Oroville, California, Sales Tax Increase, Measure R (November 2016)
| Measure R: Oroville Sales Tax Increase |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| November 8, 2016 |
| Status: |
| Topic: |
| Local sales tax Expires in: 6 years |
| Related articles |
| Local sales tax on the ballot November 8, 2016 ballot measures in California Butte County, California ballot measures City tax on the ballot |
| See also |
| Oroville, California |
A sales tax increase measure was on the ballot for Oroville voters in Butte County, California, on November 8, 2016. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of implementing an additional sales tax of 1 percent with revenue deposited into the city's general fund, thereby increasing the total sales tax rate in the city to 8.5 percent. |
| A no vote was a vote against implementing an additional general purpose sales tax of 1 percent to fund public safety services, thereby leaving the total sales tax rate in the city at 7.5 percent. |
Election results
| Measure R | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| 2,934 | 56.6% | |||
| Yes | 2,250 | 43.4% | ||
- Election results from Butte County Clerk-Recorder
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]
| “ |
PUBLIC SAFETY SOLUTIONS FOR OROVILLE — SALES TAX MEASURE Shall Ordinance No. 1816, a Temporary sales tax increase of one percent (1 %) generating approximately $3.6 million annually, that automatically expires in six years, and that establishes a citizen oversight committee to ensure that the funds are used to preserve public services such as police protection, fire suppression, vehicle repair and maintenance, finance analyst and human resources services for the City of Oroville, be adopted? [2] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the Oroville City Attorney:
| “ |
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the following impartial analysis of Measure R was prepared by the office of the Oroville City Attorney: Voter approval of this measure would amend the Oroville Municipal Code by adding a transactions and use (sales) tax for a period of six years on the sale and/or use of all tangible personal property sold at retail in the City at the rate of one cent for every dollar spent (or one percent). The tax would automatically terminate after the sixth year. All revenue generated from the measure would be deposited in the City's General Fund, and all revenue collected from the measure would be used by the City to pay for general City operations and services, including police protection, fire suppression, vehicle repair and maintenance, finance analyst and human resources services. This ballot measure proposes a "general purpose tax" requires a majority vote of the electorate for approval. The City Finance Director estimates that, if passed, the measure would generate approximately $3.6 million per year. The measure requires that a Citizens Oversight committee be established to make recommendations on the priority of expenditures of the funds and to review the use of the funds by the City. The measure further requires quarterly and annual reporting of expenditures to the public through the City's website for transparency. The proposed tax would be administered by the California State Board of Equalization, in the same manner that sales tax is currently administered, to reduce the cost of collecting the tax and to minimize the burden of record-keeping upon retailers subject to the tax. Collection of the tax would begin on April 1, 2017. A "yes" vote is a vote in favor of authorizing the temporary transactions and use tax for a period of six years. A "no" vote is a vote against authorizing the temporary transactions and use tax. [2] |
” |
| —Oroville City Attorney[3] | ||
Full text
The full text of the measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[4]
- Mayor Linda Dahlmeier
- Director of Public Safety Bill LaGrone
- Retired US Forest Service, Jess Stanton Starkey
- Owner, Golden State Auto body, Alan M. Jones
Arguments in favor
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[5]
| “ |
Oroville has grown in the last 3 years through annexation and new residents moving in, however, our public safety, police, and fire departments have not grown accordingly. Measure R will help us keep up with our growing city by increasing, maintaining and preserving public safety positions. A few years ago Oroville suffered a huge financial set back when the State canceled its Economic Development (RDA) Program and Oroville, along with other cities, was forced to return those monies to the State. Now in reviewing our current budget, the City of Oroville, through Measure R, is proposing a 1% increase to the Sales Tax to cover the cost of our Public Safety Department as our city continues to grow. Measure R will be monitored by a Citizens oversight committee to ensure the proper use of these dollars. This Measure will expire in 6 years. Currently out of the 7.5% sales tax that is collected, only .75% comes back to Oroville for our use locally, the remaining monies are kept at the State and County level. Measure R will ensure that tax dollars raised in Oroville will be used by the city to deal with our local issues. Measure R is an approach that will ensure that all people that use our local services contribute to the sales tax, not just the citizens of Oroville. Basic necessities like groceries and prescription medications won't be taxed. Visitors to Oroville will pay their fair share, so residents won't shoulder the entire cost. Oroville is our home! Let's please all work together to support our City and our Community We ask you to vote YES on Measure R on November 8, 2016. [2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[6]
- Lorraine Christensen
- Steve Christensen
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[7]
| “ |
Originally, Measure R was to be a special tax, proceeds to be used for public safety only. When Oroville City Council learned a special tax requires 2/3 voter approval, they decided to change to a general tax that only needs a simple majority and has no fiscal restraints. Measure R includes the commission of an oversight committee. They will be appointed by the council, they will report to the council, and they will have no binding authority on the council. Oroville City Council members were warned for years by several city administrators of a significant deficit if they continued to allow expenditures to exceed revenue. Now that the deficit is here, some council members have said they were shocked, as if they were blind-sided. They are now asking the voters to bail them out by raising taxes. When Oroville's City Budget listed 87 city employees, $8.6 million was allocated for salaries and benefits, averaging almost $100,000.00 per employee. These compensations are more in line with a larger and more affluent city. Prior to the annexation of South Oroville, "The Source" magazine distributed by Oroville Chamber of Commerce reported Oroville's median household income was $27,523.00 per year, well below the $31,924.00 for all of Butte County. If this tax is passed, the City of Oroville will have the highest sales tax, not only in Butte County, but in all six adjoining counties. This tax increase will have a negative impact on median income households and put Oroville businesses at a competitive disadvantage. Since we have a city council that has demonstrated inability or unwillingness to present a balanced budget, we say no on Measure R. [2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a vote of the governing officials of Oroville, California.
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Oroville Local sales tax. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Butte County, "City of Oroville An Amended Resolution No. 85161," accessed October 13, 2016
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Oroville City Attorney, "Impartial Analysis of Measure R," accessed October 13, 2016
- ↑ Butte County, "Argument in Support of Measure R," accessed October 13, 2016
- ↑ Butte County, "Argument in Support of Measure R," accessed October 13, 2016
- ↑ Butte County, "Argument Against Measure R," accessed October 13, 2016
- ↑ Butte County, "Argument Against Measure R," accessed October 13, 2016
| |||||