Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report Agenda Item #4.C 02/02/2015(i) DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT February 2, 2015 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council John C. Brown, City Manager County Sales Tax Measure and Special Legislation RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide voting guidance to Vice Mayor Miller, as the City's representative to the Sonoma County Transportation Agency, regarding the proposed County sales tar measure and associated special legislation. ._ ax" eM11iNL11 On November 4, 2014, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution declaring a fiscal emergency and calling a special election, to place a tax measure on the June 2015 ballot. The Board also adopted the "Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance" which. if approved by voters, would impose a'/< cent sales tax increase for a five year period. The proposed increase would be a "general" tax, and proceeds could be used for any governmental purpose. The Board has previously indicated, however, an intent to use the increase to fund its Long -Term Road Plan. If approved, the proposed increase would extend to incorporated as well as unincorporated areas of the County. To obtain city support for a measure, the County previously proposed to share proceeds with the cities using SCTA's Measure M distribution formula. As a general tax. the County cannot guarantee that distribution. The County is, however, proposing that proceeds would be administered by the Sonoma County Transportation Agency (SCTA). Council is aware from our discussions last year regarding Petaluma's sales tax rate, that some jurisdicitions in the County are very near to the statutory cap of two (2%) percent for local taxes. The County is concerned that increasing its sales tax by ''/., cent will create problems for jurisdictions close to the cap, and is proposing special legislation to increase that cap by one-half percent (1/2%) to 2.5 percent. DISCUSSION This matter was discussed at the December 8, 3014 SCTA meeting. SCTA staff sought direction F-om the -Board -on how to proceed_ with_ engagement - on -the _County proposal -for -a-tax increase. __ and on any sales tax legislation. Specifically, the Board members were asked: "How shall the SCTA engage in, or help facilitate discussions related to the newly proposed tax measure", and "Should the SCTA endorse increasing the sales tax cap through legislation". A copy of the materials provided to SCTA members is included as Attaclunent I to this report. City members serving on the SCTA Board were reluctant to take a position without seeking guidance from their respective City Councils. The matter came up again at the January meeting, and SCTA staff was asked to coordinate with the cities to obtain voting guidance from the member jurisdictions prior to SCTA's February meeting. Both SCTA staff and Vice Mayor Miller have asked me to agendize this matter for Council discussion to provide the Petaluma City Council an opportunity to take a position and to convey voting guidance to our representative. This matter is agendized to provide Council the opportunity to tale a position regarding the County's sales tax measure, and on proposed legislation increasing the statutory cap. It is suggested that you provide any guidance you wish to convey through City Council concensus as, due to time constraints, resolutions presupposing the City Council's position were not prepared for this agenda item. FINANCIAL IMPACTS None directly associated with the recommended action. ATTACHMENTS 1. County Report of November 4, 2014 2. SCTA Report of December 8, 3014 ATTACHMENT 1 Agenda Item Number: 11 County of Sonoma (This Section for use by Clerk of the Board Only.) Agenda Item Summary Report Clerk of the Board 575 Administration Drive Santa Rosa, CA 95403 To: Board of Supervisors Board Agenda Date: November 4, 2014 I Vote Requirement: Unanimous Department or Agency Name(s): County Administrator's Office Staff Name and Phone Number: Supervisorial District(s): Veronica Ferguson 707-565-2431 All Title: Adoption of Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance and Call Election on Same Recommended Actions: Board of Supervisors 1. Adopt an ordinance, the "Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance," imposing a general countywide transaction and use tax (sales tax) of one-quarter of one percent for a period not to exceed five years pursuant to the authority granted by Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7285. (Second Reading— Ready for Adoption) (4/5 vote required) 2. Adopt a Resolution declaring an emergency and calling a special election to submit to the voters of Sonoma County the proposed quarter -cent general sales tax measure entitled the Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance, and ordering that the special election be consolidated with the general law city election to be conducted on June 2, 2015. (Unanimous vote required) Executive Summary: Declaration of Fiscal Emergency Sonoma County continues to face financial challenges as a result of the recession of the past years, including $137 million in lost property tax revenue from fiscal year 2008/09 until 2013/14 and $42 million in lost sales tax revenue from fiscal year 2006/07 until 2012/13. These reductions in revenue, combined with increased costs, failing infrastructure and additional demands for services have resulted in Sonoma County looking for ways to meet critical unfunded needs and health and safety challenges for our residents and visitors. In response to these challenges, Sonoma County reduced expenditures from a peak in 2006/07 of $1.24 billion to $1.13 billion in 2008/09. Since the peak in 2007/08 of 4,279 FTE, the Board reduced staffing to 3,657 in fiscal year 2011/12. Over the recent years, the Board has made difficult decisions to put the County back on track for long term fiscal balance. Now the County is addressing long-standing strategic needs like our roads network, parks maintenance, community safety, and services for low income Revision No. 20140617-1 families. One example of the challenges Sonoma County faces is in the condition of our road network. Sonoma County roads have continued to deteriorate, due in large part to decreased revenue dedicated to road maintenance. It is estimated that Bay Area drivers spend an additional $931/year in higher vehicle operational costs, due to poor road conditions. In the California Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment 2014 Update, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission emphasizes that at the current funding levels, the pavement conditions will continue to deteriorate. The report states that "as roadway pavement conditions deteriorate, the cost to repair them increases exponentially." The report also notes the high threat to safety that deteriorating roads poses to California residents. Recognizing the critical need to act quickly to maintain and repair our roads, the Board on October 28, 2014 adopted the Long -Term Road Plan, which identifies funding strategies for pavement condition improvements. The full implementation of the plan is based on the identification of a permanent funding source. Unless the County is able partially restore some of these service levels that have been cut due to the recession, the critical unfunded needs and health and safety challenges of our residents and visitors will continue unanswered. Because of that threat to the public health, safety, and welfare, an emergency exists in the County, as the term "emergency" is used in Article XIIIC, section 2(b) of the California Constitution. The County must immediately address that emergency by ensuring that the County has the resources necessary to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. Accordingly, staff recommends the Board unanimously find and declare the existence of a fiscal emergency within the County. Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance In recognition of the fiscal emergency that the County currently faces and the Board's direction to explore the possibility of a general countywide sales tax for Sonoma County, staff recommends that your Board approve the Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax and call a special election to submit the tax to the voters on June 2, 2015. The Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax is a five (5) year, 1/4% general sales tax. The revenue from this tax would be available for any government purpose. The Board has previously expressed its intent that this revenue would go towards funding the Long -Term Road Plan and would be administered through a contract with the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA). However, as a general tax, the revenue must be available for any government purpose, and will be subject to the Board's annual appropriations decision-making. June 2, 2015 will be considered a special election for Sonoma County, as there are no members of the Board of Supervisors standing for election at that time. The findings of emergency discussed above are required to place a general tax on a special election ballot. Again, staff recommends the Board make these findings, as there is not another General Election until 2016. Revision No. 20140617-1 4 Prior Board Actions: October 28, 2014 -Introduction of the Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Strategic Plan Alignment Goal 3: Invest in the Future Maintenance of vital infrastructure, including roads and facilities, and the services provided to the residents and visitors of Sonoma County are necessary to continue to provide thriving, beautiful, sustainable community for all. Expenditures Budgeted Amount $ Add' Appropriations Reqd. $ Fiscal Summary - FY 14-15 Funding Source(s) 400,000 State/Federal Fees/Other Use of Fund Balance Contingencies Total Expenditure $ 400,000 Total Sources Narrative Explanation of Fiscal Impacts (If Required): $ $ 400,000 $ $ 400,0001 The costs of the election are estimated to by $400,000. If successful, the proceeds of the sales tax will cover the county for the election costs associated with this measure. If the measure is not successful, the General Fund will be responsible for these costs. Position Title (Payroll Classification) Staffing Impacts Monthly Salary Range (A— I Step) Narrative Explanation of Staffing Impacts (if Required): Attachments: Additions Deletions (Number) (Number) Attachment A: Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance Attachment B: Resolution declaring emergency and calling a special election to submit to the voters of Sonoma County the proposed quarter -cent general sales tax measure entitled the Sonoma County 2015 Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance, and ordering that the special election be consolidated with the general law city election to be conducted on June 2, 2015. Revision No. 20140617-1 Related Items "On File" with the Cleric of the Board: Revision No. 20140617-1 ATTACFM ENT 2 490 MENDOCINO AVENUE, suITE 206 SCTA SANTA ROSA, CA 95401 WNW.sCTAINFO.ORG (707) 565-5373 RCPA smmma cvu„iy �nmvarmnvnawmriry nmvnamim.r•o�mamvnamnnny Staff Report To: SCTA Board of Directors From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Item: 4.2.3 — Sales tax measures — recent actions Date: December 8, 2014 Issue: What were the results of local sales tax measures throughout the State? What is the status of the proposal for a local sales tax measure focused on local road maintenance? Backqround: The November 2014 election was an all-time low in voter turnout, but the results of numerous local tax measures throughout the State reflect that even with low turnout there is still opportunity to achieve success with local measures. CaliforniaCityFinance.com released the attached document analyzing the results of over 400 local revenue measures, including 147 non -school tax or bond measures. (httD://c2liforni2citvfinance.comNotes1411 oreliminarv.odf). Local Measures, November 2014 Total Pass Passing % City General Tax (Majority) 88 61 69% County General Tax (Majority) 6 2 33% City SpecialTaxorG.O.bond(2/3) 23 14 61% (County Spec.Tax, G.O.bond (2/3) 9 4 44% `Special District (2/3) 21 10 48% 1 Total 147 91 I 62°% In Sonoma County, the following results were realized on local measures I I Tax Rate Yes% No% Pass/Fail Type I Purpose .r t>' Petaluma Measureo Sales Tax Icent 43.6 56.4 Fail Increase General lCounty of Sonoma MeasureM 5ales Tax 1/8cent 62.2 37.8 1 Fail Increase Library ISebastopol IMeasurell Utility Tax 0.25% 61.5 38.5 I Pass Expand, reduce, extend I General I Cloverdale Measure O lUtility Tax 2% 52.2 1 47.8 I Pass Expand, increase General) I5anta Rosa IMeasureN UtilnyTax I -0.50% 46.7 I 53.3 Fail Expand,reduce General) (Monte Rio Fire Protection District IMeasure5 (Parcel Tax $60 64.4 I 35.6 Fail I New Fire Sanla Rosa Elementary School District Measure L School Sand $54 68.1 31.9 Pass Increase Measure H School Bond $410 I 65.6 I 34.4 Pass Increase ISPDC 5anta Rosa High School District Measure I School Bond $175 I 630 I 37 Pass Increase Oa6 Grove Union School District IMeasure K School Bond $6 1 62.6I 37.4 Pass Increase ICinnabar Elementary School District IMeasureJ Schoal Bond $3 1 58.9 41.1 Pass Increase I The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors recently acted to place a 5 -year, 1/4 cent general sales tax measure on the ballot for June 2015. The information is attached to this staff report and can be found on line here: htto://sonoma-county.granicus.com/MetaViewer.DhD?view id=2&clip id=440&meta id=146311 An issue related to increasing the sales tax rate countywide is that some jurisdictions will then be bumping up against the 2% cap for local sales taxes. To remedy that, State legislation is required that would enable the cap to be increased to a certain amount. Policv Impacts: Previously, the SCTA had agreed to serve as the