"Public Information Manager Amanda Rodriguez said that a two-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in San Jose could bring in approximately $27 million per year and garner more support because of the health benefits and the fact that excise taxes represent a choice to use a particular good, unlike the case with property taxes, which voters might feel forced upon them. People can choose whether or not they pay this tax by drinking or not drinking sugary beverages, Rodriguez said."
"One option is for San Jose is to enact a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. Santa Cruz became the most recent Bay Area city to enact such a tax after voters greenlit their own measure in November 2024. It includes sodas, energy and sports drinks and sweetened coffees and teas, while carving out exemptions such as for milk, baby formula, alcohol and naturally sweetened beverages."
"The city's deferred maintenance backlog has swelled to more than half a billion dollars, and a survey conducted in the fall found that 75% of participants agreed that San Jose needed more funding to sustain its parks. Meanwhile, the city last explored putting a parcel tax that would have cost the average homeowner $69 on the ballot to fund its parks two years ago, but punted on the idea"
San Jose faces a deferred maintenance backlog exceeding half a billion dollars and ongoing revenue shortfalls for its park system. A fall survey found 75% of participants agreed the city needed more funding to sustain parks. Options for next year's ballot include a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages or another parcel tax. Santa Cruz recently enacted a sugary-drink tax with exemptions for milk, baby formula, alcohol and naturally sweetened beverages. A two-cent-per-ounce excise could generate about $27 million annually and is framed as a consumer choice. County health data suggest such a tax could reduce childhood obesity and chronic disease.
Read at www.mercurynews.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]