|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A petition circulating in Redwood City has garnered 160 signatures from residents who allege the city is misinforming residents via staff reports and City Council meetings to persuade them to vote for a new tax proposal.
Resident Chris Robell, who has led the charge against the city, said he hopes the city will stop spreading misinformation and allow residents to make an informed decision based on the facts.
“I don’t want the voters to be tricked. I want them to know the whole truth,” Robell said.
According to the city’s website, it is considering increasing the documentary and property transfer tax to an amount similar to comparable cities.
According to state law, the transfer tax accrued by the county and split with the city at the county’s discretion. The new transfer tax would be a city transfer tax in addition to the county transfer tax.
The city operates on a $334 million budget and has forecasted a shortfall of $9.2 million for the next eight years. To generate revenue, it is exploring an overhaul of its business license tax, switching to a system based on the total sales of a business. The city is also looking at raising the tax on property sales.
Robell argues that the city makes it seem as if most cities have implemented the transfer tax, yet he noted that fewer than 30 cities in the state implement it, in addition to the county transfer tax.
“They aren’t spin doctors, we want them to be honest,” Robell said.
In an email to the Pulse, City Manager Melissa Stevenson Diaz said she welcomes robust community engagement for city business.
“As community members have noted, on Nov. 27, 2023, the City Council directed City staff to study the impacts of a potential voter-approved real property transfer tax,” she said.
At this time, however, Redwood City has not made an official decision whether to pursue a local revenue mechanism,” Stevenson Diaz added.
Chris Keane, a concerned resident, praised Robell for informing the residents.
“Chris (Robell) isn’t a lone watchdog, and he posts on NextDoor and Facebook, and all the residents agree with him, and it’s good for the city to understand that Chris isn’t a lone wolf,” Keane said. “There are many people on social media, and the city is a collective mind on some issues.”
While the city can’t implement the tax independently, the council can agree to put it on the November ballot for voters to decide.
Robell said he is worried the voters won’t have the information they need to make an educated decision. He stated the city is running a campaign to persuade the voters to approve the proposed tax solution.
Robell added that using words like revenue generation is misleading.
“Why don’t they just say what it is, a new tax,” Robell said.
Robell said a City Council member urged residents not to rely on social media for information but rather on the city’s website and staff report. Robell said it was a direct call out of his initiative.
In a letter to the city with the petition attached, Robell said the residents are concerned about the approach the city is taking to impose new taxes upon the community.
Robell said instead of raising taxes, the city shouldn’t be giving out raises for the top positions during a budgetary deficit.
“The city needs to tighten your belt, just like families have to do, and figure out how to optimize the money you have as opposed to giving out raises,” Robell said.
I agree with Mr. Robell on the city’s budgeting tactics. RWC needs to find other ways to balance their budget. Taking responsibility for an excess of spending on various unnecessary items would be a good start. Those outrageous salary increases were out of line.
The term “watchdog” is used very loosely to describe someone who posts on Nextdoor. This is not someone whose facts are being checked (even in this article), nor is held to any legal standard of truth. Naturally people also get riled up when taxes get raised, but also remember that in the last few years the services the City provides have increased in quality – for instance the police department, the parks, the roads, the libraries and even the events the city runs.
Someone’s got to pay for that quality of life improvement for all the residents, and it’s only fair that the city’s wealthiest residents (who strongly feel about an increase in property transfer tax) do their fair share. Especially since they stand to benefit the most from higher property values from these improved services.
I respectfully think you should give people the benefit of the doubt. I am very careful with facts and spent considerable hours, including multiple public records requests which I poured through, to gather facts.
This Misinformation Petition clearly documents what the city is doing:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScCJRkiSFAZvT8YFrLCv_cHbQXHRmstPaLRXo-sH7TNFX-wUA/viewform
Also, if you would like me to email you the table of 9 consultants and the $1,023,000 contract value (or individual contracts), I can do that. I have all this in my possession.
The policy question is obviously a different issue vs. misinformation. But I need to correct you that the property transfer tax applies to ALL homes and BOTH buyer and seller will pay. So if your child ever wants to buy a small condo in Redwood City, it will be more expensive if this tax is passed. And I think it is safe to say landlords will pass along higher taxes onto renters as well.
The truth is these new taxes are mostly needed to fund the unfunded pension liabilities. And when the city gives raises (as it just did with top executives), it exacerbates the unfunded pension liability and requires the working citizens to be taxed more to fund the generous employee retirements.
On top of that, the city isn’t doing ANY cost reduction initiatives. For example, they just hired a consultant last month for $60k to run 4 council meetings. And they just asked city council to increase the amount paid to one of the 9 consultants who will be analyzing further hikes in utility rates. Examples every week appear on the consent calendar. I watch almost every single city council meeting and hope you and others will as well!
I am in total agreement with 5he comments made by peg and Chris. The RC council and RC administration need to understand that a basic principle of sound governance is to intelligently spend funds in accordance with the revenues and not to create revenues to fund spending.