Source: http://votersedge.kpbs.org/ca/es/ballot/election/area/73/measures/measure/3380?election_authority_id=27
Timestamp: 2019-08-23 22:37:10
Document Index: 34062540

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', 'art 1', '§ 1']

Measure N — Use Tax - Elección General de California Ballot - Measures & Voter Guide - November 6, 2018
Measure N Ordinance - Majority Approval Required
3,334 votos si (51.32%)
3,162 votos no (48.68%)
To Increase and Extend the Transactions ("Sales") and Use Tax
To sustain and improve city services such as fire, police, road repairs & maintenance, shall the ordinance increasing the rate of the City of Marina's existing transactions & use ("sales") tax from 1% to 1.5% estimated to generate approximately $4,890,000 annually as compared with $3,260,000 for the current tax and extending the expiration date for the tax to March 31, 2034 be adopted?
A “Yes” vote is a vote to enact an ordinance increasing the transactions and use tax rate to 1.5% and extending it until March 31, 2034.
A “No” vote is a vote to reject the ordinance, and therefore leave the tax rate at 1% with an expiration date of March 21, 2026.
At the November 2, 2010 election, the voters of the City of Marina approved a 1% transactions and use tax. At the November 4, 2014 election the voters approved a measure that extended that tax until March 31, 2026.
This type of tax is generally called a local “sales” tax. Like the statewide sales and use tax, the transactions and use tax is imposed upon the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail within the City, and on the storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer within the City. Motor vehicle sales are taxed based on the location at which the vehicle will be registered, not the location at which the sale occurs. The tax is administered by the State Board of Equalization and follows most of the rules that apply to the statewide sales tax.
This measure would increase the rate of the City’s transactions and use tax from 1% to 1.5%. It would also extend the tax until March 31, 2034. Total revenues from the tax would increase from approximately $3.26 Million annually to approximately $4.89 Million annually.
The current overall sales and use tax rate (including both state and local sales and use taxes and local transactions and use taxes) is 8.75%. This would increase to 9.25% if the additional 0.5% local rate proposed by Measure P is approved.
Revenue generated by the transactions and use tax has been, and will continue to be, deposited in the City’s general fund, which means that the money may be used by the City for any general governmental purpose. Examples of such uses include fire, police, and road repair and maintenance.
A “YES” vote is a vote to enact an ordinance increasing the transactions and use tax rate to 1.5% and extending it until March 31, 2034. A “NO” vote is a vote to reject the ordinance, and therefore leave the tax rate at 1% with an expiration date of March 21, 2026.
Measure N will be approved if it received a majority vote of those casting ballots on the measure. Measure N was placed on the ballot by a petition signed by the requisite number of voters.
/s/ ROBERT R. WELLINGTON
This measure was placed on the ballot via the citizens’ initiative process whereby dozens of Marina residents collected signatures from their neighbors to bring you three much needed measures to provide Marina with the money that it needs to maintain and improve city services affecting our quality of life. In addition to this measure, this citizen group also qualified for the ballot a hotel tax paid by tourists and a cannabis tax. We encourage you to vote for all three measures.
Marina residents deserve quality city services including: Safe well-maintained roads; Fully staffed fire and police force; Beautiful parks; and Recreation programs for youth, families, and seniors. With this sales tax revenue Marina will be better positioned to support removal of abandoned buildings and blight around the High School, protect our drinking water, improve access to our beaches, improve the safety of walking and biking, enhance our downtown to attract and retain business, and address regional challenges of affordable housing and traffic congestion. This revenue measure is essential to fund these important public services.
This sales tax is a temporary measure that will generate approximately $1.63 million per year. Approximately 60% of all revenue generated will come from people living outside Marina. Seaside and Salinas residents have already approved identical sales tax rates allowing them to provide improved community services. State law limits the rate of sales tax to 9.25%. If Marina does not claim this last 0.5% tax for us, another regional agency can come along in the future and claim it for their spending needs. Marina residents saw the need to capture this revenue for Marina’s services and acted to place this measure on the ballot. Your vote will ensure that Marina has funding necessary to make our city Safer and Better for our future.
/s/ Jane Parker, County Supervisor
/s/ Bruce Delgado, Mayor
/s/ Wendy Root Askew, MPUSD Board of Education District 1 Trustee
/s/ Adam Urrutia, Marina Planning Commissioner
/s/ Cristina Medina Dirksen, Marina Resident
You are being asked to increase your taxes even though your city has squandered millions of dollars in various activities as follows:
1. 2002 paid approximately 2 million dollars in development fees that were not owed.
2. In 2008 reduced the sales price of property to the Dunes development by 5 million dollars.
3. 2010 leased 21.5 acres of city land to a million dollar developer for $1.00 per year for 6 years.
