I’ll keep my opinions out of it...

I have not seen anyone, including especially and particularly Elizabeth Lewis’ letter above, refute a single word Sandy has said about how the surpluses more than make up for this tax.

If property taxes are rising faster than several parcel taxes, we either do away with the tax or the town figures out how to spend all this surplus taxpayer money.

And that’s one thing I have no doubt they would accomplish!

There's a good case for Atherton to keep the parcel tax in place for a few more years. It's true Atherton property tax revenues are rising faster than OPERATING expenses. That's great! But for a long time, Atherton deferred major CAPITAL projects. In the last decade, the town has had enough revenue to cover operating expenses, rebuild reserves, and pay for some of those major capital projects, such as the Atherton Channel and other drainage projects.

One remaining major capital project is the civic center and library. Having the parcel tax revenue for the next few years means not having to dip deep into reserves nor borrowing money to pay for it.

Well, as soon as the arguments started coming in the campaign sign thread that threatened the Almanac’s sense of which side is right, they locked the thread. Standard operating procedure lately, and very sad.

The Almanac’s editorial advocating Measure F mentioned Kathy McKeithen in a sense that casual readers would believe she is in favor of Measure F. Nothing could be further from the truth! In keeping with the tradition of taking sides and putting a thumb on the scale, the Almanac has not seen fit to publish her strongly worded letter to them denouncing this editorial and its attempt to conflate her strong record of fiscal conservatism with support for Measure F.

Kathy is dead set AGAINST Measure F.

Now let’s take odds on how long it takes the Almanac to delete this statement and lock this thread. A bit like taking down campaign signs, don’t you think?

--

EDITOR'S NOTE: A few facts: The thread is not locked; it is restricted to registered users. Kathy McKeithen submitted her letter after we went to press. The Viewpoint page contains pro and con views on the parcel tax. Her letter may appear in the next paper, and she can post her comments online. The editorial in the paper said Kathy McKeithn was fiscally astute. It said nothing about her position on the parcel tax: Web Link

This thread may be locked, but I want to respond to the Just Facts comment:
"If property taxes are rising faster than several parcel taxes, we either do away with the tax or the town figures out how to spend all this surplus taxpayer money."

Sandy clearly stated that our property taxes have been rising rapidly. He said "...income from property taxes, not parcel taxes, has increased dramatically each year". Both parts of this are absolutely true. The Parcel Tax hasn't changed for 22 years. It generates $1.8m and that has been constant while costs have gone up. The Parcel Tax was created to address the inability of Atherton to support staff and services with the greatly reduced property tax that occurred from Prop 13. Other communities could offset this imbalance with sales and other taxes that generally derive from commercial activity, which Atherton doesn't have. The Parcel Tax enabled Atherton to cover significant costs related principally to police and road work. Since the recovery from the 2008-10 recession, we can all see that our property taxes have increased significantly. Atherton gets 8.5% of those taxes and while the percentage is small, the increase has result in surpluses in each of the last four year, resulting in a significant surplus in excess of our 35% reserves. This is what Sandy referred to and he is accurate.

The problem with the Just Facts statement is that the voters, not the staff or the Council, decided in June to use that accumulated surplus to build our newly planned police and admin facility and significantly change the roadwork on the existing town parcel. This is by far the most significant capital improvement project in the history of Atherton and it will use 100% of the unallocated surplus that we have accumulated. Accordingly, it isn't "the town" that will decide. It was the voters who decided. This wasn't captured in Sandy's comments, probably because he and many of the No of F votes opposed the town spending money on a new civic center, something that I believe has strong support in the Town and is essential for us to hire and retain the high quality employees that we have.

