My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2005-12-05
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2005
>
AgdaPkt 2005-12-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2005 12:02:25 PM
Creation date
12/1/2005 2:42:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Date
12/5/2005
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
332
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />6A-~ <br /> <br />The group has reached consensus on the following items so far during this process: <br />. Pursue 1/8th-cent sales tax <br />. Pursue the enabling legislation required to place the measure on the ballot <br />. Do not form a special district, instead utilize an existing board <br />. Governance responsibilities of the managing board include distribution of funds, <br />auditing and reporting functions <br />. Funds can be used for a variety of park and recreation related needs including <br />maintenance, operations, activities and programs, capital improvements and <br />acquisition. <br />. Use population and a base amount to cities as the method for distributing funds <br />to cities (Determined we could not use other methods such as acreage, <br />programs or budgets as there was no consistent measurement). <br />. Use Department of Finance annual projections to adjust allocations. <br />. The formula for distributing funds to County, cities & districts <br /> <br />Items that have been discussed but still await a recommendation include: <br />. What entity will have governance responsibilities? <br />. How will maintenance of effort be handled? <br />. What is the tax measure's sunset date and process for renewing? <br />. Exactly when the item will be placed on the ballot. <br /> <br />Whv was a one-eiqht cent sales tax chosen? <br />This approached was taken because of the strong level of support for a one-eight cent <br />sales tax, the amount of revenue that would be raised though the tax and the desire to <br />not create another special district or level of bureaucracy to administer the tax. <br /> <br />The information from the poll conducted in early January 2005 showed that 67% of <br />voters indicated that they would support or likely support a one-eighth cent increase in <br />the sales tax compared to 56% would support or likely support one-quarter cent <br />increase. The poll also showed that only a small parcel tax would garner 2/3rds support <br />by voters and only yield $4 million verses the $13-16 million projected from the one- <br />eight cent sales tax increases. <br /> <br />What amount of revenue would the sales tax change generate and how does our <br />tax rate compare? <br /> <br /> <br />Estimated Revenue & Annual Cost <br />I <br /> <br />Current <br />Sales Tax Rate Comparison <br />County Sales Tax <br />Alameda 8.75% <br />Contra Costa 8.25% <br />San Francisco 8.50% <br />San Mateo 8.25% <br />Santa Clara 8.25% <br />Santa Cruz 8.00% <br /> <br />Assumes 25% of income is spent of taxable items <br />. Based on 2002 median per capita income of $57,906 <br />.. Average personal spending multiplied by # of county residents <br /> <br />This proposal would increase the San Mateo <br />County sales tax rate from 8.25% to 8.375% <br /> <br />Why was special legislation required and what is the status of the legislation? <br />Counties possess the authority for levying sales taxes in one-quarter cent increments <br />under Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7285, the general provision for one-quarter <br /> <br />2005 City Agenda format <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.