League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	Sonoma County, CA June 5, 2012 Election
	Measure J Sales Tax City of Sonoma Majority Approval Required Pass: 2,208 / 67.1% Yes votes ...... 1,083 / 32.9% No votes See Also: Index of all Measures

Arguments For Measure J

Arguments Against Measure J

Sacramento's latest decision has left a minimum $1.2 million dollar hole in Sonoma's budget - putting essential police, fire, street paving, pothole repair, park maintenance, graffiti abatement and other vital community services at risk. Sonoma's voters have not been asked to approve a city tax on the ballot in the last 20 years. During that time we have grown as a community, and our economy has thrived with the support of local businesses and community groups all working together to keep Sonoma a great place to live, work, raise a family, retire and visit. Sonoma passes balanced budgets year after year and runs a modest City government appropriately sized for our community's needs. Despite this, the end of redevelopment funding brought by a decision made by the State of California, has placed Sonoma at a critical juncture through no fault of its own. We don't want to lose the level and quality of services that we have worked hard to maintain in our beautiful City, just because Sacramento cannot balance its own budget. A local sales tax of 1/2% would continue the excellent services our residents have come to expect and deserve. The tax would spread the cost of providing resident services to everyone who shops or visits the City of Sonoma - in fact, the majority of the tax is estimated to be paid by non-residents. Measure J is a modest, reasonable proposal that would ensure all tax dollars stay in the City of Sonoma to support residents. Measure J is not applied to grocery food purchases or prescription medications and is proposed for just 5 years. We urge you to vote "Yes" on Measure J and ensure your City continues to offer the level of services you currently enjoy. Thank you. s/ Ken Brown Mayor Pro Tem, Sonoma s/ Sam Morphy s/ Tom Rouse Councilmember - City of Sonoma s/ Jennifer A. Yankovich Sonoma Valley Chamber of Commerce s/ Robert D. Parmelee Retired Rebuttal to Arguments For Until the end of February, voters believed the City was well managed financially, without budget problems. Yet within thirty days, the City declared a fiscal emergency, and now seeks an immediate tax increase. Why didn't the City see this coming? The City has no precise plans for using this money. But in the middle of an emergency tax increase, the City is planning to build a swimming pool. That is irresponsible. The City must get spending under control. The City lived on borrowed money for decades. It hid the debts in the redevelopment program. The State has now banned that sham. The City's response? Increase sales taxes, which hurt the poor the most. The City admits this tax won't balance the budget. In the last ten days, there are new reports of further increases in Sonoma's estimated pension obligations. Even the restated projections of the City's liability are considered too low by the state's actuaries. The Sonoma Valley Unified School District, facing a bigger deficit, hasn't rushed to raise taxes. Instead, SVUSD is taking the time to study the problem and answer questions. The City should too. Did the City consider other revenue increases? Why choose a sales tax first? Has Sonoma investigated cutting spending? Have such cuts been made? And what happened to the City's cash reserves? These questions haven't been answered. Please vote no on this ill-considered and rushed measure, which taxes our poorest the hardest, without proper planning or oversight. s/ John A. Kelly Budget Advisory Committee Chairman s/ Stanley Cohen Former Mayor s/ August Sebastiani Former Mayor Pro Tem s/ Gregory Stubbs Budget Advisory Committee Member s/ Susan Norton Budget Advisory Committee Member

Taxpayers of Sonoma deserve to have their City government deliver basic ser- vices without having to pay a greater portion of their income to the government. With this sales tax proposal no new services are offered + just higher taxes for the same service. While it may not be fair that the State has taken away tax revenue from the City, that is a poor reason for taxpayers in Sonoma to pay more. The time has come for California governments at all levels to live within their means without requiring taxpayers surrender ever larger portions of their earnings. Increasingly, California is driving businesses and individuals to other states where tax and regulatory burdens are lower. Reversing that trend will take an effort from state, county and local government. Let's begin that effort here and now by rejecting this tax increase. Sonoma's hands are not totally clean is this matter either. For years the town has been misusing the redevelopment law to fund basic services. Redevelopment was originally authorized to rehabilitate blighted areas, not to fund basic services that should come from the general fund. Now we see that the Sonoma, hardly a blighted area, was really using redevelopment funds for what most would consider normal City services. It is probably a good thing that the Governor stopped this abuse of a law that once made sense, but has in practice diverted huge amounts of money away from public schools throughout the State. We suggest a better place to look for more funds would be in reforming public employee pensions. The Council has not satisfactorily addressed pension costs before racing to the ballot for more taxes. Tell the politicians it's time to stop their grab for your dollars. Vote no on Measure J. SONOMA COUNTY TAXPAYERS' ASSOCIATION s/ Daniel A. Drummond Executive Director s/ Jack Atkin President s/ Robert W. Piazza President & CEO Rebuttal to Arguments Against Sonoma is a world class city for its residents and tourists alike. Sonoma is a safe haven and we are duty bound to keep it that way. For years redevelopment funds have been used prudently and wisely to benefit our residents and local businesses alike. These funds are gone for now and into the foreseeable future. It falls to Sonoma to solve the financial crisis brought on by the State. Why risk our collective future at the hands of the State government? For a few cents a day, we can keep our City services strong and viable. Here in the Bear Flag City our independence is a real and present day living history. There is no intention whatsoever to use this money for a swimming pool. The City has now contracted out both Fire and Police. With currently 36 City employees, the City runs lean and efficient. Help keep Sonoma, Sonoma. We ask you to work together with us to be a part of protecting and preserving Sonoma for you, your neighbors and future generations. s/ Ken Brown Mayor, Pro Tem Sonoma s/ Samuel Morphy Owner The Red Grape s/ Thomas R. Rouse Sonoma City Council Member s/ David Cook Resident of Sonoma s/ Jennifer A. Yankovich Sonoma Valley Chamber of Commerce

