TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
Wendy Kaserman, City Manager
Shawn Hagerty, City Attorney
FROM: James Jeffries, City Clerk
DATE: June 10, 2026
SUBJ: Updated Meeting Materials – June 10, 2026, City Council Meeting The attached correspondence for the below-mentioned Items was received and is being provided for your consideration.
NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT:
CONTINUED BUSINESS:
(5) Resolution Adopting Legislative Policy Memorandum (LPM) 2026-01 Related to General Council Meeting Operating and Outreach Procedures, Implementing SB 707 (2025). (City Clerk/City Attorney – Jeffries/Hagerty) NEW BUSINESS:
(7) Review of the Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27. (City Manager/Finance – Kaserman/Jennings)
(8) Presentation of the Second Sales Tax Feasibility Study Results. (City Manager – Kaserman)
Elected and Appointed City Officials,
I am writing to express concerns regarding the proposed 1% sales tax increase, specifically the absence of a comprehensive analysis on its potential impact to local retail activity.
Sales tax policy directly influences consumer behavior. Santee currently benefits from attracting shoppers from surrounding communities such as La Mesa and El Cajon, many of whom choose to shop here specifically to take advantage of our relatively lower tax rate.
Increasing the rate risks eroding that competitive advantage and may redirect that spending to neighboring cities rather than growing local revenue.
Without a clear evaluation of how this increase may affect purchasing patterns (particularly in a region where consumers have nearby alternatives) creates a meaningful risk of unintended consequences. These may include reduced retail sales, decreased competitiveness with neighboring cities, and potential long-term impacts to local businesses and overall tax revenue.
I am also concerned that, should the tax increase pass, the City may not realize the forecasted revenue if retail activity declines due to the loss of this competitive advantage. If that occurs, it raises an important question: how will the City fund the projects and obligations that have already been planned or committed based on those projections? Moving forward without validating these assumptions introduces financial risk that could ultimately impact future budgets, service levels, or require additional revenue measures.
Given the current economic environment, it is critical that any decision of this magnitude is supported by data-driven analysis. At a minimum, this should include:
• Projected changes in consumer behavior and cross-border shopping • Impact to local retailers, especially small businesses • Revenue sensitivity scenarios under varying sales volume assumptions • Benchmark comparisons with surrounding jurisdictions
Implementing a tax increase without this level of diligence introduces avoidable uncertainty and risk. I strongly encourage the City to pause and conduct a thorough impact assessment before moving forward.
Our community deserves transparency and informed decision-making, particularly when policies have the potential to affect both household budgets and local economic vitality.
Sincerely,
T. Shephard
From: SS DD
To: James Jeffries
Subject: Submitted Public Comments For 6/10/2026 Council Meeting Date: Wednesday, June 10, 2026 4:39:25 AM
Attachments: ATT00001.png
Hey there, James!
Here are my submitted comments on items Non-Agenda, Item 5, Item 7, and Item 8 for tonight’s Council meeting.
Thanks so much and enjoy your Flag Day weekend,
-Truth
Non-Agenda:
Hey, it’s Truth.
On the County Minion sewage pipe presenter at the last May 27th meeting – To be frank, I'm convinced that the County intentionally hires DEI, weak men, no-brain, robot-types.
No nice way to say it other than what a disappointment, and that I STILL DON'T trust the Corrupt County, who SEVERELY under-funds their Capital Improvement Program.
They'd rather spend $14.4 million in Bonuses for their Union Campaign Funders (using Reserves!), than clean up the mess they've allowed in the River Bed...and in their budget, to the detriment of every resident in San Diego County.
On the City level...
Laura, Ronn, and John – Great job on the last Committee Updates – they were very thorough and informative. I enjoy a good recap from a perspective I may not have considered and/or information I didn't know.
I meant to give a shout out to the Chamber for promoting the Santee Street Fair very well...
I have long-critiqued the lack of promotion of City events, so I’ve been very glad to finally see some movement in a positive direction lately.
On the news, the Chamber even mentioned the trolley as a “straight shot” to the event. (Thanks to the stupid Copper Shuttle, it’s not really anymore, but still...) The Copper Shuttle that has negatively affected Santee has finally backfired on MTS...
