Yuba County Supervisors are now dispersing $20 million in sales tax spoils from their Measure K win. Measure K was passed by voters November 3, 2018 with 53.04% deciding to give more money to government. Measure K added 1% to the state tax rate of 7.25% for purchases in the unincorporated areas of Yuba County (excludes Marysville and Wheatland).
The added 1% revenue stream remains in the local community. Opponents of the tax increase argued that Measure K was promoted as a Special Tax (for public safety) that needed a 2/3s approval. However, the ordinance stated it was a General Tax (used for any purpose) needing only a simple majority.
Opponents brought a lawsuit over this deception and prevailed with Yuba County Superior Court Judge Stephen Berrier invalidating the tax. Attorneys representing Yuba County admitted that the tax was promoted for public safety and then argued that the monies were really purposed for general needs all along.
Yuba County Supervisors appealed Judge Berrier’s decision to the 3rd District Appellate Court where it was overturned by three activist jurists. Measure K will last for 10 years, expiring on November 6, 2028. The only option tax opponents have now is to repeal Measure K.
Yuba County voters (53.04%) were convinced that the monies were destined for public safety. The nearly 2-year marketing campaign illegally and unethically used taxpayer monies to create fear. Voters were told that they may not see an emergency responder for an hour after 911 was called. Hundreds of signs touted public safety needs. Town hall meetings of emergency response leaders including the district attorney declared a county emergency if people did not pay more taxes.
As the election approached, Supervisors repeatedly guaranteed the use of the money for public safety. There would be a separate fund and an oversight committee to assure veracity in spending. The County Administrator presented an estimate of annual income of $4.3 million where 92% ($3,956,000) would go to public safety and 8% ($344,000) to economic development. These guarantees and the spending formula were utilized to win over voters.
An October 12, 2021 proposal by County Administrator Kevin Mallen indicated that $14 million had accumulated during the lawsuit from April 1, 2019 – June 30, 2021. And not $4.3, but $6 million was anticipated from July 1, 2021 – June 30, 2022.
Mallen’s document says that the 2018 spending proposal ”was simply an example…but in no way has set a funding distribution formula as Measure K is a general tax and not a special tax.”(Mallen’s emphasis) Due to it being a general tax Mallen says it is up to the board to determine the best use of the money. Supervisor Andy Vasquez insisted that the money be spent for public safety.
Voters are concerned that they were told Measure K funds would be dedicated for public safety and will not be spent for general use. They have a right to be unconvinced. They have been repeatedly deceived by ballot measures saying what voters want to hear and then politicians diverting the funds to other uses.
The Mallen proposal was approved by the Supervisors. The use formula for the now estimated $6 annually was changed from the 2018 proposal to now give 75% to “public safety” (Sheriff / Fire / DA) and 25% to “essential services.” However, included under “essential services” are 2 additional sheriff deputies working with code enforcement, and a fire prevention officer.
“Essential services” also included more employees for the county counsel (different from DA), human resources, and public works. Also, monies will be allotted to hire an economic development director.
The Supervisors agreed with Mallen’s recommendations to disperse the $14 million of taxes accumulated during the Measure K litigation. Supervisors are giving 20% ($2.8 million) to 9 fire districts. They are repaying public safety debt owed other county accounts ($5 million) and also borrowed from Yuba Water ($3.5 million) to remodel the sheriff administration building.
One million dollars already funded in the public safety budget is being replaced by Measure K funds. Where the replaced funds will now be used was not included in the documents. In government, new funding streams often replace current funding sources causing government expansion. Funding is fungible.
Another $1.7 million remains unappropriated at this time.
Winning tax increases is all about how you ask for the money. If Measure K was promoted saying that the first two years of revenue would retire $8.5 million in debt, was for remodeling, and would add more human resources and public works employees, expand the County Counsel department, replace funding already budgeted and hire a business development director would it have passed? Probably not.
(Lou Binninger can be heard on No Hostages Radio podcast, live on KMYC 1410AM 10-1 Saturdays, read at Live with Lou on Facebook and at Nohostagesradio.com)
###