Rent Increase Survey

Have you submitted your latest rent increase data to the rent increase survey?

Response From No on Measure P Committee

Dear Editor:

We would like to respond to the letter in favor of Measure P from Mr. Elnick, Business Representative of the Alameda City Employees Association, Operating Engineers Union Local #3. Mr. Elnick began his letter with the statement, “”With limited development potential and retail space…”. FACT: Alameda has a great deal of development and retail potential at Alameda Point and Alameda Landing.
He went on to say that “While a significant increase in the current tax, it is the least painful…”

FACT: A 122% increase is excessive. On the average home, the seller and buyer would both pay $2,000 more. Not painful? Mr. Elnick stated that the tax could be amortized over many years. FACT: The tax cannot be amortized. It cannot be put on a credit card, paid in installments, or rolled into a mortgage. It has to be paid in full at the close of escrow. He ended with, “If you wish to own property in Alameda, it is a measure of insurance to enhance the value of that asset in the future, as it is enabling of the city wage the war against rot and decay”.

Mr. Elnick, I don’t believe that the $2,800,000 transfer tax revenue (projection based on year to date sales), not the $4,000,000 that the city needs to balance the budget, will save Alameda from rot and decay if that’s truly where we are headed. It represents a very small fraction of the city’s budget. A budget where approximately 75% is city employees’ salaries and benefits (such as your members).

Although Mr. Elnick has a right to his opinion, I believe Mr. Elnick lives in Walnut Creek where the transfer tax is $0.55. So, I agree with Mr. Elnick that it will be least painful for him. But I guarantee that it will be very painful for thousands of Alamedans for the next 20 years and it won’t solve the problem.

Nancy Rogers
No on P Committee

Comments are closed.