administering agency should a roads tax be approved. How shall the SCTA engage in or help facilitate discussions related to the newly proposed tax measure? Should the SCTA endorse increasing the sales tax cap through legislation? Fiscal Impacts: There is no direct fiscal impacts to this agenda item though actions taken related to future sales tax measures or supporting legislation will use staff resources and could lead to increasing workload and new revenues for projects. Measure M is ten years into its 20 -year life and is not directly impacted by the abovementioned proposals. Staff Recommendation: Staff is seeking Board discussion and direction on how to proceed with engagement on the County proposal for a % cent tax and any sales tax cap legislation. California CityFinance.Com Updated November 8, 3014 4:00pm PRELIMINARY PENDING FINAL COUNTS Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 The November 4, 2014 California gubernatorial election included over 400 local measures including 268 seeking approval for taxes or bonds. K-12 schools districts and community colleges sought a total of $11.775 billion in 113 separate authorizations for bonds to construct facilities, acquire equipment and make repairs and upgrades. There were just eight measures to increase or extend school parcel taxes. Among the 147 non -school local revenue measures were four measures asking for a total of $555.5 million in bonds, including a $500 million transportation bond measure in San Francisco. There were 32 city, county and special district parcel taxes requiring two-thirds voter approval, including two library measures, three street/road improvement measures, four parks and open space measures, sixteen fire, emergency medical response measures and five police/fire measures. Fifty-five proposals sought to extend or increase local sales taxes, ranging from 1the renewal of a 1/10 percent tax for the Fresno Zoo to one percent increases proposed in 15 cities. Thirteen of the 55 sales tax measures earmark the tax proceeds for a particular purpose, making them special taxes requiring 2/3 voter approval under Proposition 13. Proposed Local Revenue Measures November 2014 School Bond 2/3, School Parcel Tax, 8 CountyParcel or_ Special Tax, 8 Special District Tax, 19 Specia I District G.O.Bond, 2 CountyG.O.Bond, I j CityG.O.Bond, 2 City Parcel or Special Tax, 21 ;i 1=.I:: F,oyr.It Iaro ., aei CA i 6-661-6 Ph in= ...i :1 3582 Fay 7 F. 3p S? County General Tax,6 © 2014 Michael Coleman (.A Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —2— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 TvDes of Non -School Local Tax Measures UtilityUsersTa; Special, 1 PropTransf Tax, 3 Revenue Bond, Nnvpmhpr9nlA © 2014 Michael Coleman Overall Passage Rates Other, ). Bond, 4 BusinessTax Special, 1 Based on election night counts with 100% of all precincts reporting plus additional absentee ballots counted as of November 7, 189 of the 268 measures passed. Additional ballots have yet to be counted and the outcome of some close measures may change. ;Local Revenue Measures November 2014 Total) - J PassP-,ass-:m-g%: 'City General Tax (Majority Vote) 88� 611 69% County General Tax (Majority Vote) 6 2; 33% City SpecialTax or G.O.bond (2/3 Vote)' 231 14 61% ,County Spec.Tax, G.O.bond (2/3 Vote)I 91 4 44% Special District 2/3 21 10 48% School ParcelTax 2/3 j 8 8 100% School Bond 2/3 1 0' 0% School Bond 55% 112 90' 80% Total 268 189 71% CnliFor-miaCityFi�ancc.com H Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —3— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 The proportion of passing school measures is mirroring historic passage rates. Current tallies indicate 90 of the 113 school bonds passed. All but one required 55% voter approval. The one two-thirds vote school bond, in Vallejo, failed with 60% "yes' vote. All of the eight school parcel tax measures passed. School Tax & Bond Measures November 2014 55% Vote Bond 2/3 Vote Parcel Tax, Bond 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Percent Passing i (90/112) 89% 8/9) 100% The passage of local non -school tax and bond measures is also closely mirroring historic rates of passage. Two out of three general vote tax measures passed. And just over half of two-thirds vote special taxes and bonds passed. Citv / County / Special District Tax & Bond Measures November 2014 General Tax Majority Vote Measures Special Tax 2/3 Voter Measures 0% 20% 40% 60% Percent Passing Measure Outcome by Category 67%(63/94) 3/53) 80% 100% Among non -school local measures, the most common type of measure was a majority vote add-on sales tax (transactions and use tax). All but one of the 42 were city measures. Three out of four passed. Parcel taxes, the only tax increase option for most special districts, were the second most common. Ca liforigiaCityFiNai�ce.com t` Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —4— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Passino and Failino Citv / County / Special District Measures by Tvoe November 2014 SalesTax MajVote ParcelTax 2/3vote UtilityUsersTax MajVote HotelTax MajVote 10 SalesTax 2/3vote 8 G.O. Bond 2/3vote PropTransf Tax MajVote $1AbandonedVehTax2/3 I UtilityUsersTax 2/3 vote L Local Add -On Sales Taxes (Transaction and Use Taxes) © Passing Failing U 2014 nGchael Coleman Forty-one cities and one county proposed general purpose majority vote add-on sales tax rates ranging from'/ percent to one percent. - Voters approved at least 32 sales tax measures with Coachella's one percent measure stilltooclose to call. All extensions that did not increase an existing tax passed except for the highly unusual case of Half Moon Bay's'/ percent sales tax extension. Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - General Tax - Majority Approval Aciencv Name Tax/Fee Rate YES% NO% Marina Measure P TrUT I cent 77.4% 22.6% PASS extend Guadalupe NleasureX TrUT 1/2 cent 76.3% 23.7%PASS increase Concord Measure Q TrUT 1/2 cent 76.31%, 23.7% PASS extend Ukiah Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 74.6% 25.41:6 PA55 extend Union City Measure JJ TrUT '1/2 cent 73.2'%4 26.8% PA55 extend Pismo Beach Measure I TrUT 1/2 cent 71.2'%, 38.80,6 PASS extend San Luis Obispo Measure G TrUT 1/2 cent 70.1'%, 30.09,6 PASS extend EI Cerrito Measure R TrUT I cent 70.0'%, 30.0% PASS extend Oakdale Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 69.81GU 30.2%PASS extend National City Proposition D TrUT I cent 68.4% 31.6",6 PASS extend tion riles Measure K 'rru,1 1/2 cent 67.01%6 33.0% PA55 increase King Measure TUT 1/2 cent 65.9'% 34.1",6 PA55 increase Eureka Measure Q 'rrU r 1/2 cent 65.8'%, 34.2% PASS extend Suledad Measure I "I-[t1T I cent 65.0'% 35.046 PASS extend San Leandro Measure 11I-1 TfIJT 1/2 cent 64.6. 