Mon 13 Sep 2010
Commentary: New TAX for City Residents; a matter of time!
Posted by admin under City of Santa Clarita , County of LA , Dave Bossert , Local , Santa Clarita Valley , Tax [6] Comments
Taking over some of the local libraries will prove to be another misstep in what is becoming a long list of bungled efforts on the part of the Santa Clarita City Council and its’ management masters. That list includes Smiser Ranch, the Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital expansion, the Benz Road traffic debacle, the Golden Valley Connector eminent domain fiasco and the soon to be snafu with the proposed Tesoro/West Creek annexation.
Honestly, at what point will the City residents and voters scream; “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore?” I ask because truly the residents of the City appear to be bent over holding their ankles and yelling; “Thank you Sir, may I have another?”
The common denominator in the list of blunders is, of course, the steadfast unwillingness for the City of Santa Clarita leadership to listen to its residents and to work in a constructive way to build consensus among its constituents. It is virtually commonplace for the City Council to ram through decisions on matters that are important enough to residents that fill City Council chambers to express their disapproval.
Yet these elected officials, for the most part, are either unwilling or incapable of engaging the concerns of the constituency present during Council meetings. The simple act of tabling the vote to a later date so that more clarity, a greater depth of information and a more thoughtful analysis may be investigated seems simply out of the question to the Santa Clarita City Council. But that is exactly what they should be doing when the citizenry shows up with passionate pleas and intelligent, respectful questions.
The most recent example of this is the takeover of the County Libraries by the City of Santa Clarita. There were more questions then answers especially about the claim by the City of improved services which was nothing more than “smoke & mirrors” according to Alan Ferdman, Chair of the Canyon Country Advisory Committee.
Of course, the jokers at the Signal were fully and unequivocally supporting the City of Santa Clarita’s position based on what the City fed them and not on any kind actual reporting. As part of a journalistic investigation, The Beacon obtained documentation which references City funds that have been spent on advertising in Signal publications in the last year. These City expenditures total in excess of $150,000, from September 2009 through August 2010.
No surprise as to why the local paper isn’t going to investigate or report on anything that could cast the City in a negative light; they don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them and so the public gets screwed over!
This brings me to a very important issue and one that seems to have been swept under the rug by all those drinking the City’s Kool-aid including the local “newspaper” and that is the Library tax. When Darren Hernandez was pressed at the City Council meeting about the Library Tax he apparently made the claim that the City could still operate the libraries even if they didn’t get that tax revenue. Basically, they are promising more service with a lot less money; how does that compute?
Expanded services with less money seems hard to believe since Santa Clarita Valley received more than $1.4 million dollars in 2009 for its libraries; the bulk of which are within the City boundaries.
The total special tax funding collected throughout the County for 2010 was $12,546,984 million for the L.A. County Library system (11 of the 51 cities, including the City of Santa Clarita, within Los Angeles County pay the special tax as do all the unincorporated area).
The libraries within the Santa Clarita received $1,431,246 in fiscal 2009, the most current year that breakout figures are available. Since L.A County just closed the books on for fiscal 2010 those numbers won’t be available until this November. That $1,431,246 in funds is what was spent exclusively for library services in Santa Clarita.
Now, Los Angeles County Counsel has already determined that the City cannot receive the special tax money collected by the County since the voters approved that special tax for the L.A. County Library system on a ballot vote. This means that once the County libraries are transferred to the City the County Assessor will stop assessing Santa Clarita City residents that tax on their property tax bill.
The County Library will not receive that money nor will the City, the tax will simply just stop being collected from Santa Clarita City residents. If the City of Santa Clarita wants to collect a library tax, then they will need to place a special tax proposal on a ballot and it will need to be approved by 2/3 of City voters pursuant to Proposition 218. (From the Legislative Analyst’s Office: In general, the intent of Proposition 218 is to ensure that all taxes and most charges on property owners are subject to voter approval. In addition, Proposition 218 seeks to curb some perceived abuses in the use of assessments and property-related fees, specifically the use of these revenue-raising tools to pay for general governmental services rather than property-related services.)
So what! This would just be the same $22 parcel tax and the City would be collecting it; right? Sure in a perfect world that would be the case and it would be a palatable move if the City had a good reputation with its citizenry, but that is not necessarily the case here.
What would stop the City from asking for $24, $26, $30 or more dollars for the special tax? After all they are spending lavishly on a new library for dilapidated downtown Newhall. The City could conceivably make a case for that and leave it open ended for further increases and not necessarily just inflation indexed increases.
It will all depend on how confusing they write the ballot measure and how gullible the city voters continue to be. You can bet that City management will do whatever under handedness it must to get that Library Tax measure past, and count on the Signal to help cram it down the throat of their gullible readers.
