BEVRLYRLY STAFF REPORT. Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 To: From: Subject:

BEVRLYRLY STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 To: From: Subject: Honorable Mayor & City Council Cynthia Owens, Senior Management Analyst Request for the City Council to Take a Positon on (a) Proposition 68 California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal - Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018, (b) Proposition 69 - Motor Vehicle Fees and Taxes: Restriction on Expenditures: Appropriations Limit, (c) the Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018 (#17-0050, Amdt #1), and (d) the Proposed Ballot Initiative (#17-0033) to Repeal Senate Bill 1 - the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 Attachments: 1 Local Streets and Roads Projected Revenues INTRODUCTION - The City Council has historically taken positions on proposed state legislation of interest to Beverly Hills because of the City s location, economy, programs, and policies This item requests the City Council provide direction to staff on drafting letters of support/opposition, adopting resolutions in support/opposition, or remaining neutral on: a) Proposition 68 - California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018; b) Proposition 69 - Motor Vehicle Fees and Taxes: Restriction on Expenditures: Appropriations Limit; c) The Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018 (#17-0050, Amdt #1); and d) The proposed ballot initiative (#17-0033) to repeal Senate Bill 1 the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 The City Council Legislative/Lobby Committee (Liaisons Mayor Gold and Vice Mayor Mirisch) reviewed these items on March 15, 2018 and their recommendations are included in the following section of the report DISCUSSION On March 15, 2018, the City Council Legislative/Lobby Committee recommended that City Council consider: Opposing Proposition 68, Supporting Proposition 69,

Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 Opposing the Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018 (#17-0050, Amdt #1), and Supporting the proposed ballot initiative (#17-0033) to repeal Senate Bill 1 Proposition 68 - California Drought, Water; Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for all Act of 2018 Proposition 68 would authorize the sale of $4 billion in general obligation bonds for state and local parks; water infrastructure and flood protection projects; and other environmental protection projects This ballot measure was initiated by the 2017 state legislature passage of Senate Bill 5 With the assumption of a 35 percent interest rate, this bond is expected to accrue $253 billion in interest with the state ultimately spending $653 billion to pay off the bonds issued Portions of the Proposition 68 bond funds would be allocated as follows: $725 million for the construction of parks in park-poor neighborhoods $200 million in per capita grants to local governments for park rehabilitation grants o $200,000 minimum for cities o $40 million in grants to local jurisdictions where voters have passed local or regional park infrastructure improvement measures $142 million for the California River Parkways Act o $375 million to the Santa Monica Conservancy for projects to enhance the Los Angeles River Watershed On March 15, 2018, the City Council Legislative/Lobby Committee recommended the City oppose this legislation The Liaisons expressed concerns about the $4 billion bond becoming a $653 billion bond once $253 billion in interest accrues The Liaisons also expressed concerns with how the repayment of the bond would affect the state s other general fund obligations and programs Proposition 69 - Motor Vehicle Fees and Taxes: Restrictions on Expenditures: Appropriations Limit Proposition 69 would require the revenue from the diesel sales tax and Transportation Improvement Fee (TIF) created by the passage of Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) be dedicated for transportation-related purposes SB I is expected to generate $52 billion over the next decade with annual proceeds estimated at $54 billion The legislation requires approximately 50% of the proceeds to be set aside for city and county governments with the remaining amount allocated to the state As defined by SB 1, the new motor vehicle fees and taxes will provide annual funding in the following amounts to local and state governments: Local Funding State Funding $15 billion to local street and road maintenance $1 5 billion for state highway maintenance and rehabilitation $750 million for transit operations and capital $400 million for highway bridge and culvert maintenance and rehabilitation $200 million to the local partnership program $300 million for high priority freight corridors $100 million for the Active Transportation $250 million for solutions for congested corridors Program bikes and pedestrian projects Page2of6

Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 Local Funding State Funding $825 million dollars for the regional share of the $80 million for parks programs, off-highway State Transportation Improvement Program vehicle programs, boating programs, and agricultural programs $25 million for local planning grants $275 million for the interregional share of the State Transportation Improvement Program $25 million for freeway service patrols $7 million for transportation research at the University of California and the California State University $5 million for workforce training programs Total Local Annual Revenue = $2,657,500,000 Total State Revenue = $2,594,500,000 As of 2018, the state constitution prohibits the legislature from using gasoline excise tax revenue and diesel excise tax revenue for general non-transportation purposes This proposition would require the diesel sales tax revenue generated by SB 1 to be deposited into the Public Transportation Account This account is designed to distribute funds for mass transportation and rail systems Proposition 69 would require the TIF revenue be spent on public streets, highways and transportation systems This is the primary funding source for the $15 billion annual funding for local street and road maintenance Additionally, Proposition 69 exempts the revenue from SB l s fee schedules and tax increases from the state appropriation limit, sometimes referred to as the Gann Limit This limit, approved by voters in 1979, prohibits both state and local governments from spending revenue in excess of the per-person government spending in the fiscal year 1978-1979 after several adjustments for cost-of-living and population changes Proposition 69 only applies to the revenue generated by SB 1 and does not restrict any other money the state generates that is related to fuel taxes, vehicle fees, etcetera unless that funding is already restricted by the state s constitution Nothing in this proposition or in SB 1 guarantees local funding will continue at its current levels The funding levels could change with an act of the state legislature Should SB 1 be repealed through a voter initiative, than the passage of this proposition will have no effect The City Council Legislative/Lobby Committee recommended the City support this legislation as long as it did not include provisions to affirm the taxes and fees enacted by the passage of SB 1 Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018 (#17-0050, Amdt #1) The Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018 ( Act ), which is sponsored by the California Business Roundtable, seeks to expand the requirement of a supermajority approval in order to enact new revenue measures The California League of Cities ( League ) is opposed to this Act The League has identified this Act as being detrimental to the ability of local governments to charge fees for services The League is requesting the assistance of local jurisdictions in defeating this Act While the Act applies universally to the state legislature and local government, the information provided below focuses on the impacts to local jurisdictions Page3of6

Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 This Act broadens the definition of what taxes and fees would require approval by a twothirds supermajority vote of the local authority for new revenue measures For local governments, it would also require two-thirds approval of the electorate to raise new taxes or of the governing body to raise new fees For our City, this would require approval by four of the five City Council members for any fee increases Some key elements of the Act regarding taxes include: Requiring two-thirds approval of all members of the local legislative body before a tax can be placed on the ballot; Eliminating local authority to impose a tax for general purposes by majority vote; Expanding the definition of a tax to include payments voluntarily made in exchange for a benefit received, which may include local franchise fees; Prohibiting any tax from being placed on the ballot unless it either specifically identifies by binding and enforceable limitation how it can be spent, with any change requiring re-approval by the electorate, or states in a separate stand alone segment of the ballot that the tax revenue is intended for unrestricted revenue purposes ; and Requiring tax measures to be consolidated with the regularly scheduled general election for members of the governing body, unless an emergency is declared by a unanimous vote of the governing body Additionally, this initiative will restrict the ability of local governments to impose fees or charges, other than those subject to Proposition 218, by: Prohibiting a fee or charge from being imposed, increased or extended unless approved by two-thirds vote of the legislative body; Authorizing a referendum on decisions of a legislative body to impose, increase or extend a fee by petitions signed by 5% of affected voters; Requiring a fee or charge proposed by initiative to be subject to a two-thirds vote of the electorate; Narrows the legal threshold from reasonable to actual costs for fees applied to local services, permits, licenses, etc Further, the measure authorizes new avenues to challenge actual costs by enabling a payor to request a court decide whether they are reasonable Opens up further debate by replacing the existing standard that fees and charges bear a fair and reasonable relationship to the payors burdens and benefits with a more rigorous proportional to the costs created by the payor standard; and Increases the legal burden of proof for local agencies from preponderance of evidence (more likely than not) to clear and convincing evidence (high probability) to establish that a levy, charge or other exaction is: o not a tax, o the amount is no more than necessary to cover the actual costs, and o the revenue is not being used for other than its stated purpose The City Council Legislative/Lobby Committee recommended the City oppose this ballot initiative Proposed ballot initiative (#17-0033) to repeal Senate Bill I - the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 This ballot initiative would repeal SB 1, which enacted the following vehicle fuel taxes and fees to pay for repairs and improvements to local roads, state highways, and public transportation Gasoline excise tax: $012 per gallon Page 4 of 6

Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 Diesel excise tax: $020 per gallon Diesel sales tax: 4% per gallon Road Improvement Fee of $10000 per year for zero-emission vehicles Transportation Improvement Fee (TIF) The fee will be based on the market value of the vehicle with the fee range described below: o $2500 per year for vehicles with a market value $0 - $4,999 o $5000 per year for vehicles with a market value $5,000 - $24,999 o $10000 per year for vehicles with a market value $25,000 - $34,999 o $15000 per year for vehicles with a market value $35,000 - $59,999 o $17500 per year for vehicles with a market value $60,000 and higher SB 1 also specifies that the tax rates and fees specified in this bill are adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) Furthermore, this initiative will require the state legislature to submit any future measure enacting specified taxes or fees on gas or diesel fuel, or on the privilege to operate a vehicle on public highways, to the electorate for approval It is currently estimated that SB 1 will raise approximately $54 billion annually in dedicated transportation funding to rehabilitate and maintain local streets, roads, and highways; safety improvements; repair and replace aging bridges and culverts; congestion reduction; and bicycle and pedestrian facilities According to wwwcaliforniacityfinancecom, the City is projected to receive $950,272 in funding for local streets, toad maintenance and rehabilitation during Fiscal Year 2017-18 (Attachment 1) Of that funding, $236,979 is new funding from SB 1 For Fiscal Year 2018-19, the City is projected to receive $1,453,694 