News


Bay Area-wide parcel tax would cost Pleasanton home owners $12 a year

June 7 ballot measure sponsored by San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority

A Bay Area-wide measure on the June ballot that would impose a parcel tax over the next 20 years to raise funds for shoreline improvement projects is drawing broad support.

The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority, a governing body established in 2008 to allocate resources for preserving the Bay's natural resources, has voted to put the measure on the June 7 ballot.

The measure would impose a $12 parcel tax from 2017 until 2037 for every property owner in the nine-county Bay Area. The "Clean and Healthy Bay Ballot Measure" would need two-thirds approval of voters in all nine counties: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma.

Exactly what projects the roughly $500 million the tax is expected to raise would fund remains unclear and would be at the discretion of the restoration authority.

The large slate of projects would include restoring wetlands and habitats for marine wildlife, trash and pollution cleanup, adding and expanding recreational activities like hiking trails and parks, and shoring up areas at risk of flooding.

Half of the funding would be allocated according to the population of the area, so for example the more heavily populated shorelines of the East Bay would potentially receive more funding than the more sparsely populated areas of the North Bay. The authority also hopes to attract other sources of funding to supplement the tax revenue.

Supporters said they gathered more than 11,000 signatures in favor of the measure online. In addition to various environmental groups in favor of it, business groups and local politicians have also advocated its passage.

"The San Francisco Bay is our region's defining feature, and this measure is an historic opportunity to leave the Bay better off for our children and grandchildren," Bay Area Council business association CEO Jim Wunderman said in a statement.

"By acting now to restore our wetlands, we can improve the Bay ecosystem for fish and wildlife while protecting huge portions of the Bay shoreline from storm surges and rising seas," Wunderman said.

— Bay City News Service

Comments

24 people like this
Posted by Citizen
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 18, 2016 at 12:53 pm

NO MORE TAXES!


14 people like this
Posted by Mark
a resident of Birdland
on Jan 18, 2016 at 1:45 pm

Let's see, that's maybe 3 Starbucks drinks a year to keep our bays and shorelines healthy? I will gladly brew my morning coffee at home a few extra times and pay for he greater good.


43 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jan 18, 2016 at 2:30 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

The key sentence, if accurate: "Exactly what projects the roughly $500 million the tax is expected to raise would fund remains unclear and would be at the discretion of the restoration authority." Therein lies the problem. $12 isn't much by itself and its a good cause, ostensibly, but $500 million with no specifics or oversight . . . different kettle of smelly fish.


28 people like this
Posted by FrequentWalkerMiles
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 18, 2016 at 3:08 pm

I agree with Kathleen, if they can't tell us what the funds will be spent on and how the spending will be monitored, I will vote against it.

I am amazed that people like Mark are so enthusiastic about raising taxes without knowing how it will be spent. Perhaps he has the extra money to spend on buying coffee outside regularly, but some of us have to budget our money to pay for existing taxes, so we already drink home brewed coffee.


20 people like this
Posted by PEVC
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 18, 2016 at 3:22 pm

Another 'One Bay Area' style initiative to grow government and raise taxes. It may be time to reconvene PEVC and affiliated groups to fight this 9 county parcel tax.


29 people like this
Posted by kbenson
a resident of Bordeaux Estates
on Jan 18, 2016 at 4:34 pm

Tax increase here, BART fare increase, Toll increase, insurance increase, food cost increase, Garbage disposal increase, water/sewage increase.

Unexpected appliance failure $$$
Unexpected health related expense $$$


Paychecks barely budge- But everyone still wants more of what you have in your wallet/purse


20 people like this
Posted by Eric
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Jan 18, 2016 at 5:34 pm

"At the discretion" nope.


7 people like this
Posted by Tina
a resident of another community
on Jan 18, 2016 at 5:48 pm

Tina is a registered user.

I would rather have a parcel tax for the schools.


14 people like this
Posted by Rusty Slade
a resident of Livermore
on Jan 18, 2016 at 6:02 pm

IN a word. . . NO


40 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 18, 2016 at 6:12 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

This $12 yearly property tax initiative is not alone.

Bart is floating a $4.8 billion property tax initiative also.

PUSD is testing the waters for a property tax initiative.

That is not all of it, more is coming our way.

Hang on to your wallet! - VOTE NO ON ALL Of THEM!


10 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 18, 2016 at 7:55 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

I will support it if it comes with a government mandate to reduce spending yr over yr for all ongoing services without decreasing service levels.

We need to vote in efficiency. The government needs to bring in revenue, they also need to learn to do more with less.


15 people like this
Posted by Jack
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 18, 2016 at 7:58 pm

What happened to all the money our state was supposed to get from The Lottery and Indian Gaming?


Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 18, 2016 at 8:11 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Pretty sure thats earmarked for education


8 people like this
Posted by Criminal
a resident of Bonde Ranch
on Jan 19, 2016 at 8:33 am

I wonder how much of this money will go to fund the economic loser Tesla (never made money and the get $640 million a year from us), money losing sun and wind power generation funded by us. Not economically viable with oil at 28 a barrel.


17 people like this
Posted by Not on your life
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 19, 2016 at 9:27 am

Until every single public employee make 100% of the contributions into their pensions I will vote no on everything. Enough already.

If you are stupid enough to buy into the Nigerian emails then go ahead and vote for an additional tax that they have the discretion to spend as they like.


12 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 19, 2016 at 9:45 am

I'd also rather see a parcel tax in Pleasanton for schools than this tax.


