The Merced City Council voted 6-1 on Monday night to place a 1-cent general sales tax measure on the November election ballot in an effort to help “maintain the city’s financial stability and preserve general services residents have identified as priorities — including fire and emergency response, public safety, street and pothole repair, safe and clean parks and public spaces, and other local services.”
Councilman Fue Xiong cast the lone NO vote.
“We need to thrive,” said City Manager Scott McBride. “We need to find a path forward to address all the community-wide needs.”
McBride added later: “Merced residents have been clear about the services that matter most to them, from emergency response and public safety to streets, parks and overall quality of life. At the same time, the cost of providing those services continues to increase, and the city is facing significant funding decisions in the coming years. This measure gives Merced voters the opportunity to decide how they want the City to address those needs.”
The “Vital Services Protection Measure” is now headed to the ballot two years after Merced voters passed Measure C — a half-cent sales tax designed to support police and fire protection and road maintenance. Unlike Measure C, the city’s proposed measure does not have a sunset clause, and if approved, voters would have to push forward a new ballot measure effort to repeal or reduce the tax. The new measure is designed as a general tax measure that would require a 50 percent plus one approval by local voters.
A recent community survey found that as many as 59 percent of respondents would support the measure. As part of its long-term planning, the city conducted its “Let’s Talk Merced” outreach program through the Engage Merced platform, gathering input through community meetings, mail, phone, email and online feedback. According to a city staff, more than 2,000 residents responded, identifying priorities that included retaining qualified police officers and firefighters, maintaining fast fire response, preventing gang activity, improving 911 response times, repairing roads and potholes, and maintaining safe and clean public spaces.
One of the city’s upcoming financial challenges is the expiration of the federal Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response, or SAFER, grant. The grant currently funds 24 Fire Department positions, representing approximately 27 percent of the department’s sworn staffing. SAFER-funded staffing also provides approximately 60 percent of the Merced Fire Department’s Advanced Life Support coverage, supporting firefighter-paramedic staffing at three of the city’s five fire stations.
Approximately 70 percent of Merced Fire Department calls are for emergency medical services, making firefighter-paramedic coverage an important part of the city’s emergency response system.
“The challenge goes beyond one grant, one department or one service,” McBride said. “Without additional local revenue, the city will have to make difficult decisions about how to balance emergency response and public safety with other community priorities, including streets, parks, neighborhood safety and other services residents rely on every day.”
The Vital Services Protection Measure would provide funding for general city services and community-identified priorities, including fire and emergency response, public safety, street and pothole repair, safe parks and public spaces. Revenue generated by the measure would remain local and could not be taken by the state or federal government. The measure also includes accountability provisions — including citizen oversight, independent audits and public disclosure of spending.
Mayor Matt Serratto said the need was clear for the measure, and offered data on Merced’s overall sales tax compared to other places.
“The state sales tax is 7.25 percent. That’s the minimum,” he said. “Ours is currently 8.25 percent. The state average is roughly 8.75 percent. A few cities in Merced County, such as Atwater, Livingston, Los Banos — they’re all at 8.75 percent. Richmond is actually at 9.75 percent.”
Several residents spoke up on the proposal, most asking for the Council to not go forward with it, at least as it is currently written. The lack of a sunset provision, lack of specificity on funding priorities and affordability issues facing local families were all brought up as concerns.
“This measure is too broad,” said Rene Gutierrez. “It does not clearly identify how funding will be allocated, how it will establish funding priorities, or provide a framework for measuring outcomes. Without those safeguards, voters are being asked to approve a blank check.”
Latonya Ricard said: “Passing a new tax to cover possible multimillion-dollar annual deficits treats the symptom not the cause. The city needs fiscal discipline and budget realignment — not another financial burden passed on to residents struggling with inflation.”
It was Councilman Xiong, however, who offered the most critical response to the proposed measure, suggesting it will be used as a public safety measure in disguise if it gets voter approval.
“When this first came up, a little over a year ago, I said: ‘We know where it’s going to end up.’ It’s always police and fire. It always is, right? Back then, it was proposed as, ‘Hey, it’s not gonna be a sales tax. It’s going to be this idea that we’re going to just start looking into. And then we’re going to look at services for everybody.’ … But similar to the original Measure C, all of that money is going to just be used for police and fire. We know it.
“Council members are up here mentioning it’s up to the voters. ‘Let the residents decide.’ So let the Measure C [citizens] committee do the work. Why do they not lead this? If you really want citizen ownership of this, let them do it. It’s because this ain’t going to pass that way. And they know it too.
“It’s disingenuous to include items in here where we have no intention of actually putting money there. Parks — we know it’s not going to ever go there. It’s never happened. With the original Measure C, we could have put money there. It’s a general sales tax. We never did it. … I disagree with adding youth services in here without removing any of the other stuff. Because, again, it’s disingenuous. We are going to say these things and not actually mean it. The presentation mentions that the PD, the staffing level, hasn’t matched the population. No department here has. None. How many people work in housing? How many people are in Planning, Engineering?
“We keep saying the same story of, ‘Hey, this is meant for the overall greater Merced.’ … It was just mentioned about ARPA funding. That money couldn’t be used for police and fire. … We talk about the greatness that comes out of the [Merced Regional Sports Complex], the youth jobs program, utility bill relief, downtown. None of that [ARPA funded] stuff was police or fire. And so let’s not confuse the two, saying that they’re the same things, that we’re going to see the same results, because we’re not going to see it. The renewal of Measure C talks about roads, right? Police and fire and roads. So what’s happened? Nothing. So we’re adding it in here because we hear about it all the time, right? … The streets and roads are an issue. But at the end of the day, we’re not going to actually put money there to fix anything.”
Both Mayor Serratto and Mayor Pro Tem Sarah Boyle strongly disagreed with Xiong’s characterization of the purpose of the new measure — something both of them had worked on in a committee assignment.
“That’s not true,” Boyle said after Xiong made his remarks. She went on to discuss other areas besides public safety that have been widely discussed as potential beneficiaries of the tax measure, including parks that need updating, or ones that are ready to be developed but lack existing funds for full completion.
McBride pointed out that the decision is ultimately up to the voters, not the Council.
“We want to give Merced voters the opportunity to weigh in before the City has to make difficult decisions about emergency response, infrastructure and other services,” he said.
For more information on the Vital Services Protection Measure, go online and visit: engage.cityofmerced.gov.