At the April 8th, 2026 SANDAG Independent Taxpayers Oversight Committee, Committee Members pushed back on the lack of Audit compliance with San Diego County residents’ Tax Dollars. Good for them, it’s about time
(You can enjoy that time-stamped video [1hr 26min-36min mark] here on Youtube:
https://youtu.be/2AY3U4S_AlA?si=x_YW5taS1Swgwe-J&t=5184) Assuming one doesn’t already exist...
This is the year for the City to create an annual Seniors & Military Resource Fair. The City of Imperial Beach has one, and it offers really great services, such as free help with Veterans Disability Claims – with a very high success rate. I can’t stress enough how incredibly and invaluably helpful that would be for Santee-based Veterans.
Santee also has many Seniors, so please consider some type of similar event to what IB puts on.
John – You were dead-on about how good Santee has it. I have often used the City’s stability, efficiency, and business-friendly environment as an example for other Cities, Officials, and potential Officials to aspire to.
Just wanted y’all to know that.
La Mesa may be the magnet, Lemon Grove may be the fighter, and El Cajon may be the heart, but Santee is the quiet giant of East County.
For fun...
Here's a video I made where, at the very end, I mention John and eating cookies~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6e8PJpRJ2w
(For the record, this video also triggered the [crazy] main topic of focus [not John], which is some drama I get to address soon – Fun! )
Item 5: (SB707)
I wanted to provide you all with an example of when telephonic access goes wrong...
Yesterday, calling into the San Diego County Board Of Supervisors meeting, the call-in number suddenly said it was “not taking public comments at this time”. I unfortunately wasn’t ever able to get in to leave a comment for item 18.
The public comment part of the (recently updated) County website has basically an emergency operator line for when people need help with public comments, so I called that, and they eventually called me back after things were fixed, and also provided me with a secondary number to call in with.
This isn’t the first time I’ve experienced issues, but the County’s pretty good at quickly fixing problems, even if it requires a meeting pause.
So lesson here:
Make sure you have a system that automatically alerts Staff of when there’s an issue, and also add a manned phone number people can call when they experience issues. Also consider a backup line if all else fails. Email isn’t going to cut it.
Question:
Policy 12.5 saying: “If adequate telephonic or internet service is not operational at the meeting location, the City Council shall not be required to provide remote access.” – Is that a City-decided Non-Commitment? Or a State-decided Non-Commitment?
Other serious issue:
Requiring someone who wants to speak remotely to email the Clerk with their phone number, putting personally identifiable information at risk.
Yes, Redaction is a requirement of Public Records Requests, but I certainly do NOT feel comfortable with such a proposition where a simple mistake can release personally identifiable information.
As an example, as part of a Public Records Request, a City once accidentally released a Council Member’s private email address and phone number to me.
I can assure you that they were NOT happy to finally learn recently that I have that information.
I certainly would NOT want that to happen to me...(although, the Doxxing of my phone number already DID happen before in the past, so been there...) Any process that has a chance at a leak is a STUPID IDEA.
Santee obviously needs a proper sign up system, NOT an outdated, unsecured email system.
Demanding speakers provide their private phone numbers to a Clerk via emails subject to PRAs is something worth raising attention about for the sake of privacy. I personally will forward that demand to privacy organizations, if need be.
Item 7: (Budget)
I'm mostly commenting because I want the budget to receive at least 1 public comment.
Or can I rely on Carl to take my place??
...But can I really rely on anyone to speak up for needed trash cans around the City?? Probably not...
I'd like to see some kind of City Border Wall around Edgemoor and its County Drug Graft and Drugged-Up Riff Raff...including the Sex Offenders using it as their "home address". ...Learned that from the Megan's Law website.
3%-4.5% Salary Increases guaranteed every year – Only in Government! I find it ironic to then whine about CALPERS.
I don’t really see the benefit of increased membership costs to LAFCO, the League of CA Cities, and SANDAG.
I’d almost prefer an expensive investment in City-directed Lobbyists. I’d like to see a cost comparison.
It sounds like the In-House system is going well – wise investment.
I can’t believe the Pickleball Courts didn’t already have a sound wall! That was a failure to plan.
Somebody was obviously more concerned about playing, rather than worrying about the full effects of the courts.