for local streets, road maintenance and rehabilitation with $614,720 generated from SB 1 This legislation also contains language that the tax rates and fees are adjusted annually for CPI; therefore, the annual amount generated by SB 1 could increase each fiscal year The City Council Legislative/Lobby Committee expressed concerns that the increase in the gas tax passed by the state legislature is a regressive tax that will create an undue burden on taxpayers, especially those in lower income brackets Additionally, they deemed the tax to be overreaching by the Governor and state legislature As such, the Liaisons recommended taking a position of support to repeal the increase of the Legislature approved gas and car tax FISCAL IMPACT The anticipated financial impacts to the City for each initiative is estimated as follows: a) Proposition 68 guarantees each City will minimally receive a one-time amount of $200,000 It is unclear how much of the bond money would be available through grants to the City and whether or not the City would receive any of the grant funding b) Proposition 69 guarantees the funding generated by the passage of SB I is dedicated for transportation-related purposes Should this funding not be dedicated, there is potential for the state legislature at a later date to appropriate funds generated by the SB 1 for other purposes It is unknown what the revenue loss to the City would be should the revenue be redirected but it could be up to the annual, dedicated allotment c) Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018 (#17-0050, Amdt #1) would require higher thresholds for the approval of taxes and fees Additionally, it narrows the threshold of what is considered a reasonable cost to recover through Page 5 of 6

Meeting Date: April 10, 2018 a fee to what is the actual cost Pet the Secretary of State s website, there is a potential for substantial decreases in annual local revenues depending upon future actions of the state legislature, local governing bodies, voters and the courts d) Proposed ballot initiative (#17-0033) to repeal Senate Bill I - the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 would decrease City revenue The City is projected to receive $950,272 in funding for local streets, road maintenance and rehabilitation during Fiscal Year 2017-18 Of that funding, $236,979 is new funding from SB 1 For Fiscal Year 2018-19, the City is projected to receive $1,453,694 for local streets, road maintenance and rehabilitation with $614,720 generated from SB 1 Should this item be repealed, the City would lose this new revenue stream for maintaining City streets at an approximate cost of $614,720 per year RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction on drafting letters of support/opposition, adopting resolutions in support/opposition, or remain neutral on: a) Proposition 68 - California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection and Outdoor Access for all Act of 2018; b) Proposition 69 - Motor Vehicle Fees and Taxes: Restrictions on Expenditures: Appropriations Limit; c) The Tax Fairness, Transparency and Accountability Act of 2018; and d) The proposed ballot initiative (#17-0033) to repeal Senate Bill 1 - the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 Page 6 of 6

Attachment 1

44,021 117,569 Local Streets and Roads - Projected Revenues - - - :- - -- 2017-18 2018-19 Estimated 11 January 2018 Hwy Users Tax Loan Road ntnc Hwy Users Tax Loan Road Mntnc Account Repayment RehabAcct Account Repayment RehabAcct LOSANGELESCOUNTY AGOURA HILLS 435,967 23,894 119,870 579,731 512,212 23894 349,026 885,132 ALHAMBRA 1,774756 98,815 495,733 2369,304 2090,074 98815 1,443,431 3,632,320 ARCADIA 1,175,632 65224 327,215 1,568,072 1,383,762 65224 952,755 2,401,742 ARTESIA 349,766 19,117 95905 464,788 410,768 19117 279,247 709,132 AvALöN -:- 81,390 4,238 21,261 106,890 94,914 4,238 61,907 161,059 AZUSA 1 019789 56571 283802 1 360162 1 200305 56571 826350 2083226 BALDWIN PARK 1 543 911 85 873 430 802 2 060 585 1 817 928 85 873 1 254 371 3 158 172 749,019 41,390 207,642 998,051 881,093 41390 604,593 BELLFLOWER 1 566 620 87 146 437 189 2 090 955 1 844 700 87 146 1 272 970 3 204 816 BELL GARDENS 879,112 48,684 244,233 1,172029 1,034,460 48,684 711,137 1,794,281 BEVERLY HILLS 713293 39,387 197,593 950,272 838,974 