35X%PASS increase Del Rey Oaks Measure R TrUT 1/2 cent 63.8% 36.246 PASS increase Salinas Adeasure G TrUT 1 cent 62.2'% 37.8",6 PA55 in creast CaIdorniaCityFiNatice.com Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 -5- Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - General Tax - Majority Approval (continued) Acencv Name Tax/Fee Rate YES% NO% Benicia Measure C TrUT 1 cent 61.9% 38.1% PASS increase Dunsmuir Measure N TrUT 1/4 cent 61.1% 389% PASS increase Sausalito Measure O TrUT 1/2 cent 60.5% 39J% PASS increase Weed Measure? TrUT 1/4 cent 60.4% 39.6% PASS increase Atascadero Measure F TrUT 1/2 cent 59.o'90 41.0%, PASS increase Rancho Cordova Measure H TrUT 1/2 cent 58.81% 413°iu PASS increase Red Bluff Measure D TrUT 1/4 cent 57.7% 42.3% PASS increase Sand City Measure ] TI'UT by 1/2tolcent 54.6'% 45.5% PA66 increase Stanton Measure GG TrUT I cent 54.5% 45.5% PASS increase County of Humboldt Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 55.4% 44.6%PASS increase Richmond Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 53.7% 46.3%PASS increase Rio Dell Measure U TrUT 1 cent 53.2% 46.896. PASS increase Pinole Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 52.01% 48.0%. PASS increase Paradise Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 51.6'90 48.5%PASS increase Placerville Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 50.9'% 49.1% PASS increase Coachella Measure TrUT I cent 499% 5o.1% FAIL increase CLOSE Marysville Measure W TrUT I cent 48.2% 51.8% FAIL increase HalfMoon Bay Measure O TrUT 1/2 cent 47.6% 52.4% FAIL extend Tehachapi Measure TrUT 1/2 cent 45.7% 54.3%. FAIL increase Desert 1 -lot Springs Measure 77 TrUT 1 cent 44.3% 55.7'% FAIL increase Gilroy MeasureF TrUT 1/2 cent 44.2% SS.s% FAIL increase Petaluma Measure Q TrUT 1 cent 43.6'%. 56.4% FAIL increase Hanford Measure S TiLIT 1 cent 43.4% 56.6% FAIL increase Fortuna Measure V TrUT I cent 36.5% 635% FAIL increase Blythe Measure W TrUT 1/2 cent 363% 63.7% FAIL increase Four of these general purpose majority vote measures were accompanied by an advisory measure specifying the use of the funds should the tax measure pass. Advisory Measures as to Use o1'Proceeds Ivng Ptontere)MeasuaN "50% -Public Safety (Police. Fire, Recreation). 30%. Motley Managem7U.7%. ent 79.3% PASS ' (Debt Reduction k Reserves). 100/'o Communication- 10'% Appearance" Amscaderu S:n Luis Obispo MeasureE streets 69.1% 30.9% PASS "8596 arpm ceeds oflhe itety t.n to the intpmvemeaI ofpolice and lire Red Blu IT Tehama Measure E services and allucate the remainder to support parks. recreation and olhergeneral find services." "fire and police protection, tnllic sacty, suect and sidewalk repair, part: Adar�sville Tuba Measure Y maintenance and debt service" Ca Iif'orniaCityFina�ce.cowt 59.4%. 40.7% PASS 76.7% 23.3'% PASS t� Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —6— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 There were 13 add-on sales tax measures earmarked for specific purposes. Five of these were county- wide measures including the 1/10 percent sales tax extension for the Fresno Zoo which passed. Post election ballots have also put Del Norte County's measure ahead. Monterey's one percent streets and storm drain tax, Monterey -Salinas Transit's 1/8 percent paratransit tax, and Alameda County's 1/2 percent transportation tax increase and extension also passed. Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - Special Tax - Two -Thirds Approval Aqencv Name Rate Purpose Sunset YES% NO% Monterey Measure P 1 cent Streets/Drains increase 4yrs 74.5% 255% PASS Monterey -Salinas Measure Q 1/8 cent pamtansit increase 72.5% 27.6% PASS Transit District County of Fresno Measure I/lOcent Zoo extend 10yrs 71.3% 28.7% PASS County of Alameda Measure BB incr 1/2 cent Transportation increase 30yrs 69.6"/, 30.4% PASS to 1 cent and extend County of Del Norte Measure F 1/4 cent County Pair increase 7yrs 66.9% 33.1% PASS County of Lake Measure S I/2 cent "citywide cleanup increase IOyrs 63.0/" " 37.0 /o " FAIL and improvement" County of Sonoma Measure 1/8 cent Library increase l0yrs 62.2% 37.8% FAIL Turlock Measure B 1/2 cent Streets increase 61.0% 39.0'%" FAIL Isleton Measure I/2 cent Public Sarety, Parks increase 5yrs G0.2"/" 3'J.8'%, FAIL &Ree Santa Paula Measure F 1 cent police, fire streets increase 12yrs 57.9% 42.1-/. FAIL Redding Measure F 1/4 cent Police increase 555% 44.5'% FAIL Clearlake Measure R I/2 cent "citywide cleanup increase IOyrs " 53.3/, 4G.7'%� FAIL and improvement" Yreka Measure 1 IW cent Arts, entertainment, increase 6yrs 38.6'%, 61.4'%" FAIL education, youth Ca liforniaCityFinancc.com I� Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —7— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 The following chart shows the various measures, their tax rates and percent "yes" votes. This election saw more one percent measures than ever before. In prior elections,'/4 percent and '/z percent requests have been the norm. Add -On Sales Taxes (Transactions and Use Tax) Measures - November 2014 m Y Q y Guadalupe —e— Concord' W Monterey -Salinas Transit ?' 75/o District Ukiah' —j y Union City' Pismo Beach` a Q --County of Fresno' San Luis Obispo' F 70'x° J" Oakdale' County of Alameda County of Del Norte 65% County of&-noma--,& Dunsmulr 60% Weed Red Bluff —Q Redding —,�> 55% 50% 6- Gonzales King — Eureka' Del Rey Oaks County of Lake -� Turlock ;dew,,Sausalito + Atascadero Rancho Cordova County of Humboldt Richmond —�.,j— Sand City Clearlake Pinole Paradise Placerville Half Moon Bay' —Q 45% Tehachapi Gilroy —� Marina` —0 F Monterey EI Cerrito' National City` —0 Soledad' —10 Salinas Benicia Santa Paula —Q Stanton —0 Rio Dell —Q Coachella — , Marysville --Q Petaluma —' Hanford 40'/0 0.00% 0.10% 0.20% 0.30% 0.40% 0.50% 0.60% 0.70% 0.80% 0.90% 1.00% 1.10% Sales Tax Tax Rate Increase: percentage of taxable sale --------- - - -- -- o Pass 13 Fail O Majority Vote General Tax O 2/3 vote Special Tax ' extension - no increase Ca VorvriaCityFhiav ce.com Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 — 8 — Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Transient Occupancv (Hotel) Taxes There were 14 measures to increase or expand Transient Occupancy (Hotel) Taxes, all majority vote general purpose. Just four passed including an extension in Marina which also extended its one percent sales tax. This is a significantly lower success rate than in prior elections. Nearly two out of three of the more than 150 hotel tax measures since 2001 have passed. Companion advisory measures as to use of funds in Palm Desert and Blythe apparently did not help enough. Transient Occupancy Tax Tax Measures Agency Name County NO% Indio Riverside Measure Palo Alto Santa Clara Measure Marina Monterey Measure Tustin Orange Measure Imperial imperial Measure Capitola Santa Cruz Measure Blythe Riverside Measure Palm Desert Riverside Measure County of Santa Barbara Santa Barbara Measure Fountain Valley Orange Measure Comity of San Benito San Benito Measure Needles San Bernardino Measure County of Mariposa Mariposa Measure Hollister San Benito Measure All General Majority Vote Rate YES% NO% by 3% to 13% 79.5% 20.5% PASS increase by 2% to 14% 75.64/, 24.4% PASS