LWV League of Women Voters of California
Smart Voter
Alameda County, CA November 5, 2002 Election
Measure II
Temporary Transient Tax Surcharge
City of Oakland

Municipal Code Amendment - Majority Approval Required

34411 / 43.4% Yes votes ...... 44835 / 56.6% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Results as of Nov 15 4:54pm, 100.0% of Precincts Reporting (244/244)
Information shown below: Summary | Fiscal Impact | Impartial Analysis | Arguments | Full Text

Shall the Oakland Municipal Code be amended in order to provide for a three percent (3%) temporary (five year) surcharge to the City's transient occupancy tax rate?

Summary:
This measure would authorize the City of Oakland to impose a three percent (3%) surcharge for five years to the City's Transient Occupancy ("hotel") Tax Rate. The tax is imposed on the rental amount paid by any person who, for any period of not more than thirty (30) consecutive days, obtains the right to use space for sleeping or overnight accommodations in any hotel, inn, hostelry, tourist home or house, motel, etc.

The current transient occupancy tax rate is eleven percent (11%). The surcharge would increase the amount of transient occupancy tax paid to fourteen percent (14%) for a five-year period.

The City may expend revenue it receives from the surcharge for any general fund purpose.

Fiscal Impact from The City Auditor:
This measure proposes to amend the Oakland Municipal Code in order to provide for a three percent (3%) temporary (five year) surcharge to the City's transient occupancy tax rate. This three percent (3%) surcharge is in addition to the current eleven percent (11%) transient occupancy tax. Thus, the proposed tax rate would be fourteen percent (14%) for five years.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Financial Services Agency estimates that the City will gain $2,740,364 in revenue annually from this three percent (3%) transient occupancy tax surcharge. Although it is difficult to make such estimates with precision, we have reviewed data from the Financial Services Agency and the City Manager's Budget Office; and, conclude that these estimates are reasonable.

This tax surcharge revenue will be deposited into the City's General Fund subject to appropriation pursuant to the budget and fiscal provisions of the City Charter. An accompanying advisory measure (Resolution 77325) will allow the voters to determine if they want this tax surcharge revenue to be spent on violence prevention programs.

Hotel operators will collect this three percent (3%) transient occupancy tax surcharge from their room occupants. For example, a $100 room rate will have a $3 tax surcharge.

There will be administrative costs associated with this measure; however, these costs cannot be determined until program implementation.

s/ROLAND E. SMITH, CPA City Auditor

Impartial Analysis from The City Attorney
Measure II asks that voters of the City of Oakland authorize the City to impose a three percent (3%) temporary (5 year) surcharge to the City's transient occupancy tax rate. This tax applies to the rate paid for sleeping or overnight accommodations in any hotel, inn, hostelry, tourist home or house, motel, etc.

All revenues the City receives from the temporary surcharge will be deposited in the general fund of the City and can be expended by the City for any general fund purpose.

A "Yes" vote is a vote in favor of authorizing imposition of a three percent (3%) temporary surcharge to the City's transient occupancy tax rate.

A "No" vote is a vote against the imposition of a three percent (3%) temporary surcharge to the City's transient occupancy tax rate.

Measure II is submitted to the voters of the City in accordance with the Constitution of the State of California. In order to pass, a "Yes" vote by a majority (50%+1) of the voters voting on the measure is required.

s/JOHN RUSSO City Attorney

  News and Analysis

Oakland Tribune

San Francisco Chronicle
Suggest a link related to Measure II
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure II Arguments Against Measure II
This measure, together with Measures GG and HH will provide the necessary revenues to fund our violence prevention campaign. It is no secret that violent crime and particularly murders have increased recently. We must take decisive action to reverse this dangerous trend. Measure II provides the money to do so.

With hard economic times in the Bay Area, Oakland has had to cut back on many programs. If we are to add 100 more police and carry out the specific crime prevention programs described in the Advisory Measure FF, we need more city revenues. This is what the temporary surcharge of Measure II makes possible.

For five years only, a three (3) % surcharge will be added to the hotel and motel bills which visitors pay for staying in Oakland. It is only fair that those who come into our city and benefit from all the public investments pay their fair share.

Fighting crime, helping troubled youth, reducing domestic violence and assisting returning parolees simply cannot be done without more money. Having our visitors pay a little more on their hotel room bills is a small price to pay for increased personal safety and public well-being.

Please help keep Oakland on the move. Vote the revenue needed to support our violence prevention programs.

For more information, see http://www.jerrybrown.org.

VOTE YES ON II.

s/JERRY BROWN Mayor of Oakland
s/ROBERT L. JACKSON, Pastor Acts Full Gospel Church
s/HENRY L. GARDNER Former City Manager

Rebuttal to Arguments For
OAKLAND ON THE MOVE, RIGHT ON! Try on bicycles! Efficient, fun, practical. But pain from theft, destruction. Of 300 reported to police, stolen, ten recovered. Building guard, "Leave your bicycle outside!" - Claptrap generated by a faceless administrator holed up inside. "I want to read in the library, shop, go other places without a car, be heard at city hall, without jeopardizing my bicycle. If I can't, I feel bad, rejected, stay home, watch TV, get a car, maybe shoot, speed."