39,387 575,333 1,453,694 BRADBURY 28,246 1,258 6,313 35,818 32,262 1,258 18,383 51,903 BURBANK 2,144,480 119,404 599,023 2,862,908 2,525,497 119,404 1,744,183 4,389,085 CALABASAS 500,527 27,513 138,029 666,069 588,322 27513 401,900 1,017,735 CARSON 1,911,662 106,491 534,241 2,552,394 2,251,473 106,491 1,555,555 3,913,519 CERRITOS 1,026,906 56,886 285,382 1,369,173 1,208,427 56,886 830,950 2,096,262 CLAREMONT 745309 41 182 206598 993089 876718 41 182 601 554 1 519454 COMMERCE 272690 14,852 74,506 362,048 320,080 14,852 216,941 551,873 COMPTON 2,040,944 113,740 570604 2,725,287 2,403,884 113,740 1,661,435 4,179,059 COVINA 1,004,562 55,717 279,519 1,339,798 1,182,354 55,717 813,879 2,051,950 CUDAHY 504,765 27,751 139,221 671,736 593,318 27,751 405,370 1,026,439 CULVER CITY 823,940 45,590 228,715 1,098,246 969,418 45,590 665,952 1680,960 DIAMOND BAR 1,169,387 64,874 325,458 1,559,720 1376,399 64,874 947,641 2,388,914 DOWNEY 2,322,892 129,407 649,206 3,101,505 2,735,828 129,407 1,890,300 4,755,535 bjaite -- 456,548 25,048 125,658 607,254 536,474 25,048 365,881 927,403 EL MONTE 2,331,732 129,903 651,692 3,113,327 2,746,250 129,903 1,897,540 4,773,693 EL SEGUNDO 347,759 19,004 95,340 462,103 408,401 19,004 277,603 705,009 GARDENA 1 243497 69029 346303 1 658830 1 463768 69029 1 008336 2541 133 GLENDALE 4105503 229353 1 150607 5485463 4837362 229353 3350237 8416952 GLENDORA 1 078 995 59 806 300 033 1 438 835 1 269 836 59 806 873 611 2 203 253 HAWAIIAN GARDENS 311,436 16,772 84,139 412,347 364,954 16,772 244,989 626,715 HAWTHORNE 1,789,761 99,657 499,953 2,389,371 2,107,763 99,657 1,455,719 3,663,139 HERMOSA BEACH 406,540 22,300 111,874 540,714 477,699 22,300 325,744 825,743 H IDDEN HILLS 2,143 10,751 56,914 50,859 2,143 31,302 84,304 HUNTINGTON PARK 1,216,367 67,508 338,673 1,622,548 1,431,785 67,508 986,117 2,485,410 INDUSTRY 14,945 513 2,572 18,029 16,581 513 7,489 24,583 INGLEWOOD 2344547 130621 655297 3130465 2761357 130621 1908035 4800013 IRWINDALE 34,653 1,618 8,116 44,387 39,815 1618 23,630 65,063 LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE 425,403 23,302 116,898 565,603 499,758 23,302 340,374 863,434 L-IABRA HEIGHTS 6,210 31,157 154,936 137,387 6,210 90,719 234,316 LAKEWOOD 1,635,377 91,001 456,529 2,182,907 1,925,759 91,001 1,329,281 3,346,040 January 2018 Ca tiforiacitjfirtaricecow r;;;; tnew

- 842,534 1,409,479 506,285 176,556 604,277 Local Streets and Roads - Projected Revenues 2017-18 Estimated 11 January 2018 Hwy Users Tax Loan RoadMinc Account Repayment Rehab Acct LA MIRADA 1,013,139 56,198 281,932 1,351,268 LANCASTER 3,214,805 179,414 900,078 4,294,297 230,723 1,107,791 37713 189198 910357 37,930 190,287 915,536 23,195 116,362 563,054 545,874 2,738,518 13,035,323 81,975,656 4,594,724 23,050,626 109,621,006 LA PUENTE 831,078 45,990 LA VERNE LAWNDALE LOMITA LONG BEACH LOS ANGELES LYNWOOD MALIBU MANHAHAN BEACH MAYWOOD MONROVIA MONTEBELLO 683,446 687,319 423,497 9,750,931 1,472,133 266,161 730,365 578,861 791721 1,308,300 81,848 14,485 40,344 31,849 43784 72,663 41,368 207,533 167,228 838,945 238 1,192 I I 2018-19 410,613 1,964,593 72,670 353,316 202,395 973,104 159,781 770,491 219,653 1,055,158 364,531 1745,494 MONTEREY PARK 1,261,442 70,035 351,351 1,682,828 NORWALK 2,154,943 119,991 601,966 2,876,900 PALMDALE 3230722 180307 904555 4315583 PALOS VERDES ESTATES 284 835 15532 77 923 378 290 PARAMOUNT 1,146,211 63,575 318,940 1,528,726 PASADENA 2,921,063 162,945 817,455 3,901,463 PICO RIVERA 1,310,916 72,809 365,267 1,748,992 - POMONA 3,163,831-885,740 4,226,127 RANCHO PALOS VERDES 880,329 48,752 244,576 1,173,656 REDONDO BEACH 78,335 392,990 1,880,804 118,980 575,501 508,483 23,716 346,435 878,635 562,523 2,686,864 2,370,012 112,129 1,637,904 4,120,045 148,237 715,607 997,536 4,003,637 11,467 632,110 880,639 3,531,086 10,796 29,548 41,368 167,228 238 431,624 2,442,766 3,471 1,093,283 1,526,284 6,141,081 14,504 Ce 1iFotv iacitj FirLcrLce cow Hwy Users Tax Loan Road Mntnc Account Repayment RehabAcct 1,192,465 56,198 820,903 2,069,566 3787,31 2 179,414 2,620,767 6,587,493 977,832 45,990 671,798 1,695,620 803,788 37,713 550,889 1,392,390 808,353 37,930 554,061 1,400,344 497,511 23,195 338,813 859,519 11492,802 545,874 7,973,776 20,012,452 96,637,317 4,594,724 67,116,782 168,348,823 1,733,308 81,848 1,195,586 3,010,742 312,383 14,485 211,594 