increase 12% (was 10%) 73.2% 26.8% PASS extend H by4%to 10% 51.9% 48.1% PASS increase by 2% to 10% 46.6% 53.44/. FAIL increase I by 1%to 11% 45.2% 54.8% FAIL increase by3%to 13% 44.9% 55.1% FAIL increase by 2% to 11% 43.5% 565% FAIL increase by 2% to 12% 41.5% 58.5% FAIL increase by 1% to 10% 39.7% 60.3% FAIL increase by4%to 12% 39.3% 60.7% FAIL increase by2%to 12% 35.9% 64.1% FAIL increase 125% to 11.2`_ 33.0% 67.0% FAIL increase by4%to 12% 325% 67.54/, FAIL increase Advisory measures as to use of proceeds in Palm Desert and Blythe were moot as those tax measures failed. Agency Na County Palm Desert Riverside Measurcl-I Blythe Riverside MeasmeY YES% NO% ,.promotional effurts including advertising, 34.20N, 65.3'%. FAIL public relations, marling collateral '.road improvements and maintenance, lire and police departments, city promotion, 57.2% 42.3% PASS community center and recreation center CahfornictCityFinntncexom 4 Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —9— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 The following chart shows the rate increases and total rates of the proposed TOT increases. There appears to be no clear connection between the amount of rate increase or total resulting tax and the ballot outcome. Transient Occunancv Tax Measures — November 2014 1696 t°- County of County of County of Mariposa San Santa ii 1496 1-blhster Benito daroara Blythe 2 Founlain u`o. Needles Valley Palm > u 1296 IAt - - l,apnola zrtperial Tustin r 1096 8% 6% 4% 296 <--FAIL PASS--> 096 30,096 35.0% 40.0",6 45.0% 50.0% 55.0% Utilitv User Taxes Palo Alto dio Marina 60.0% 65.0% 70.0% 75.0% 80.0% Percent "Yes" vote ic"1 0014 Cnlrrr to Voters in 16 cities considered measures to increase or expand utility user taxes. All were majority vote general taxes except Coalinga, whose two-thirds vote measure still garnered the lowest "yes" percentage. Eleven passed. San Jacinto remains close with some ballots yet to be counted. Eight of the measures "modernized" the UUT to cover wireless phones and billing practices including seven that reduced the rate and one maintained the same rate. All but Santa Rosa passed. Of the eight proposals for new or increased UUTs, four passed. Utilitv User Tax Measures Nov 2014 —Tax Proposal Pass Fail Total j Expand and and Reduce 6 '-1 7. Expand, same rate 1 0 7: New or increase 4 4 8, 11 5 16 'Includes 2/3 vote special tax in Coalinga j Cal iforv,incityFivtalnce.com �Al Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 Utility User Taxes NO% Aqencv Name County to 10% from 11% Palo Alto Santa Clara Measure C Seal Beach Orange Measure DD Guadalupe Santa Barbara Measure V Santa Ana Orange Measure AA Newark Alameda Measure Norwalk Los Angeles Measure B Salinas Monterey Measure 1-1 Sebastopol Sonoma Measure R Blue Lake Humboldt Measure T Cloverdale Sonoma Measure 0 Canyon Lake Riverside Measure DD San Jacinto Riverside Measure CC Santa Rosa Sonoma MeasureN Adelanto San Beni rd in Measure O Artesia Los Angeles Measure Coalinga Fresno Measure Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Rate NO% Imam 5% to 4.75% expand&reduce to 10% from 11% expand&reduce remove M50 cap increase to5.5%from 6% expand&reduce from 3.5% to 3.25% expand,reduce&extend no change expand 6% to 5% expand&reduce from 4% to 3.75% expand,reduce&extend 4% new 1% to 3% expand&increase 3.95% new 65% new from 5% to 4.5% expand&reduce 7.95% new 4.9% new 5.5% new YES% NO% 84.6% 15.5% PASS 80.6% 19.4% PASS 79.8% 20.2% PASS 75.6"/ 24.4% PASS 75.2% 24.8% PASS 69.1'% 30.9% PASS 61.7% 38.3% PASS 61.5% 38.5% PASS 53.6% 46.4% PASS 52.2% 47.8% PASS 50.CZ, 49.4% PASS 48.3% 51.7% FAIL dose 46.7% 533% FAIL 37.6% 62.4% FAIL 373% 62.7% FAIL 27.2% 72.8% FAIL Business License Taxes There were 20 business license tax measures, including two proposals to tax sugared beverages and eleven measures that involved the taxation of marijuana. Rialto voters approved a measure to tax businesses engaged in owning, operating, leasing, supplying or providing one or more wholesale liquid fuel storage facilities, commonly known as "tank farms." Berkeley voters passed the first local sugared beverage tax in California. But the San Francisco measure was a special tax with the proceeds earmarked for nutrition and health programs. It garnered 54% yes votes, short of the two-thirds needed to pass. Business License Tax Measures: Majority Vote General Aqencv Name County YES% NO% Guadalupe Santa Barbara Measure W s 80.6% 19.4':1. PASS lsleton Sacramento Measure c 59.3% 40.791. PASS Banning Riverside Measurer 53.494 46.61:11, PASS Rialto San Bernardino Measure U 51.8% 48.21!. PASS Antioch Contra Costa Measure 50.9% 49.1% PASS Poll I'luellenle Ventura Measure 44.49. 55.6%, FAIL Milpitas San to Clara Measure L= '� 25.74. 74.3'% FAIL Califort�iaCityFira1ce.com l �� Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 — 11 — Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Sugared Beverage Taxes Aqencv Name County YES% NO% Berkeley Alameda Measure D 75.1% 24.9% PASS City and County of; San Francisco Proposition E 54.5% 45.5°/. FAIL Marijuana Dispensary Measures and Initiatives - Imposing Business Tax Aqencv Name County YES% NO% Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Measure L 82.1%. 17.9% PASS County of Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Measure K 77.2% 22.s% PASS Desert Hot Springs Riverside Measure 11 72.8% 27.2% PASS Cathedral City_ Riverside MeasureN 71.9% 28.1% PASS Shasta Lake Shasta Measure C 71.5% 28.5% PASS Desert Hot Springs Riverside Measure Hit 68.3% 31.7% PASS Santa Ana Orange Measure BB 65.5% 34.5% PASS Santa Ana Orange Measure CC 54.2% 45.9% PASS Blvthc Riverside Measure 45.9% 54.1% FAIL La Mesa San Diego Proposition d 45.3% 54.7% FAIL 13ncinitas San Diego Proposition F 43.9% 56.1% FAIL Property Transfer Tax Voters in three cities considered real property transfer tax increases, all majority vote general purpose taxes. Only the Emeryville measure passed. Prope rty Tni ns fe r Taxes Aqencv Name County Measure Nat Rate YES% NO% E=Tyville Alameda Measure V $12$1000k 59.2'X, 40.9% PASS Santa Monica Los Angeles Measure 1-1 by $6 to $951 OOOAV ifover,$lmillionAV `t"% 57.8'%, FAIL City and County ofSan San Francisco Propos ition G 14-24'X� 46.0% 54.0% FAIL Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Tax Voters in the County of San Benito appear to have narrowly approved an extension of the county's $1 per motor vehicle charge to fund abandoned vehicle abatement programs. These charges were once imposed by the County Boards of Supervisors as fees without a vote of the people. Proposition 26, passed by the voters in 2010, requires voter approval of any extension or increase of these charges as taxes. Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Tax (Fees prior to Prop26 of 2010) - 2/3 voter approval required County ol'San Benito Measure 1-1 $I.