City Council members who breezed – unresisted – through the first three community meetings about a proposed sales tax increase, woke up this morning staring in the face a freshly baked two-tiered conundrum.
• Since the half-cent hike has been hugely popular in the Council’s tour of Culver City neighborhoods, why not raise the ante to a three-quarter cent increase, as some residents have urged?
• Whichever route is chosen, should the initiative be accompanied by a sunset date or made permanent?
Will the more liberal choice offend voters enough to turn it down?
Next Monday is Decision Day, and conditions seem to have been sharply and abruptly altered in these closing hours.
Half-Cent Old News?
Blown away, apparently, is the old notion – of yesterday – that the Council mechanically will endorse a half-cent boost at Monday evening’s meeting because every speaker to-date has said yes, and blithely be on their way.
As Councilman Jim Clarke firmly pointed out at last night’s fourth in a series of five community dialogues, this time at Lin Howe School, reasoning a safe, winning way out of this dilemma is a most delicate undertaking.
Mr. Clarke explained that if the Council places the original half-cent sales tax increase on the ballot, the revenue only would maintain present services, not help City Hall out of a deepening financial hole.
Should the Council be conservative and stay with the half-cent increase, which many regard as a cinch winner?
Or should they take a risk, reach for three-quarters of a cent, which not only would cover the status quo but would partially narrow a deficit?
The temptations over which to choose drool all over a man’s face.
To sunset or not sunset is as daunting for Council members to reason out.
“We are holding these community meetings,” Mr. Clarke said, “because we need to get a sense from the residents about the multiple aspects of the dilemma we have.”
Tell Me More
The freshman Councilman sounded like a man who has not heard nearly enough from residents.
“If we do a half-cent increase,” said Mr. Clarke, “we still have a shortfall with our Reserve Fund, and it would not cover our infrastructure, capital improvement projects. If this is sunset, then unless the economy picks up, we will be right back in the same position in a few years, having to go to voters and asking for still another increase.
“The people who polled the community in May found no substantial difference in residents between sunsetting and not sunsetting,” Mr. Clarke said. “But I think there is, given that there will be at least three other tax measures on the ballot, and ours will be the last one people will be voting on.
“I made the point last night that whatever we do, we need to show a good-faith effort that we are trying to reduce expenses. As much cynicism as there is about government, we have to show we not only will use the money to close the gap but we will apply it to reducing our costs, too.”
Finally, on a cheery note, unlike certain other measures, passage for this proposed hike requires only a 50 percent-plus-one majority.
