Placing Users Utility Tax measure on November 2016 ballot
City Council sponsored a Study Issue to evaluate the potential of a Utility Users Tax (UUT) ballot measure for the November 2016 election. On December 1, 2015, a Council Study Session was held to discuss the City’s current UUT regulations and ways to prevent UUT revenues from declining due the fact that significant portions of the current ordinance have not been updated for virtually four decades, during which time technology and telecommunications have changed dramatically. It is important to note that this is an existing revenue stream and the City Council is not creating a new tax. The options for updating the existing ordinance included potential rate increases, broadening the base against which the tax is collected, and ways to address modern telecommunication services that didn’t exist when the City’s UUT regulations were adopted. Council comments favored staff returning with an ordinance modernizing the telecommunications UUT without broadening the base or increasing the rate. Council also supported conducting community opinion research to evaluate the public’s potential interest in, and the viability of a UUT update.
A draft ballot question reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office was created to evaluate interest in modernizing the City’s telecommunication UUT without raising the tax rate. This measure would need a simple majority to pass. Support for the measure was between 57% – 58% which is above the margin of error for the study.
Considering the overall results, on May 17, 2016, Council directed staff to return with the necessary documents to place a measure on the ballot for the November 2016 election to modernize the City’s Utility User Tax without increasing the rate.
Where: Sunnyvale City Council
When: July 12, 2016, 7:00p
Link to item: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2776570&GUID=B877AADF-4B44-45A8-9CAC-564B982B3F2F
Link to agenda: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=455186&GUID=51F42885-BEC9-455F-89EB-7C1F0B486E39
Placing “Public Lands for Public Use” Initiative on November ballot; Council & proponents debating language of ballot question
On June 14, 2016, Council considered adopting a resolution calling an election to submit the “Public Lands for Public Use Act” (the “Initiative,” “Ordinance,” or “Measure”) ordinance to the voters, which would modify the City’s municipal code by requiring prior voter approval for any sale, lease, lease extension, lease renewal, land swap, or transfer of property owned, leased, or used by the City as a public park or community service amenity. Following the June 14 meeting, proponents of the measure contacted the City Attorney and raised several questions and concerns related to the ballot question, arguments, and other issues. This report updates the June 14 report to include discussion of the additional issues raised by the Council and proponents.
Ballot Question
The draft ballot question (sometimes referred to as the “ballot label”) presented to Council on June 14 was:
Shall an ordinance be adopted to require the City to conduct a citywide election requesting approval from a majority of voters for any sale, lease, lease extension, lease renewal, land swap, or transfer of any property, facility, or land that the City owns, leases, or uses for government administration, recreation, public park, or similar community purposes?
Council and Proponents’ Concerns Regarding the Ballot Question
The Council has substantial discretion in determining the ballot question. Neither the Elections Code nor relevant case law requires the City to use the exact ballot title or summary in forming the ballot question, as suggested by proponents (although that is an option the Council may select in drafting the ballot question). Similarly, because Elections Code Section 13119 requires the question to include “Shall the ordinance be adopted…” changing “adopted” to “amended” is not appropriate, although additional wording could be added to further explain that the ordinance would amend the municipal code.
With respect to proponents’ concerns about using the term “citywide election” rather than “voter approval,” staff believes that “citywide election requesting approval from a majority of voters” accurately describes the process that would be required. “Citywide election” is a term used in the ballot summary. Finally, while proponents’ suggestion to condense the types of uses to “community service amenities” and “public parks” is possible, staff believes it is appropriate to provide examples, particularly of what is considered a “community service amenity,” as that is a specifically defined term in the ordinance that is not currently defined or used in the Sunnyvale Municipal Code, or a term used in general conversation. The revised ballot question includes key examples of broad uses that would fall into these categories that most voters would understand. As the ballot question is limited to 75 words, it necessarily cannot include the full definitions contained in the initiative.
With respect to Councilmember Griffith’s question about whether the voter-approval requirement in the initiative would apply equally in leasing city property to others and private property from others, the answer is that it does apply to both types of property transactions related to leases, sales and other applicable property transfers. As discussed in the Report on Impacts of Public Lands for Public Use Act Initiative Under Elections Code Section 9212 report, at page 8, the initiative amends SMC Chapter 2.70 to cover “rights to use land for a public park or CSA, including land owned by others.” (emphasis added).
Options for Ballot Questions
Considering the issues raised above, staff provides the following ballot question options:
- Draft presented to City Council on June 14:
Shall an ordinance be adopted to require the City to conduct a citywide election requesting approval from a majority of voters for any sale, lease, lease extension, lease renewal, land swap, or transfer of any property, facility, or land that the City owns, leases, or uses for government administration, recreation, public park, or similar community purposes?
