Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Larkspur, California, Sales Tax, Measure B (November 2017)
| Measure B: Larkspur Sales Tax |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| November 7, 2017 |
| Status: |
 Approved
|
| Topic: |
| Local sales tax Expires in: Never |
| Related articles |
| Local sales tax on the ballot November 7, 2017 ballot measures in California Marin County, California ballot measures City tax on the ballot |
| See also |
| Larkspur, California |
A sales tax measure was on the ballot for Larkspur voters in Marin County, California, on November 7, 2017. It was approved.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of authorizing the city to increase the then-existing 0.50 percent sales tax to 0.75 percent (three-quarter cent) and continue it until ended by voters, with revenue going to general city services. The measure was also designed to allow the city to incur debt funded by revenue from the sales tax. |
| A no vote was a vote against authorizing the city to extend and increase the then-existing 0.50 percent sales tax to 0.75 percent (three-quarter cent) sales tax, thereby allowing the existing 0.50 percent sales tax to expire in 2019. The measure was also designed to allow the city to incur debt funded by revenue from the sales tax. |
In 2013, Larkspur voters approved a sales tax measure that imposed a 0.50 percent city sales tax with a sunset date set for 2019. Measure B proposed to extend the tax with no automatic sunset date and to increase the rate to 0.75 percent, establishing the total sales tax rate in Larkspur at 9.0 percent. The state-mandated tax rate that applied throughout California as of 2017 is 7.25 percent, with revenue allocated to various purposes. As of 2017, Marin County also levied a 1.0 percent sales tax, and the average total sales tax rate throughout the county was 8.25 percent.[1][2]
City officials estimated that Measure B would generate $1.65 million yearly. The measure was also designed to allow the city council to consider the use of debt in the form of bonds, which city officials stated would be used to finance roadway improvements. Officials estimated that the debt could range from $25 million to $30 million over 20 years or more.[3]
Election results
| Measure B | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 1,945 | 66.59% | ||
| No | 976 | 33.41% | ||
- Election results from County of Marin
Text of measure
Ballot question
The ballot question was as follows:[3]
| “ |
Larkspur Essential City Services Measure. To maintain City services, including repairing aging, deteriorating neighborhood streets, roads, potholes, major boulevards; clearing brush to prevent fires/improve emergency vehicle access; upgrading storm drains; fire protection/911 emergency/medical response; and other services, shall the City of Larkspur extend the voter-approved sales tax at the 3/4¢ rate until ended by voters, providing $1,650,000 annually with authority to incur debt to accelerate infrastructure projects, subject to citizens’ oversight/audits?[4] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the Larkspur City Attorney:
| “ |
The City Council of the City of Larkspur placed Measure B on the ballot to ask the City’s voters to approve a three-quarter of one percent (0.75%) transactions and use (“sales”) tax. If approved, the total local sales tax would add 3/4¢ to the price of an item that costs a dollar (if the item is normally subject to sales tax). Funds from Measure B could be used for any legitimate local governmental purpose. It is therefore a “general tax,” not a “special tax” that restricts the funds to specific purposes. The City Council has adopted a policy for the use of proceeds from the tax. It committed no less than 80% of funds to road repair, rehabilitation, and maintenance, and related improvements. The other 20% may also be used for the same purposes and for emergency services and the repair and maintenance of the City’s storm drain system. The measure would authorize the City Council to incur debt, including issuing bonds, allowing the City to accelerate roadway projects. The Council’s policy on the use of funds calls for consideration of a financing plan to make possible a five-year roadway improvement plan. It is anticipated that any debt incurred would be in the $25-30,000,000 range, repaid over at least 20 years. Because a financing plan has not yet been adopted, the measure does not include an automatic sunset in a term of years. Instead, it states that Larkspur voters have the authority to terminate the tax through the ballot and empowers the Citizens’ Oversight Committee, discussed below, to recommend to the Council that it submit a measure to Larkspur voters to end the tax. Such a measure could not terminate the tax while debt to fund roadway improvements was outstanding but would result in termination as soon as it was repaid. In 2013, Larkspur voters approved Measure C, a 0.50% sales tax, revenue from which has been used primarily for road repair, rehabilitation, and maintenance projects, and also for clearing vegetation that might obstruct fire engines, improving the downtown fire station, and leasing a new fire truck. Measure C will expire in 2019 unless renewed. Measure B would extend Measure C and increase the rate by 0.25%. If Measure B were approved, the total sales tax rate in Larkspur would be 9.0%. The measure is estimated to produce $1,650,000 annually. Measure B would continue the role of the Citizens’ Oversight Committee established by Measure C. Its duties include reviewing a mandatory report prepared annually by the City’s auditors regarding the collection, management, and expenditure of measure revenue; evaluating the projects and services provided with measure revenue; and making recommendations to the City Council regarding priorities for expenditure of measure revenue. A “Yes” vote is a vote to approve a 3/4¢ sales tax, with annual review by independent auditors and a citizens’ oversight committee. A “No” vote is a vote against the tax. Measure B would be approved if it received a simple majority of “Yes” votes.[4] |
” |
| —Larkspur City Attorney[3] | ||
Full text
The full text of the measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[3]
- Kevin Haroff, mayor, city council
- Laura L. Collins, member, Measure C Citizen Oversight Committee and Larkspur taxpayer
- Sandy Blauvelt, resident of 46 years
- Perry Butler, owner, Perry’s on Magnolia
Arguments in favor
Cindy Winter of the Marin Voice wrote an opinion in support of Measure B, stating, "Measure B will reassure all whose streets remain unrepaired under Measure C that theirs will be fixed, at least by Year Five. While some may find this delay unsatisfactory, they should consider that without Measure B their road might not be improved for perhaps 10 or 20 years, if then."[5]
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[3]
| “ | Tired of Larkspur’s deteriorating streets and potholes? Vote YES on B!
