Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Revenue And Oversight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee discusses revenue options and oversight concerns amid Measure W reporting
Summary
Committee members weighed longer-term revenue options — including occupancy and utility‑users taxes — and discussed smaller, non‑tax revenue ideas such as naming rights and 'adopt a park' programs. Members also pressed staff for clearer oversight and transparency about how Measure W projects were selected.
At its June 8 meeting, the Cathedral City Finance Advisory Committee spent substantive time reviewing potential future revenue opportunities and discussing citizen oversight concerns tied to Measure W expenditures.
Committee members outlined three categories of revenue ideas: (1) larger ballot measures that could raise meaningful sums (examples mentioned included increases to the occupancy/hotel tax and a potential adjustment to the utility users tax); (2) another half‑percent sales tax measure was discussed hypothetically as a long‑term funding source; and (3) smaller, non‑tax revenue or cost‑savings opportunities such as naming rights for the amphitheater, park adoptions, and operational savings suggestions.
Staff said a 1 percentage‑point increase in occupancy tax would yield roughly $350,000 based on current revenues, while 1 percentage point on the utility users tax could generate roughly $1.3–$1.4 million depending on current baselines and collection; staff presented these as illustrative figures for future consideration.
Committee members emphasized that the committee’s mission includes both monitoring spending and proposing revenue enhancements. Several members urged that any future staff comparisons of peer cities (for hotel tax, UUT and sales tax levels) be an informational inventory rather than advocacy and be a manageable staff task. The committee agreed to request a short comparative inventory of those tax rates among nearby cities at a future meeting.
Members also raised concerns about transparency and perceived fairness in selecting specific streets for Measure W‑funded repairs, noting questions about why some streets in Panorama were chosen while others with visible deterioration were not. Staff responded that project selection stems from the pavement management plan, engineering prioritization, and council approval of the CIP.
No new taxes or ballot measures were proposed or approved at the meeting. Staff will prepare the requested inventory comparing tax levels across nearby cities and return with that item at a future meeting.
