Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey
San Diego, California, Football Stadium Initiative, Measure C (November 2016)
| Measure C: San Diego Football Stadium Initiative |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| November 8, 2016 |
| Status: |
 Defeated
|
| Topic: |
| Local hotel tax Expires in: Never |
| Related articles |
| Local hotel tax on the ballot November 8, 2016 ballot measures in California San Diego County, California ballot measures Local zoning, land use and development on the ballot |
| See also |
| San Diego, California |
A hotel tax measure to fund a new football stadium was on the ballot for San Diego voters in San Diego County, California, on November 8, 2016. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of increasing the city’s hotel occupancy tax by an additional 6 percent to fund the construction of a city-owned downtown professional football stadium. |
| A no vote was a vote against increasing the city’s hotel occupancy tax fund the construction of a football stadium. |
A similar measure, Measure D, was also on the ballot. If it had passed, Measure D would have increased the city’s hotel occupancy tax by up to an additional 5 percent and allowed Qualcomm Stadium property, if vacated, to be sold for educational and park uses.
Election results
| Measure C | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| No | 306,887 | 56.36% | ||
| Yes | 237,597 | 43.64% | ||
- Election results from San Diego County Elections Office
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]
| “ |
DOWNTOWN STADIUM INITIATIVE. Should the measure be adopted to: increase San Diego’s hotel occupancy tax by 6% to build a City-owned downtown professional football stadium and convention center project, and fund tourism marketing; effect the project financing, design, construction, use, management, and maintenance, including a $650,000,000 contribution and 30-year commitment by a professional football entity; end Tourism Marketing District assessments; adopt a development ordinance, and related land use, sign, and zoning laws?[2] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the San Diego City Attorney:
| “ |
This citizens’ initiative measure would amend the City’s Downtown Community Plan and the San Diego Municipal Code to provide for the development, financing, management, and use of a downtown convention center and professional football stadium project (the Project) on a 10-block area east of Petco Park (the Site), and require the City to:
Increase the City’s Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). This tax is paid by guests at hotels, recreational vehicle parks and campgrounds. This tax is itemized on guests’ bills, collected from guests by the operator and turned over to the City. The current tax is 10.5%. This measure would increase TOT to 16.5%, and end Tourism Marketing District assessments. New tax revenue would be deposited in special trust funds for:
The measure also would:
|
” |
| —San Diego 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]
- Jerry Sanders, President & CEO, San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
- Carol Kim, Boardmember, Middle Class Taxpayers Association
- U.S. Rep. Juan Vargas (D-51)
- Nicholas Segura, San Diego Building & Construction Trades Council
- John Thomson, retired Deputy Fire Chief
Arguments in favor
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[3]
| “ |
It will be more than a football stadium. It will be a multi-use facility that will serve as an expanded convention center, a stadium for the Chargers and a world-class events center. It will be a home for international soccer, collegiate basketball championships, extreme sports competitions, concerts and political conventions. The ground level will be filled with coffee shops, retail spaces, a museum and an incubator for start-up businesses. And it will also be a spectacular site for America’s national holiday: The Super Bowl. No new or increased taxes will be imposed on San Diego residents. The Chargers and the NFL will be contributing $650 million in private investment. The rest will be paid through an increase in the hotel tax paid by visitors to San Diego. Residents of the City of San Diego who don’t stay in a hotel room in the City will not pay for the development or operation of this facility. The City will oversee the design, construction and operation of the facility, not the Chargers. The measure plans for a new public governing structure or Joint Powers Authority to oversee the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the new facility and manage the hotel taxes and the bonds to complete the development. Again, no general fund dollars are designated to finance or operate any part of the project. Even more, the initiative would relieve existing obligations at Qualcomm Stadium that are currently paid out of the general fund totaling $15 million per year. The facility will create new local jobs. The facility will create 17,000 jobs during its construction. In addition, between the Chargers’ operations and other events at the facility 3,000 permanent jobs will be created in San Diego. [2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[3]
- Haney Hong, President & CEO, San Diego County Taxpayers Association
- Julie Meier Wright, former California Secretary of Trade & Commerce
- Vice Admiral Peter Hekman
- David Alvarez, Councilmember
- Chris Cate, Councilmember
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[3]
| “ |
Vote No on a Downtown Stadium - Jobs and Streets First! Dean Spanos’s Measure C is a Bad Deal for San Diego Raises Taxes by More Than $1 Billion It is a massive tax increase that should be spent on repairing streets, hiring 911 dispatchers and fully funding after-school programs. Instead of paying for those services, we would be raising taxes to help fund a rent-free stadium for Dean Spanos and his billion-dollar corporation. Measure C would be one of the largest tax increase in city history and the largest bond offering. Does Not Require Any New Parking or Traffic Improvements Getting in and out of Downtown San Diego is already difficult. So is finding parking. Dean Spanos’s stadium would make a bad situation worse. His tax measure exempts him from providing parking spaces required under the law. So if Measure C passes Dean Spanos would receive a special benefit. It means San Diego taxpayers would be forced to pay for parking and infrastructure to reduce traffic. Does Not Protect San Diego Taxpayers An independent analysis commissioned by the City found the public contribution could be $2.3 billion over 30 years. Four independent analyses all reached the same conclusion – the proposed hotel tax increase might not cover costs. The City’s Independent Budget Analyst said low hotel tax revenues could prompt the City to cover stadium costs with money normally used for public safety and other core services. Measure C Threatens San Diego’s Tourism Economy and Jobs Comic-Con and other large conventions are opposed to the measure. When we lose conventions, tourism declines. When tourism declines, we lose jobs, our economy suffers and tax revenues the city relies on for street repairs and other services fall. The City has more important priorities. Vote no on a bad deal! [2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a successful initiative petition campaign.
San Diego has its own initiative process for charter amendments and ordinances determined by the city charter. There are no specific subject matter restrictions for petitions. Signature requirements are 3% of the registered voters of the city at the last general city election for presentation to the legislature and 10% for the ballot. Circulators must wait 21 days after publication of intention to circulate and must turn in petitions 180 days after said publication. Circulators may be either paid or volunteer, but they must be a U.S. citizen and at least 18 years of age. The city code determines the format of the petition. The pre-approval process includes registration and publication in a newspaper of the intention to circulate. If 3% sign, then the petition goes to the legislature for passage. If at least 10% sign, then it proceeds to the ballot. A simple majority determines the outcome of the election.
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms San Diego Local hotel tax. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ San Diego Registrar of Voters, "Local Measures for November 8, 2016," accessed September 29, 2016
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 San Diego Registrar of Voters, "Measure C," accessed September 29, 2016
| |||||