An alternative: Youth, adults construct

Bicycles Inside Hitching Posts. See Caltrain's Bicycle Car, other city council chambers bicycle friendly inside: Palo Alto, Union City, Menlo Park, Newark, San Jose. Oakland's City Hall, too, can be green! Bicycles replace cars when bicycles can always be within owners' sight and ready reach.

Automated Bicycle Garage! Compared with a vehicle garage: for the land/space $106 vs. $945, 1:9; and for the construction cost/space $1600 vs. $8514, 1:5.

Try on buses!

Tell AC Transit to use Local bus manufacturer for new buses federally funded 80% and local labor instead of shipping $61,000,000+ and XXXXX jobs to Belgium; 100% from local operating and maintenance funds - causing AC Transit deficit, fare hikes, and service cuts!

Small, quiet, non-diesel buses, 1/4$$ to buy, 1/2$$ to operate, and without diesel Riders' -, neighborhoods' -, and taxpayers'-friendly. Chemical toxins and noise - 85 dB!


Enhanced mobility and access options bring new vistas!

Walk the talk, No on II and yes on the above!

s/NANCY JEWELL CROSS, CEO Clean Air Transport Systems
Regional & Interregional Developers

California state and local governments are trying to raise money in times hard for many people. - To raise billions, from us! Bonds offer the wealthy tax-exemption, cost us 40% more. Prices shock us as increasing fees and taxes insert themselves.

The price of a hotel or motel room commonly includes the cost of vehicle storage, complimentarily. The cost is not credited to a non-user. The land for a room and a car space is about equal, except that an 18-wheeler may take 10x as much space as human sleeping room, with the cost to provide put onto other tenants' bills!

If we are going to get human shelter for everyone, we have to unbundle imposing complimentary vehicle storage costs onto other people seeking shelter only for themselves. We need to think carefully whether we want to tax shelter in a hotel or motel because people may be residents of another county, city, or country, or if of this city, county, and country, unable by homeless status to vote in the practicalities # easy scapegoats for city burdens.

Also visitors who may not vote here may spend here, and higher from the tax, avoid coming. Loss of tourist business may break businesses we cherish! Churches' and police resources to help persons in desperate circumstances with vouchers for a night or two or a few weeks will dry sooner with this insensitive-to-shelter as such tax.

Concept complimentary land use, if any, priority for human shelter! Vote No on this measure!

(510) 792-8523

s/NANCY JEWELL CROSS, Chief Executive Officer Clean Air Transport Systems
Regional & Interregional Developers

Rebuttal to Arguments Against
All major cities impose a hotel and motel tax to pay for city services that benefit tourists. Given the increased number of murders in Oakland, it is only common sense to add a few dollars to the nightly room charge so as to make the city safer. If we bring down the crime rate, it will encourage more tourists to stay in Oakland and that's good for the hotels and good for the local economy.

The sole opponent to Measure II is non-Oakland resident. For some reason, she asserts that Oakland hotels include the cost of parking in the price of the room. That is simply not true. Visitors are always charged extra if they want their car parked in the hotel garage.

But the important point is that Oakland must do more to fight crime! Every person in the city, whether visitor or resident, has the right to be more secure.

That's the purpose of Measure II and the reason why you should vote for it.

VOTE YES ON MEASURE II.

s/JERRY BROWN Mayor

Full Text of Measure II
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Oakland desires to amend the Oakland Municipal Code in order to provide for a three percent (3%) temporary surcharge to the City's transient occupancy tax rate; and

WHEREAS, all revenues received from any increase will be deposited in the general fund of the City to be expended for general fund purposes; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the City Council of the City of Oakland does hereby submit to the voters at the November 5, 2002 special election the text of the proposed ordinance, which shall be as follows:

SECTION 1. The Municipal Code is hereby amended to add, delete, or modify sections as set forth below (section numbers and titles are indicated in bold type; additions are indicated by underscoring and deletions are indicated by strike through type; portions of the regulations not cited or not shown in underscoring or strike-through type are not changed).

SECTION 2. The Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Section 4.24.031 to read as follows:


4.24.031 Imposition of surcharge.
Effective February 1, 2003 or such later date as required by state law, there shall be a surcharge of three percent (3%) of the rent charged by the operator of a hotel, in addition to the eleven percent tax specified in Section 4.24.030, for the privilege of occupancy in any hotel in the City of Oakland. The surcharge so collected shall be deposited in the General Fund subject to appropriation pursuant to the budget and fiscal provisions of the Charter.

If rent is paid in installments the rent so paid, charged, billed or falling due shall be subject (1) to the tax of eleven percent imposed by Section 4.24.030 to the extent that it covers any portion of the period prior to February 1, 2003, and (2) to the three percent (3%) surcharge imposed herein to the extent that it covers any portion of the period between February 1, 2003 and February 1, 2008. Where any tax has been paid hereunder upon any rent without any right of occupancy therefore, the Tax Administrator may, by regulation, provide for credit or refund of the amount of such tax upon application therefore as provided in this Code.

The surcharge imposed by this Section shall expire on February 2, 2008.


Alameda Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: December 6, 2002 03:14 PST
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://ca.lwv.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.