$3com IOyis 66.91X� 33.111,� PASS extent CLOSE CalifarniOCityFinancC.COM �C\ Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —12— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Parcel Taxes and Special Taxes (non -school) There were 32 parcel taxes and a special tax applied to water meter connections in Alturas. Seventeen of these were special district measures, two were county measures. Under a state constitutional provision included in Proposition 13 (1978), parcel taxes require two-thirds supermajority approval. Twenty passed. City, County and Special Dishict Parcel Taxes (2/3 vote) Anencv Name County Amount Purpose. YES% NO% El Matador Road Santa Clam MeasureR $750/yr Streets 32yrs 88.6'% 11.4'% PASS new Maintenance District Alleadena Library District Los Angeles Measure A S40/parcel Library 10yis 85.3'% 14.70N, PASS extend Albion little River Fire Mendocino MzasureM in cr ,535 to Fire/EMS orate SLC% 18.595, PASS increase Protection District $75/parcel &emend Cemtan Cemetary District Glenn Measure T S5/parcel cemetery none 80.9% 19.1'G, PASS new Clayton Contra Costa Measure P $19.03/parcel Park 20yrs 80.0% 20.0'7 PASS emend Oaldand Alameda MeasureZ 599.77/unit fire, police Illyrs 77.1% 23.0".6 PASS extend Ross Marin Measure N1 S57+$6/yr EMS 4yrs 75.70% 2430%, PASS extend A limas Modoc MeasureZ 'SI.5L 2%COLA Mosquito none 75.7% 24.3 PASS emend hvalermeter Control 13erlmley Alameda Measure inccS40 to Parks none 74)'% 25.1",6 PASS increase $278/1900S]- $278/1900SPCorte CorteMaden Marin Measure .$75/parcel EMS dyrs 73.7'% 26.396 PASS extend Fort Bragg Mendocino Measure O $4 togg Piro IOyrs 73.4'% 26.6%, PASS increase $Jparcel Fairfax Marin Measure K S57+$6/yr EMS 4yrs 72.4% 2ZGY, PASS extend Kentlield Fire District Marin Measure Q $57+$6/yr EMS 4yrs 72.1% 27.8".6 PASS extend Fairfax Marin Measurel increase $20 to Fire, Police. Syrs 71.6%� 28.495, PASS Increase $195 Public Works `emend Lime Pine Fire Protection Inya Measure D $10/parcel Fire/EN1S l0yrs 70.4'% 29.696 PASS new District Orange Cave Fresno Measure 0 S95/parcel fire, police 10yrs 69.6'% 30.599 PASS new ]tarry Camp Fire Siskdyou Measure G S39/pureel Fire 5yrs 68.7%, 31.3,9 PASS new Protection District San Anselmo Marin Measure N ,S57+$6/yr EMS -lyrs 68.9%, 31.10.11 PASS emend Larkspur Marin Measure L $57+$6/yr &1dS 4yrs 67.9'%, 32. P:L PASS emend Santa Clara County Open Sarna Clan Measure Q $31/parcel park+, open 15yis 67A'% 32.6".l, PASS new Space Authority space Cal iforninCityFinn nce.cowt Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —13— Updated Preliminary November B, 2014 City, County and Special District Parcel Taxes (2/3 vote) (continued) Anencv Name County Amount Purpose YES % NO% County o(Marin Matin Measure S29/parcel fire, police 20yrs 65.9% 34.1'% FAIL new CLOSE Monte Rio Fire Protection Sonoma Measure S S60/parcel Fire none 64.4% 35.69/. FAIL new District City and Countyof-SinFrancisco San Francisco Proposition A r $500 million cans ponation 71.2'% 28.88fi PASS Cnovcr Beach County Service Area 27 Marin Measure P $57+$6/yr EMS 4yrs 64.l'Y 35.9% FAIL emend Sleepy Hollow Fire Marin Measure S $57+$6/yr EMS 4yrs 63.80. 36.2'Z. FAIL extend Protection District 46.0% FAIL County GI -Los Angeles Los Angeles Measure S23/parcel parks, recreation 30yrs 62.0%, 38.n% FAIL emend Cameron Estates Ll Dorado MeasureD by $100 to 5350 Streets none 5970.'0 40.3,xi FAIL increase Community Services Parlier Fresno Measure S $180/parcel fire, police 5yrs 57.5"„ 42.5% FAIL new Rincon Ranch Community San Diego Proposition, $150/parcel Streets none 61.3".ii 38.7%, FAIL new Services District Pomona Los Angeles Measure PPI $42/parcel Library 10yts 48.70N. 5,1.3'%, FAIL new Olivehurs't Public Utilities Yuba MeasureX $120/parcel Fire/EivIS none 46.50,9 535% FAIL increase Fire Service Arca 3 extend Julian Cuyamaca Firein San Diego Proposition $197/parcel Pim none 44.3','!,55.7'% FAIL cease District S emenJ Spalding Community Lassen Measure S65/parcel Fire note 36.8/i, 63.2% FAIL new Services District Lake Valley Fire Protection FI Dorado Measure H $12043%inll Fire none 33.5% 6(,.5% FAIL increase District S emend General Obligation Bonds There were four local general obligation bond measures and one revenue bond measure for the Claremont water system. On election night only Claremont's revenue bond and the $500 million San Francisco Transportation bond were passing although the Grover Beach measure is very close. City, County and Special District General Obligation Bond Measures (2/3 vote) Aciencv Name County Amount YES% NO% City and Countyof-SinFrancisco San Francisco Proposition A r $500 million cans ponation 71.2'% 28.88fi PASS Cnovcr Beach San Luis Obispo Measure R r $48 million sucels 67.51% 32.5"-h PASS Cottonwood Fire Protection District Shasta Measure D r $4 million Fire 62.6%i 37.4% FAIL Straoben- Recreation District Main Measure? $35 million recreation 54.094 46.0% FAIL CaliforniaCityFinatncc.com t�� Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —14— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 School Parcel Taxes School parcel taxes fared better than non -school parcel taxes. The ballot included just eight local school parcel taxes, fewer than in prior presidential and gubernatorial elections. All but two simply extended existing taxes without increase. All passed. School Parcel Taxes (2/3 voter approval) Aciencv Name County Rate YES% NO% Emery Unified School District Alameda Measure K $0.15/SF 84.4% 15.6'% PASS extend Albany Unified School District Alameda Measure LL Burlingame Elementary School Distr San Mateo Measure L Oakland Unified School District Alameda Measure Alum Rock Union School District Santa Clam Measure O Bayshore Elementary School Distric San Mateo Measure Fremont Union High School District Santa Clam Measure ] School Bonds $278/parcel 83.3% 16.7% PASS increase from $159 Aciencv Name and extend $256/parcel 76.6% 23.5% PASS extend $120/parcel 75.8% 24.2% PASS new $177/parcel 74.51G. 25.6% PASS extend $103/parcel 72.6% 27.4% PASS extend $98/parcel 69.9% 30.2'% PASS estend There were 113 school bond measures on the ballot for a total of over $11.775 billion in bonds. One of these measures, the Vallejo City Unified School District, was too large to meet the rules for a 55% vote threshold. It failed with 60% "yes." Vote counts through November 7 indicate no fewer than 90 passed, a total of $9.208 million in approved bonds. Several more measures might pass when final ballot tabulations are completed by the end of the month including the largest proposal this election, the $574 million North Orange County Community College District Measure J. School Bond Measures Amount Aciencv Name Coun (millions) YESOA NO% Mendota Unified School District Fresno MeasureN $ 15 79.1'% 20.996 PASS Compton Community College District Los Angeles Measure C $ 100 77.'9%, 22.10,51 PASS National School District San Diego Proposition $ 26 77.5%, 223N' PASS Arvin Union School District Rem Measure S 15 77.111A 2291'.11 PASS Hayward Unified School District Alameda tNleasureL $229 76.8% 23.2%, PASS Los Nietos School District Los Angeles Measure E $ 15 76.7'G. 23.3% PASS Los Nietos School Dis triet Los Angeles MeasureN $ 13 76.5% 23.594, PASS Dixie School District Marin \Measure C $ 30 73.01N6 27.0'X. PASS Robla School District Bond Issue Sacramento Measure K $ 30 71.3% 28.21;4 PASS Lemon Gave School District Sat Diego Proposition $ 10 71.60/6 28.4';5. PASS I.aytonville Unified School District Mendocino Measure Q $ 6 71.3'%, 28.795, PASS San Luis Cu as tat Unified School District San Luis Obispo Measure D $ 177 71.1'% 28.941, PASS Natomas Unified School District Sacramento Measure 1 $ 129 7I % 29.095, PASS .leflerson Unified Hi=h School District San Mateo Measure.l $ 133 70.8% 29.2".L PASS Rosemead School Disuict Los Angeles Measure RS S 30 711.594. 