Full Text of Measure J

EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO._______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SONOMA IMPOSING A TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF SONOMA: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The voters of the City of Sonoma hereby find and declare as follows: 1. The City is experiencing an existing and immediate funding crisis, which is the result of factors largely outside of its control, namely the California Supreme Court's decision on December 29, 2011 in CRA v. Matosantos up- holding State legislation, Assembly Bill 1X 26 (AB1X 26). AB1X 26 causes all redevelopment agencies in California including the Sonoma Community Development Agency, which had been in existence for over 28 years, to be dissolved as of February 1, 2012. 2. Recurring State takeaways and borrowing of local funds dramatically impact the City's ability to maintain vital and high quality services. In Fiscal Year 2009-10, the State borrowed 8% of the City's property tax share ($132,925) and took $1.9 million from the Sonoma Community Development Agency. In Fiscal Year 2010-11, the State took an additional $394,918 from the Sonoma Community Development Agency. Other ways to "take" additional monies from cities are continuously being considered by the State Legislature to address the State's own budget crisis, while the City of Sonoma continues to be fiscally prudent. The State's inability to balance its own budget continues to negatively impact our local community and the services provided by the City of Sonoma. 3. Despite the steps the City has taken to align its General Fund budget in a sustainable manner over the past four years of the ongoing nationwide recession, the dissolution of redevelopment has placed the City's General Fund in an unsustainable and structural deficit position which is likely to result in decreasing public safety, road maintenance and other essential services. Absent redevelopment as a funding source, current City General Fund resources cannot support our community's current services, needs and levels of services. 4. The City has not sought new revenue from its voters in 20 years, and has not raised its fee schedule since 2008, in recognition of the difficulties of its residents and businesses in dealing with the effects of the nationwide downturn in the economy which resulted in an extended recession with local impacts. 5. Because of changes in State law, particularly the approval of Propositions 62 and 218, the City has very few means available for increasing General Fund revenue. 6. In 2011, the Sonoma Community Development Agency issued Tax Allocation Bonds in an amount of $15,750,000 in order to finance major capital improvement projects within the former Redevelopment Project Area including public infrastructure, streets improvements, stormwater infrastructure, bike-way and pedestrian improvements, sidewalk improvements, traffic safety improvements, handicap accessibility upgrades to parks and public areas, renovation of a public library, capital grants to partner agencies, renovation, seismic upgrades and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance upgrades of historic landmark properties, and funding dedicated to affordable housing projects, all projects which were planned and identified in the Sonoma Community Development Agency's 5-Year Implementation Plan publicly adopted in December 2009. In January 2012, the DOF issued its interpretation of the tax allocation bond provisions of AB1X 26. Said DOF interpretations do not allow unexpended bond proceeds to be utilized for the purposes for which the bonds were sold and instead require said funds to be used to defease the bonds whose sale generated said funds at the earliest possible opportunity. Although said DOF interpretations continue to be the subject of debate and challenge, out of an excess of caution the City and Successor Agency have halted approximately one-half of the CDA's planned public improvement projects, most of which were road improvement and upgrade projects. 7. Absent a new source of General Fund revenue, the City's ability to maintain public service levels, roads and infrastructure is uncertain, and the City's General Fund budget will be out of balance by a minimum of approximately $1,234,926 starting July 1, 2012, and on an ongoing basis thereafter, resulting in either the need for drastic public service reductions and/or depletion of City reserve balances leaving the City at risk of not having adequate reserves set aside for natural or man-made disasters and emergencies. 8. Unless a new funding source is found, public facilities and property will not be properly maintained, road and hardscape surface quality will degrade, public safety standards will degrade, police response times are likely to in- crease, the community will not have safe and maintained parks and open spaces, graffiti is likely to be left unchecked, businesses and families will be discouraged from moving to or remaining in Sonoma, and the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Sonoma will be endangered. With police and fire, and emergency medical services comprising over 74% of the City's General Fund budget, the City cannot avoid considering potential cuts to public safety, absent a new revenue source, which could likely result in longer 9-1-1 emergency response times. 9. Because of that threat to the public health, safety, and welfare, an emergency exists in the City, as the term "emergency" is used in Article XIIIC, section 2(b) of the California Constitution. The City must immediately address that emergency by ensuring that the City has the resources necessary to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 10. The identified emergency necessitates that the City Council submit a tax measure to the voters of Sonoma at the June 5, 2012 election, even though such an election would not be consolidated with a general election for a member of the Council. 11. Article XIIIC,section2(b) of the California Constitution permits the City, in an emergency situation such as that declared herein by the City Council, to seek voter approval for a general tax at an election that is not consolidated with an election for a member of the Council. SECTION 2: Amendment of Code: Chapter 3.12 "2012 Transactions and Use Tax" shall be added to the Sonoma Municipal Code and shall read as follows. 