Local governments collect $2.4B in property taxes

The release Thursday of the county’s property tax highlights report illustrates who’s paying what and how much local governments are receiving. It also provides a glimpse into how the rush of developments and investments is manifesting in the county’s pocketbook.

“For the sixth consecutive year, property taxes collected countywide have increased. This was primarily due to sale of properties and new construction, both of which result in increases to properties’ assessed values,” Raigoza wrote in his report.

The total tax levy includes about $1.94 billion from the general 1 percent tax, $231 million in various debt service payments for bonds and $244 million in special charges, according to the report. The controller is responsible for distributing taxes to 131 local government agencies that include the county, cities, school districts and special districts.

Proposition 13 keeps the general tax at 1 percent and allows assessed property values to increase at no more than 2 percent. Of the $1.94 billion collected from the general tax, schools will receive 46 percent, the county gets 25 percent, 16 percent is split amongst the cities, 11 percent supports special districts and 2 percent will be collected by former redevelopment agencies.

With the $2.4 billion pot of funds based on last fiscal year, even more could be available at the end of fiscal year 2017-2018. The assessor last year announced San Mateo County property values topped the $200 billion mark for the first time following a $15 billion year-over-year increase. The next time the controller divvies out property taxes, it will be based on $206 billion in countywide assessed property values.

In the meantime, local governments are seeing revenue pour in from fiscal year 16-17. The 1 percent general tax also includes funds from vehicle license fee swap, excess educational revenue augmentation fund, or ERAF, and redistribution of redevelopment funds, according to the report..

The county is slated to receive a total $478.8 million in taxes, including $111.8 million in excess ERAF. The cities and towns are taking in about 16.5 percent of the total 1 percent tax. Those receiving the most include Redwood City regions taking in nearly $52 million, San Mateo at $49 million, Daly City at $33.5 million, South San Francisco at $31.2 million, Menlo Park at $19 million, Burlingame at $18.4 million, San Carlos at $14.2 million, San Bruno at $13.4 million and Belmont at $7.9 million. Foster City, which is listed under the special districts category, is slated to receive $26.5 million, according to the report.

Schools districts receive the most, at 46.3 percent or about $891.7 million. The school districts taking in the most include San Mateo County Community College at $131 million, Sequoia Union High with $125.3 million, San Mateo Union High at $124.7 million, the County Office of Education at $86.5 million, and San Mateo-Foster City Elementary with $78.7 million, according to the report.

Special districts will split a $123.5 million pot of the 1 percent tax funds. That includes $44.1 million supporting the Menlo Park Fire Protection District, $13.5 million for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, $11.5 million for the Sequoia Health Care District and $6.2 million for the San Mateo County Harbor District, according to the report.

A variety of school districts, cities and special districts also receive funds related to debt payments — such as taxes for school bonds — for which affected property owners pay $231 million, according to the report.

The tax roll includes both secured and unsecured properties covering residential and corporate taxpayers. The top 10 taxpayers in the county contribute more than 5 percent of the total revenue. That includes bills sent to Pacific Gas and Electric at $22.1 million, Genentech at $21 million, Gilead Sciences at $16.9 million, United Airlines at $15.7 million, Google at $10.3 million and Oracle Corporation at $7.3 million, according to the report.

While the year-over-year increases continue, Raigoza cautioned about future uncertainties and asked the public to remember expenses are also on the rise.

“While the county and most local government agencies have recently experienced significant growth in their annual property tax revenues due to the growing economy, in the long term, this is unlikely to be sustainable,” Raigoza said in a press release. “Historically, good economic times have not gone on indefinitely. Furthermore, as the cost of providing essential services continue to increase, the county and other local agencies should continue to think long term and plan appropriately.”

Visit controller.smcgov.org/2017-pth to review the controller’s Property Tax Highlights report.

samantha@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106

Twitter: @samantha_weigel