ARTICLE
The Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce has reviewed, discussed and taken action on three ballot measures that will impact the Santa Cruz business community. The Board voted to oppose Measure N — the Empty Home Tax (EHT), Oppose Proposition 30 —the statewide ballot measure, and voted to support the Santa Cruz City School Bonds (Measures K & L) that will be on the November 8, 2022 ballot. Let’s take a broader look at these measures: Measure N, the Empty HomeTax proposes to create a new affordable housing funding stream by taxing vacant residential property in the City of Santa Cruz. The proponents of the EHT have crafted the measures in such a way that each single family empty home, if vacant for 120 days, would add an additional $6000 to the property assessment; a multi-family or condo home would be taxed at $3000. There is a discrepancy as to how many vacant residential properties would be charged with this tax and what portion of potential funds collected (after administrative costs) would be directed to an affordable housing account. The estimated range is somewhere between $2 million to $6 million according to various sources. The EHT may not likely apply to every homeowner in the city, however every homeowner must register and provide a legal affidavit every year to verify that the owner was home. If the homeowner does not comply they are subject to a criminal penalty (misdemeanor) for every day the homeowner fails to provide the legal affidavit of occupancy. There are other flaws within Measure N language that, if approved by voters on November 8, can only be changed if the city council brings an action to amend the measure back to city voters. According to the City Attorney’s impartial analysis, “An Empty Home Tax Oversight Committee would be established to oversee the administration of the tax and to make recommendations to the City Council for improvement of zoning and land use designations in the interest of creating affordable housing. The Committee would have up to nine members, including three members who must be renters, two low-income individuals, two with financial expertise, one UCSC student, and one unionized city employee. The measure would require the City Manager or designee to provide clerical assistance, administrative support and technical assistance, and to attend Committee meetings.” This Committee has no practical required experience in administering a tax; has no practical experience in the affordable housing sector, and has no implied knowledge of zoning and the land use decision-making process. Furthermore, only two members of the nine-member Committee have a designated requirement of financial expertise (undefined). While the Santa Cruz County Chamber has actively supported many affordable housing projects throughout the county and has written letters of support to state and federal agencies that fund affordable housing projects, the EHT does not provide an assurance that it can collect funds and is too invasive of homeowner privacy. Without major modifications to Measure N, it will only add another layer of bureaucracy to the city government while the city grapples with a structural financial deficit. Proposition 30 is a statewide measure set for the November 8 ballot. It will provide funding for programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by increasing the tax on personal income over $2 million by 1.75% for individuals and married couples. The Proposition also allocates new tax revenues as follows: (1) 45% for rebates and other incentives for zero-emission vehicle purchases and 35% for charging stations for zero-emission vehicles, with at least half of this funding directed to low-income households and communities; and (2) 20% for wildfire prevention and suppression programs, with priority given to hiring and training firefighters. On the surface, it seems like a likely option to tax the wealthy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, Prop. 30 — as are virtually all ballot initiatives — is the creation of special interest groups. In this case, Lyft, the rideshare company, and an environmental coalition seeking more public funds to expedite action on climate change. The tax hike would be imposed on personal incomes exceeding $2 million a year. That would raise up to $5 billion annually, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Of that, 80% would be spent to help California motorists convert to electric vehicles by providing rebates for purchases and installing charging stations. Prop. 30 is a special interest carved out by a single corporation, Lyft, to force taxpayers to foot the bill for Lyft’s transition to the use of electric vehicles. In 2021, the California Air Resources Board passed a mandate for Lyft and other ridesharing companies to convert 90% of their fleets to zero-emission vehicles by 2030. Lyft concocted Proposition 30 and has spent $16 million so far on the campaign to get California taxpayers to pay for this requirement. Santa Cruz City Schools Parcel (Bonds) — (Measure K & Measure L). Generally speaking, the Santa Cruz County Chamber is reluctant to support tax increases — whether sales tax, transient occupancy tax, or other fees related to community services — unless we see that the investment brings back value to the community. We understand that a parcel tax must show transparency in where these funds, if approved by the voters, will be spent. Regarding Measures K and L, as limited by law, the funds from the sale of these bonds shall only be used for specific purposes related to the school site facilities, buildings, and classrooms. The law does not allow these bond funds to be used for teacher and administrator salaries or operational expenses. The Santa Cruz City School District Board has outlined specific use of the funds as follows: > Removing hazardous materials from school sites and repairing or replacing infrastructure, such as roofs, heating, ventilation, and electrical systems; > Upgrading older classrooms and labs for career technical education courses for student preparation in health sciences, engineering, and skilled trades; > Modernizing classrooms, facilities, and technology to support high-quality and hands-on instruction in multiple subject areas, including reading, science, engineering, and the arts; > Constructing affordable rental housing for teachers and staff; > Improving indoor and outdoor student safety and campus security systems, such as security lighting, cameras, and emergency communication systems; and/or > Upgrading outdoor learning, physical education, and athletic facilities to support student health, fitness, and safety. The Santa Cruz City Schools District passed a previous parcel bond back in 2016, and the district has utilized those funds to make serious improvements to our schools. But there is more improvement needed to ensure that our students are given a facility infrastructure environment to protect the outstanding quality of education at our local public schools and help ensure they continue to provide an academic environment where our students can thrive. The Chamber supports the 2022 Bond Measures K & L.
The Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce has reviewed, discussed and taken action on three ballot measures that will impact the Santa Cruz business community. The Board voted to oppose Measure N — the Empty Home Tax (EHT), Oppose Proposition 30 —the statewide ballot measure, and voted to support the Santa Cruz City School Bonds (Measures K & L) that will be on the November 8, 2022 ballot.
Let’s take a broader look at these measures: Measure N, the Empty HomeTax proposes to create a new affordable housing funding stream by taxing vacant residential property in the City of Santa Cruz. The proponents of the EHT have crafted the measures in such a way that each single family empty home, if vacant for 120 days, would add an additional $6000 to the property assessment; a multi-family or condo home would be taxed at $3000. There is a discrepancy as to how many vacant residential properties would be charged with this tax and what portion of potential funds collected (after administrative costs) would be directed to an affordable housing account. The estimated range is somewhere between $2 million to $6 million according to various sources. The EHT may not likely apply to every homeowner in the city, however every homeowner must register and provide a legal affidavit every year to verify that the owner was home. If the homeowner does not comply they are subject to a criminal penalty (misdemeanor) for every day the homeowner fails to provide the legal affidavit of occupancy. There are other flaws within Measure N language that, if approved by voters on November 8, can only be changed if the city council brings an action to amend the measure back to city voters.
According to the City Attorney’s impartial analysis, “An Empty Home Tax Oversight Committee would be established to oversee the administration of the tax and to make recommendations to the City Council for improvement of zoning and land use designations in the interest of creating affordable housing. The Committee would have up to nine members, including three members who must be renters, two low-income individuals, two with financial expertise, one UCSC student, and one unionized city employee. The measure would require the City Manager or designee to provide clerical assistance, administrative support and technical assistance, and to attend Committee meetings.” This Committee has no practical required experience in administering a tax; has no practical experience in the affordable housing sector, and has no implied knowledge of zoning and the land use decision-making process. Furthermore, only two members of the nine-member Committee have a designated requirement of financial expertise (undefined).
While the Santa Cruz County Chamber has actively supported many affordable housing projects throughout the county and has written letters of support to state and federal agencies that fund affordable housing projects, the EHT does not provide an assurance that it can collect funds and is too invasive of homeowner privacy. Without major modifications to Measure N, it will only add another layer of bureaucracy to the city government while the city grapples with a structural financial deficit.
Proposition 30 is a statewide measure set for the November 8 ballot. It will provide funding for programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by increasing the tax on personal income over $2 million by 1.75% for individuals and married couples. The Proposition also allocates new tax revenues as follows: (1) 45% for rebates and other incentives for zero-emission vehicle purchases and 35% for charging stations for zero-emission vehicles, with at least half of this funding directed to low-income households and communities; and (2) 20% for wildfire prevention and suppression programs, with priority given to hiring and training firefighters. On the surface, it seems like a likely option to tax the wealthy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, Prop. 30 — as are virtually all ballot initiatives — is the creation of special interest groups. In this case, Lyft, the rideshare company, and an environmental coalition seeking more public funds to expedite action on climate change. The tax hike would be imposed on personal incomes exceeding $2 million a year. That would raise up to $5 billion annually, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Of that, 80% would be spent to help California motorists convert to electric vehicles by providing rebates for purchases and installing charging stations. Prop. 30 is a special interest carved out by a single corporation, Lyft, to force taxpayers to foot the bill for Lyft’s transition to the use of electric vehicles. In 2021, the California Air Resources Board passed a mandate for Lyft and other ridesharing companies to convert 90% of their fleets to zero-emission vehicles by 2030. Lyft concocted Proposition 30 and has spent $16 million so far on the campaign to get California taxpayers to pay for this requirement.
Santa Cruz City Schools Parcel (Bonds) — (Measure K & Measure L). Generally speaking, the Santa Cruz County Chamber is reluctant to support tax increases — whether sales tax, transient occupancy tax, or other fees related to community services — unless we see that the investment brings back value to the community. We understand that a parcel tax must show transparency in where these funds, if approved by the voters, will be spent. Regarding Measures K and L, as limited by law, the funds from the sale of these bonds shall only be used for specific purposes related to the school site facilities, buildings, and classrooms. The law does not allow these bond funds to be used for teacher and administrator salaries or operational expenses. The Santa Cruz City School District Board has outlined specific use of the funds as follows:
The Santa Cruz City Schools District passed a previous parcel bond back in 2016, and the district has utilized those funds to make serious improvements to our schools. But there is more improvement needed to ensure that our students are given a facility infrastructure environment to protect the outstanding quality of education at our local public schools and help ensure they continue to provide an academic environment where our students can thrive. The Chamber supports the 2022 Bond Measures K & L.