3.13.010 TITLE. This ordinance shall be known as the City of Sonoma Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance. The City of Sonoma hereinafter shall be called "City." This ordinance shall be applicable in the incorporated territory of the City. 3.13.020 OPERATIVE DATE. "Operative Date" means the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after the adoption of this ordinance, the date of such adoption being as set forth below. 3.13.030 PURPOSE. This ordinance is adopted to achieve the following, among other purposes, and directs that the provisions hereof be interpreted in order to accomplish those purposes: A. To impose a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Section 7285.9 of Part 1.7 of Division 2 which authorizes the City to adopt this tax ordinance which shall be operative if a majority of the electors voting on the measure vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose. B. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that incorporates provisions identical to those of the Sales and Use Tax Law of the State of California insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with the requirements and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. C. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides a measure therefore that can be administered and collected by the State Board of Equalization in a manner that adapts itself as fully as practicable to, and requires the least possible deviation from, the existing statutory and administrative procedures followed by the State Board of Equalization in administering and collecting the California State Sales and Use Taxes. D. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that can be administered in a manner that will be, to the greatest degree possible, consistent with the provi- sions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, minimize the cost of collecting the transactions and use taxes, and at the same time, minimize the burden of record keeping upon persons subject to taxation under the provisions of this ordinance. 3.13.040 CONTRACT WITH STATE. Prior to the Operative Date, the City shall contract with the State Board of Equalization to perform all functions incident to the administration and operation of this transactions and use tax ordinance; provided, that if the City shall not have contracted with the State Board of Equalization prior to the Operative Date, it shall nevertheless so contract and in such a case the Operative Date shall be the first day of the first calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract. 3.13.050 TRANSACTIONS TAX RATE. For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the incorporated territory of the City at the rate of one-half of one percent of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in said territory on and after the Operative Date of this ordinance. 3.13.060 PLACE OF SALE. For the purposes of this ordinance, all retail sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless the tangible personal property sold is delivered by the retailer or his agent to an out-of-state destination or to a common carrier for delivery to an out-of-state destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include delivery charges, when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax, regardless of the place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the State or has more than one place of business, the place or places at which the retail sales are consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by the State Board of Equalization. 3.13.070 USE TAX RATE. An excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use or other consumption in the City of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer on and after the Operative Date of this ordinance for storage, use or other consumption in said territory at the rate of one-half of one percent of the sales price of the property. The sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made. 3.13.080 ADOPTION OF PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW. Except as other- wise provided in this ordinance and except insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, all of the provisions of Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code are hereby adopted and made a part of this ordinance as though fully set forth herein. 3.13.090. LIMITATIONS ON ADOPTION OF STATE LAW AND COLLECTION OF USE TAXES. In adopting the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code: A. Wherever the State of California is named or referred to as the taxing agency, the name of this City shall be substituted therefor. However, the substitution shall not be made when: 1. The word "State" is used as a part of the title of the State Controller, State Treasurer, State Board of Control, State Board of Equalization, State Treasury, or the Constitution of the State of California; 2. The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by or against this City or any agency, officer, or employee thereof rather than by or against the State Board of Equalization, in performing the functions incident to the administration or operation of this Ordinance. 3. In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to sections referring to the exterior boundaries of the State of California, where the result of the substitution would be to: a. Provide an exemption from this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not otherwise be exempt from this tax while such sales, storage, use or other consumption remain subject to tax by the State under the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or; b. Impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject to tax by the state under the said provision of that code. 4. In Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), 6711, 6715, 6737, 6797 or 6828 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. B. The word "City" shall be substituted for the word "State" in the phrase "retailer engaged in business in this State" in Section 6203 and in the definition of that phrase in Section 6203. 3.13.100 PERMIT NOT REQUIRED. If a seller's permit has been issued to a retailer under Section 6067 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, an additional transactor's permit shall not be required by this ordinance. 