From: Beverly May
To: City Council
Subject: tax proposal fro ballot
Date: Friday, July 5, 2024 2:27:31 PM
We support the proposed new business license tax structure.
Harold and Beverly May
919 North Rd
July 9, 2024
The Honorable Julia Mates, Mayor
The Honorable Gina Latimerlo, Vice Mayor
The Honorable Davina Hurt, Councilmember
The Honorable Tom McCune, Councilmember
The Honorable Robin Pang-Maganaris, Councilmember
City of Belmont, California
1 Twin Pines Ln.
Belmont, CA 94002
RE: Opposition to Business License Tax
Dear Mayor Mates, Vice Mayor Latimerlo and Members of Council:
On behalf of Chamber San Mateo County members located and/or operating in the city of Belmont, I am writing to oppose the Council’s proposed action at your meeting today to “Adopt a resolution calling a municipal election on a measure to update and simplify the City’s business license tax program […],” and ask you to delay any action on this issue until a future election cycle.
While the Chamber agrees that updates are needed to modernize the City’s current business license tax model, we strongly oppose the City’s approach to enacting a gross receipts model.
Efforts to bring equity to the City’s taxing structure under this proposal actually create greater inequity through a gross receipts process:
• With a triple net lease arrangement, under which many businesses operate, the burden of new City taxes will be passed down from the landlord to the tenant that is also required to pay their own business license tax. In these circumstances, the tenants will be paying to tax twice.
• A gross receipts tax model disproportionately impacts businesses with low profit margins and high production volumes (such as restaurants), along with new, high revenue businesses who see losses in the early stages of their business (such as entrepreneurs, startups, etc.).
• Some businesses will be paying drastically more under this model (as much as 1,500% more) than under the current model.
The Chamber also is concerned about the unintended consequences of adopting a gross receipts tax model which could lead to businesses, particularly those who provide professional and retail services, to relocate their operations to cities with more favorable tax structures and/or be limited in their abilities to grow their businesses due to burdensome city taxes.
The Chamber’s relationship with the City and its elected and staff leaders is an important and lasting one. We appreciate the commitment and transparency from City staff in working From: Jay Beard Old
To: x-City Clerk"s Office
Subject: Item B - City of Belmont Business License Modernization and Simplification Measure Date: Friday, July 5, 2024 1:49:35 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Hello My Name is Jay Beard, I am the Owner of Heavywood Construction.
I am an out of city, General Building Contractor. My comment is on identifying the Tax requirement of previous years. Does that mean for a contracting business, there is a base tax of $25.00 plus the category 3 fees associated with my previous years business income. My Concern Is in regards to the Per Project Assessment of $69.00.
That shows up on Each and Everyone of my permit fees. This fee just started showing up on my Permit fee evaluations in the Past 18 Months, No one in the building department could or would justify the fees, except to say this was the finance departments decision.
I tried to contact finance on 2 occasions, Both times I was told there was no one in finance Available to to talk with at the time. So I have yet to get a response regarding the additional $69.00 Charge That has showed up on my permit evaluations. It feels very much like a “Hidden Tax” on the Contractors doing business in Belmont. It would be appreciated if Some response and resolution in regards to this additional fee be provided. As up until now No one has provided a response for its purpose, Except that it is an Additional fee, required by the Finance Department. Which seems to contradict the concept of modernization and Simplification of the business license fees. Any help here would be appreciated Thanks for allowing me to be of service.
Jay Beard ©
[email protected]
Heavywood Construction
650-280-1778
Chamber Letter to Council RE: Business License Tax
collaboratively to engage the business community on this important issue. Though we do not agree with the conclusions reached by City staff and the Council, we do respect the process that was created to ensure the voices of businesses were considered.
It is with this mutual respect and for the reasons outlined above, and those we have conveyed to Council and staff over the last several months, that Chamber San Mateo County opposes the city of Belmont’s proposed gross receipts tax model, and encourages you to delay this action.
Sincerely,
Amy N. Buckmaster
President & CEO
C: Afshin Oskoui, P.E., City Manager, City of Belmont
Kathy Kleinbaum, Assistant City Manager, City of Belmont Lennies Gutierrez, Chair of the Board, Chamber San Mateo County Mary Morrissey Parden, Chair, Belmont Business Committee, Chamber San Mateo County Board of Directors, Chamber San Mateo County
Chamber San Mateo County Members Located and/or Operating in Belmont From: Giuliano
To: City Council
Subject: Comments on Traffic Calming Proposal.
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 4:42:08 PM
We need a workshop for public discussion with staff. There's been no ability for public to meaningfully comment and seek changes to this proposal. 3 minutes for public comments at a City Council meeting are not enough.
I hope new policy will make user safety a bigger consideration than neighbor votes, road type (local, collector, arterial), and traffic volumes.
I hope that create entire SRTS is a priority.
Existing policy requires approval of neighbors. How do folks who do not live in the vicinity provide input and “vote”. We have to use these roads, even if we don’t live nearby. Especially for those roads where cyclists are directed as an alternative to arterials. I’m fine for “locals only” for “cut through” roads that are used to avoid collectors and arterials. For example, my street is used to avoid Ralston traffic.
Existing policy excludes requests for arterials. Why? They need to be safe too. We need to prioritize user safety over speed. I’ve been directed to submit suggestions for changes to Ralston to PTSC. If they will not even consider them, why am I being told to submit my requests to them? What is meant by “education”. Signs telling folks that cyclists are present are near useless. My daily experience demonstrates this. I’ve documented a fraction of these on videos. And have submitted a fraction of these videos.
Hase the city done anything, ever to actually educate its residents? In 25 years I’ve exactly once seen an officer pull over someone who endangered me. BPD has refused to do anything, even to just each out with a letter rather than a citation, even when I’ve provided video evidence, even when the offence was folks driving exceptionally recklessly, even when the offense was assault.
giuliano
--
Drive a bike a bit more often and cars a bit less. You'll be healthier and happier, and so will our world.
Reach out if you'd like to learn to cycle more safely (LCI #7105). https://bikesiliconvalley.org
https://www.peopleforbikes.org/news/your-bike-advocacy-playbook