I’m not against the end goal, but is there a cap on the Highway 52 Fund? There’s been very little movement that I can see, yet there’s been a steady stream of Tax Dollars going to it. Maybe if there was a timeline of accomplishments, there would be something to sell...
A Recreation budget of $325,000, with a total of 26 events – I critique having that many Citysponsored events, especially without ever providing a chart on Costs/Benefits. I believe that extraneous events that rely heavily on City-funding, and don’t have a tangible, measurable benefit to the City should be defunded. Put that towards actual needs. Because I can assure you that events (mostly for young children) don't make a community, the quality of life does. (So do the people!)
However, not HAVING to cut events is impressive budgeting. Though Entertainment (AKA Bread and Circus) is by NO means a necessary expense, I commend Community Services for increasing participation, access, and (hopefully) looking toward more diversification of event content (I’m still recommending a Pow Wow), with more local donations and sponsorships.
On Law Enforcement – I VERY much appreciate anytime Deputies can monitor the Trolley Square.
It makes a HUGE difference when they do the job MTS FAILS MISERABLY at.
Similar safety concerns could be said for the area near Wal-Mart...yeah, the area that was burned down by Drug Addicts.
What I do NOT approve of from Law Enforcement – The handing out of Foil, Pipes, or Needles to Drug Addicts via Harm Reintroduction Kits. Absolutely NOT If that’s “just” Naloxone...clarify it. Please get that “Goal” removed/modified I appreciate all the different Departments’ lists of Accomplishments, Goals, and Objectives. They serve as a very useful reminder and perspective, and are pretty accurate.
For the Goal of Marketing of the City to Tourism – Up until the last Santee Street Fair and Fido Fest, I’ve seen very little about Santee promoted to the media and/or outside communities, as has been a complaint of mine in the past. I would recommend Santee restaurants (especially newer restaurants) get on FOX5 as part of the “Be Our Guest” program.
Santee Lakes is also very promotable.
Santee itself has become a “one stop shop” for shopping, too, yet nobody’s capitalized on that yet.
Serious question: Is it a Council Goal to make the City of Santee a Brewery/Winery destination? It’s not explicitly stated, but it’s reflected in the Marketing Goals....and it’s very obviously reflected in the...“culture/lifestyle”.
Perhaps that should be more openly addressed and sought if you’re all in agreement with that Goal.
I take little to no issue with Council Goals and Objectives – The only exceptions being the Multiple-Species Conservation Plan Scam and the Arts & Entertainment District. Regarding the District, however, I understand that sometimes a very long-range vision can one day be beneficial and bring something unique that Santee currently severely lacks. It’s possible, I just don’t see it. But hey...enough Angelenos transplanting in, and maybe you’ll have a miniHollywood soon.
Been there, done that, and I prefer my feet here on Earth.
My Priorities – REAL Safety, as in all aspects of Fire response and prevention (including better conditions for Fire Fighters), and Fixed Roads with obvious improvement worth celebrating and humbly bragging about.
Good job on increasing Reserves, even if only by “a little”. Savings are more important than ever.
Only critique – Anything labeled “Miscellaneous Income” with no specificity of source.
Overall, I like the organization of the budget – Great job, Staff.
Thanks for making one of the easiest, most user-friendly budgets I’ve ever skimmed/read.
Santee may have set a new standard with this one, seriously.
Item 8: (Tax)
Staff didn't realize until February that a FULL CENT was needed – Why not? Why wasn't that determined around August 2025?
What changed with Staff's math in those 7 months after the fact?? Where was the proper "Fiscal Analysis" THEN
Now, all of a sudden, the new economic determination and results are available a couple weeks early.
Sounds like a Communist California election!
This whole endeavor seems SO flawed, I now question both its credibility and its feasibility of passing with voters.
More importantly, I also question the reliability of Staff to provide Transparent answers.
Call me educated, but their financial and informational redirection has provided SANDAG Measure A vibes.
Free history lesson: https://voiceofsandiego.org/2017/07/11/sandag-misled-voters-2004-taxmeasure-showing-pattern-deception-goes-back-least-13-years/ Hoping Council can be more Transparent on this topic.
Thanks for reading ,
-Truth,
PRA Initiator Extraordinaire
--
Sent with https://mailfence.com
Secure and private email