San Francisco, California, Sales Tax Increase, Proposition K (November 2016)
| Proposition K: San Francisco Sales Tax Increase |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| November 8, 2016 |
| Status: |
 Defeated
|
| Topic: |
| Local sales tax Expires in: 25 years |
| Related articles |
| Local sales tax on the ballot November 8, 2016 ballot measures in California San Francisco County, California ballot measures City tax on the ballot Local sales tax on the ballot |
| See also |
| San Francisco, California |
A sales tax increase was on the ballot for San Francisco voters in San Francisco County, California, on November 8, 2016. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of increasing the city's sales tax by an additional 0.75 percent tax for 25 years with revenue deposited into the general fund, creating a total sales tax rate in the city of 9.25 percent. |
| A no vote was a vote against this proposition to increase the city's sales tax, thereby leaving the total sales tax rate in the city at 8.75 percent. |
Proposition K was also designed to increase the city's appropriations limit through a gann override—a measure to increase the spending authority of a local jurisdiction—to allow the city to spend all of the revenue collected through the sales tax proposed by Proposition K.
A gann limit, or appropriations limit, is a restriction on how much a local governmental agency is allowed to spend in a year. The gann limits for local governments in California were originally set by Proposition 4 in 1979. The result of this limit is that sometimes a government will collect more revenue than it can legally spend, forcing it to return some of the money. Article XIIIB of the California Constitution gives voters in a governmental jurisdiction the authority to override a local gann limit, allowing the jurisdiction to spend all of its revenue.
Election results
| Proposition K | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| No | 246,947 | 65.29% | ||
| Yes | 131,286 | 34.71% | ||
- Election results from San Francisco Department of Elections
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]
| “ |
Shall the City increase its sales tax by 0.75%, for a total tax of 9.25%?[2] |
” |
Simplification digest
The following summary of Proposition K was provided by San Francisco's Ballot Simplification Committee:[1]
| “ |
The Way It Is Now: San Francisco has an 8.75% sales tax, with two parts: • 7.5% in State taxes, of which the City receives 1.25%; and • 1.25% in local sales taxes that fund the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), the San Francisco County Transportation Authority and the San Francisco County Public Finance Authority. After December 31, 2016, the overall sales tax in San Francisco will be reduced to 8.5%. State law allows the City to increase the local sales tax up to an additional 0.75%, with voter approval. State law limits the amount of revenue, including tax revenue, the City can spend each year. Under State law, San Francisco voters can approve increases to this limit for a maximum of four years. The Proposal: Proposition K is an ordinance that would increase the sales tax in San Francisco by 0.75%, for a total tax of 9.25%. This 0.75% increase would go into the General Fund. If voters approve this proposition, the increase would start on April 1, 2017. The sales tax increase would expire after 25 years. Proposition K would also increase the State’s limit on the City’s annual tax revenue spending by the amount of additional taxes collected under the proposed rate increase. The increased limit would last for four years. A “YES” Vote Means: If you vote “yes,” you want the City to increase its sales tax by 0.75%, for a total tax of 9.25%. A “NO” Vote Means: If you vote “no,” you do not want to make this change.[2] |
” |
Fiscal impact
The following fiscal impact statement about Proposition K was provided by the San Francisco Controller:[1]
| “ |
City Controller Ben Rosenfield has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition K: Should this ordinance be approved, in my opinion, it would result in an annual tax revenue increase to the City of an estimated $37.5 million in fiscal year (FY) 2016–2017 and $155.1 million in FY 2017–18. The tax is a general tax and proceeds would be deposited into the General Fund. The measure would amend the City’s Business Tax and Regulations Code to increase the local sales tax rate by 0.75% (three-quarters of one percent) as of April 2017, for a period of twenty-five years.[2] |
” |
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:[1]
- Mayor Edwin M. Lee
- President London Breed
- Supervisor John Avalos
- Supervisor Malia Cohen
- Supervisor Mark Farrell
- Supervisor Eric Mar
- Supervisor Katy Tang
- Supervisor Scott Wiener"
Arguments in favor
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[1]
| “ |
Proposition K restores and grows funding for vital local services. Proposition K will generate $150 million for San Francisco’s General Fund to invest in housing the homeless, fixing public transportation, improving neighborhood public safety and building more affordable housing. Proposition K is progressive and fair because the wealthy, big corporations and visitors to San Francisco who spend more will always pay more. Proposition K is a progressive approach to funding vital services, because wealthy individuals and corporations that make large purchases always pay more. What’s more, only about half of our local sales tax is paid by local residents, with the rest paid for by tourists, visitors and businesses buying from other businesses. San Francisco’s sales tax rate will STILL be lower than many other Bay Area Cities & Counties. San Francisco today has a lower sales tax rate than many other Bay Area cities and counties, including adjacent Alameda and San Mateo Counties. In addition, a quarter-cent sales tax increase approved by California voters in 2012 is set to expire in 2017. Proposition K will increase the overall local sales tax by just half a penny over what it is today. And even with the passage of Proposition K, San Francisco will STILL have a lower sales tax rate than many other Bay Area cities and counties. The funds generated by Proposition K will remain in San Francisco to be spent 100% on local priorities and vital services. Please join us in voting for much-needed funding for vital public services. For progress on homelessness, for better transportation, for improved public safety, affordable housing and investing in our future, please vote YES on Proposition K.[2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
