|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
We spearheaded the “No on Measure G” effort.
For the following reasons, we now support Measure G and encourage others to do so also.
Our initial opposition to the initiative was based on of our concern that, as originally presented, the majority of the dollars collected through the measure were earmarked to fund the new public safety building.
We felt that this priority, while important, ignored other equally important, unfunded challenges facing the city. Many in the community also voiced these concerns.
After some initial resistance, the city and City Council heard us. On Sept 10, the council passed a second resolution clarifying how G revenues would be spent. Measure G revenue has now been allocated as follows:
- 35%–40% Public safety facilities
- 30%–35% Parks and open space
- 20%–25% Affordable housing
- 5%–15% Other general government services
While by no means perfect, this new allocation is a vast improvement over the previous plan.
Because the city recognized our concerns and has committed to using significant portions of the Measure G revenue for parks and affordable housing, we no longer oppose this measure.
To the contrary we now believe it will help alleviate some of the city’s most pressing concerns.
We are confident these tax dollars will be used appropriately and effectively and plan to vote “Yes” on G. We urge other residents of the Mountain View community to vote the same.
Signed by: Jim Zaorski, Vivek Chopra, Judy Levy, Robin Lin, Joan MacDonald and Jill Rakestraw
Amid immigration crackdown, Mountain View discovers unauthorized access to license plate dataJanuary 30, 2026 2:14 pm
Sadly, I still have multiple concerns about Measure G. I am voting NO.
My key concern: Measure G is being marketed as a “sock it to the rich” proposal, but the average homeowner will most likely be subject to the higher transfer tax in only a few short years. The marketing materials are misleading. They stress that only a few residents will be subject to the tax, but that is only true TODAY. It most likely will NOT BE TRUE in just over a decade from now. If only a trivial number of residents would be subject to the tax, why make ANY residents subject to it?
If the City Council wants to ensure that most residents are not subject to the new tax, they could easily accomplish that goal with a simple change to the language. They could strike the word “residential” from the phrase “imposed on residential/commercial property sales above $6,000,000 only”. We need to vote NO on Measure G in order to get the Council to give us a new version, one that makes it clear that residents will not be subject to the higher tax either TODAY or TOMORROW. Increasing taxes on homeowners increases the cost of housing.
Did you know that the average sales price of a home in Mountain View doubled between 2013 and 2024 Q2?
Did you know that as of 2024 Q2, the average sales price is $2.75 million ($2,749,836 to be more precise).
My source for this data is The Troyer Group, a local real estate firm that has been mailing out impressive “Real Estate Reviews” for many years. I have obtained the average sales price information for the years 2013 through 2024 Q2 from their literature.
If housing appreciation continues at the same rate, the average sales price of a home in Mountain View will double again in ten years. In 2034, it will be $5.5 million. And not long after that, it will reach $6 million. At that point, the AVERAGE HOME in Mountain View will be subject to Measure G, and will pay a property transfer tax about 4x higher than what is imposed today.
For the record, I am the owner of a home that is not worth anything close to $6 million. If Measure G is passed, it will slowly be imposed on more and more homeowners as time goes on. It’s a matter of Math. If the City Council does not willingly remove Measure G from the ballot, then voters need to vote NO in order to obtain a new version, one that makes it clear that residents will not be subject to the higher tax either TODAY or TOMORROW.