The Marin Post

The Voice of the Community

Blog Post < Previous | Next >

Tina Mc

Opponents to Novato's Measure M Exclude Facts

Posted by: Tina G McMillan - September 3, 2024 - 3:18 AM PDT

Failure to pass Measure M is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater

Opponents of Novato's Measure M, which increases the percentage of sales tax by .75%, or seven and a half cents on every $10 spent, exclude facts critical to understanding Novato's decades long fiscal struggles.

Measure M isn't just intended to repair the structural deficit.

It is needed to fund costs associated with repairs and upgrades to infrastructure beginning with roads (an increase of between $4 and $11 million a year), to increase salaries to retain staff, to increase staffing levels in departments where professional services and overtime are being used to mitigate inadequate levels of support, and to cover costs associated with Park's repairs and upgrades.

As Measure M covers more immediate costs associated with services and infrastructure, money remaining in General Fund may be used to pay down unfunded debt associated with escalating state pension costs.

When opponents focus only on structural deficit, they are not providing an accurate picture of revenue needed to cover costs.

This is what Measure M says:

To protect essential City services, the Novato City Council unanimously voted to place Measure M on the November 2024 ballot, to increase Novato's local sales tax with 100% of the funding remaining in Novato for local services.

If voters pass Measure M, Novato sales tax will increase from 8.5% to 9.25%.

San Rafael Sales Tax is 9.25%

Petaluma Sales Tax is 9.5%

Both SR and Petaluma taxes are at cap.

Novato sales tax will be right where it needs to be to cover basic costs of city services and infrastructure with potential funding available to pay down unfunded debt.

Cities in Marin and Sonoma are putting sales tax measures on the ballot to increase rates to make up for deficits in general fund revenues. General Fund Revenues are primarily used for services and infrastructure.

Based on population size, Novato is one of the last cities to act.

Mill Valley has a measure on the November ballot to increase their sales tax to 9.25% to cover infrastructure costs and they collect the same property tax revenue as Novato with only 14,000 residents.

It's time Novato stepped up by increasing sales tax to the full cap.

The individual cities portion of sales tax, in this chart, does not include the 1% Bradley-Burns tax, that all cities in CA receive. That's why some cities are listed as none. The percentage in the chart indicates the city passed a sales tax measure to add to their revenue beyond the Bradley-Burns Tax.

Novato's Measure M, like Petaluma's Measure U, Information About Measure U - Petaluma (cityofpetaluma.org) is intended to mitigate the structural deficit that impacts Novato's General Fund Revenue as well as pay for infrastructure repairs and upgrades, such as roads and parks, and equipment. Costs associated with these repairs and upgrades are presented in reports requested by the Novato City Council to ensure that spending of tax dollars is specific to need and the city's long-term fiscal sustainability.

Petaluma sales tax measure, like Novato's, has no sunset clause. Petaluma's circumstances are similar to Novato's - structural deficit necessitated new permanent revenue stream.

Measure M will provide approximately $10.3 million in additional sales tax revenue by the end of the calendar year following passage of the tax.

A general sales tax can only be put on the ballot in even years. If Measure M fails, the next time it can be put on the ballot is in November 2026 and the revenue cannot begin to be collected until January 2027. The revenue will take one year to accrue.

If Measure M fails, Novato will have no additional funds in 2024 to bring reserves back to 15%, staff losses will fall well below a basic level of service, overtime and professional service costs will increase, damage to roads will likely require a bond measure to mitigate and there will be no additional revenue to address escalating pension costs.

Bond measures to pay for infrastructure costs also require voter approval, force the city to pay interest on money gained, and add to the cost of whatever project they are used to create. This is why Mill Valley is putting a general sales tax measure on its ballot. A General Sales Tax Measure is more fiscally prudent.

It makes no fiscal sense to use bonds when an increase in sales tax can provide a consistent source of present-day revenue at a lower cost that is also paid by residents outside Novato.

It is municipal suicide to delay passage of Measure M so opponents can attempt to strip the tax of its needed value by reducing the percentage and adding a sunset clause. If another agency decides to put a measure on the ballot to increase sales tax, they can reduce the percentage Novato needs due to the cap.

Any delay on passage of Measure M hurts the city and its 52,000 residents.

The majority of opponent's complaints have to do with policy, not fiscal sustainability.

Policy is determined by elected officials. Opponents deny the urgency of the tax in spite of the information Novato has going back to 2010, when Michael Frank was Novato's City Manager.

Michael Franks' "Fiscal Sustainability Plan" along with his power points about Novato's fiscal struggles all back up the present-day Measure to increase Novato's percentage of sales tax revenue to a full 1%.

Without Measure M, Novato will have to cut staffing in multiple departments.

  1. Novato loses money by not being able to hold onto police and other employees due to insufficient general fund revenues.

