Pros and Cons of Albany Measures

Posted on by

Measure C – City of Albany Safe and Accessible Sidewalks and Pathways Special Parcel Tax   2/3 Yes to pass

YES – 70.51 %   NO – 29.49 %

Title and Type of Proposition: The City of Albany Safe and Accessible Sidewalks and Pathways Special Parcel Tax proposes to authorize a special tax on each parcel of real property within the City.  It includes exemptions and discounts based on income.  This Measure needs approval of 2/3rds of the voters.

The Question: Should the City of Albany assess a special tax to be used to repair and upgrade public sidewalks and pathways, and to remove obstructions in order to improve safety and accessibility?

The Situation: While implementing the November 2016 Measure P1, a parcel tax to repair sidewalks, additional problems were noted. Last June, the City Council adopted Resolution No 2024-55 titled the Sidewalk and Pathway Repair Policy.
https://www.albanyca.org/home/showpublisheddocument/55989/638628725806870000  It  seems that one or more needed sidewalk repairs were found on almost every block. Further, repairs for occupants with special access needs, like limited mobility, should be expedited.  By working on the safety and quality of Albany’s sidewalks and pathways now, the City can avoid the steeper costs of deferring the work.  Safe walkways and pathways will encourage pedestrian travel in the community.

The Proposal: Repair of the sidewalk is the responsibility of the property owner, yet the City can collectively do repairs for about half the cost. Waiting to repair means more deterioration which only increases the cost.  Safe public walkways and pathways are basic elements for  Albany’s Climate Action Plan of 2010 and its Active Transportation Plan of 2012, which both encourage pedestrian travel throughout the city.  Measure C creates a guaranteed source of local funding.

Fiscal Effect: It is estimated that Measure C will provide an additional $392,282 in annual local funding dedicated to repairing and upgrading public sidewalks and improving Class I multi-use pathways.  It replaces the existing sidewalk parcel tax from one based on property size brackets to one based on a tax per square foot of property. This means that  the residents are taxed equitably.  Measure C has exemptions for single family parcels and rentals if the persons’ combined family income qualifies as very low-income and provides a 50% discount to those qualifying as low-income.  Applications for the exemptions and discounts are obtained from the Finance Director.  The special  tax is $0.017 per lot square foot, which is subject to a yearly adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index.  The funding must be spent locally for Albany residents if approved.  It will take effect July 1, 2025 and expire June 30, 2035.

Supporters Say:
Measure C will continue necessary funding for Albany’s sidewalk repair program.
The cost for the City doing repairs collectively is half of what it would cost the property owner.
Ohlone Greenway is a pathway that is substantially degraded in many locations.
The Measure included exemptions and discounts for households with low incomes.
Safe walkways and pathways will encourage pedestrian travel in the community.

Opponents Say:
No opposition was filed.

 

Measure L – Albany Unified School District Modernization and Improvement Measure    55.00% Yes votes to pass

YES – 72.20 %   NO -27.80 %

Title and Type of Proposition: The Albany Unified School District Modernization and Improvement Measure proposes a $63.8 million bond measure to improve and construct safe, modern facilities.  Funds would go directly to the District and be locally controlled;  that is, not subject to control by the State of California. It includes independent oversight audits.  This measure needs at least 55% of the voters to pass.

The Question: Should Albany authorize locally controlled bonds to be used for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or replacement of school facilities with spending monitored by a Board established, independent citizens’ oversight committee?

The Situation: Funding includes the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities.  Specific projects that the District proposes are on its Bond Project List found in the full text of the Measure.  The improvements include seismic and library technology upgrades.  Other issues are replacement or repair of portable classrooms, health equipment & fixtures, staff and lunch rooms, athletic facilities, playground equipment and office buildings.  The list includes construction of teacher and/or workforce housing plus refinancing debt on existing facilities and school sites. The cost of making the updates and upgrades that District schools need is beyond the scope of the District’s annual operating budget.

