Early Results Show Sonoma Co. Voters Rejecting Sales Tax Hike

Sonoma County voters are turning their thumbs down to a quarter-cent general sales tax measure on today’s special election ballot.

The tally of absentee ballots at 8 p.m. shows 63.3 percent of the voters voted against and 36.7 percent voted in favor of Measure A. The tax needs a majority approval to pass.

No results from the county’s 319 precincts have been reported. The tally represents 27.2 percent of the county’s 240,067 registered voters.

The 5-year tax hike under Measure A would raise an estimated $20 million a year. Fifty-six percent, or $11.3 million will go to the eight cities and the Town of Windsor, and 44 percent, or $8.8 million will go to the county. The tax would cost each resident about $41 a year. The money will be divided based on population and the number of miles of road in the jurisdictions. If approved by the majority of voters, it will take effect on June 2. Ten percent of the money also could be spent on public transit or toward free transit for students and veterans.

As initially proposed by the Board of Supervisors, who were grappling with public anger about the poor condition of many of the county’s 1,370 miles of roads and the failure of past Boards of Supervisors to tackle the issue, the measure was a quarter-cent general sales tax hike for 20 years. It was to be on the March 15, 2015 ballot and was to include a companion advisory measure directing how the money would be spent.

County staff, however received input suggesting there was a lack of public trust that the tax money would actually be spent on road improvements.

County Administrator Veronica Ferguson suggested the Board reduce the life of the tax from 20 to five years, put the measure on the ballot in June 2015 and rescind the proposed advisory measure. Public distrust and skepticism has remained, however because the wording of Measure A states the tax money would go in the general fund for “general governmental services, including public safety, local roads and pothole repair, senior, student and veterans transit and other essential services.”

County officials and supporters of the measure say the “public safety” reference in the measure refers to faster response times along improved roads by police, fire and emergency personnel and safer routes for pedestrians and bicycles.

“The measure does not restrict the use of tax revenue to any specific purpose,” County Counsel Bruce Goldstein said in his impartial analysis of the measure.

If the measure were a specific tax earmarked for road improvements only, it would have required two-thirds approval. The county estimates it needs $47.7 million annually for 20 years to increase pavement condition of the entire road network from poor to good.

County officials also argue Sonoma County receives less revenue from state gas taxes than many counties with fewer miles of roads.

Craig S. Harrison, co-founder of Save Our Sonoma Roads, a citizens group that has lobbied for road improvements for the past four years, is supporting the measure. The group and other supporters say Measure A provides annual audits by the Sonoma County Transportation Authority to show where the tax money is spent.

“I don’t really see a mechanism for the money to be spent on anything else. If we’re not satisfied, the tax expires in five years,” Harrison said.

Harrison said he doesn’t believe a specific tax measure would have received two-thirds approval.

“The reality is, we’re not going to get two-thirds approval. And if the measure was too specific and passed with 50 percent approval, it would have been challenged. The roads are still deteriorating. We need the funds right now,” Harrison said. “It may not be the best option, but it’s the least bad option.”

Opponents of Measure A include Timothy Hannan, president of the Sonoma County Taxpayers Association and Michael Hilber, secretary of the Redwood Empire Tax Committee.

“True, Measure A was first proposed last year as a replacement for declining gasoline taxes that are used for road maintenance. But the Board of Supervisors has since amended the language of the ballot measure to place public safety (read ‘salaries and pensions’) at the top of the list,” Hannan said.

“This began as a ‘roads tax’ and has morphed over time to one that specifies ‘public safety’ and the standard catch-all ‘essential services,’” Hilber said in his ballot argument against the tax.

“This does not guarantee road repairs and has prompted concerned voters to label it ‘bait and switch,’” Hilber said. “Probably it is fair to say the drain the pensions have on the General Fund have a role in the County’s motivation to enact this new tax,” Hilber said.

Proponents of Measure A claim support of the tax from business groups, environmentalists, labor unions, farmers, the Sonoma County Conservation Action, North Bay Labor Council, the Santa Rosa Firefighters Association, police and local city councils.

--Bay City News/Shutterstock image

Also on Patch:

• Are You Hooked On Phonics, Parents? You Should Be
• Hands-On Rainwater Harvesting Workshop in Healdsburg!
• Healdsburg Is Your Jazz Destination: 17th Annual Festival Is Underway
• Missouri Dad Socks Away $25 A Month Since Daughter Was Born For This Trip To BottleRock Napa Valley
• Petaluma Eats! at Vicci Moto Coffee Cart - First To Yelp Review
• Petaluma Farmers’ Market Kicks Off Wednesday
• Know Any Local Environmental Trailblazers? Nominate The Person, Group Or Business