What the Measure Would Do

This measure would levy a $0.02/square foot parcel tax (capped at $7,500) with exemptions for seniors, Social Security Income/Social Security Disability Income recipients, parking garages, and affordable housing units. It would add about $29 to the existing $36 in parcel taxes for the average single-family home, or about $2,000 to the parcel taxes for a 100,000-square-foot multi-family property.

Cost of the Open Space Authority Parcel Taxes for Single-Family and Multifamily Properties

The estimated $17 million in annual revenue would fund the Santa Clara Open Space Authority (OSA) to

• Restore and protect open space, water, and natural lands, including through habitat restoration and wildfire risk reduction.
• Expand public access to parks and open space, including trails, recreation areas, and urban parks, and clean up polluted or vandalized sites.
• Invest in nature-based projects in urban areas, especially in underserved communities, through grants and partnerships (with a cap of 25% of funds for urban grants).
• Provide environmental education, volunteer programs, and workforce development.

The Backstory

In 2020, 81% of voters in Santa Clara County voted yes to pass Measure T, a permanent renewal of Measure Q, a $24 flat parcel tax that generates approximately $8 million per year for the OSA.¹

In the past 10 years, the OSA has more than doubled the amount of land it protects and manages from 12,000 acres to 30,000 acres and has expanded its work on climate resilience, but funding has remained relatively flat.² Independent financial audits included in its annual expenditure report show that parcel tax revenues are expended appropriately and transparently.³

Beyond land acquisition and management, the OSA has hosted hundreds of free community events and volunteer stewardship activities, constructed a neighborhood park in East San José, developed native garden classrooms and outdoor learning spaces for students, and funded urban agriculture, science day camp activities, and community bike rides through its urban grants program.⁴ It collaborates with Peninsula Open Space Trust, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, local tribes, Santa Clara County Parks, wildlife conservancies, FireSafe councils, and CalFIRE.

Municipal financial analysts, who were hired to evaluate the OSA’s fiscal outlook and expenditures, found that current Measure T funding would be insufficient to continue the authority’s current and projected work beyond a few years. Land acquisitions have increased both the total area under management and visitor traffic, leading to higher management and operational costs, while the authority continues to expand its work on climate resilience beyond traditional conservation efforts.

The proposed measure would close this funding gap and grant the OSA authority to adjust the tax annually in line with the Consumer Price Index for the Bay Area. The OSA Board of Directors votes annually on an expenditure plan to select projects aligned with the authority’s objectives and those of the Santa Clara Valley Greenprint. An independent citizens’ oversight committee and an annual audit would ensure funds are spent within the OSA’s jurisdiction and as intended by voters.

As a citizen’s initiative sponsored by the Peninsula Open Space Trust Action Fund, this measure would require a simple majority (50% plus one vote) to pass.

Equity Impacts

The measure would increase equitable access to nature by investing 25% of funds in open space, parks, trails, and grants in urban areas. The OSA would prioritize six neighborhoods that “experience greater environmental burdens and barriers to access to nature” for grants, education programs, and community engagement.⁵ Entrance to all OSA preserves, as well as events and programs, would remain free of charge year-round.

This measure would reduce disproportionate climate and health risks in communities that may not otherwise have resources for wildfire risk reduction, floodplain restoration, and urban greening. Such investments would reduce public health impacts, property damage, and the risk of displacement, which tend to hit vulnerable populations hardest.

The measure would fund partnerships with native American tribes, including cultural access to conserved lands, the use and preservation of traditional ecological knowledge, and support for practices such as cultural land burning.

Although not a progressive revenue source, the proposed parcel tax would exempt senior and disabled property owners to reduce the financial burden on residents on fixed incomes. Because the tax would be based on square footage rather than a flat rate, owners of larger, higher-value buildings would pay more than owners of smaller buildings.

Pros

• The measure would provide approximately $17 million annually in additional, stable, long-term funding for an agency with a strong track record of preserving open space and agricultural land and of directing grants to increase access to parks.
• It would allow the OSA to plan far into the future, knowing it would have sufficient funds to maintain and operate the land it manages.
• The $7,500 cap on the parcel tax would minimize the impact on operating costs for small businesses, nonprofits, and community organizations.

Cons

• Although scaled to building size, the tax would not be means-based, so it would disproportionately impact lower-income property owners and residents.
• It would have no expiration date and could preclude the passage of parcel tax measures for other priorities.