The Proposal: All bond funds would stay local and be monitored by independent oversight audits. The estimated annual rate is $60 per $100,000 of assessed value of taxable property as found on the County’s official tax rolls.  This would begin in fiscal year 2025-2026 the final year being 2056-2057.

Fiscal Effect: Measure L proposes to maintain the combined current repayment rate for all Albany School District bonds. Some bonds are maturing shortly, meaning they will be paid off, which would lower the repayment rate. This measure would fill in that gap, keeping the repayment level at $180/$100,000 of assessed value for the total repayment rate, up to $60 of which would be Measure L.
In the event that issuance of all of the authorized bonds requires the outstanding debt of the District to exceed its statutory bonding limit, the District intends to seek a waiver from the State Board of Education. None has been sought or granted at this time.  Full Text: https://4.files.edl.io/c738/08/20/24/193828-737064a6-b11e-4155-96a2-8a2577cd98a9.pdf

Supporters Say:
Albany’s schools are its pride.  Schools need modern effective HVAC systems, technology, modern restrooms, and up-to-date accessible facilities. With the potential for State funds becoming available through the passage of Proposition 2, it is crucial that Albany pass this bond in order to be eligible for matching funds.  Emergencies may arise in our environment  that will require additional funds. The measure would not increase taxes, but extend the years at the current tax rate.

Opponents Say:
The property tax bill will increase.  There is no exemption for seniors, disabled or low-income property owners. A recent 2023 State of California inspection found Albany school buildings to be exemplary or good.  In the past, a Citizen’s Bond Oversight Committee did not meet the accountability requirement of seven members, having only three.

 

Measure R – Supplemental Special Tax on Residential Rental Businesses   2/3 majority Yes votes to pass

YES – 47.60 %   NO – 52.40 %

Title and Type of Proposition: The City of Albany’s Supplemental Special Tax on Residential Rental Businesses proposes an annual supplemental special business license tax on businesses renting or leasing residential dwelling units in Albany.  This Measure requires approval by 2/3rds of the voters to take effect.

The Question: Should Albany establish a tenant rental assistance program for vulnerable renters at sudden, imminent risk of homelessness?  Shall Albany have a  program to assist qualified tenants with occupancy costs, monitor compliance with State and local codes, make available free or reduced-cost legal services, and support rental providers to avoid financial hardship?

The Situation: It is estimated that Measure R will provide an additional $475,000 in annual local funding to be deposited into a special “Rental Assistance and Code Enforcement Fund.” This type of funding has been successfully implemented using a portion of pandemic funding, which allowed many to avoid losing their housing during the pandemic. Pandemic funding runs out in 2026.  Measure R would  provide funding to continue helping renters and landlords when an emergency arises.

The Proposal: A Supplemental Special Tax would be levied on residential rental businesses operating in Albany. It would fund a tenant rental assistance program, enhance the city’s monitoring of the habitability of units, provide free or reduced legal assistance for tenants and landlords, and support rental providers. The Finance Director would annually prepare and submit to the City Council a report on the special tax proceeds collected and expended. The tax would begin January 1, 2025.

Fiscal Effect: The tax would be calculated based on a percentage of gross receipts. For businesses with four units or less, the rate would be 0.36% while for those with five units or more, the rate would be 1%.  The tax would not be levied on nonprofit corporations providing affordable housing, residential rental units that are controlled for income-qualified tenants, units owned or leased by a State University for student or faculty housing, or units owned or leased by Albany Unified School District for faculty or staff.

Supporters Say:
The tax levied would average $10 per month for each residence rented by rental businesses with four or less units and $25 per month for those with five or more units.  This is a modest tax that will keep Albany residents from losing their housing, provide legal representation for those who can’t afford  it, ensure rented homes are safe, and keep housing providers from losing  income due to sudden tenant financial hardship, and doesn’t negatively impact low-income seniors.

