My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Finance Highlights 2016 0315
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Committees
>
Finance Committee
>
Finance Highlights 2016 0315
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2019 10:18:49 AM
Creation date
4/14/2016 10:33:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Committee Highlights
Document Date (6)
3/15/2016
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2016 0418 CS+RG
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2016\Packet 2016 0418
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
File Number: 16-194 <br />Harborside's application and the earliest it will open may be September 2016. <br />City Attorney stated, should the City Council incline, the definition of cannabis related <br />business to include cultivation to keep options open. <br />City Manager Zapata recommends staff do a poll, which would cost is $25k; ask to see if the <br />2/3 makes sense and if to see if Community would like the funds to be designated. Godbe <br />would be the person in charge of constructing the poll <br />Lee is supportive if it does not delay putting on ballot <br />Mayor Cutter asked where the funds for the research poll would come from. <br />City Attorney Pio Roda stated that the money used for the research is not in advance of a <br />ballot because it has not qualified by Council to be on and therefore the City may use general <br />funds. <br />Mayor Cutter inquired on how much it would cost to put on ballot. <br />Mr. Engelbart stated it is about $15k and that is based on the amount spent on Measure HH. <br />2.C. Discussion of Potential Local Revenue Measure for the November 2016 Ballot - <br />Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) <br />Finance Director Baum provided a summary benefits to increasing the Transient Occupancy <br />Tax. The recommendation is to increase from 10% to 12%. The 10% has been in place <br />since 1994. Current the revenue is $540k, less than 1 % of general fund revenue. Due to the <br />lack of available of hotel rooms and the increased of strength of economy, the time is right to <br />increase. There are three other cities in Alameda County have higher than 10% tax rate; <br />Oakland is 14% and both Emeryville and Berkeley are at 12%. Most cities in states of 10% or <br />less but 91 cities have more. Oakland increased in 2009; they 70% yes vote and assigned <br />revenue to arts and culture and education. <br />City Manager Zapata stated the main factor is location and that we are between airports and <br />recommends the increase. <br />Councilmember Lee also supports the increase however asked, why only 12% and not 14%, <br />and does this include Air BNB? <br />Director Baum stated, no this would not include Air BNBs; there are very few in the city, <br />perhaps 50. <br />City Manager Zapata we could equalize ourselves with Oakland and raise to 14% <br />Councilmember Prola supports increase and stated we could start off at 12% and request <br />14% later. <br />Mayor Cutter supports the increase but would like to stay with 12% <br />City of San Leandro Page 6 Printed on 4111/2016 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.