|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Following months of discussions on a growing structural deficit facing the city and budget cuts aimed at balancing the current fiscal year’s budget, voters in San Ramon are set to decide the fate of one potential remedy that city officials are putting forward in the form of a proposed sales tax increase.
Measure N was placed on the ballot for the upcoming Nov. 5 election following a series of debates the city’s budget deficit, during which all City Council members and a group of San Ramon residents that recently organized for the cause all expressed support for seeking to pass a 1% sales tax increase that would be in effect for 10 years, with funds subject to citizen oversight.
As it stands, with the city never having increased its sales tax rate of 8.75%, only 1% of the current sales tax collected goes directly to the city, with 6% going to the state, 1.5% going to the county and 0.25% going to the Local Transportation Fund, according to an analysis prepared by city attorney Martin Lysons.
However, the additional 1% that would be generated by the proposed increase would all go to the city, thereby doubling the funds it receives from sales tax collected within its borders.
“The tax proposed by Measure N would be a general tax, with all proceeds deposited into the City’s General Fund,” Lysons wrote. “The Added Sales Tax could be used for any municipal governmental purpose, including maintenance of City of San Ramon programs, services and facilities; public safety and police services; neighborhood crime prevention; traffic enforcement and road safety; street and road improvements and maintenance; library and recreation services; park maintenance; and youth, senior, and cultural programs.”
All of these programs and services are being impacted to some degree by $8.1 million in budget cuts that the city council reluctantly approved for the current fiscal year in June, at the same meeting in which they began discussing the potential of a potential sales tax increase in this year’s general election.
Debates on a potential sales tax increase, which requires a simple majority at the ballot box to pass, ensued for several subsequent City Council meetings, reemerging at the most recent meeting on Sept. 10 as well as in the official arguments and rebuttals for and against the measure.
One ongoing and vocal critic of the measure since discussions first began is former San Ramon mayor Greg Carr.
“When you go to the ballot, think about what that means, where does it end, how uch has it become, and then vote your conscience,” Carr said during the public comment period of the most recent City Council meeting. “There’s always things that get trimmed back in the city government. That’s just how it is. There are two sides to this.”
Carr was among the signatories on the official ballot argument against the measure, along with former councilmembers Mary Lou Oliver and Jim Blickenstaff, and advocates against the mixed-use development consisting primarily of housing set to replace the current iteration of the Marketplace Shopping Center, Susie Ferris-Inderkum and Steve Cohen.
The opponents of the measure argue that the 1% increase would bring the city’s sales tax rate past the statutory limit according to the state’s tax code, and point to the note outlined in Lysons’ analysis about funds generated by the tax going directly into the general fund without being earmarked for a specific purpose, while the measure “advertises various specific purposes”, according to opponents.
“So Measure N’s proceeds would become General Fund dollars, subject to Council discretion, with none of its announced specific purposes (earmarks) guaranteed,” opponents wrote in the argument against the measure. “That’s why Measure N’s passage would require only a simple majority.”
According to Lysons’ analysis, a public audit report of revenue generated by the measure and the expenses those funds are used to cover would be produced annually and posted to the city’s website, with the report also being discussed in a public city council meeting.
“To facilitate citizen oversight, the City would email to all interested members of the public notices of the publication of the annual audit report, including a link to the report and instructions for submittal of public comments, timely notice of any Council or committee meetings on the report, and a notice that all comments received shall be considered by the Council in any decision it makes pertaining to the report,” Lysons wrote.
The oversight component was one point that the newly formed group supporting the measure, Citizens for San Ramon, requested during discussions of the potential of placing the measure on the upcoming ballot, along with the amount of the tax (1%) and its 10-year sunset – also terms that were supported unanimously by the City Council.
The group’s communications director, Rob Maser, thanked the council for supporting the measure at Tuesday’s meeting and announced the debut of Residents for San Ramon’s campaign site and their campaign kickoff event Friday evening.
