.
Feedback

Countywide Tax Measures in Upcoming Election

June 5 election includes three tax initiatives to help balance the budget, but critics say the hikes would hurt the local community.

Tomorrow Coastsiders will have the opportunity to vote on three countywide ballot measures that would involve tax increases. Supporters of each initiative point to the county’s $28 million budget deficit as evidence of their necessity.

According to proponents, Measure T would raise $8 million annually by levying a 2.5% tax on car rental businesses in unincorporated areas: “San Mateo County residents must content with all of the traffic and pollution caused by vehicles transiting through our county....This measure simply allows local residents to derive a modest benefit in return.” Yet critics say that a tax on rental cars would threaten the security of the county’s 10,000 jobs at San Francisco Airport.

Measure U would raise the current tax on transient occupancy from 10% to 12%, and it would apply to any individual occupying a hotel room or other temporary lodging for 30 consecutive days. Proponents say that revenue from this increase will come from visitors to the area but will remain in San Mateo County, benefiting local communities. Yet opponents argue that Measure U would hurt tourism and decrease job security for workers in the hospitality industry.

Lastly, Measure X would levy a tax on operators of commercial parking facility businesses in unincorporated areas of the county. The tax would be 8% of gross receipts, and supporters say it would raise $5 million countywide.

Critics of all three measures question whether county officials would be held accountable for how the extra funds would be appropriated. “The County claims this will benefit police, fire, schools, but there’s nothing to hold them to it,” the rebuttal of Measure U states. “If we have to raise taxes, we should insist on controls to ensure the money is spent on what matters most.”

Each of these measures needs a majority vote to pass. For more information about the upcoming election, see the county's Voter Toolkit here. Check back next week for continued coverage of the election.

Got Patch? Sign up for our newsletter by clicking on the "Patch Newsletter" link on the top right of our homepage.

To receive news feeds about Half Moon Bay and the unincorporated Coastside between Montara and Pescadero, visit Half Moon Bay Patch on Facebook and "like" us here. Follow us on Twitter here.

Want to blog for us? Click here.


Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Half Moon Bay Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Jon DeLong May 18, 2013 at 06:45 pm
With so many good Mexican restaurants in the area, why bother?
Cid May 17, 2013 at 06:14 pm
I enjoy an occasional Taco Bell, but in the same shopping center as Happy Taco with far better,Read More authentic LOCAL Mexican food! Nah! I do enjoy the Combo locations that have KFC & TACO BELL. (Face it, Americans like to have choices!). With no drive-through, perhaps it will be better than the average suburban stores along the El Camino. As for another chain restaurant in Half Moon Bay...What did you expect? Demographics will continue to dictate that we can still expect to keep our "Fast-Food-Free-Zone" between Linda Mar and HMB while "City Councils or Planning Departments in the Cities will attract them....for their tax base.
Dee May 15, 2013 at 08:07 pm
Seriously? Taco Bell? Next to New Leaf? How did this happen? Not happy about this addition and notRead More looking forward to seeing Taco Bell trash all over the place. Not sure about KFC ... we already have a fast food chicken place at Popeyes so we certainly don't need another. The high school students will probably frequent Taco Bell the most and keep it in business but I will not be going there that's for sure.
Carol Wexler May 18, 2013 at 02:42 pm
I would consider volunteering at the California State Parks but dogs are not allowed and I wouldRead More need to bring my dog.
pae May 18, 2013 at 11:22 pm
Misha, I understand where you're coming from, but that's what we don't want to do. One reason thatRead More all dog owners are being discriminated against is those few who don't follow the rules. It doesn't matter that there are bicyclists and horseback riders who don't follow rules, they're "OK," it's the dog owners who pay the price. We want an area where our dogs can exercise freely and legally, where we won't be bothered by people who are afraid of dogs or dislike them, and where they're not at risk from horses who spook. For those of us who live surrounded by Rancho land especially, we don't want to have to drive miles to a small, fenced lot with crowds of others seeking to exercise their dogs in the same small area. We're paying for this open space with our tax dollars, and we want to have access to it. There's plenty of room for everyone.
Misha Flores May 17, 2013 at 09:35 am
To be honest I would probably just let my dog run around without a leash anyway, except there's soRead More much darned poison oak around these hills. I don't want her to get contaminated and then I hug her and trouble ensues.
Anne Martin May 16, 2013 at 04:29 pm
I don't own a dog now but empathize with the dog owners who have been deprived of the right toRead More allow their dogs to run free in the national recreation area that we as taxpayers own. As a taxpayer, I want to know the rationale for this policy. If it is to protect horses from being frightened by dogs what is the basis for that? How many horses use the open space? It appears that dozens of people who have been able to enjoy walking with their dogs in the open space adjoining their neighborhood are now being grossly inconvenienced because some faceless bureaucrats are creating rules that may have no basis in reality.