|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Looking to bolster the city’s coffers, Mountain View is asking voters this November to pass a ballot measure that would increase taxes on local hotels.
Measure F would authorize the City Council to raise its existing 10% “transient occupancy tax” to as high as 15%. That could generate an additional $5.2 million annually, according to a city analysis.
The measure requires a simple majority to pass. If voters sign off, city staff plan to return to the council after the election with a proposal to boost the tax rate.
A “no” vote would reject the ballot measure and the city’s hotel tax would remain at 10%.
What is the hotel tax?
Established in 1967, Mountain View’s transient occupancy tax is paid by visitors who stay in hotels, motels and other short-term rentals. Government employees on official business and any stays longer than 30 consecutive days are exempt from the tax. The operators of the lodgings collect the tax as part of the room bill and pay the tax to the city.
Mountain View has one of the lowest hotel tax rates in the region, according to a June city staff report. The last time Mountain View voters increased the hotel tax was in 1991, when they raised it from 8% to 10%.
A majority of cities in Santa Clara County have hotel tax rates ranging between 12% and 15.5%, the staff report said.
Currently, Mountain View has 19 hotels, totaling approximately 1,780 rooms citywide, according to the staff report.
Pivoting to a hotel tax
Earlier this year, Mountain View had considered placing a general obligation bond on the November ballot. However, the city ditched those plans after polls indicated flagging support for the initiative. In a last-minute switch, the city pivoted to the hotel tax.
This is the second time in two years that Mountain View residents have been asked to pass a tax measure to bolster the city’s funding. In 2024, voters approved raising the property transfer tax on commercial and residential buildings that sell for more than $6 million. The increased tax generated $5.1 million in the 2025-2026 fiscal year.
What would the hotel tax increase fund?
Voter Guide 2026
Get to know the candidates and measures on your ballot with the Mountain View Voice’s 2026 Voter Guide, including in-depth profiles, issue comparison grids and campaign finance coverage.
View the Voter Guide ➔Revenue generated from Measure F would go into Mountain View’s general fund, which covers public services and basic operating expenses.
The ballot language lists potential spending areas, including repairing city streets and sidewalks, improving police, fire and emergency response services, supporting affordable housing, adding new parks and “other general government services.” The city would conduct annual independent audits.
Support for Measure F
A group of five local leaders submitted a formal statement in favor of Measure F, according to city records. Mountain View Mayor Emily Ann Ramos, City Council members Chris Clark and Lucas Ramirez, former Mountain View Mayor Mike Kasperzak and Retired Firefighter Dale Kuersten signed the statement, which largely summarizes what the measure would accomplish.
The League of Women Voters of the Los Altos-Mountain View Area also supports Measure F, according to the statement.
Opponents to Measure F
No formal argument was submitted against Measure F, according to county records.
Check out the Voice’s 2026 Voter Guide, which includes in-depth coverage of this and other local races and ballot measures.
Most Popular
This Mountain View food truck specializes in a cuisine rarely seen along the PeninsulaOctober 13, 2026 2:43 pm
It always surprises me that the argument for a new tax is that it’s been a long time since we updated the tax and we aren’t as high. God forbid we have lower taxes than our neighbors!
Taxing hotel stays is not a slam dunk to increase city revenue. If the overall price (including tax) of similar hotels is about the same, then city projections should prove accurate. Without seeing a comparison of pricing at similar hotels in Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, and Cupertino it is difficult to predict. At the same time, MV City Council has deferred hotel tax payments for selected hotels or motels, as an incentive to build here. It would help to know how many hotels are exempt from the hotel tax and for how many years. At one time, the proposed hotel on Hope Street was deferred for ten years. That’s a lot of tax revenue lost when and if the hotel is ever constructed. All things considered, the proposed tax initiative seems a positive for Mountain View. Donald McPhail
This tax will reduce stays at area hotels and AirBnbs. I have run a backyard AirBnb at my house for several years. Most commonly, parents and grandparents stay to visit their children who live in smaller apartments. Many have told me they are thankful for the lower cost AirBnb compared to the hotels, it allows them to have a longer visit. An extra 5% cost will reduce the stay length a little and will also make it a little more likely visitors will stay in neighboring cities instead. The city will see more money, but restaurants and stores will see less.
Why does the city need to keep increasing tax rates?
Why do we always see articles trying to justify increasing taxes or approving bonds?
Why don’t we see articles on how the city management is becoming more efficient?
Southern USA cities and states do just fine and it cost them much less for services, utilities, road maintenance, …
Why can’t we?
Tax rates shouldn’t keep increasing. A good government would become more efficient and reduce them.
This is a 50% tax increase. It seems kind of brutal, especially since many visitors to Mountain View are family, lob-hunters or visiting middle & high school sports teams, or sometimes local folks such as myself who need a break. What is the need for a 50% tax increase?
“ballot language lists potential spending” = they will waste the revenue on whatever pet project they want; its a nice touch that government employees are exempt.
Most government employees have never had a real job, their solution is always to increase taxes or issue bonds; no surprise there are no formal politicians opposing. They dislike tough choices required in private industry. Increased revenue never is greater than money remaining in peoples pockets; a significant portion is always lost to government administration and inefficiencies.
People get tired of this playbook, to the point, if they aren’t directly paying it, then its fine. Some just go scorched earth and vote for all taxes increases because they are leaving in a year anyway and want to force more jobs to leave California.
I’ve lived long enough to learn that no amount of taxes will ever be enough. Politicians are spending the money of people they don’t know. How careful will you be if you’re asked to spend faceless people’s money so that you can tout your accomplishments?