I like your suggestion of exempting hotels for 5 years and would insert "at least" into that sentence. They got hit with the TOT increase and then the COVID slow-down; a break is in order.

Where do you stand on requiring that the revenue be restricted for specific purposes?

Thanks Annette,

My preference is for specified uses but that to be effective would require a 2/3 vote and I do not expect council to go this route.

Thanks. I hope CC does go the 2/3 route b/c I will most certainly vote against a tax that flows to the general fund.

*"I support no tax on hotels of any size for a minimum of five years as they have been and are very hard hit by the pandemic."

I disagree on this proposal. Those mediocre motels along ECR were raking it in prior to the pandemic. Midweek rates were often $275.00+ per night (plus tax) as there were countless out-of-town visitors attending business seminars and meetings in Silicon Valley pre-2020.

There are downturns to any business and a five-year tax increase exemption is too generous for these motel operators...unless they are willing to price their rooms at $100.00 per night maximum for the duration of your proposed tax moratorium.

I agree. Those motels along El Camino Real in Barron Park (and Mountain View) leave something to be desired and most provide sub-standard lodging at best.

They are also visual eyesores and could easily be converted into public assistance housing for the homeless and other displaced individuals.

Only then would they be deserving of a 5-year business tax break.

There are no nice roadside motels in either Mountain View or Palo Alto so why should their owners get a tax break?

Just let them go out of business and build affordable housing at the former sites.

I thank you for your insights, Steve. Here are some of my thoughts and proposals of other taxes.

The question is not whether it is justified, but rather is there a realistic pathway to revenue neutrality over the full term of the parcel tax and how can the tax be extended if it is not?

The parcel tax is estimated to generate $9 million in 2018, but the city of Palo Alto still needs at least $6.5 million in sources of new revenue over the two-year period to pay off the $10.7 million debt and make future capital improvements.

A simple and fair way to find these new sources of revenue would be to implement a progressive parcel tax over the full term of the parcel tax. In this model, a portion of the tax would be charged to all property owners in the city each year.

This model ensures revenue neutrality by shifting taxes to those who use more services and also ensures a rational funding structure by making it impossible for the city to increase the rates of the annual tax without making the new tax revenue available to pay down the old debt.

I spoke to a friend of mine who runs a local business Mountain View US and Foreign Coins https://mvcoins.org and he indicated to me that since the storefront is a fairly small storefront, he would not be paying as much in taxes. However, it would be unfair if, for example, the place had a warehouse to store inventory. Especially with the low margins in the coin appraisal and US coin business that he is in. The place is located on 200 E Dana St. and it's just an awesome location and pleasantly quaint store and he would love to stay in our community if the business climate would let him.

One of the things that the owner of the 200 E Dana St. location is interested in of the 6% vacancy factor for non office uses: It is possible that a percentage below 6% is accurate because there is relatively little office space in the City with a 10,000 square foot size and when property is vacated it is normally filled immediately with a

Democrats increase taxes and governmental spending.

Republicans are more fiscally disciplined.

No new taxes as austerity on frivolous spending will cover the bases