Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears county half‑cent sales‑tax briefing; staff says Bell could lose about $2.7 million annually if not on ballot
Summary
Acting on behalf of the city manager, a staff member briefed the City of Bell council on a Los Angeles County proposal to add a half‑cent sales tax to the June 2 ballot; staff estimated the county measure could divert roughly $2.6–$2.7 million a year that might otherwise have remained in Bell, and the council voted to receive and file the report.
Ricky Mandel, sitting in for City Manager Michael Antoine, briefed the City of Bell council on Feb. 11 about a Los Angeles County proposal to place a half‑cent sales‑tax increase on the June 2 ballot and its likely effect on local revenue.
Mandel told the council the measure "will definitely pass" and that placing a competing city measure would be the only way to ensure that additional proceeds would flow directly to Bell rather than to the county. He reported a back‑of‑the‑envelope estimate that the county measure could mean approximately $2.6–$2.7 million a year that otherwise might have been available to the city.
Council members asked detailed procedural questions about which cities would be affected, whether cities could opt out, and how state-level caps on local sales taxes might be impacted. Mandel said staff would research opt‑out mechanics and report back.
The council moved to receive and file the briefing; the mayor called a voice vote and announced the motion passed (the transcript records a voice vote; no roll‑call tally for this motion in the transcript). The council later took routine consent actions and approved minutes after a clerical date correction.
Why it matters: City staff framed the county measure as likely to pass and said Bell could lose an estimated $2.6–$2.7 million annually if the city does not place a local competing measure, a potential hit to the general fund and local services. Council members expressed competing concerns: some highlighted the need for county funds for health services in heavily impacted communities, while others noted the local fiscal tradeoffs.
What the council did: The council voted to receive and file the staff briefing. Councilmembers asked staff to research opt‑out options and to report back to the council before any local ballot decision is made.
Next steps: Staff will research opt‑out mechanisms and return with options; no local ballot placement or other formal action on the sales‑tax measure was recorded that night.