Opponents Say:
A modest tax can have negative impacts if small rental property owners have no choice but to pass on the cost to tenants.
This measure was rushed and was not vetted by the Financial Advisory Committee. The Committee would review the measure for fiscal soundness and long-term impact thereby providing public discussion and transparency.
It is unclear as to how it might affect Albany’s seniors.
Owners may take their units off the market rather than subject themselves to more regulation.

 

Measure S – Charter Amendment on Appointment Offices Authority

YES – 66.59 %   NO – 33.41 %

Title and Type of Proposition:  Charter amendment on appointment of offices authority.
This measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council and requires a simple majority to pass.

The Question: Shall the Albany City Charter be amended to delegate appointment authority for City officers and department heads, except for the City Attorney, from the City Council to the City Manager (The City Attorney would still be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council.)

The Situation: Currently, the necessity to bring any appointment to the City Council needlessly slows down the hiring process.

The Proposal: This change would ensure the City matches the best practices of other jurisdictions: of the 14 cities in Alameda County, all but three, including Albany, provide their City Manager appointment authority over officers and department heads.  This change will make hiring easier by streamlining the process and ensure the retention of qualified candidates. The hiring process is already difficult due to the struggle to attract qualified candidates at this level and making a competitive offer before they take another job.

Fiscal Effects if Measure is Approved:  No fiscal effects have been called out.

Supporters Say: 

  • Measure S modernizes the City charter and streamlines the City’s hiring process.
  • It would remove the requirement that the Albany City Council approve the appointment of all department heads and officers.
  • It would remove the need for the City Council approval in hiring: the City Clerk, Finance Director/City Treasurer, Community Development Director, Public Works Director, Police Chief, Fire Chief, and Recreation and Community Services Director.

Opponents Say: 
No official argument against Measure S was submitted.

Supporters: 
The measure is endorsed by the League of Women Voters Berkeley Albany & Emeryville.
John Miki, Mayor of Albany; Robin Lopez, Vice Mayor of Albany; Jennifer Jansen-Romer, City Councilmember; Preston Jordan, City Councilmember; Aaron Tiedemann, City Councilmember.

Opponents: None Identified

 

Measure T – Charter Amendment on City Officers Bonding Requirement

YES – 70.93 %   NO – 29.07 %

Title and Type of Proposition: . Charter amendment on City Officers Bonding Requirement. This measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council and requires a simple majority to pass.

The Question: Shall the Albany City Charter be amended to eliminate the requirement for officers, as determined by the City Council, to execute a bond before entering upon their official duties.

The Situation: The Albany City Charter currently states that officers as determined by the City Council, before entering upon their official duties, execute a bond to the City in the sum required by the Council and to file it with the Council or, in the case of the City Clerk, with the Mayor.

The Proposal: This measure would remove confusion regarding the requirements for new City Officers by affirmatively stating that no City Officer is required to post a bond prior to taking up their official duties. The City’s Charter and the California Government Code include provisions suggesting that some City Officers may be required to post a bond before being hired. This requirement has not been used in Albany according to the public record.

Fiscal Effects if Measure is Approved: No fiscal effects have been called out.

Supporters Say:

  • There is no record of this clause being used in Albany, and it reflects an outdated practice not used by any neighboring city.
  • The language in the Charter is not clear as to which offices might be required to post a bond, leaving ambiguity regarding the City’s practices.
  • By removing the language and stating that the City overrides California Government Code, we can eliminate this ambiguity and ensure the City uses best modern day practices.

Opponents Say: 
No official argument against Measure T was submitted.

Supporters:The measure is endorsed by the League of Women Voters Berkeley Albany & Emeryville.
John Miki, Mayor of Albany; Robin Lopez, Vice Mayor of Albany; Jennifer Jansen-Romer, City Councilmember; Preston Jordan, City Councilmember; Aaron Tiedemann, City Councilmember.

