presents
Voter's Edge California Voter Guide
Conozca la información antes de votar.
Presentado por
MapLight
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
March 3, 2020 — Primary Election
Local

City of Oakland
Measure S Ordinance - Majority Approval Required

To learn more about measures, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.

Resultados electorales

Se aprueba

82,583 votos si (72.35%)

31,562 votos no (27.65%)

100% de distritos activos (244/244).

Shall the measure increasing the appropriations limit under Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (which limits city expenditures of tax proceeds) to allow the City of Oakland to continue to expend revenues from taxes previously approved by Oakland voters for emergency medical services, paramedic services, library services, public safety and violence prevention services, homeless services and other lawful governmental purposes, without increasing or imposing new taxes, be adopted?

¿Qué es esta propuesta?

Información básica sobre la iniciativa de ley — Información oficial sobre esta iniciativa

Resumen

Oakland City Auditor

This measure would authorize the City of Oakland to continue spending the proceeds of voter-approved City

taxes, including Measure M (Emergency Medical Services), Measure N (Paramedic Services),

Measure Q (Library Services), Measure C (Hotel Tax), Measure Z (Public Safety and Violence

Prevention Services), Measure HH (Sugar Sweetened Beverages), Measure D (Public Libraries

Preservation), Measure W (Vacant Properties), as well as other taxes received by the City such

as, Property Tax, State Tax, Business License Tax, Utility Consumption Tax, Real Estate

Transfer Tax, Transient Occupancy Tax, and the Parking Tax.

Análisis del analista legislativo / Proposal

BARBARA J. PARKER, City Attorney

In 1979, California: voters passed Proposition 4, an initiative that added Article XIIIB to the

California Constitution. This constitutional amendment established a limit, known as the "Gann

Limit" or "Appropriations Limit", on the amount of tax revenue state and local governments

(including cities) can appropriate (spend) in any fiscal year. The expenditure of tax revenue by

state and local governments cannot exceed their appropriations limits.

Article XIIIB requires that local governments calculate appropriations (spending) limits annually.

An appropriations limit is calculated by adjusting the "base year" appropriations limit each year

for inflation and population growth. In 1990, California voters passed Proposition 111, which

established Fiscal Year 1986-1987 as the "base year" for all governments. Therefore, the City of

Oakland's annual appropriations limit is the City's appropriations limit from Fiscal Year 1986-

1987 (base year) adjusted each year for inflation and population growth.

Since Fiscal Year 1986-1987, Oakland voters have passed local tax measures that generate tax

revenue to pay for important municipal services such as emergency dispatch services, paramedic

services, libraries, violence prevention, and services to the homeless. To permit the City of

Oakland to continue to spend tax revenue on these important municipal services without

exceeding the City's appropriations limit, the City of Oakland's appropriations limit must be

increased. Section 4 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution allows the electors of a local

government to increase the City's appropriations limit by a majority vote for up to four years.

This measure would increase the City's appropriations limit until March 3, 2024. This increase

will allow the City to continue to spend the tax revenue from local taxes previously approved by

Oakland voters on important municipal services such as emergency dispatch services, paramedic

services, libraries, violence prevention, and services to the homeless, without increasing or

imposing new taxes.

This measure was placed on the ballot by the Oakland City Council. Passage of this measure

requires an affirmative vote of a majority of voters (i.e., more than 50% of the votes cast). A "Yes"

vote will approve the measure; a "No" vote will reject the measure.

Efectos fiscales

Oakland City Auditor

This measure does not approve or impose any new taxes or increase any existing taxes. It

raises the tax appropriation limit therefore authorizing the City to continue spending tax

revenues previously approved by the voters or the City Council for Fiscal Year 2020-21

through Fiscal Year 2023-24.

The City would not be able to appropriate and spend all available tax monies if the City's tax

revenues exceed the appropriation limit, unless the voters approve this measure. Tax

revenues exceeding the appropriation limit would have to be returned to the taxpayers by

revising the tax rates or fee schedules within the following two fiscal years.