Representatives of SaveMuni signed the official argument against the measure.[1]
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[1]
| “ |
VOTE NO on PROP K BAIT, SWITCH and GRAB A regressive sales tax is counterproductive. Prop K uses the lure of homelessness to divert funds from cash-strapped city services to one city agency---which we have already given billions of dollars in sales taxes, bonds, fares, fees and fines. For any one of the following reasons, Vote No on Prop K: • City Economist’s economic impact report of Prop K: “The tax increase is expected to generate nearly as much tax revenue as it costs in consumption spending [lost retail sales] ---approximately $154 million by 2017-18.” • As shoppers flee San Francisco for lower sales taxes, particularly along the southern border and easily into nearby neighborhoods, small businesses will be disproportionately impacted. • With ever-rising sales taxes and fees, low and middle-income residents and families will be disproportionately impacted. • Double-Dipping: San Francisco’s sales tax already has an existing fixed transportation allocation. • Prop K is the economic-equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic---instead of managing the City’s $9.6 billion budget, which exceeds that of many states and small countries. • Despite billions of dollars in expenditures, with a $241 million annual budget, homelessness is worsening. • Despite billions of dollars in expenditures, Muni’s per capita ridership has declined---indicating the need for sound decision-making, not just money. • Despite billions of dollars of expenditures and one of the largest budgets in history, voters are taxed more and more for less and less. [2] |
” |
Media editorials
Support
- San Francisco Chronicle: "The second measure, Prop. K, sets up the sales tax itself. San Francisco’s 8.75 percent bite is now among the lowest in the Bay Area and would remain so if the proposed increase is tacked on....The real danger to the propositions may be the ballot itself. Voters will be working through federal and state races and 17 California measures before facing San Francisco’s marathon roster of candidates and 24 local measures. It’s an endurance test, but local voters mustn’t skip past these two choices. Vote Yes on Props. J and K."[3]
- The Bay Area Reporter recommended a yes vote for Proposition K.[4]
- San Francisco Bay Guardian: "We don’t love the idea of these two linked ballot measures. Mayor Ed Lee and Sups. Mark Farrell and Scott Wiener, who are trying to criminalize homeless people (see prop. Q), want the voters to pass a (regressive) sales tax to fund services for the homeless and transportation. One of the reasons that there are so many homeless people is that evictions have been epidemic since the mayor gave Twitter and other tech firms at tax break to come to town. One of the reasons that Muni has so much trouble is that Lee, Wiener, and Farrell support the idea of the giant Google buses that take up Muni stops and pay nothing even remotely near their share of the cost. More: The city has the right to charge developers more than $80 a square foot for Muni service. The mayor and the sponsors of this sales tax went with $18. They want to tax the working people of the city and not tax the developers, the Ubers and Lyfts of the world, the Google buses, and tech companies. It’s enough to make you sick. But in the end, the city needs the money, the services are critical, and the tax hike is the only way to pay for the (dubious) set-aside. Hold your nose and vote Yes."[5]
- San Francisco Examiner: "A sales tax to raise $150 million for transit improvements and homelessness services is consistent with our most urgent needs and priorities in San Francisco. Jeff Kositsky, head of the new department of homelessness, and Ed Reiskin, head of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority, which oversees Muni, both argue that such an investment is vital to address the basic mission of their respective departments."[6]
Opposition
Email editor@ballotpedia.org to submit media editorials that should be posted here.
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through an 8-3 vote of the San Francisco board of supervisors.
"Yes" votes
The following supervisors voted in favor of putting Proposition K on the ballot:[1]
- Eric Mar - District 1
- Mark Farrell - District 2
- Katy Tang - District 4
- London Breed - District 5
- Scott Wiener - District 8
- David Campos - District 9
- Malia Cohen - District 10
- John Avalos - District 11
"No" votes
The following supervisors voted against putting Proposition K on the ballot:[1]
- Aaron Peskin - District 3
- Jane Kim - District 6
- Norman Yee - District 7
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms San Francisco sales tax increase Proposition K. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 San Francisco Elections Office, "San Francisco Voter Information Pamphlet and Sample Ballot," accessed September 26, 2016
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ San Francisco Chronicle,"Pass SF Props. J and K to ease homelessness, improve transit," September 22, 2016
- ↑ The Bay Area Reporter,"B.A.R. election endorsements," accessed October 9, 2016
- ↑ San Francisco Bay Guardian,"ENDORSEMENTS! The case for six progressive supes, Kim for state Senate …," accessed October 6, 2016
- ↑ San Francisco Examiner,"Examiner Endorsements: City measures," October 13, 2016
| |||||
