Goleta Drops Sales-Tax Plan to Avoid Posing Challenge to Measure A
Bennett says Santa Barbara County may be open to discussing the revenue-sharing agreement after all.
In an abrupt reversal, the Goleta City Council on Tuesday night backed away from plans to place a citywide sales tax measure on the November ballot. The Goleta initiative could have derailed Measure A, a $1 billion Santa Barbara County transportation tax that, if approved, will fund projects over the next three decades.
Although the Goleta gambit could have been a bluff from the start, several council members as late as last week advocated the move as a way to gain leverage in a long-running dispute with the county, which has been reluctant to renegotiate a revenue-sharing agreement the parties entered into when Goleta incorporated in 2002.
Goleta has said the revenue-neutrality agreement — which, by law, counties can require for aspiring cities — is a raw deal, costing the city an estimated $8.2 million in tax revenue next year alone, or a third of its revenue.
The idea was that a sales tax initiative for Goleta would have allowed the city to recoup some of those costs. It could have jeopardized Measure A because that initiative needs a two-thirds majority to pass, and some feared that many Goleta residents would be reluctant to approve both measures, and would favor the local one over the regional.
At Tuesday’s council session, Goleta Mayor Michael Bennett surprised many in the audience by swiftly wrapping up the matter with a short prepared speech before the council voted unanimously to scrap the idea.
“We do not want to be the cause of Measure A failing in November,” Bennett said. “We want to work with the county. There is no good that can come out of an adversarial relationship.”
Also terminated was a ballot proposal to let Goleta voters decide whether they wanted to back out of the revenue-neutrality agreement. The legality of that option had been questioned by county officials.
After the meeting, Bennett was guarded about the reason for the about-face, but he did say that county representatives recently expressed an interest in talking with Goleta officials.
“I am confident we can accomplish our goals over the next year,” he said.
Goleta also had been under pressure from other cities to drop the idea, most vociferously from Carpinteria City Councilman Joe Armendariz, who attended Tuesday’s meeting in Goleta.
There’s a good chance the idea of a Goleta sales-tax measure was a lost cause even without the change of heart. Putting sales-tax measures on the ballot requires a council supermajority — which in Goleta means four of five votes. Only three council members had expressed support for it: Bennett, Jean Blois and Eric Onnen. Council members Roger Aceves and Jonny Wallis were opposed.
However, the measure asking Goleta residents whether to just say no to the revenue-neutrality agreement would have required a simple majority three votes.
Revenue-neutrality agreements prevent counties from losing a disproportionate amount of money from sales and property taxes that would start to go to a new city. Bennett and other Goleta officials have said the agreement is particularly hard on Goleta, and that it is the worst of its kind for any new city in California.
Per the 2002 agreement, the county takes half of Goleta’s sales and property taxes and 40 percent of its hotel bed taxes. Beginning in 2012, the deal would get a little better for Goleta, reducing the county’s share of the sales tax by 20 percent and allowing Goleta to keep all of its bed taxes. However, the terms of the agreement are to go on in perpetuity — in other words, for forever.
Noozhawk staff writer Rob Kuznia can be reached at .
» wrote on 07/04/08 @ 09:45 AM
Could it not be that the "magnificent three" and their highly paid staff and consultants finally had an "ah ha moment" and realized that it required four votes on the council to put the measure on the ballot, and alas they were only three... So in a face-saving move they claim “unity to save Measure A.” What a farce.» wrote on 07/03/08 @ 12:01 PM
The government thinks taxpayer are fools, and will say yes to any new bond or fee if they word it right.» wrote on 07/03/08 @ 11:16 AM
The more government programs and projects, the more job security and job expansion for government employees. Follow the money. And remember, local government here hasn't changed basic focus (i.e. firmly to the left - ever more programs and higher taxes) in decades, so many must approve of what they are doing. Or our elections are rigged...» wrote on 07/03/08 @ 06:59 AM
Yes we the people want police, roads, fire and schools. We don't want free day care, free breakfasts, city subsidized housing for low paid tourist industry workers or $1220 trash cans to impress homeless tourists. We are tired of mission creep and social engineering. No government does a good job of providing anything but the most basic services, seldom at the lowest cost. The argument that people want all these services is claptrap. Not everyone is entitled to these services that government claims "we want".» wrote on 07/03/08 @ 05:59 AM
Yes, We the People want our government to provide and maintain roads and police and ambulances and all the other stuff, but We the People don't want to pay for them, and We the People want to complain all the time about what the government crooks are doing to us. We the People better hope that we never get what We ask for!» wrote on 07/02/08 @ 03:05 PM
what happened is that the County graciously provided Goleta with a way out of the messy corner Onnen and Bennett had backed themselves into. Nothing really changed----except that we had a chance to see how blundering the Chamber-controlled majority can be. good thing we saw it before the fall election for two seats on the Goleta Council, too! Come on people, let's find some REAL statesmen and women to lead us---not these embarassing excuses for leaders» wrote on 07/02/08 @ 06:56 AM
Now is the time for investigative journalism. Why the abrupt change in Goleta's position? A behind closed doors deal with the sneaky crooks at SB city hall? I find it (to use my lest favorite word) disengenuous at best to claim to not want to cause the downfall of Measure A. In spite of all the illegal methods that the city and SBACG will use to try to get their fix, Measure A is doomed by we the people. Don't tread on us!Efforts Aim to Take Bite Out of Carpinteria Mosquito Outbreak
Trash Hauler MarBorg Industries Making Inroads In Recycling
Michael Martz Named Partner With Hayes Commercial Group
Officials Bracing For Winter Rains, Floods in Wake of Gap Fire
Local Scouts Get Out-of-This-World Experience With Orbiting Astronaut
KCLU Acquires Santa Barbara Radio Station KIST-AM
Santa Barbara Ranch Plans Building Toward a Legacy Project
» The Noozhawk Network
The Ultimate Allowance Financial Parenting System
Recession-proof your children. From dependence to financial independence in 18 years flat!
Empower your child to move out and stay out.
www.ultimateallowancebook.com
Santa Barbara Psychotherapy
Individuals ~ Couples ~ Families
Kristine J. Schwarz, M.A., MFT
Marriage and Family Therapist Lic. # MFC 44909
www.santabarbarapsychotherapy.com
McIntire Physical Therapy
Most Insurance Accepted Headache, Back, Neck, Scoliosis, Ribs, Shoulder, Hip, Knee, Ankle, Foot, TMJ Pain & Dysfunction One Hour, One on One with Licensed Physical Therapist 20 years experience McIntirePT.com
