South City is weighing options for a revenue ballot measure to help close its general fund deficit, with the City Council leaning toward a parcel tax to add to next election’s ballot.
The city faces a $12 million general fund deficit, with the gap between revenue and spending remaining “unsustainable without structural changes,” Finance Director Karen Chang said.
General fund deficits are common among many cities throughout the county, especially in light of volatility around a unique revenue source that is in jeopardy. The complicated funding stream is related to vehicle license fees, and Peninsula cities typically receive reimbursement from the state. But the payback has been uncertain as the state also grapples with its own shortfall.
Sales tax revenue in the city is also expected to decrease, while other revenue sources, including franchise fees, are expected to either stay flat or modestly increase. Property tax revenue is projected to increase by $6.7 million.
During a meeting June 11, councilmembers contemplated several ballot measure options to go before voters in the 2026 election that could narrow the structural deficit. According to a presentation, the sales tax would largely affect South City visitors and would exclude many food items and medicine.
“A significant portion of sales tax comes from visitors and nonresidents, so there’s a greater tax base than the South San Francisco residents in paying this sales tax,” Wing-See Fox, managing director for Urban Futures, a city consultant, said during the council meeting. “For instance … with the Costco on El Camino Real, about 47% of visitors are from San Francisco.”
But the council still unanimously opposed another sales tax, partly due to the high tax rate it would put on residents — about 10.375%, and potentially 10.625% if the county opts into a regional transit measure — and its susceptibility to economic volatility.
Recommended for you
“Part of my reluctance on the sales tax side is that we just did that with Measure W,” Vice Mayor Mark Addiego said. “And the way you sell [a sales tax] is what we already used that to the public, and I don’t know that we can go back to the well in the same manner.”
Measure W is a half-cent sales tax passed in 2015 that pays for a range of city services.
Councilmembers also agreed that a parcel tax would be most favorable, with the fee structure not on assessed value but on land use and size. For instance, to attain the $14 million revenue goal, staff estimated an average single-family residence could pay around $300 while a larger commercial space could pay up to $5,000 annually.
While the parcel tax is less dependent on market conditions, it also needs a two-thirds majority approval to pass, rather than a simple majority for the sales tax.
A property transfer tax was also discussed, though was not supported by all councilmembers, largely due to its potential volatility as well.
“I like a parcel tax because it can be more progressively structured,” Councilmember James Coleman said. “I do like the idea of a property transfer tax, but this is not a tax that should be used to plug a general fund deficit.”
The council needs to make a decision on the ballot measure by next June, with the deadline to submit the ballot measure in August 2026.
When I first saw “South City” I thought the article was about South San Jose but it seems like SSF is trying to rebrand (not a very good one, IMO). Regardless, vote NO on any tax revenue ballot measures. Remember that in the last few years, SSF has given out hefty raises to city union workers, to school district union workers and if I recall correctly, to themselves as councilmembers, to the tune of almost $5,000/year. I’d posit those are the main reasons why SSF are in the hole to the tune of $12 million and why they’re passing the hat to gouge revenue from homeowners. Vote NO. SSF will take your money and reward city union workers, school district union workers, and themselves. Again. And then another tax revenue ballot measure. And then more generous union worker raises and councilmember increases. Rinse and repeat.
??? There's no REbranding. You probably don't live in SSF. It's been called South City for ages, at minimum 60 yrs ago when my siblings were in high school. Everything I agree with -- to reject yet another reach in the pockets which they'll mismanage, yet again.
Thanks for imparting inside knowledge, bjune-smj. I’ll commit South City in my memory bank. In my defense, I’m not from SSF but have worked in that area for over a decade and nobody I’ve spoken to, SSF resident or not, have ever referred to SSF as “South City.” I imagine when non-insiders look towards San Bruno Mountain, they identify SSF as I do, “The Industrial City.” Have a great day!
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
When I first saw “South City” I thought the article was about South San Jose but it seems like SSF is trying to rebrand (not a very good one, IMO). Regardless, vote NO on any tax revenue ballot measures. Remember that in the last few years, SSF has given out hefty raises to city union workers, to school district union workers and if I recall correctly, to themselves as councilmembers, to the tune of almost $5,000/year. I’d posit those are the main reasons why SSF are in the hole to the tune of $12 million and why they’re passing the hat to gouge revenue from homeowners. Vote NO. SSF will take your money and reward city union workers, school district union workers, and themselves. Again. And then another tax revenue ballot measure. And then more generous union worker raises and councilmember increases. Rinse and repeat.
??? There's no REbranding. You probably don't live in SSF. It's been called South City for ages, at minimum 60 yrs ago when my siblings were in high school. Everything I agree with -- to reject yet another reach in the pockets which they'll mismanage, yet again.
Thanks for imparting inside knowledge, bjune-smj. I’ll commit South City in my memory bank. In my defense, I’m not from SSF but have worked in that area for over a decade and nobody I’ve spoken to, SSF resident or not, have ever referred to SSF as “South City.” I imagine when non-insiders look towards San Bruno Mountain, they identify SSF as I do, “The Industrial City.” Have a great day!
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.