Larkspur still has the worst streets and roads in Marin County. YES on B repairs our aging, deteriorating local streets, roads, and boulevards -- making them safer and maintaining our property values. YES on B does NOT create a new tax. Measure B simply extends the existing, voter-approved Larkspur sales tax at the ¾ cent rate. This voter-approved funding has been used to repave some of the most degraded roads in the hills, on Magnolia Avenue, and Larkspur Plaza Drive. While this funding has been critical in preventing some roads from falling into further disrepair, more roads will fail unless we extend it.
All Measure B money must be spent on our LOCAL needs and Sacramento politicians can’t touch a dime! We must continue to invest in our local infrastructure to make needed improvements, prevent further deterioration, and lower future street maintenance costs. YES on B continues tough accountability provisions such as independent financial audits, publishing expenditure reports, and continued review by an Independent Citizens Oversight Committee – ensuring funds are used as promised to the community. Here’s what Measure B WON’T do:
Join a unanimous City Council and neighborhood leaders and residents throughout Larkspur in voting YES on B.[4] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[3]
- Michael Hartnett
Arguments against
Michael Hartnett, who filed the official argument in opposition to Measure B, wrote an opinion against the measure in the Marin Independent Journal, criticizing the fact that the measure was designed without an automatic sunset date. He also argued, "Measure B would bring in about $1.7 million per year, meaning that it would take several decades to pay off the debt and interest. There must be a better way."[6]
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[3]
| “ |
Everyone agrees on one thing. The roads in Larkspur are in deplorable condition. But saddling the taxpayers with sales tax of 0.75% in perpetuity is not the solution. Since the passage of the half-cent tax four years ago, there has not been a substantial increase in expenditures on roads. There has been a significant increase spending on pensions and salaries. This sales tax goes to the city’s General Fund. It does not have to be spent on our roads. By having revenues go to the General Fund, the city avoids the two-thirds’ majority requirement for passage if the measure were strictly for roads. City officials are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Like many municipalities, Larkspur has a serious shortfall in its obligation towards pensions and benefits to its public employees. It is likely that the increased revenue from this measure will go to salaries and benefits for them. It is shameful that the city chose to neglect its basic infrastructure for so long. In a prosperous community with a thriving business sector, there should have been enough money for road maintenance without this tax. This tax increase will hurt businesses and consumers in Larkspur. The city has yet to adequately confront its looming employee pension and benefit shortfall. Passing this tax only enables them of avoid the issue. They need to live within their means. Vote “No” on this deceptive tax increase.[4] |
” |
Background
While Measure B was earmarked to fund general purposes in the city, officials stated that the sales tax measure would allow the city to fund roadway projects through the use of municipal bonds. According to the Marin Voice, the sales tax measure that passed in 2013, Measure C, provided enough funding to improve 38 percent of Larkspur's roads by its sunset date in 2019. City officials stated that Measure B would allow for the completion of roadway projects in the first five years.[5]
According to an October 2016 report, the "California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment," Larkspur road pavement conditions were rated "poor," the lowest in the county.[7]
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the Larkspur City Council.[3]
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Larkspur Local sales tax Measure B. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ InsideGov, "Larkspur, Marin County Sales Tax Rate," accessed October 16, 2017
- ↑ Sale-Tax.com "Larkspur, CA Sales Tax Rate," accessed October 16, 2017
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 Marin County Elections Office, "November 7, 2017 - Measure B," accessed September 22, 2017
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Marin Voice, "Marin Voice: Measure B pays for a five-year road repair promise," October 5, 2017
- ↑ MarinIJ.com "Marin Voice: Send government TEA — Taxed Enough Already," October 6, 2017
- ↑ Save California Streets, "California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment," October 2016
| |||||
