By Jake Lannon
Piedmont voters will decide Measure GG on November 3. The measure would raise the city’s real property transfer tax, paid when a home is sold, from 1.3% to 1.75% of the sale price. It is expected to bring in about $1.5 million a year for the city’s general fund.
In the last weeks before the election, much of the money spent on the measure has come from outside of town. The National Association of Realtors and the California Association of Realtors have contributed $52,100 so far to defeat it. The City of Albany is in a similar situation, attempting to pass a measure to increase its transfer tax; the Realtors association has contributed $78,500 to defeat that local measure. Residents have been finding a steady stream of mailers urging a no vote.
Piedmont Mayor Betsy Andersen spoke with the Piedmont Post about the measure and the outside spending. “That is an absurd amount of money to spend on a local measure,” she said. She added, “There are no local contributors who are anti GG. None. Zero.” When asked about the flyers, Andersen said, “I think they’re alarmist, full of misinformation, and funded by outside groups … they don’t live here, and they certainly don’t care about our finances.”
The Yes on GG campaign, by contrast, has raised about $11,000, all from local donors, according to campaign finance reports. Andersen also pointed to Piedmont realtors who have endorsed the measure and are helping with the campaign, including Theresa Baum, Matt Heafey, Anian Petit Tunney, Adrienne Krumins, Pamela Fullerton, Carol Brown, Julie Gardner, Sarah Abel, and Lisa Chan Carnazzo.
“I think it’s important for residents to know that local realtors are supportive,” she said, and “that the National Association and California Association don’t speak for the local realtors.”
Andersen is concerned about the future of local elections if large donors influence them. “Future volunteers will be discouraged from running if they think they have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to get elected,” she said.
For Andersen, the more important story is what the transfer tax already does for Piedmont. “Our city transfer tax already exists, and pays for about 10% of our annual operating costs,” she said.
The difficulty is that the city’s costs are rising faster than its income. “Piedmont’s collective property tax revenue goes up less than 5% a year,” Andersen said, while “our overall expenditures, the cost of everything, are increasing much faster than that. So, we have a gap.”
Piedmont has almost no commercial or sales tax and has limited revenue sources. “This transfer tax has not been increased in 33 years and all of the communities around us have increased their transfer taxes,” Andersen said.
“What we are asking for with Measure GG is a relatively modest increase,” she said. “It would align with the middle tier of transfer taxes in Oakland.” She noted that Berkeley will charge 3.5% on higher-priced homes starting next year. “Why are we discounting Piedmont properties relative to Oakland and Berkeley? That makes no sense to me.” The increase was recommended by the city’s Budget Advisory and Financial Planning Committee.
Because the money goes into the general fund, Andersen said she cannot commit a future council to how it will be spent. “What I can say is that public safety has always been our top priority as a council in my nine years, and I don’t see that changing,” she said.
Going forward, the added revenue could help upkeep aging buildings and streets. She noted that “the fire station is 100 years old, the police department is nearing 75 years old. These old buildings are expensive to maintain.” The measure will not solve every problem, she said. “Really, Measure GG is about not falling farther behind.”
Piedmont’s full-time city staff is about 101 people, including all police officers, firefighters, and public works crew. “We’re already doing more with less,” Andersen said. Andersen added that, “Our residents have very high expectations for the level of services they will receive here in Piedmont, and it’s our goal as both a city council and as a city staff to deliver on those expectations. And we can’t do that without more funding.”
Her message to voters in the final days was simple. “Don’t listen to the outside forces trying to influence our local election.”