Maser, a lifelong San Ramon resident other than his time as a college student in Santa Barbara, told DanvilleSanRamon that he had recently departed a longstanding career in sales and marketing in favor of connecting more closely with his hometown by taking a job as a maintenance worker in its parks department.
Both factors, he said, made him keenly aware of the impacts of the city’s current budget crisis that began to come to light earlier in the year and the millions in cuts in the current year’s budget.
“If you look at what the city’s projecting to be the deficit and the position of the city, you know more cuts are coming, and the multiplication of those cuts is just scary,” Maser said. “Having lived in the city, in my lifetime the people who live here love the city and understand it could deteriorate, and we have an opportunity to prevent that.”
It’s a message that seems to have resonated with many in the community, with Maser and three other founding members quickly organizing the citizens’ group in recent months to first call for the measure to be placed on the ballot, then to campaign in favor of it in this year’s election season.
In a rebuttal to the argument against the measure, supporters called opponents’ reference to tax laws, rates, and caps “not only flat-out WRONG,” but “also distractions that ignore what’s truly at stake: ensuring that our special community remains safe, clean, and well maintained.”
“Without Measure N funds — approximately $16 million annually — the City of San Ramon will likely be forced to continue cutting essential city services that directly contribute to public safety and our high quality of life,” supporters of the measure wrote in the rebuttal to opponents. “Measure N safeguards public safety and essential services.”
The pro-Measure N supporters who signed the rebuttal were historic foundation president and former councilmember Carol Rowley, college district Trustee Andy Li, SRVUSD Trustee Rachel Hurd, Arts Advisory Commission member Robert Bickel, and Chamber of Commerce boardmember Annestelle Maes.
In the argument in favor of the measure, supporters – consisting of former mayor Bill Clarkson, library foundation president Linda Henika, retired firefighter Ken Sui, parks commissioner Partha Mitra and chamber chair Mino Sastry – also note that more cuts across the city’s departments could be on the horizon should it fail to pass, particularly emphasizing the need to maintain or increase funding levels for public safety.
“Your YES vote on Measure N will also safeguard the high quality of life and well-being of our community,” supporters wrote. “Without Measure N funds, ~$16 million annually, the City of San Ramon may need to cut essential city services that contribute to our high quality of life such as increased crime prevention and the upkeep of our public spaces.”
In their rebuttal to the pro-tax measure argument, opponents – consisting of the same group who signed off on the full argument against it – argue that the tax would be “regressive, hurting those least able to afford it,” as well as critiquing the increase in cost with city services despite a drop in its population since 2020.
“Many San Ramon citizens are tightening their belts,” opponents wrote in their rebuttal. “The City must do far more itself.”
They also note that while retail and commercial properties generate sales tax, as opposed to “tax-depleting housing” the city elected to approve the contentious Marketplace redevelopment, which is set to consist primarily of housing in place of the shopping center.
“San Ramon shortsightedly allowed a developer to demolish or drive away Marketplace merchants like Nob Hill Foods, CVS and others,” opponents write. “To facilitate Marketplace destruction, San Ramon violated its own General Plan requirements and CEQA.”
Despite the city’s grim financial circumstances, opponents also critiqued spending on professional polling and analysis on the feasibility of passing the measure as well as its preparation for the ballot “to influence public opinion”.
While Responsible Growth San Ramon – the group behind Citizens Against Marketplace Development led by Ferris-Inderkum and others – is urging its members and supporters to read arguments both for and against the measure in an “Election Watch” note posted to their blog on Sept. 4, no apparent unified campaign the measure or website for such a campaign seemed to be active as of Tuesday night.
More information from the city on the ballot measure is available here.
Pleasanton man accused of DUI in deadly crash on Crow Canyon Road in San RamonNovember 29, 2025 6:07 pm
One solution would be the State receiving less of the sales tax. Don’t hold your breath on that one though. Also note that with our inflation we all are paying more for products as well as more sales tax associated with purchases. Spending within your means is the best answer.
I think most residents would be curious about the exact external forces that helped to create the deficit. Knowing that information would useful in any decisions for or against the measure.