The other point that I'd like to make is that when the Council unanimously approved Measure F, we clearly proposed it for THREE YEARS, which is different from the four years that it has always been. The reason for this is that in three years, we should be done with the civic center and we should have a clear vision of whether or not we need the Parcel Tax. Some will want it, but if we continue to conservatively manage our finances as we have for the past many years, and if property taxes continue to rise faster than expenses, then I believe that we won't need the Parcel Tax. This was an important decision to propose this Parcel Tax for only three years. Of course, that hasn't been mentioned by those against taxes, but it was a good faith recognition that we have had surpluses and we may be able to meet our obligations in the future without the parcel tax after we have finished with the civic center.

Atherton is one of the wealthiest communities in the country, and our taxes make sure our property values reflect that. This parcel tax is a small price to pay for the environment we receive.

Maybe it is time, if not long overdue, for Atherton to consider a limited amount of businesses or other commercial uses that would generate a modest amount of sales tax, or hotel tax, or gasoline tax, along with property taxes. These could be located on El Camino Real and/or other commercial area, including Alameda de las Pulgas. As Atherton is not an Island, but part of the Mid-Peninsula, with traffic flowing in and through the Town on a daily basis, it may be a way to generate considerable funds. Redwood City and Menlo Park on either side are changing; perhaps there is a lesson to learn here. A handful of businesses generating sales tax, business license fees, etc. may be a welcome addition.

@Another rich guy – Yes, I'm successful, but I've worked hard for it. I don't mind paying when I get value, but I don't want my money wasted either. Many Athertonians – too many – believe the proposed Town Center is overblown.

@Rick DeGolia – Here's the problem with your argument: the voters who decided "to use that accumulated surplus to build our newly planned police and admin facility" (in lieu of abating the parcel tax) were of insufficient number to provide the necessary 2/3rd vote to pay for that decision (in so far as the parcel tax requires 2/3rd support to renew).

That's why I said above that "too many" Athertonians believe the plans are overblown. Instead of scaling them back to try to get a broader consensus to pay for this project, your group decided to muscle ahead. The muscling has continued to the point of advocating for the removal of opposing signs, which as Peter pointed out in the other thread, is both unprecedented as well as illegal.

The Town Center project was conducted by a committee that very much was like minded. It could have benefited from a diversity of views to achieve broader consensus. It didn't. Rather than admit to the public during the process that private funding wasn't materializing, it solicited public input under the disingenuous guise that the public wouldn't be paying for it. In my view, the very anemic vote was a direct consequence of a lack of a completely forthright process.

I predict that when and if the parcel tax vote fails, the same people will continue the muscling and try to accumulate debt to pay for the Town Center, again in defiance of the lack of consensus required to proceed, and claim that such a decision is the prerogative of the council rather than the citizens of Atherton.

Rather than do this, it would be more appropriate for you and Elizabeth to step down from the council and let some new voices bring the process forward. I would hope you would agree to do so right here and right now if the vote fails.

"Yes, I'm successful, but I've worked hard for it."

And the rest of us that have worked hard but aren't wealthy are what? [Part removed.]

@Menlo Voter – people who worked hard but didn't get wealthy. It also requires luck. I just don't believe in the argument that if I'm wealthy, I shouldn't question an expenditure.

@problems:

your town center is a dump. Do you think that is acceptable? The costs that have been put forth are not out of line with similar public works projects thanks to "prevailing wage" requirements, but that's a discussion for another day. Do you not think your dump of a town center needs to be replaced with something besides more temporary buildings?

@Menlo Voter – yes, but not at 2.5 times what neighboring communities took to rebuild theirs and $50MM +. I think the design is more than we need.

@problems:

and when did they rebuild theirs?

Nine years ago, and prices, real estate values and wages haven't gone up 250% since then. You're entitled to your view that Atherton should spend more than $50MM on a new town center. I don't believe the required majority of residents agree with you, however. I'm going to give others a chance to enter the debate now.

"Nine years ago, and prices, real estate values and wages haven't gone up 250% since then. "

You have no experience in today's construction market do you?

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 pm
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.
if the Council can only get a 61% Yes vote when no taxes are involved how we it get 67% Yes vote when there is a tax increase involved?