city to have a City Clerk, who is to be either elected or appointed. The City Clerk's office is responsible to maintain custody and preservation of official records of the City including agendas, minutes and public hearing notices, contracts, as well as actions of the City Council such as ordinances, resolutions and contracts. The City Clerk also serves in an administrative capacity as Clerk of the Council,directs municipal elections, is the filing officer for campaign and economic interest statements required by the Political Reform Act, and is custodian of the City seal. The City Clerk manages the City's Records Management Program, maintains the Municipal Code and administers the department's imaging system.
This measure would change the manner in which the City Clerk of the City of San Carlos is selected. Currently, the City Clerk is elected directly by the people and must reside in and be a registered voter of the City. There is no current requirement that the City Clerk have any specific education, certification or training. The City Clerk serves an elective term of four years and must stand for re-election to continue as City Clerk. Any vacancy in the position must be filled by appointment for the duration of the elective term or by special election.
This measure would make the City Clerk's office an appointive rather than elective office. If this measure passes, any person serving as the City Clerk would continue to serve the current elective term until its expiration on November 8, 2011, or until there is a vacancy in the position, whichever occurs first. Thereafter, the City Clerk would be appointed by the City Council,which could adopt minimum qualifications for training, education, experience or certification for the City Clerk position. The City Council could recruit and interview for the position of City Clerk from among all qualified candidates, regardless of where they reside or are registered to vote. An appointed City Clerk would serve at the pleasure of the City Council, and as a department head of the City Clerk's department. Thus, an appointed City Clerk could be replaced due to unsatisfactory performance or if he or she became unable or unwilling to perform the job duties. Temporary appointments could be made to the position during recruitment of qualified applicants, and no appointment within thirty days or special election would be required. The City Council would have the right to adopt an ordinance to delegate appointment authority for the City Clerk's position to the City Manager. If the measure does not pass, the City Clerk will continue to be an elective office.
Argument in Favor of Measure V The selection of the City Clerk should be based on qualifications and experience - not the result of a political campaign.
Demands on the City Clerk have evolved over the past few decades. The complexities of the position have increased and the technical skills and knowledge required are significant. The Clerk’s responsibilities include management of the City’s electronic document management program, oversight of all municipal elections, compliance with conflict of interest regulations, following federal/state laws and recording decisions of the representative government.
Logic demands that the Clerk be selected based on an extensive screening designed to recruit and hire the person with the strongest technical, administrative and professional skills. Once hired, an appointed City Clerk can be held accountable to perform to the same standards established for City department heads and executive staff.
Under California law, the only qualifications to serve as an elected City Clerk are that the person be at least 18 years old and that they are registered to vote in San Carlos. This potentially eliminates qualified candidates living nearby but unable to afford living in San Carlos.
You expect the duties of this vital position will be performed by an experienced and skilled professional. This can best be accomplished by selecting a person to serve based on technical skill, education and relevant experience.
Statewide, the trend has moved towards appointed rather than elected City Clerks. Seventy-six percent of California cities appoint their City Clerks. We join many groups and individuals in California committed to quality local government and encourage you to support this logical and necessary change.
Your yes vote ensures the duties of the City Clerk are performed by a qualified professional selected on experience, education and training, not by popular vote.
/s/ Bob Grassilli, Mayor of San Carlos /s/ Christine D. Boland, CMC, City Clerk of San Carlos