4. 2013 voted to waive over $630,000 in impact fees even though Marina Community Partner (Dunes) agreement requires the Dunes to find the developer at no cost to the city.
5. 2013 made a gift of $275,000 to a billion dollar corporation.
6. 2016 increased the city manager’s wages from $15,000.00 per month, (annually $180,000) to $17,585.33, (annually $211,023.96). Plus $400.00 per month car allowance and accrual & credit for personal leave and administrative leave as if the city manager had been employed for 16 years. He was hired in 2013. City manager also receives 3% minimum increase in 2017, 2018 & 2019.
7. As of 2017 Average salary, health and benefits for top 10 city employees: $201,622.00
8. 2018 agreed to retroactive salary increases for employment agreements.
9. Made a gift of $5,000.00 to the City of Salinas.
10. For 8 years failed to demand that the county sell real property resulting in a loss of an estimated $250,000 to the city.
11. Failed to collect rent and damages in the amount of $54,933.35 on the restaurant at the airport.
12. Presently owed over $354,000 by a present tenant for past due rent.
Vote NO on Measure N. You should not have to bail out an inefficient, wasteful city government.
The undersigned proponents or authors of the primary argument against ballot measure N At the general election for the City of Marina to be held on November 6, 2018 hereby state that this argument is true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief.
/s/ Frank O’Connell
/s/ Michael M. Owen
/s/ Chandler P. Roland
In 2010, the City of Marina's sales tax increased with a definite expiration date of 5 years. In 2014, the City of Marina sought and received an extension of the sales tax to 2026. Now, in 2018, the proponents of Measure N want another increase AND another extension –until 2036. But somehow they still claim this sales tax is a “temporary measure.”
The Marina City Government has done very little, if anything at all, to address the root cause of needing a sales tax increase in the first place: its own waste and inefficiency. So long as the City is wasteful and inefficient, the proponents’ argument that thisis a “temporary” sales tax measure is completely unbelievable.
The "pitch" for the increases and extensions has been the same in 2010, 2014 and now: that the additional revenue will improve city services and create a better quality of life. But the City has had 8 years of additional revenue from the tax: how has this revenue improved city services or given residents a better quality of life?
Seniors, people on fixed income, and those trying to “make ends meet" are hurt far more by another increase in thecost of the goods than more affluent City residents.
For the last several years the City of Marina has claimed that its budget is balanced. So why do they want to make it harder for you to balance YOUR budget?
/s/ Michael M. Owen, Public Works Commissioner
/s/ Chandler P. Roland, Retired
/s/ Jack D. Stewart, Retired
/s/ David Burrett, Retired
/s/ Virgil M. Piper, Retired
Opponents of Measure N try to paint good decisions as bad ones. Don’t be fooled!
A one-time investment of $275,000 in Marina’s new theater was a wise decision that pays $66,000/year in sales taxes to our City forever. This investment also helped bring the new restaurants such as Blaze Pizza. We likely wouldn’t have the Dunes restaurants if not for this investment. The restaurants generate hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in sales tax.
Opponents don’t tell you that the $1,000,000 incentive offered to Marina’s new Marriott Hotel cost the City nothing because the hotel didn’t open in time. Now our community will earn $550,000 or more per year for decades from Marriott Hotel taxes and it cost us nothing.
These wise investments have paid off and kept many city services from declining.
Remember, Measure N was put on the ballot by the citizens, not the City Council, because we have decided that it’s time to invest our resources into making Marina safer and better. If we want better streets, parks, more activities for youth, and faster Fire Department response to our homes we need the revenue Measure N will bring. Failing to invest in our city now means that it will only cost more to get these things later.
It’s time to stand up for a safer and better Marina to help all of us and our families. Vote Yes on N!
/s/ Wendy Root Askew, MPUSD School Board Trustee
/s/ Adam Urrutia, Planning Commissioner
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 chapter if a two-thirds majority of the city council voted to adopt the ordinance codified in this chapter placing the measure on the ballot and a majority of the qualified electors voting on the measure voted to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose.
D. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax chapter that can be administered in a manner that will be, to the greatest degree possible, consistent with the provisions 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 chapter. (Ord. 2010-03 § 1 (part), 2010)
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 chapter.
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. (Ord. 2010-03 § 1 (part), 2010)
1. Sales of tangible personal property, other than fuel or petroleum products, to operators of aircraft to be used or consumed principally outside the city 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 subsection, delivery to a point outside the city shall be satisfied:
5. For the purposes of subsections (B)(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 chapter, the storage, use or other consumption in this city of tangible personal property:
5. For the purposes of subsections (C)(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 subsection (C)(7) of this section, a retailer engaged in business 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 Chapter 2 of 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 chapter 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. (Ord. 2010-03 § 1 (part), 2010)
APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE of the People of the City of Marina on November 6, 2018.