Lines drawn in sales tax debate

Arguments for and against Petaluma’s Measure Q, a permanent 1-percent sales tax increase, have painted two divergent pictures of the “Better Roads Safer Petaluma Measure,” which will appear on the Nov. 4 ballot. But amid the accusations and promises made on each side of the issue, a pivotal question remains - exactly how would the money from the general sales tax measure be spent?

If the measure passes, city officials say the tax would bring in $10 million in revenue each year for projects such as road repairs, traffic relief and public safety improvements. The move would raise Petaluma’s sales tax rate from the lowest in Sonoma County at 8.25 percent, to the county’s highest rate along with the City of Cotati at 9.25 percent.

Official ballot arguments were released last week, and proponents of the sales tax measure - Councilmembers Mike Healy, Kathy Miller and Gabe Kearney, along with Petaluma Police Officers Association President Garrett Glaviano and retired nurse Judith Hillery - wrote that the tax measure would allow Petaluma to achieve street and sidewalk improvements, accelerate construction of the Rainier cross-town connector and interchange, restore police positions, replace public safety vehicles, repair street lights and have safe police and fire stations.

“Your council majority understands the community’s priorities and will work tirelessly to make sure that the priority projects listed in Measure Q - with streets and the Rainier Connector at the top of the list - get funded and achieved,” the argument states.

But authors of the bill’s opposing argument ­- Mayor David Glass, Councilmember Teresa Barrett, council candidate Janice Cader-Thompson, Petalumans for Responsible Government Executive Director Bryant Moynihan and Sonoma County Taxpayers’ Association Executive Director Dan Drummond - say the measure is “deceptively titled,” representing “empty promises of proponents who want to lull” voters “into believing this tax will pay for road repairs and police officers.”

“Measure Q is a ‘general purpose’ tax that goes directly into Petaluma’s general fund where it can be used for anything a majority of the city council wants to spend it on from pensions to personnel perks,” the argument reads.

While the Petaluma Chamber of Commerce won’t be announcing its position on the tax until September, several other local organizations have already taken stances on the measure. Both the police and fire unions are supporting Measure Q, according to representatives.

The Petaluma Fire Department union president Ken Dick said the decision was made to support the measure after city staff explained the city’s financial situation. Dick said firefighters’ ability to do their jobs relies on the upkeep of Petaluma’s road system, and traffic relief from the Rainier connector could improve response time to emergencies.

Glaviano, who signed the argument in favor of the tax hike, confirmed in an email that the police union will be actively campaigning for the measure.

“Without the resources gained from this tax measure, the level of service the police department can provide will continue to decline,” Glaviano wrote. “The residents of Petaluma deserve better service, but we can only do as much as our resources allow.”

Spending priorities

The proposed tax increase would be permanent, which is necessary to fund the majority of the measure’s potential projects. To make these improvements, the city could spend between $336 and $466 million, according to project cost estimates from a July city staff report.

That includes $86 to $210 million for street and sidewalk maintenance and repair, $88 million for the Rainier connector and interchange, $39 million for flood protection and storm drainage, $53 million for city vehicle replacement, $45 to $51 million to restore public safety positions and $25 million for public facilities.

City Manager John Brown said when deciding how to spend the first fiscal year’s collection of sales tax revenue, the council would likely rely on several “screening mechanisms” to sift through potential expenditures.

One major consideration would be the readiness of a project. Brown gave the example of the downtown fire station relocation - a shovel-ready project that has already been through the site planning and architectural review process. Located on D Street, the current station, built in 1936, is not seismically stable.

“I would put that one on top of the readiness list,” Brown said.

Brown said another place to start could be public safety vehicle replacements. The need to repair or replace degrading vehicles was analyzed and presented to the council earlier this year.

“That would be one of those items I would ask the council to give higher priority to, because we know what it is, and it’s ready to go,” Brown said.

The city manager noted that street projects also range in readiness, and consideration of what can be done without gridlocking town will be important to plan out. Larger ticket items, namely the Rainier connector, would be more difficult to fund right away, Brown said.

“The widening of Highway 101 needs to go forward, and when that does, we can certainly do the cross-town connector piece of it,” Brown said. “There are other elements that need to be put into place to do the full interchange.”

How to monitor spending

In an attempt to alleviate concerns over how the new funds would be spent, a majority of council members agreed to incorporate the creation of a citizen oversight committee to monitor the city’s spending. While the specifics have yet to be hammered out, Brown said committee members would likely be selected in the same manner and at the same time as other council advisory committees. The oversight committee’s mission is to make sure the money is spent as promised.

While the sales tax revenue would still go into the city’s general fund, the council agreed to spell out the revenue’s uses each year in budget reports. Brown said tracking the sales tax revenue through its own set of accounts would ensure that the funds weren’t lost in the “larger revenue stream.”

“(The sales tax revenue) wouldn’t need to have its own budget,” Brown said. “We have a budget that we set up within the larger budget for the successor agency, for example, so we can see revenue sources and area of expenditures.”

But these revenue tracking techniques don’t ease the mind of Dan Drummond, executive director of the Sonoma County Taxpayers Association.

“Our concern is this is just going to be more money going into compensation and pensions, and that problem has yet to be addressed meaningfully,” Drummond said. “I think that’s why they went with a general purpose tax.”

Drummond, who has served on oversight committees for school bond measures, said he views the oversight committee model as “meaningless.”

“Those (committees) are simply devices trying to assuage voters that there is some sort of meaningful oversight,” Drummond said, “but those committees have no authority.”

Judy Hillery, a retired Petaluma nurse and signer on the argument for the measure, is confident in the transparency that has been written into the measure - from clearly identified expenses to quarterly reports on spending to the public.

“Rainier is something the community has wanted for so long,” Hillery said. “If we do nothing, we’re going to get nothing. So we have to try.”

But Drummond argues that the council’s spending promises for the measure’s revenue hold little meaning when it comes to the decisions of future councils.

“What’s to say that the next council wouldn’t have a change of mind?” he questioned.

(Contact Allison Jarrell at allison.jarrell@argus courier.com)