References to information in our independent analysis represents the best information at the

time of this analysis.

Published Arguments — Arguments for and against the ballot measure

Argumento A FAVOR

NO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE S WAS SUBMITTED

— Office of the City Clerk, City of Oakland

Argumento EN CONTRA

 

 

Argumento EN CONTRA

Vote No on this Spending Increase. In 1979 California Voters protected Taxpayers from a City’s urge to tax us out of our homes, called the ‘Gann Limit.’ Oakland has taxed us so aggressively that it is surpassing the ‘Gann Limit.’  Now the City wants to voters approve a higher limit without the public ever debating this Increase.

This Measure is deceptive because it argues that this Measure does not raise our taxes.  The Measure uses tricky words to mislead the voters when it argues ‘without increasing or imposing new taxes.’ True, this measure itself does not ‘impose new taxes’, but it DOES pave the way for new taxes and more spending.

The Measure suggests that the City has already exceeded the ‘Gann Limit’ and now needs to get permission after its violation.  Oakland gets and A+ for spinning words and duping voters into to voting their way, but these crafty “wordsmiths” receive an F- for accountability of how they spend OUR money!

Now is the time to demand accountability for Oakland’s spending. No more empty promises about annual audits. No more diversion of Bond money to unaccountable projects with most of the that money spent on bureaucracy. No more bureaucratic run-a-round from citizens asking for answers.

Now is the time to demand accountability for Oakland’s bad streets. Oakland has the worst paved streets in the Bay Area. Why did the Mayor and City Council neglect the streets for the last 20 years? The City has diverted the taxes into benefits for the ever-expanding City staff, such as the newly created Department of Transportation.  The benefit package to City staff is breathtaking, but no longer readily available on the City website. The City must answer our accountability questions.

Vote NO and Demand Accountability.

 

s/ Marcus Crawley

President of Alameda County Taxpayer Association    

 

— Office of the City Clerk, City of Oakland

Leer la legislación propuesta

Legislación propuesta

Section 1. Findings and Intent.

a. Oakland voters have passed local tax measures that generate

revenue to pay for important municipal services such as emergency

dispatch services, paramedic services, libraries, violence

prevention, and services to the homeless.

b. Article XIIIB of the California Constitution establishes a limit on the

amount of tax revenue a local government can appropriate each year.

c. To permit the City of Oakland to continue to spend the revenue

generated by the local taxes passed by Oakland voters on the above-

mentioned municipal services without exceeding the appropriations

limit set by Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, the City of

Oakland's appropriations limit must be increased.

d. Section 4 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution allows the

electors of a local government to increase the appropriations limit by

a majority vote for up to four years from the most recent vote.

e. It is the intent of the People of the City of Oakland in enacting this

Ordinance to increase the City's appropriations limit to permit the

continued expenditure of revenue from local taxes previously

approved by Oakland voters over the next four years.

 

Section 2. Appropriations Limit; Expiration. Pursuant to Section 4 of Article XIIIB

of the California Constitution, the appropriations limit for the City of Oakland is hereby

increased by the amount of revenue collected from local taxes previously approved by

Oakland voters and any income from the investment of said tax revenue. This Section

2 shall expire on March 3, 2024, and the appropriations limit of the City of Oakland

shall thereafter be determined as if this Ordinance had not been adopted.

 

Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this

Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by decision of any

court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the

remaining portions of the Ordinance. The people of the City of Oakland hereby

declare that they would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection,

clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that one or more other sections,

subsections, clauses or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

¿Quién proporcionó dinero?

To see who is funding ballot measures in Oakland, visit Open Disclosure Oakland.

Use tabs to select your choice. Use return to create a choice. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.

Comparta este sitio para ayudar a otras personas a investigar sus opciones para las votaciones.

PUBLISHING:PRODUCTION SERVER:PRODUCTION