10 people like this
Posted by Eric
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Jan 19, 2016 at 10:46 am

Criminal, the Middle East is pushing the price down to put our production of oil, electric cars and solar power out of business so that we continue our thirst for oil. OPEC will eventually jack the prices back up if people start buying V8's, Escalades and Hummers again but those that are purchasing these vehicles are short sighted. The oil producing, terror supporting nations are scared of what people like Elon Musk and Tesla is doing because we are turning off the tap and getting off the teat of big oil. If we as a nation support the use of solar, wind, electric vehicles and efficiency then of course the price of oil will continue to drop but our air, planet and safety will be the better for it. It's criminal to not decrease our use of the filthy, tainted, polluting black goo. As we sit today all OPEC has to do is turn the tap off and then what?? Everything will stop, our economy collapses.


13 people like this
Posted by FrequentWalkerMiles
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 19, 2016 at 5:31 pm

Michael

You bring up a good point. With the perceived "good times" in the Bay Area there will be many attempts to get the gullible and uninformed voters, or voters with other agendas, to campaign and vote in new taxes with vague promises of "greater good","community initiatives" and "infrastructure improvements" while the money goes to service interest payment of older bonds/measurements and line pockets of government consultants and contractors.

What intrigues me is that the very same people who most passionately rail against "corporate greed" because private companies don't lower prices fast enough when their costs decrease, are often the ones most out spoken in arguing for ever more creative taxes and fees imposed by the government to pay for more and more things with minimal accountability. I suspect these "greater good" people have excellent tax attorneys and creative accounting so they will be very infrequently exposed to these new liabilities, while the rest of us fund their life style and visions of utopia.

To that, I say no thanks, the government needs to balance a check book like any Joe Six Pack is required to. After all, gas stations and supermarkets lower prices far more frequently than governments lowering taxes.


3 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 19, 2016 at 8:47 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Criminal,
Tesla paid back it's tax payer loan long ago


6 people like this
Posted by P Town Parent
a resident of Birdland
on Jan 19, 2016 at 8:51 pm

When the Barton Reading Program was cut from the PUSD budget, I lost what little faith I had in the people running our schools. I will not be voting for a parcel tax, for the schools, or something as nefarious as the one mentioned in this article.


7 people like this
Posted by Walter Jenhks
a resident of Mohr Park
on Jan 19, 2016 at 11:13 pm

Oh sure, just another $12 for the shoreline. After, we can't pay this out of existing revenues.

You see, only 10 years ago, largely unknown to the public, Pleasanton raised all of its pensions "overnight" by a enormous 35%...
Employees expecting a $60,000 pension at age 60, suddenly got a $81,000 pension, despite no more money having been put away to pay for that huge increase.

Imagine, at age 60, with a life expectancy of 23 to 25 years (male and female), that hidden pension hike amounts to a EXTRA $500,000 over the expected life of that city employee.
Oh, you weren't aware of that? Well then, I guess you be taxing yourself for the extra $12... After all, the city has no money to spare.


7 people like this
Posted by Taxpayer
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 20, 2016 at 12:27 am

Looks like our CA electeds want to charge a gas tax for 'road reapir' since the money they said would go to repairs, actually went to public unions, illegasl/dreamers. The crime is that road repairs are because of car weight, but electeds pick and choose which people they want to tax, and who to give a 'free ride' to. Natch since we have given people the electric cars, and cheap power, we would want to give them the 'free tax ride' too.
Just tax GAS ! WHY ? Electric cars tear up our roads too. Trucks pay more fees. Electric should pay their 'fair share' of repairs they cause, so a "weight registration license fee should be required of these priviledged drivers. Long distance commuters buy much gas but drive smaller commuter cars. Electric free loaders really disgust me,
We've had several 'gas' taxes, but the 'elected thieves' used it to themselves 'votes' by passing out 'social freebies'. Disgusting. Gas tax taken from commuters should be untouchable. The trust has been broken. How can we let them take from just 'targeted' drivers, when other tear up the roads too, and then frudently, payoffs unions, and use tax revenues for 'social' services to buy themselves votes. The cycle must be broken.


Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Downtown

on Jan 20, 2016 at 8:10 am

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


7 people like this
Posted by not on your life
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 20, 2016 at 8:28 am

"Employees expecting a $60,000 pension at age 60"

Not if you are a cop or firefighter. They only have to work til age 50 and then START their pensions at 90% of their final wages and get COLAs every year. By about age 53 they are making the same amount as their final wages and that goes up for the rest of their lives. How much of that money was contributed by them? Pennies on the hundreds of thousands of dollars.


5 people like this
Posted by enough
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 20, 2016 at 9:34 am

Enough already! Added fees here and there, they all add up! Where do they go? To fund the pension plans. NO MORE TAX INCREASES.


4 people like this
Posted by Taxpayer
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 20, 2016 at 10:39 am

The fact remains that CA roads desperately need repairing. The freeway potholes are wrecking our cars and increasing our insurance costs. The Sacramento thieves (elected by greedy & ignorant) have redirected & misused our 'road' dollars, preferring to hand out to 'selected' groups of people.
So in addition to our road violation, we get flipped off and told if we want decent roads we have to pay more again, then again, then more. We continue to subsidize $$ electric drives, and pay them for their priviledge to drive cars and not contribute to road repairs.
Wake up! We need lawyers protecting our rights to decent roads that we paid for. All those people who happily 'took' from taxpayers, this go 'round, we can not be stupid enough to excuse them from sharing in reapair costs. We fools or 'others' paid to build them whole new lanes... they will damn well share in this transiportation costs.Lives are being lost due to unfit roads filled with potholes, way beyond temp repairs.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Battle over downtown Livermore plan heats up
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 892 views