Salinas oversight committee reviews Measure G finances and launches extension outreach
Loading...
Summary
City staff presented an unaudited Q2 Measure G financial report showing $12.5 million received year‑to‑date and warned the tax expires in 2030; the city manager said polling and outreach have begun to consider placing a renewal on the ballot.
City staff presented a quarterly, unaudited Measure G financial report and told the Measure G Oversight Committee the city has begun polling and outreach work ahead of a potential extension on the ballot.
Yesenia Nunez, finance management analyst, said the Measure G one‑cent transaction and use tax is projected to generate $34,500,000 in revenue for fiscal 2025–26. "Please note that these numbers are unaudited," Nunez said, adding that $12,500,000 — roughly 36% of the budgeted revenue — had been received through October, and department expenditures stood at about $12,900,000, or 50% expended or encumbered.
The report listed Measure G funding across departments and projects, including public works street and sidewalk repairs, ADA and tree‑planting work, recreation center projects and a fire training tower. Nunez noted Measure G currently funds about 106.5 full‑time positions across police, fire, public works, recreation, community development, finance, human resources and administration. "As a limited time measure, it is set to expire in 2030, potentially leaving the city with a significant annual revenue gap of over $40,600,000 if not renewed by the voters," she said.
Renee Mendez, city manager, told the committee the city has engaged a consultant and has begun drafting polling questions and an outreach plan. "We've started the process on Measure G," Mendez said, describing a project team that includes the city manager's office, finance, the city attorney and the city clerk. She said staff will present poll questions and outreach strategy and that the council will decide whether to place a renewal before voters.
Mendez and committee members debated consultant selection and local experience. One member noted online materials for the selected firm did not show prior work in Monterey County and asked why the firm was chosen; Mendez said firms were scored on a set of criteria, including knowledge of local communities and the quality of proposed polling and legal guidance. "They were selected because they met the criteria set, which was did they understand what they were bidding on?" she said.
Several committee members urged clearer and more visible messaging tying Measure G revenue to services voters remember, such as police, fire and street repairs. Members cautioned that presenting a general‑use renewal as if it were a specific‑use measure risks a fiscal‑challenge claim: a specific use tax requires a two‑thirds vote under the rules the committee discussed. Mendez acknowledged the nuance and said staff is working to show how Measure G supports core services without misrepresenting the legal nature of the tax.
Staff also described next steps: polling results will inform whether the council places a renewal on the ballot; if the council chooses to proceed, the city’s role will be limited to education and a separate community committee would carry out campaign advocacy. Mendez said staff expect to return to the committee with consultants and draft materials and that there may be additional touch‑point meetings before the next quarterly session.
Because the committee did not reach quorum, no formal action was taken at the meeting.
