Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Piedmont council pauses vote on proposed transfer‑tax increase to seek more input

Piedmont City Council · July 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After discussing state developments and regional comparators, the council voted to continue the second reading of Ordinance 792 (proposed transfer tax increase to 1.75%) and associated ballot language to the July 20 meeting to allow additional public input and to monitor pending state actions.

The Piedmont City Council on July 7 discussed a proposed increase to the city’s real property transfer tax (from 1.3% to a proposed 1.75%) but unanimously voted to continue the ordinance’s second reading and the proposed ballot language to the July 20 meeting for additional public review and to allow staff to refine language.

City staff noted a recent statewide compromise that removed a pending constitutional amendment from the ballot and appears likely to close a state “initiative loophole” (often described as raising the voter threshold for citizen‑led tax measures). Staff said that change reduces a key legal risk and makes it appropriate for the city to revisit its rate framework. Staff estimated that a 1.75% rate applied to Piedmont’s three‑year average sale price (about $3,000,000) would generate roughly $1.5 million in additional revenue annually.

Councilmembers asked staff for comparative context. Staff summarized that neighboring jurisdictions use tiered or higher transfer taxes (Oakland and Berkeley have higher tiered rates for portions of a sale price). Councilmembers also asked for median sale‑price data; staff said that figure would be provided at the July 20 meeting.

Mayor Betsy Smigel Anderson suggested postponing action to give residents more time to weigh in; Acting City Attorney Denise Pisano confirmed that continuation to the July 20, 2026 meeting would still meet county submission deadlines. Council Member Long moved to continue agenda item 10 (second reading of the ordinance) and Council Member Long moved the continuance of item 11 (ballot language) with both motions seconded and adopted unanimously.

What’s next: both the ordinance second reading and the ballot language will return to the council on July 20 with refined language and additional financial and comparative data; public comment opportunities will be provided before final action.