Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transient Occupancy Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hanford council agrees to move proposed hotel tax measure to June 2026 to allow more outreach
Summary
City staff recommended two timing options for a proposed transient occupancy tax ballot measure; council members expressed concern about cost and voter fatigue and indicated consensus to wait for the June 2026 general election to give more time for education and to cut election costs.
City of Hanford officials signaled consensus on Aug. 5 to delay placing a proposed transient occupancy tax (TOT) on the ballot until the June 2026 general election rather than holding a stand‑alone special election in November 2025.
City staff presented two timing options and associated cost estimates and turnout expectations. Staff said holding a special election on Nov. 4, 2025, would bring the TOT into effect earlier and raise an estimated $120,000–$200,000 in additional annual revenue for the general fund, but that the county’s estimated cost to run a single‑issue special election would be substantially higher than bundling the measure with the 2026 election. Staff reported the county’s estimate for a November special election at roughly $92,100–$107,500 and estimated a lower cost of $43,800–$58,300 if the measure is on the June 2026 ballot.
The council’s discussion focused on three tradeoffs: (1) the possibility of capturing revenue sooner with a November special election, (2) the higher direct election cost of a single‑issue special election, and (3) the risk of lower turnout and “voter fatigue” following the passage of Measure H last year. Several council members — including Councilwoman Kimber Regan and Vice Mayor Ken House — said they favored postponing the measure to June 2026 to allow more public outreach and to improve the measure’s chances of passing. Vice Mayor House highlighted the roughly $50,000 election‑cost savings by waiting. Mayor Paden said he “look[ed] at our council, and we have consensus” to move the ballot placement to June 2026 and directed staff to proceed accordingly.
Public commenters at the study session voiced opposition to a near‑term vote. Bob Ramos, who identified himself as a Hanford resident, said the city had only recently enacted a separate sales tax and said residents were not ready for “another thing” on the ballot. Shane Strawn, who spoke during public comment, urged the council to postpone the measure and to devote more time to outreach; he emphasized the compressed campaign window for a November special election and warned that a well‑organized opposition could influence a low‑turnout vote. A third commenter, identifying himself as Chris (City of Hanford), questioned whether increasing TOT would change out‑of‑town travel behavior and cited examples of tourism declines elsewhere.
Staff told the council that if the June 2026 timing is selected it would give the city more time for public education. Staff also noted that the Secretary of State’s calendar (ballots drop in early October for the November election) would leave only about a month of effective campaigning if the city filed for the Nov. 4 special election.
Next steps: staff said they will prepare outreach materials and additional exhibits for public workshops and report back to council. The council did not take a formal roll‑call vote that night; Mayor Paden recorded a council consensus to wait and to use the additional time to expand public outreach before placing the measure on the June 2026 ballot.
