Katharine Mieszkowski

No Vehicle License Fee Increase for SF Drivers

Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill Tuesday that would have allowed San Franciscans to raise the vehicle license fee on cars and trucks registered in the county to help fund local services. 

"Before we embark on a piecemeal approach for one city, we should try to fashion a broader revenue solution to our state's fiscal crisis," Gov. Brown wrote in his veto message

State Senator Mark Leno, who sponsored the bill, replied in an interview: "What does he think that we've been doing unsuccessfully for the past eight years? Arnold Schwarzenegger destroyed this state by eliminating a revenue source worth $6 billion annually to California -- that was the vehicle license fee." Gov. Schwarzenegger cut the state's vehicle license fee from 2 percent of the market value of a vehicle to .65 percent.

In 2009, the state Legislature approved a .5 percent increase in the fee, which expired on June 30 of this year. Gov. Brown could not convince Republican legislators to extend that increase or to allow voters to decide whether to extend it.

Senator Leno's bill, SB 223 would have allowed San Francisco to raise the fee by as much as 1.35 percent to fund local services, like fire protection and public works -- but only if two-thirds of the Board of Supervisors and a majority of voters approved the increase. 

Leno said the governor's veto "makes no sense," adding that the bill was co-sponsored by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce and the San Francisco Labor Council, as well as supported by the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor. 

"That's universal support for a local bill to let voters decide, and the Governor vetoed it," he said. "It could have meant $75 million in new general fund dollars annually to San Francisco, when cities have so few options to replace revenue no longer provided by the state." 

Katharine Mieszkowski
I'm a senior reporter for The Bay Citizen, covering the environment and health. I welcome your tips and comments. I've been a journalist in the Bay Area for more than 15 years, where I've been ... View Profile
David Zisser
David Zisser
wrote on 10/05/2011 at 8:55 a.m. PDT

As I pay a $65 parking ticket to the parasites who inhabit City Hall, I can only say "Thank You", Jerry Brown. This City doesn't have a revenue crisis; rather, it has a spending crisis which is completely out of control. The only way to bring something resembling sanity to San Francisco's spending addiction is to cut off as much funding as possible.

Daniel connelly
Daniel connelly
wrote on 10/05/2011 at 5:18 p.m. PDT

Vehicles impose specific and identifiable costs on a city: congestion, road damage, noise, pollution, and hazard. It is rational that a city be able to charge a fee to help offset these costs. That's basic economics. Vetoing this bill, unless it is replaced with an alternate mechanism to accomplish the same purpose, was an enormous mistake. We need to provide economic disincentives to driving if we are going to promote less damaging alternatives.

David Zisser
David Zisser
wrote on 10/06/2011 at 7:27 a.m. PDT

I hope you're not so naive, Dan, that you think this corrupt city would actually spend this new revenue stream on mitigating the costs "imposed" upon San Francisco by automobiles? No, the money goes into the same pot which pays for an out-of-control city bureaucracy with its self-serving "work" rules, fat and unjustified salaries, and outrageous pensions. If you're a young guy and not working for San Francisco, you're a fool. Get on the gravy train, dude! If you start early enough you might be able to retire like Heather Fong at age 53 with a $265K/year persion. Not bad, for a dummy who started out as nothing more than a patrolman.

Add a Comment

Join the Conversation

Not a member yet? Register Now

You must sign in to post a comment.

or