Tuesday’s election may lack the drawing power of a presidential
or gubernatorial race, but both sides of local ballot initiatives
say voters will get the chance to make some crucial decisions.
Tuesday’s election may lack the drawing power of a presidential or gubernatorial race, but both sides of local ballot initiatives say voters will get the chance to make some crucial decisions.
In Hollister, sales tax initiative Measure T follows on the heels of Measure R, a similar tax increase defeated in November 2006. Supporters of the 1 percent tax hike noted that after Measure R failed – 52 percent to 48 percent – the city had to substantially cut services, including the elimination of positions in the police and fire departments. Even after the cuts, the city still faces a $1.4 million structural deficit.
City Councilman Doug Emerson, a spokesman for the Yes-on-T campaign, said voters need to decide what level of services they want.
“Are we satisfied with the current services?” Emerson said. “More importantly, do we want them decreased?”
Local architect and Planning Commissioner David Huboi led the 2006 effort to pass Measure R, and he’s co-chairman of the Yes-on-T campaign. Huboi said the campaign is much better organized this year, which offers hope for a different result.
For example, the pro-R organizers raised around $5,000 and sent out one flier in the mail. The Yes-on-T campaign, on the other hand, has raised more than $20,000 and mailed four fliers. They also organized phone banking and precinct walks, which will continue this weekend.
The measure’s opponents aren’t nearly as organized, but Hollister resident Marty Richman has been speaking out against the tax increase at government meetings and in the newspaper. A half-cent tax increase for three years would be much more reasonable, Richman said.
“Think about whether the tax is the right size,” he said. “The majority of the money will not be spent on what’s advertised.”
The city council has been “too sanguine” about economic development, Richman added.
“They haven’t embraced it,” he said. “They haven’t enabled it. Until that happens, no amount of taxes is going to help.”
The Yes-on-T camp also faces special challenges this year, Huboi noted. For one thing, it’s a special election, so only those with strong feelings about the issue are likely to vote. In addition, some locals are more leery of a tax increase, given the lackluster local economy.
“But when it comes to what the rewards are and what’s at stake, I remain as committed to seeing Measure T approved as Measure R,” Huboi said. “In fact, I’m more committed.”
San Juan Bautista residents will be voting on Measure C, a smaller, 0.5 percent tax increase. They’re also considering Measure B, which would raise the city’s growth cap from seven homes to around 20 new homes per year.
Both measures, said Councilman George Dias, will help the financially ailing city. Many locals don’t understand that loosening growth restrictions wouldn’t actually lead to more development, Dias said. There are only “a handful” of parcels within city limits that can still be developed, he said, and annexations would be handled separately.
“This is not to promote growth,” Dias said. “This is just to get the state money that we deserve but we can’t get, because our ordinance is illegal.”
City Manager Jan McClintock and state representatives have said California has deemed the Mission City’s growth cap too restrictive, making the city ineligible for some grants and also opening it up for lawsuits.
Former Councilman Chuck Geiger, on the other hand, said he isn’t buying it. Noting that uncontrolled growth led to Hollister’s sewer moratorium in 2002, he said loosening San Juan’s growth rules could cause similar problems.
“This could easily be the final straw that breaks the camel’s back,” he said.
Geiger said he’s also opposed to the sales tax, particularly because, unlike Measure T, it doesn’t end in five years.
Whatever locals decide, they need to get out and vote, Richman said.
“It should reflect the will of the community,” he said.