Opponents:  None Identified

 

 Measure U – Charter Amendment on City’s Bonding Limit

YES – 71.57 %   NO – 28.43 %

Title and Type of Proposition: Charter amendment on City’s bonding limit and removing the exception for school purpose bonds.This measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council and requires a simple majority to pass.

The Question:Shall the Albany City Charter be amended to clarify that no bonds issued for school purposes count against the City’s authority to issue bonds against the credit of the City?   General obligation bonds shall be issued on the credit of the City which in aggregate shall increase such bonded indebtedness of the City beyond the lesser of (i) 15% of the assessed valuation of the property in the City subject to direct taxation or (ii) the statutory maximum amount, as more specifically set forth therein.  

The Situation: Albany Unified School District and the City have separate authority to pass bond measures, essentially meaning that the use of bond capacity by one body does not affect the other. However, our current Charter language is outdated, referencing school bonds because when the City was founded the School District did not yet exist.

The Proposal:Measure U would remove language from the Charter that references bonding for school purposes ensuring there is no confusion for either the School District or the City to put forward bonds in the future. This measure would modernize our charter and set up our City to better fund infrastructure in the future. If approved Measure U would amend the City Charter to clarify that no general obligation bonds shall be issued on the credit of the City which in aggregate shall increase bonded indebtedness of the City beyond the lesser of 15% of the assessed valuation of the property in the City subject to direct taxation or the statutory maximum amount.

Fiscal Effects if Measure is Approved: No fiscal effects identified. Albany Unified School District and the City of Albany issue their own bonds.

Supporters Say: 

  • Measure U modernizes the charter and sets our City up to better fund infrastructure in the future.
  • Albany Unified School District and the City have separate authority to pass bond measures so that the use of bond capacity by one body does not affect the other.
  • The new language should remove confusion for the School District and the City to put forward bonds in the future.

Opponents Say:
No official argument against Measure U was submitted.

Supporters:
The measure is endorsed by the League of Women Voters Berkeley Albany & Emeryville.
John Miki, Mayor of Albany; Robin Lopez, Vice Mayor of Albany; Jennifer Jansen-Romer, City Councilmember; Preston Jordan, City Councilmember; Aaron Tiedemann, City Councilmember.

Opponents:  None Identified

 

Measure V – Charter Amendment Allowing 16 and 17 Year Olds to Vote

YES – 64.09 %   NO – 35.91 %

Title and Type of Proposition: Charter Amendment/Measure V. This measure was placed on the ballot by City Council and requires a majority to pass.

The Question: Should registered 16 and 17 year-olds be able to vote in Albany elections for ballot measures and elected officials, and should outdated language on the City Charter be updated?

The Situation: Currently, the City of Albany limits voting to age 18 and up. However, Albany residents have the ability to lower the voting age according to the CA State Constitution due to “home rule.” This would be accomplished via a City Charter Amendment. Albany City Council voted to place Measure V on the ballot on 15 July, 2024 and it requires a majority vote to pass.

The Proposal: This measure amends the City Charter to allow registered 16 and 17 year olds to vote in Albany City elections of municipal officials (City Council) and school district elections. It would not allow 16-17 year olds to vote in federal, state, county, or any other “special” elections. Measure V would also not allow under-18 year olds to be elected to City Council or the School Board. Should Measure V pass, the City would have to wait to confirm that the Alameda Registrar of Voters could support 16-17 year old voting at a cost-effective price. After this, 16 and 17 year old voters would be included in the next election. Measure V would also remove outdated language pertaining to an elected City Judge, City Chief of Police, and City Attorney.

Fiscal Effects if Measure is Approved: The only fiscal effect would be the cost of the future election.

Supporters Say: 

  • Encourages civic participation, especially among youth, whose voice is sorely underrepresented in our democracy
  • Gives the youth a chance to help decide the policies that will impact their futures
  • Increases overall voter turnout and youth who vote once are more likely to keep voting

Opponents Say:

  • 16 and 17 year-olds are not yet mature enough to vote

 

All League News