Should Pleasanton voters approve Measure HH? (November 3, 2026 ballot)

What's this about?

People disagree about whether Pleasanton voters should approve Measure HH on November 3, 2026.

The measure would slowly raise the city tax on hotel stays.

What supporters say

• Studies do not show that a higher hotel tax always harms hotels or lowers the number of guests.
• Visitors staying 30 days or less would legally pay the tax, not Pleasanton families directly.
• The measure could bring about $1.4 million in its first year and $2.8 million each year later.

What critics say

• The city’s money guess may prove wrong because it depends on future hotel stays and prices.
• City leaders could spend the money on many needs, because the measure does not set one fixed use.
• Higher room prices might make some people choose other places in this very competitive market.

How to read this

The number of points on each side does not show who is right; check how strong the proof is behind each point.

Measure HH would gradually raise Pleasanton’s tax on short-term hotel stays, putting the question of added city revenue against concerns about hotel demand, prices and control over spending. Voters will decide whether to approve it on Nov. 3, 2026.

The case for

The strongest argument for Measure HH is the substantial, recurring revenue it could provide. The city’s official estimate projects about $1.4 million in additional revenue during the first year and roughly $2.8 million annually once the increase is fully phased in. The existing transient occupancy tax would rise from 8% to 10% on July 1, 2027, and then to 12% on July 1, 2028. 1

The money could be used for police, fire protection, streets, parks, recreation and other general government needs. That flexibility matters because Pleasanton describes the measure as a response to broader operating-budget pressure, rather than as funding for one specific project. Still, the projected $2.8 million would ease financial pressure, not necessarily solve the city’s underlying budget problems.

The legal tax charge would fall on short-term lodging guests, including nonresidents, rather than directly on Pleasanton households. The tax would apply to guests staying 30 days or less, with hotels and other lodging businesses collecting and sending the money to the city. 2 That does not mean residents or local businesses would feel no effects: hotels could pass some of the cost into room prices, or absorb part of it through lower margins.

Research also undercuts the idea that a higher hotel tax automatically harms the lodging market. One study of more than 7,000 observations across more than 100 U.S. urban submarkets found that lodging taxes could be passed on to guests without reducing occupancy, average room rates or revenue per available room in its sample. Other research has similarly found that tax increases do not always produce a broad decline in hotel performance. 3

The case against

The city’s revenue figure is an estimate, not a guarantee. Pleasanton’s hotel-tax revenue remains below pre-pandemic levels, and actual collections could change with occupancy, the number of available rooms, travel patterns and the wider economy. The available materials do not provide a city-specific range showing how far receipts might fall below—or rise above—the official projection. 4

Measure HH also would not legally dedicate the money to any particular service. The city lists police, fire, parks, streets, recreation and other uses, but those examples are not a binding spending plan. Voters would give the City Council discretion to redirect the proceeds as priorities change. That flexibility can help city finances, but it provides no enforceable promise that any particular service will receive the money. 6

A further concern is that higher prices could reduce demand, especially because Pleasanton competes with nearby lodging markets and may face price-sensitive customers. Research says the effect depends on factors such as customer sensitivity, local conditions and the availability of substitutes. Local hotelier opposition to a similar proposal in a neighboring community illustrates the concern, but does not measure its likely effect in Pleasanton. 5

The central gap is the lack of a Pleasanton-specific economic forecast. The broader studies suggest that damage is not automatic, but they do not show that Pleasanton would experience no decline in visitors, occupancy or hotel employment.