|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Almost 60% of people who responded to a poll to assess Redwood City residents’ priorities would support a business license reform and tax, according to Godbe Research, a public opinion research agency hired by the city.
Another 52.6% of people initially said they would support a real property transfer tax, but the support dropped to 51.4% after they were given additional information, according to the survey.
The Redwood City Council on Monday voted 6-1, with Mayor Jeff Gee dissenting, to move forward with the recommendation to further research changing how business taxes are calculated, moving from a business license tax to a gross receipts model, as the only Redwood City-specific revenue on the November ballot.
City Council at staff’s recommendation decided not to move forward with a study on a property transfer tax.
Unlike a business tax license, a gross receipts tax grows as a business makes more money from its sales. The tax is applied to every dollar the business makes from selling goods or services, regardless of how much it costs the business to produce those goods or provide those services.
The Godbe poll was sent to 4,000 randomly selected households and conducted through telephone and online interviews from Jan. 25 to Feb. 7. A total of 603 Redwood City respondents participated.
According to Godbe, the results “show residents with high levels of satisfaction,” with 75% of residents satisfied with city services. The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.96%, and the results were weighted to match the demographic profile of Redwood City’s likely voters.
While the Godbe survey showed primarily positive data, 152 emailed public comments to the city council sent ahead of the meeting on Monday were not as optimistic. Many of them concerned the two taxes.
Public Comments
Yet, when it came time for the public comment portion of the public hearing, the emailed comments were not read aloud.
In September 2023, Gee announced that the city would no longer allow virtual comments due to the so-called Zoom bombing occurring in cities across the region.
“This was a proactive step to try to minimize that from coming to Redwood City,” Gee said at the time. “We’re trying to figure out how to not have our communities intimidated by others who want to espouse hate and a number of other less-desirable traits.”
Redwood City’s Deputy City Manager Jennifer Yamaguma said in an email to the Pulse that emailed public comments received by 5 p.m. on the meeting date, within the City’s jurisdiction, may be read at the Mayor’s discretion and will be included in the meeting’s final record.
“Also, at the beginning of the meeting, Mayor Gee stated following, ‘As we anticipate a high volume of public comment this evening, we may decrease the time allotted for each comment or limit the total time for public comment. This is to ensure the City Council can address agenda items in a timely manner and is allowed under the City Council’s Guide to Communications and Business,’” Yamaguma said.
Council member Chris Sturken also weighed in on the issue.
“We want to make sure staff, the public and council get home safely, and with three meaty items, if we read all 152 comments, we’d likely go until midnight,” Sturken said.
David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, said the Brown Act guarantees the right to give spoken comments at city council or other legislative body meetings, but it does not provide a right to give written comments or require the city council to do anything in particular with written comments.
“In particular, it does not require the mayor or council to read them out loud,” Loy added. “Although the First Amendment generally guarantees the right to speak freely and petition the government, it does not necessarily obligate the government to listen or respond to public comments in any particular way.”
Loy cited Supreme Court case Minn. State Bd. for Cmty. Colleges v. Knight:
“Nothing in the First Amendment or in this Court’s case law interpreting it suggests that the rights to speak, associate, and petition require government policymakers to listen or respond to individuals’ communications on public issues.”