538,463 859,101 40,344 589,315 1,488,760 680491 31 849 465235 1 177576 93J 434 43,784 639,565 1,614,784 1,540,165 72,663 1,061,409 2,674,236 1,484,923 70,035 1,023,032 2,577,991 2,537,832 119,991 1,752,752 4,410,574 3,806,076 180,307 2,633,802 6,620,185 334399 15532 226888 576820 1,349,077 63,575 928,660 2,341,312 3,441,016 162,945 2,380,195 5,984,156 1,543,248 72,809 1,063,551 2,679,609 3,727217 176,556 2,579,019 6,482,793 1,035,894 48,752 712,134 1,796,780 1659445 78,335 1,144,273 2,882,054 ROLLING HILLS ESTATES 170,369 9,171 46,008 225,547 199,633 9,171 133961 ROSEMEAD 1,127,172 62,507 313,584 1,503,264 1,326,631 62,507 913,067 342,764 2,302,206 SAN DIMAS 704,878 38,915 195,226 939,019 829,054 38,915 568,442 1,436,410 SAN FERNANDO 27,836 139,648 673,770 595,111 27,836 406,616 1,029,563 SAN GABRIEL 46,633 233,945 1,123,111 991,338 46,633 681,180 1,719,150 SAN MARINO 280,861 15,310 76,805 372,975 329,714 15,310 223,634 568,657 SANTA CLARITA 4,401,577 245,953 1,233,885 5,881,415 5,186,406 245,953 3592719 9,025,078 SANTA FE SPRINGS 379,674 20,794 104317 504,785 446,026 20,794 303,741 770,561 SANTA MONICA 1,914,906 106,673 535,153 2,556,732 2,255,298 106,673 1,558,212 3,920,183 SIERRA MADRE 231,042 12,516 62,792 306,351 270,982 12,516 182,833 466,331 SIGNAL HILL 243,188 13,197 66,208 322,593 285,300 13,197 192,780 491,277 SOUTH EL MONTE 432,804 23,716 SOUTH GATE SOUTH PASADENA TEMPLE CITY 748,634 TORRANCE 2,997,464 VERNON 10,038 January 2018 2,012,212 112,129 537,822 29,548

- - - - - 2,200,849 1,253,119 317185 203,636-10,784 5,602-238,019 Local Streets and Roads - Projected Revenues \ I 2017-18 Estimated 11 January 2018 Hwy Users Tax Loan Road ntnc Account Repayment Rehab Acct WALNUT 621,806 34,257 171,860 827,923 WEST COVINA - 122,565 614,878 2,938,291 WEST HOLLYWOOD 738,354 40,792 204,642 983,788 WESTLAKE VILLAGE 176,513 9, 51 5 47,736 233,764 WHITTIER 1,790,694 99,709 500,215 2,390,618 County of Los AneIes 148,520,749 7,020,753 35,221,432 190,762,934 Total Cities &County: Los Angeles 335,771,823 17,464,962 87,617,523 440,854,308 Ii1!c 1 IhII -----,---- ------ ---- 2018-19 Hwy Users Tax Li Roadntnc Account Repayment RehabAcct 731,120 34,257 500,407 2,591,950 122,565 1,790,348 868,519 40,792 595,858 206,876 9,515 138,993 2,108,862 99,709 1,456,483 170,479,841 7,020,753 102,554,664 391,058,154 17,464,962 255,116,989 1,265,784 4,504,863 1505,169 355,383 3,665,054 280,055,258 663,640,105 - - - CHOWCHILLA 362,558 21,418 107,448 491,424 431,080 21,418 312,858 765,356 MA ERA 75,124 376,878 1,705,121 1,493,463 75,124 1,097,361 2,665,948 County of Madera 4,694,232 333,432 1,672,747 6,700,411 5,753,130 333,432 4,870,557 10,957,119 Total Cities & Madera 6,309,908 429,974 2,157,073 8,896,955 7,677,673 429,974 6,280,776 14,388,423 MARIN COUNTY BELVEDERE 50,869 2,469 12,387 65,726 58,742 2,469 36,068 97,279 CORTE MADERA - 54,100 268,520 10,784 157,525 406,328 FAIRFAX 163,899 8,607 43,179 215,685 191,341 8,607 125,724 325,673 LARKSPUR 268,671 14,292 71,701 354,664 314,239 14,292 208,771 537,303 MILL VALLEY 16950 85035 419170 371228 16950 247596 635774 NOVATO 1,143,640 61,982 310,949 1,516,572 1,341,261 61,982 905,395 2,308,638 ROSS 58,568 2,891 14,503 75,962 67,785 2,891 42,229 112,905 SAN ANSELMO 276,245 14,707 73,782 364,734 323,136 14,707 214,832 552,676 SAN RAFAEL 1,274,781 69,167 346,994 1,690,942 1,495,309 69,167 1,010,345 2,574,821 SAUSALITO 158,836 8,330 41,787 208,953 185,394 8,330 121,673 315,396 TIBURON 204,093 10,809 54,226 269,127 238,555 10,809 157,890 407,254 County of Mann 5,085,918 261,943 1,314,107 661,968 5,908,538 261,943 3,826,301,996,782 Total Cities & Coun Mann 9,206,342 482,931 2,422,750 12,112,023 10,733,547 482,931 7,054,351 18,270,829 MARIPOSA COUNTY County of MariDosa 1,574,171 103,817 520,826 2,198,814 2,693,654 103,817 1,480,000 4,277,471 MEN DOCINO COUNTY FORT BRAGG 167,002 8,835 44,325 220,163 195,179 8,835 129,062 333,077 POINT ARENA 15,117 514 2,578 18,209 16,756 514 7,506 24,775 UKIAH 4507 18,546 93,042 456,664 404221 18,546 270,911 693,679 WILLITS 107,379-28,105 141,087 125246 5,602 81,835 212,683 County of Mendocino 3,652,845 241,335 1,210,719 5,104,899 4,417,906 241,335 3,525,266 8,184,507 Total Cities & County: Mendocino 4,287,419 274,833 1,378,769 5,941,021 5,159,308 274,833 4,014,580 9,448,720 January 2018 Ca Iifory iacityfiarc co