29595. PASS Ca lifor niaCityFiataince.com Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 School Bond Measures (Continued) AgencV Name Court Kentlield School District Marin Benyessa Union School District Santa Clara Rio Elementary School District Ventura Desert Sands Unified School District Riverside Santa Clara Unified School District Santa Clam Santa Rosa Elementary School District Sonoma Ojai Unified School District Ventura New Haven Unified School District Alameda Briggs Elementary School District Ventura Pittsburg Unified School District Contra Costa Evergreen School District Santa Clam Folsom Cordova Unified School District Sacmmcnto East Side Union High School District Santa Clam Washington Unified School District Yolo Central School District San Bernardino EI Monte Citv School District Stockton Unified School District Sonoma Community College District East Nicolaus Joint Unified School District San Marco County Community CD Carpenteria Unified School District Los Angeles -15- Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Amount (millions) YES% NO% Measure D $ 30 69.6% 30.4% HASS Measure L $ 77 69.1'% 30.9% PASS Measure G $ 39 68.9% 31.1% PASS Measure KF $225 68.8% 31.2% PASS Measure $419 68.8% 312'9 PASS Measure $ 54 68.1% 31.9%, PASS Measure J S 35 68.0%, 32.0% PASS Measure M $125 67.9'% 32.1% PASS Measure K $ 5 67.6% 32.4% PASS MeasureN $ 85 67.6'% 32.5% PASS Measure M $ 100 67.5'x. 32.5% PASS MeasmeG $195 67.3% 32.7% PASS Measure 1 $ 113 67,2% 32.8% PASS Measure V $ 50 66.6'% 33.4% PASS MeasureN $ 35 66.5% 33.5%, PASS Measure M S 78 66.4% 33.6% PASS San Joaquin Measure E $11.1 65.8% 342% PASS Marin / Sonoma / Mender: Measure H $410 65.6-/., 34.4% PASS Sutter / Placer San Mateo Santa Barbara Conejo Valley Unified School District Ventura Gusiine Unified School District Merced Torrance Unified School District Los Angeles Lakeport Unified School District lake Southern Humboldt Unified School District Humboldt/Mendocino Famersville Unified School District Tulare Oak Grove School District Santa Clara Palo Verde Community College District Fremont Union I li_gh School District Moreno Valley Unified School District Bclmmtt-Redwood Shores SO Measure W S 4 65.5% 345% PASS MeasureH $388 65.4% 34.6% PASS Measure $ 90 65.4% 34.6% PASS iNdeasure 1 $ 197 65.3% 34.71%, PASS Measure P S 14 65.2'X, 34.891. PASS Measure T $ 144 65.0%, 35.091, PASS Measure T S 17 64.2'%, 35.89% PASS Measure,)' .$ 10 64.1%, 35.991. PASS Measure A S 5 64.1'%, 359% PASS Measure S 90 639'1/. 36.1°/, PASS Riverside/ San Bemmdina Measure P $ 13 63.6%, 36.4% PASS Santa Clara Riverside San Maten Santa Rosa High School District Sonoma Mojave Unified School District Kern Oaf. Grove Union School District Sonoma Colusa Unified School District CDlusa Hollister School Distiict San Benito Bassett Unified School Disoict Los_Angeles Ca Vo rniaCityFincuncc.cann Measure $295 63.4% 366% PASS bieasurre M $398 63.3'%, 36.7°/, PASS Measure ) S 48 63.3'x, 36.8%, PASS Measure 1 $175 63.0% 37.0% PASS Measure C $ 8 62.8% 37.2% PASS Measure K $ 6 62.6'x, 37.495, PASS Measure A $ 6 62.2'x, 379%, PASS NICaSLIle Pi $ 29 62.WV,, 38.0'N, PASS Measure V S 30 61.8%, 38.2% PASS Ca Vo rniaCityFincuncc.cann Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 -15- Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 School Bond Measurivs (Continued) Amount Aciencv Name Court (millions) YES%" NO% San Luis Obispo Community College District Monterey / San Luis Obis Measure L $275 61.7% 38.3% PASS Golden Plains Unified School District Fresno Measure G $ 13 61.7°/, 38.3% PASS Alameda Unified School District Alameda Measure) $180 61.4% 38.6% PASS Tipton Elementary School District Tulare Measure C $ 3 61.0% 39.0% PASS Atascadero Unified School District San Luis Obispo Measure B ,$ 58 60.8% 39.2%" PASS Vacaville Unified School District Solano Measure A $194 60.7% 39.3% PASS Torrance Unified School District Los Angeles Measure U $ 50 60.6'%, 39.4% PASS Downey Unified School District Los Angeles Measure O $248 60.5% 395% PASS Western Placer Unified School District Placer Measure A $ 60 60.5"A 39.5% PASS Greenfield Union Elementary School District Monterey Measure C $ 10 60.5"/. 39.5% PASS Santa Maria Bonita School District Santa Barbara Measure T $ 45 60.0% 40.0% PASS Jumpa Unified School District Riverside Measure EE $144 59.5'% 40.5% PASS Salinas High School District Monterey Measure B $128 59.4'%" 40.7%" PASS Cinnabar Elementary School District Sonoma Measure) $ 3 589"/ 41.1% PASS Pacific Grove Unified School District Monterey Measure A $ 18 58.9% 41?%" PASS Tahoe -Truckee Unified School District FI Dorado/Placer Measure E $ 62 58.6% 41.4% PASS Mount San Jacinto Community College Distr Riverside Measure AP $295 5 8.6 % 41.4% PASS lakeside Union School District San Diego Proposition _ $ 31 58.40% 41.6% PASS Fullerton R Unified High School District Orange/Los Angeles Measure 1 $175 58.3% 41.7% PASS Greenfield Union Elementary School District Monterey Measure D $ 10 58.1% 41.9% PASS Nlurietta Valley Unified School District Riverside Measure BB $ 98 57.8% 42?% PASS Anaheim Unified School District Orange Measure 1-1 $249 57.7%, 42.3",6 PASS Madera Unified School District Madera Measure G $ 70 57.7'%, 42.3'% PASS Saugus Union School District Los Angeles Measure EE $148 57.7%6 423% PASS Manteca Unified School District San Joaquin Measure G $159 57.0% 43.0'9" PASS Los Altos School District Santa Clam Measure N $150 56.8% 43.2% PASS West Hills Community College District Fresno/kings/Monterey/ Adcosore T $ 20 56.7'% 43.30'0 PASS Maden Lake Tahoe Community College District El Dorado Measure F $ 55 56.6E 43.4% PASS Southern Kern Unified School District Kern Measure D S 28 56.5'M. 43.5% PASS Norwalk -La 1\,Iimda Unified School District Los Angeles Measure G $375 56.5'M, 43.5% PASS Corona -Norco Unified School District Riverside Measure GG $396 56.3'% 43.71%, PASS Eureka City School District Humboldt Measure S $ 50 55.8% 44.2"'- PASS Escondido Union School District San Diego Proposition $182 55.70A 4431N. PASS McCabe Union Elementary School District Imperial Measure G S 7 55.6"M, 44.495, PASS Ca VornictCityFinnncc.conn Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 -17- School 17 - School Bond Measures (Continued) Aqencv Name CountV Updated Preliminary November 6, 2014 Amount (millions) YES% NO°/ Azusa Unified School District Los Angeles Measure K S 92 55.41% 44.6% PASS Columbia Elementary School District Shasta Measure E IS 9 55.4% 44.6% PASS Yreka Union High School District Sisldyou Measure 1-1 $ 8 553% 44.7% PASS Jacoby Creek Charter School District Humboldt Measure $ 3 54.7% 45.3% FAILdose North Orange County Community College Di Orange / Los Angeles Measure J $574 54.4% 45.6% FAIL ct_ose Orange Unified School District Orange Measure K $296 54.1% 45.9% FAIL dose Hermosa Beach City School District Los Angeles Measure Q $ 54 52.9% 47.1% FAIL John Swett Unified School District Conner Costa Measure M $ 52 52.9% 47.2% FAIL Vallechos Unified School District San Diego Proposition $ 2 52.7% 47.3% FAIL Napa Valley Community College District Napa/Sonoma Measure E $198 52.3% 47.7% FAIL Tahoe-Tmckee Unified School District Nevada/Placer Measure U $114 52.3% 47.7-% FAIL Pine Ridge Elementary SCI]onlDistlml Fresno Measure R $ 4 50.20/. 