For Measure M opponents to say there is plenty of money in the general fund to maintain existing staffing through 2027 is untrue. It makes a mockery of the Novato Police who attended the July 23rd City Council Meeting to support Measure M to save the city.

Current staffing levels are insufficient.

If Novato doesn't get the tax increase beginning in January 2025 and has to wait until January 2026 to put the tax back on the ballot, it will have to cut costs now in order to prepare for lower revenues.

That's how municipal finance works. The city cannot risk putting itself in a position of having so little revenue that it can't cover present day costs, so in anticipation of higher expenses and no tax increase, it must cut costs even if services and infrastructure decline.

See July 23rd city council meeting to listen to staff discuss cuts to staffing.

Municipal Financial Health should not be managed through continuous cuts to funding for services and infrastructure, avoidance of planning for long-term debts, and the refusal to put a substantive sales tax measure on the ballot when it is the last option the city has to stabilize its General Fund.

For decades Novato has avoided the reality that it will never have a sufficient increase in property taxes to cover its basic service costs. Novato, a town of 52,000 residents, in 2024/25 will collect the same property tax as Mill Valley a town of 14,000 residents.

That is Novato's reality.

Municipal Financial Health requires planning beyond the short term and revenue to cover costs well into the future.

By the time a city or special district actually declares municipal bankruptcy and goes into receivership, it is already dead and buried. Very few recover from the costs of going over the fiscal cliff.

Why would opponents want to take that risk?

According to Novato's 5 Year General Fund Financial Forecast, Novato's deficit spending is expected to continue to increase every year for the next five years.

In the past five years, reductions in the deficit have been due to one-time funds, like Covid Relief Funds, reductions in staffing, delays in infrastructure repairs and maintenance and the city running on fumes in all departments. Reserves are already below the 15% minimum. By 26/27 reserves will be in deficit as well.


With passage of Measure M, Novato will have sufficient revenue to increase staffing to necessary levels in each department to lessen overtime as well as reduce professional service costs to attract and retain police, to add funds to roads and other infrastructure projects, to address unfunded debt, and to come up with a fiscal sustainability plan that is proactive rather than reactive.


Novato's service levels have been constrained for more than a decade and a half, going back to former city manager, Michael Frank's predictions of fiscal insolvency and the drastic measures taken to keep Novato afloat. Mr. Frank made stringent cuts to staffing and services. He put Measure F on the ballot in 2010. It increased sales tax revenue by .5% for 8 years.

In spite of Mr. Frank's predictions, voters, due to the Measure F sunset clause, believed the measure was temporary and would not support maintaining Measure F at .5%. 20/20 hindsight demonstrated this was a mistake.

Measure C, which increased sales tax by .25% was put on the ballot and passed, but the revenue it provided was a Band-Aid on a broken leg; it was not sufficient to keep up with service or infrastructure costs. It could not cover unfunded debt.

Mr. Frank predicted the lowering of Measure F to .25% would not make up for insufficient property tax and sales tax revenue, putting the city even further behind in funding for salaries, infrastructure, capital improvements, utilities, equipment, and other basic costs that come out of the General Fund.

The current 5-year forecast validates Michael Frank's predictions.

It shows Novato's push toward the fiscal cliff has already impacted the city's ability to hire and retain staff in all departments. Roads are in a state of continual disrepair, park's projects are behind, there is no revenue to adequately staff departments like planning, even with excellent ideas for better service models.

The closer Novato gets to the edge, the more it costs to move back to solid ground.

Measure M opponents would have you believe that voting against the tax is a guardrail, when in fact it's a costly misstep in municipal management due to opponents' failure to do their homework.

Novato residents need to pass Measure M to keep the city solvent.

It is the most cost-effective way to provide services and pay for infrastructure. It shares the cost burden with residents outside Novato and it allows the city to take advantage of the cap by bringing its portion of sales tax, beyond Bradley-Burns, to a full 1%.


In addition to the structural deficit, Novato needs revenue to -

The ballot language for Measure M reads:

“Shall the measure continuing locally controlled funding, that the State cannot take away, and maintaining City of Novato’s services, such as: fixing potholes/ streets; maintaining 9-1-1 emergency response, crime/ gang prevention; attracting/ retaining small businesses; maintaining parks/ recreation facilities; enhancing wildfire prevention; and repair aging storm drains; by establishing a 3/4c sales tax in the City of Novato, until ended by voters, for general government use, providing an additional $10,300,000 annually, with citizens’ oversight, independent annual audits be adopted?"

Measure M requires strict fiscal accountability protections, including:

On November 5, Novato voters will be asked to consider Measure M to protect essential City services and quality of life.

Measure M is supported by:

For additional information on Measure M

Measure M | City of Novato, CA