They will need to because as they have pissed off they’re own voters, so too have they pissed off L.A. County officials. The entire library transfer process ahead will be one that is as difficult and costly as possible. You can bet that County residents are already voicing their opinions on not giving away valuable assets or book collections; only top dollar will do!!
Again, it is absolutely confounding as to why the City of Santa Clarita leadership was compelled to move so quickly on the library takeover. Coupled with the other questionable issues before this; the Golden Valley Connector eminent domain fiasco, Benz Road traffic screw-up, etc., which all collectively have further galvanized this pattern of arrogant snap decision making that seems to come back and bite them again and again.
The euphemism that; “you get more with honey than you do with vinegar”, seems to fall on deaf ears with Santa Clarita City officials. They just continue to do whatever they want regardless of what their constituency has to say. All of this must and will come to an end at some point; but it will be up to City voters in the next City Council election to end this reign of terror and incompetence.
Dave Bossert- Commentary
Dave Bossert is a community volunteer who serves on a number of boards and councils. His commentaries represent his own opinions and not necessarily the views of any organization he may be affiliated with or those of the West Ranch Beacon.
September 14th, 2010 at 8:14 am
[...] Dave Bossert predicts the City won’t be able to collect on the 1997 library tax passed by voters in LA County and says the City will then have to conduct an election for a new tax. Oh, and he also says we can’t trust the Signal to be unbiased when it comes to City matters: “The Beacon obtained documentation which references City funds that have been spent on advertising in Signal publications in the last year. These City expenditures total in excess of $150,000, from September 2009 through August 2010.No surprise as to why the local paper isn’t going to investigate or report on anything that could cast the City in a negative light; they don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them and so the public gets screwed over!” WRB [...]
September 14th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
@Dave Bossert, I believe when you identify Alan Ferdman as Chair of the Canyon Country Advisory Committee, you should also mention he is speaking exclusively on his own behalf and NOT representing the CCAC. We have a process by which an item must be agendized for open discussion and a vote taken of eligible voting members before ANY OFFICIAL position is represented on behalf of the CCAC. This process has not been followed for several years; therefore, Mr. Ferdman is continuously representing HIS VIEWS and not those of the CCAC membership.
I would like to ask the following question regarding the City and local control of Santa Clarita libraries:
If the City did not take the recent action to withdraw from COLA who do you think would pay for additional materials and staffing at the expanded Jo Anne Darcy Canyon Country Library and the new Newhall Library when constructed?
It is my understanding that in addition to the City paying for the actual construction costs, besides sending more money into COLA than receiving back in services even without the additional assessment, COLA told City staff that there is no money for additional staffing or materials for any of our libraries. Existing staff would be moved around, hours of operation would be curtailed at Canyon Country and Valencia to accommodate larger Newhall Library, and existing materials would have to suffice UNLESS City also wanted to pay extra for those also. Therefore, Santa Clarita residents wind up paying three times to have decent library facilities, once to COLA via regular property tax, once through Special Assessment to COLA, and once through City General Fund monies. In the meantime, COLA spends OUR surplus money elsewhere.
In my opinion, the City did the correct thing in deciding to maintain local control of our local dollars, library programs, materials and facilities.
September 14th, 2010 at 7:13 pm
Sorry but I think that you don’t have all the information that you should to make an informed decision. Through the recent actions of the City there will be less money than before until the City asks its residents to vote in a new library tax. I’m not sure that you will be getting expanded services with less money.
As for Alan Ferdman, you’ll have to take up your gripe with him. As far as we are concerned he is the current Chair of the CCAC until we hear differently.
Thank you,
-Dave
September 14th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
@Dave Bossert, I very clearly said that Alan Ferdman is the Chair but is not authorized to speak for the CCAC without following the steps as outlined in CCAC By-Laws.
I also very clearly said even without the Special Assessment dollars, we still send surplus money to COLA.
I know you are not that obtuse Dave so you must be intentionally misinterpreting my comments. Your blog, you can do what you want.
September 15th, 2010 at 7:20 am
Berta,
I am not intentionally misinterpreting your comments. Your comments are not as clear as you may think.
Tank you,
-Dave
September 15th, 2010 at 8:09 am
“You get more with honey than you do with vinegar”…if it’s flies you want, use dog crap. That’s what our city council thinks of us. Actually, they DON’T think of us. This library issue was passed so quickly because they council doesn’t want the public to know the truth, and we’ve no doubt “signing” bonuses have already been paid. There is a very real recall movement afoot. We don’t have to wait 2 years to get rid of these clowns.