49.8% FAIL College School District Santa Barbara Measure $ 12 49.7% 50.3% FAIL Santa Barbara Community College District Santa Barbara Measure S $288 48.9% 51.1'% FAIL Cajon Valley Union School District San Diego Proposition $ 20 48.6% 51.4% FAIL Bolinas-Stinson Union School District Marin Mcasore B $ 9 48.3% 51.7%. FAIL Ramona Unified School District San Diego Proposition $ 40 46.0% 54.0% FAIL Snowline Joint Unified5chool District Los Angeles / San Bemar.Measure L $ 60 45.491. 54.6% FAIL Montecito Unified School District Santa Barbara Measure Q $ 27 44.6% 55.4% FAIL ABC Unified School District Los Angeles Measure AP $195 43.8'9 56.2"/. FAIL Fortuna Elementary School District Humboldt fvl eas ore R' $ 9 43.6% 56.4% FAIL Woodland Joint Unified School District Yolo/Sutter Measure S ,$ 78 42.6% 57.4"/ FAIL Woodland Joint Unified School District Yolo/Sutter Measure T $ 19 40.5% 59.5'% FAIL 1-lcsperia Unified School District San Bernardino Measure M $207 37.495, 62.6'% FAIL Porterville Unified School District Tulare Measure 13 $ 67 37.395, 62.7%. FAIL School Bond Measul-es - Two -Thirds Vote Amount Aqencv Name Coun (millions) YES% NO% Vallejo City Unified School District Solana Measure E $ 239.000 5I9",S. 4o.1 -G, FAIL Ca GForniaCityFinnnce.com Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —18— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Some Historical Context There were more local revenue measures on ballots this November than any of the four prior gubernatorial or presidential elections. Based on election night counts with 100% of all precincts reporting and additional absentee ballots counted as of November 7, 189 of the 268 measures passed. Additional votes are yet to be counted and the outcome of some close measures may change. ---California--Local-Tax-and-Bond Measures 300 Gubernatorial -&Presidential -Elections 250 200 150 100 so 0 Nov2006 Nov2008 Nov2010 Nov2012 Nov2014 ©2014 Michael Coleman Overall Success Local Revenue Measures in California Passed/Proposed Gubernatorial and Presidential Elections preliminary Ca ldormiaCityFiwance.com `4v NoV2006 No\12008 No\2010 NoV2012 Nov2014 City General Tax (Majority Vote) 31/43 40/56 44/67 48/60 61/88 County General Tax (Majority Vote) 2/5 5/9 6/12 4/6 2/6 Special Dist. Majority Fee / / / / 0 City SpecialTax,GOband (2/3 Vote) 18/34 11/21 7/11 5/15 14/23 County SpecialTax, GObond (2/3 Vote) 5/13 7/12 0/3 7/12 4/9 Special District (2/3) 19/35 10/19 6/17 7/16 10/21 School ParcelTax2/3 2/7 17/21 2/18 16/25 8/8 School Bond 2/3 0/0 2/3 0/0 1/1 1 School Bond 55% 55/67 85/92 47/63 90/105 90/112 Total 132/204 177/233 112/191 178/240 189/268 02014 Michael Coleman Ca ldormiaCityFiwance.com `4v Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 -19- Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 Other Measures of Note • Emeryville voters approved charter city status for more local choice in contracting, organizational structure and financing. Costa Mesa and Arroyo Grande voters turned down charter city proposals. Chatter City icity Court YES% NO% Emeryville Alameda Measure U 57.6% 42.4% PASS Costa Mcsa Orange Nleasure0 36.6% 63.4% FAIL Arroyo Grande San Luis Obispo Measure C 36.2% 63.8% FAIL • Voters in four cities and in Lassen County adopted new term limit rules for city council members Tetra limits Atlencv Name County YES% NO% Moreno Valley Riverside Nleasure 1 78.9% 21.1% PASS Lake Forest Orange Nleasure Y 77.3%, 22.7'% PASS Irvine Orange Measure N 74.6% 25.4% PASS County of Lassen Lassen Measure Z 71.81/ 28.2% PASS La Nlesa San Diego Proposition K 66.0% 34.0% PASS Gustine Unified School lMerced Measure R 48.0% 52.0% FAIL Redondo Beach Los Angeles Measure BE 35.0% 65.0% FAIL Redondo Beach Los Angeles Measure CD4 33.0% 67.0% FAIL • Five cities and four special districts voted to move to district elections but Highland voters decided to stay with at -large representation. District Elections Aciencv Name County YES% NO% Turlock St an isIaus N4easureA 74.0'%, 26.0% PASS Anaheim Orange NleasureL 68.2% 31.8'% PASS Woodland Yolo Measure U 67.8% 32.2% PASS N4anteca Unified School District San Joaquin Measure 1 65.5% 34.59.6 PASS Los Banos Merced Measure S 64.0% 36.0% PASS Imperial Irrigation District Imperial Measure 1-1 62.1% 37.9"/ PASS Durham Irrigation District Butte Ddeasurc D 58.59/4 415% PASS Ripon Unified School District San Joaquin Measure 11 54.4'%, 45.6'% PASS Merced Merced Ddeasure'f 51.8%, 48.346 PASS Highland San Bernardino Measure T 42.9'!i. 57.1'y,, FAIL Ca Gro rninCityFi name e.co m i�1 Local Revenue Measure Results November 2014 —20— Updated Preliminary November 8, 2014 • San Bernardino voters approved a charter amendment altering employee disciplinary procedures but turned down a measure that would repeal a provision of the charter that provides police and fire employees with automatic, survey driven compensation increases. There are two important charter reform measures in the financially troubled city of San Bernardino. San Bernardino Chante r Re form Agency Name County YES% NO% San Bemardino San Bernardino Measure 54.8% 452% PASS San Bernardino San Bernardino Mensure Q 44.7% 55.3%. FAIL • Eight small cities are considered measures to make the currently elected office of city clerk or city treasurer appointed positions. Five approved. Appointed City Clerlc / City Treasurer/ etc. Agency Name County YES% NO% Pleasmul-lill Contra Costa Measure appoint clerk 69.9% 30.1% PASS Point Arcna Mendocino MeasureR appoint treasurer 69.1'% 31.0% PASS Crescent City Del None Measure C appoint clerk 563"/ 43.7% PASS Seal Beach Orange Measure EE appoint clerk 52.0% 48.0% PASS La Mesa San Diego Propos ition M appoint clerk 51.6% 48-4% PASS Benicia Solano Measure B appoint clerk 46.8"/ 53.2% FAIL Galt Sacramento Measure C appoint clerk 43.9% 56.1'%. FAIL Hollister San Benito Measure K appoint treasurer 41.2% 58.8% FAIL For more information: Michael Coleman 530-758-3952. coleman@muniwest.com Source: County elections offices. F CaVormiat? tyFinawce.com f��