Despite a large looming budget deficit, a proposed 1% sales tax increase for unincorporated parts of Santa Barbara County failed to gain support from the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.
The supervisors heard a proposal for a ballot measure to increase the sales tax in unincorporated areas by 1%, but took no action due to a lack of support.
If the measure had been approved, residents would have been able to vote on a sales tax hike in unincorporated areas. The increase would have brought the tax rate from 7.75% to 8.75%.
The measure, which would have needed only a simple majority to pass, would have been placed before voters in the June primary election.
Deputy County Executive Officer Brittany Odermann informed the board that the tax increase to 8.75% in the unincorporated areas could generate $33.4 million in annual revenue.
Of the current 7.75% sales tax, the county receives 1%, with the remaining 6.75% split between the state of California, Measure A, roads and transportation, and the local share.
If the sales tax had been approved, the county would have received 2% of the 8.75% tax.
Oderman said estimates show the current rate of 7.75% will bring $16.7 million in revenue for the 2025-26 fiscal year.
The additional revenue also would have provided some relief to the county, which faces a $23 million budget deficit for the 2026-27 fiscal year, which begins July 1.
Odermann said the shortfall is driven by losses in state and federal funding, rising operating costs, and expenses such as the expansion of the Northern Branch Jail.
“Without additional revenue generation, significant budget cuts could impact services used by county residents,” Odermann told the Board.
County staff proposed setting an end date of five years for the tax increase, or allowing it to continue until residents voted to end it.
The increase would only affect unincorporated areas, such as Isla Vista, Orcutt, and parts of the Lompoc, Goleta, Santa Ynez and Carpinteria valleys.
Odermann also shared survey results that polled 800 people from across the county. It showed that only 33% of voters said they were a definite yes, and 32% said they were a definite no.
During the discussion, supervisors representing the North County were reluctant to put the measure on the ballot. It needed four votes from the five-person board to be placed on the ballot.
Fifth District Supervisor Steve Lavagnino said he did not think voters in his district would support it.
Lavagnino added he feels there is deep mistrust of the government in his district right now, all the way from the federal level to the local level.
“If we could go to everybody’s door and have a 25-minute conversation with them, yeah, I can convince people. (If) I sit down with them and go through this,” Lavagnino said. “Problem is, you don’t have that opportunity.”
Lavagnino also said he did not think it should go to voters since other recent items, like the oil and gas phaseout, were not presented to the public as ballot measures.
Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson also opposed the ballot measure and said his constituents would not vote for it.
“They already feel like they’re not getting their share with what they already paid,” Nelson said.
Second District Supervisor Laura Capps said she thought there was a strong case for increasing the rate, but acknowledged the polling is not strong.
She added that recent news about the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Office or jail expansion makes it more difficult to build support.
“I think a significant obstacle for that to pass would be the headlines that people continue to see about $21 million of overtime pay,” Capps said.
Third District Supervisor Joan Hartmann argued that the Board should not focus on how the election would turn out and said they have a duty to present it to voters. The County is headed toward a financial cliff, she added.
“I haven’t heard anything about how we’re going to deal with it and just to say, ‘we’re creative’ and ‘we can do it.’ I think it’s going to be at a tremendous cost,” Hartmann said.