3.13.110 EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS. A. There shall be excluded from the measure of the transactions tax and the use tax the amount of any sales tax or use tax imposed by the State of California or by any city, city and county, or county pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law or the amount of any state-administered transactions or use tax. B. There are exempted from the computation of the amount of transactions tax the gross receipts from: 1. Sales of tangible personal property, other than fuel or petroleum products, to operators of aircraft to be used or consumed principally outside the county in which the sale is made and directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property under the authority of the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign government. 2. Sales of property to be used outside the City which is shipped to a point outside the City, pursuant to the contract of sale, by delivery to such point by the retailer or his agent, or by delivery by the retailer to a carrier for shipment to a consignee at such point. For the purposes of this paragraph, delivery to a point outside the City shall be satisfied: a. With respect to vehicles (other than commercial vehicles) subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, and undocumented vessels registered under Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code by registration to an out-of-City address and by a declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, stating that such address is, in fact, his or her principal place of residence; and b. With respect to commercial vehicles, by registration to a place of business out-of-City and declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, that the vehicle will be operated from that address. 3. The sale of tangible personal property if the seller is obligated to furnish the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the Operative Date of this ordinance. 4. A lease of tangible personal property which is a continuing sale of such property, for any period of time for which the lessor is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by the lease prior to the Operative Date of this ordinance. 5. For the purposes of subparagraphs (3) and (4) of this section, the sale or lease of tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised. C. There are exempted from the use tax imposed by this ordinance, the storage, use or other consumption in this City of tangible personal property: 1. The gross receipts from the sale of which have been subject to a transactions tax under any state-administered transactions and use tax ordinance. 2. Other than fuel or petroleum products purchased by operators of aircraft and used or consumed by such operators directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property for hire or compensation under a certificate of public convenience and necessity issued pursuant to the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign government. This exemption is in addition to the exemptions provided in Sections 6366 and 6366.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California. 3. If the purchaser is obligated to purchase the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the Operative Date of this ordinance. 4. If the possession of, or the exercise of any right or power over, the tangible personal property arises under a lease which is a continuing purchase of such property for any period of time for which the lessee is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by a lease prior to the Operative Date of this ordinance. 5. For the purposes of subparagraphs (3) and (4) of this section, storage, use, or other consumption, or possession of, or exercise of any right or power over, tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised. 6. Except as provided in subparagraph (7), a retailer engaged in busi- ness in the City shall not be required to collect use tax from the purchaser of tangible personal property, unless the retailer ships or delivers the property into the City or participates within the City in making the sale of the property, including, but not limited to, soliciting or receiving the order, either directly or indirectly, at a place of business of the retailer in the City or through any representative, agent, canvasser, solicitor, subsidiary, or person in the City under the authority of the retailer. 7. "A retailer engaged in business in the City" shall also include any retailer of any of the following: vehicles subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, or undocumented vessels registered under Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code. That retailer shall be required to collect use tax from any purchaser who registers or licenses the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft at an address in the City. D. Any person subject to use tax under this ordinance may credit against that tax any transactions tax or reimbursement for transactions tax paid to a district imposing, or retailer liable for a transactions tax pursuant to Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code with respect to the sale to the person of the property the storage, use or other consumption of which is subject to the use tax. 3.13.120 AMENDMENTS. All amendments subsequent to the effective date of this ordinance to Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code relating to sales and use taxes and which are not inconsistent with Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, and all amendments to Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, shall automatically become a part of this ordinance, provided however, that no such amendment shall operate so as to affect the rate of tax imposed by this ordinance. 3.13.130 ENJOINING COLLECTION FORBIDDEN. No injunction or writ of mandate or other legal or equitable process shall issue in any suit, action or pro- ceeding in any court against the State or the City, or against any officer of the State or the City, to prevent or enjoin the collection under this ordinance, or Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, of any tax or any amount of tax re- quired to be collected. SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the applica- tion thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance relates to the levying and collecting of the City transactions and use taxes and shall take effect immediately. SECTION 5. TERMINATION DATE. The authority to levy the tax imposed by this ordinance shall expire on the fifth anniversary of the Operative Date, unless extended by a majority vote of the voters of the City. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was adopted by Declaration of the vote of the Sonoma City Council on the ___ day of _____, 2012 at a regular meeting of the Sonoma City Council by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________ Mayor Attest:______________________ (Signature) ______________________ City Clerk