- Revised language recommended by staff based on Council direction and proponent comments:
Shall an ordinance be adopted amending the municipal code to require the City to conduct a citywide special or general election requesting approval from a majority of voters for any sale, lease, lease extension, lease renewal, land swap, or transfer to or from other parties of any property, facility, or land that the City owns, leases, or uses for public parks or as a community service amenity, which includes places primarily used for government administration, recreation, exercise, or enjoyment public park, or similar community purposes?
- Question based on proponent’s request to use ballot title language only:
Shall an Initiative Ordinance be adopted amending the City of Sunnyvale’s Municipal Code to require voter approval for any sale, lease, lease extension, lease renewal, land swap, or Transfer of Property Owned, Leased, or Used by the City as a Public Park or Community Service Amenity?
Where: Sunnyvale City Council
When: July 12, 2016, 7:00p
Link to item: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2776573&GUID=FDF31647-3F32-45A1-9B72-661FEDA43EF0
Link to agenda: https://sunnyvaleca.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=455186&GUID=51F42885-BEC9-455F-89EB-7C1F0B486E39
Second reading to adopt Development Agreement & ground leases with Related for City Place mega-development
The first reading of both ordinances was passed by the City Council on June 28; this is the second reading.
Adoption of ordinance No. 2956 will authorize signing a Development Agreement between the City and Related is for the construction of the 240-acre “CityPlace Santa Clara” project. The project will potentially build up to 9.16 million gross square feet of office, retail, entertainment, hotel and residential uses at a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 at up to 17 stories in height. The DA will vest the density and intensity of development at the project site for 30 years.
Adoption of ordinance No. 1957 will allow the City to enter into 99-year ground leases of the City-owned land at City Place to Related.
Where: Santa Clara City Council
When: July 12, 2016. 7 pm
Links to items: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=52713
http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=52706
Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1801&doctype=AGENDA
Possible charter amendments re Councilmember compensation, term limits, filing Council vacancies, and requiring a 2/3 vote of the electorate for changes in use of City-owned parks or open space
At the City Council meeting of October 27, 2015, City Council directed the creation of a Charter Review Committee. The direction from the Council included review of the election system for the City Council Members, Council Member compensation and other elements of the City Charter which may not fully comply with current laws or reflect best practices.
The Committee now brings forward five recommended amendments to the Charter concerning:
- Mayor and City Council compensation;
- term limits for the Mayor and City Council;
- filling vacancies in the offices of Mayor and City Council;
- disposition of open space; and
- calling special meetings of the City Council.
It is the Committee’s recommendation that the City Council proceed with the implementation of these amendments, direct the City Attorney to draft the appropriate ballot questions for each and for staff to take any other necessary actions to give effect to the Committee’s direction.
Regarding disposition of open space, the Committee expressed concern regarding the preservation of City owned parks & open space, particularly the Santa Clara Youth Soccer Park and the Ulistac Natural Area. It concluded that any disposition or change in use of such properties should require a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the people at a general election. It also determined that any action to build or develop these properties by the City should be made by ordinance and be subject to referendum.
While the Committee spent considerable time and effort considering possible modifications to the City’s at large by seat method of electing City Council members, it ultimately decided to conclude deliberations on that issue in order to leave sufficient time before the November 8, 2016, general election to more fully examine other potential amendments to the Charter. The Committee, however, recommends that the City Council continue its analysis of the City’s election system after this election cycle has concluded. Accordingly, the City Council may either reconvene the Committee at a later time, appoint a new committee for that purpose or take no further action on the issue.
Where: Santa Clara City Council
When: July 12, 2016. 7 pm
Link to item: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/agdocs.aspx?doctype=agenda&itemid=52720
Link to agenda: http://sireweb.santaclaraca.gov/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1801&doctype=AGENDA
San Jose/Evergreen Community College District
Placing $748M bond measure on November ballot
A recommendation that the Board approve Resolution No. 071216-2 authorizing a general obligation bond election for November 8, 2016. The Board, requests the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters to call an election and submit to the electors of the District the question of whether bonds of the District in the aggregate principal amount of $748,000,000 (the “Bonds”) shall be issued and sold to raise money for the purposes of educational facilities needed to be constructed, renovated, acquired and equipped, in a fiscally prudent manner.
Where: San Jose/Evergreen Community College District
When: Tuesday July 12, 2016
Link to item: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/sjeccd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=ABKTGA77467B
Link to agenda: http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/sjeccd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AAXN595E27F4
Do you have a news tip you would like to share? Would you like to contribute to The Left Hook? Email us at LeftHookBlog@gmail.com
No Comments