No new taxes: Petaluma scraps sales tax plan

Petaluma officials have hit the brakes on an effort to place a new sales tax for road repair on the November ballot, following late polling results that showed public support falling short of the threshold needed to pass.

The recent survey showed only 64 percent of Petaluma voters would approve the tax, fewer than the two-thirds majority required, according to City Manager John Brown. The measure was shaping up as a three-quarter-cent tax for 20 years, which would have fueled a $179 million facelift for a wide swath of city streets that are today considered among the worst in the Bay Area.

Members of the Petaluma City Council expressed profound surprise and disappointment over the poll results during a special workshop on Monday, where several blamed an acrid national political climate that has trickled down as unfavorable public opinion of government action at the local level.

“The timing isn’t right,” said Petaluma Mayor David Glass.

Citing the results, Brown advised the council to shelve the effort and save the money it would have cost to move forward. Continuing the process would have cost roughly double the $110,000 spent so far, he said, money that has gone toward two polls, two mass mailers and consultant time to develop outreach materials.

Most on the council appeared to reluctantly direct staff to strike next week’s planned public hearing to consider placing the item on the November ballot. Yet Councilman Dave King said he’d still like to see the hearing go forward, providing a last-minute venue for public input before an August filing deadline.

“I have no doubt that the public wants the roads repaved and are willing to pay for it,” said King, who emphasized that council members themselves have a stake as taxpayers in Petaluma. “I think it would pass, but it would take a lot of work.”

Had the measure gone forward and passed at the ballot, Petaluma planned to quickly bond against the future revenue to embark on a massive $120 million pavement repair program in the first five years alone, said Dan St. John, the city’s director of public works and utilities. Spending would taper off for the ensuing years, but would continue at a level that could maintain streets at a significantly better quality than today for the life of the measure.

The plan was the product of computer modeling that showed where Petaluma should target its efforts for maximum overall impact, incorporating major arterials like East Washington Street and quiet neighborhood roadways alike. Since it would cost less to maintain those improved streets, St. John explained, it would be unlikely that Petaluma would need a similarly sized funding boost to maintain the upgraded status quo once the measure ran out.

“The most cost-effective way to maintain your pavement is to get it up to a good level and keep it there,” he said.

Without the additional funding to get to that point of relative stability, the city’s pavement conditions, on average, will continue to decline, he explained. Traditional funding sources for road repair have not kept up with the need, particularly declining revenue from a state gas tax that comprises around a third of Petaluma’s street maintenance budget.

The city’s street repair budget is just over $3 million for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2017, compared to the $26.6 million Petaluma planned to spend in the first year of windfall from the new tax, according to a report to the council. Petaluma’s streets ranked at a 47 on the 100-point scale of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in 2015, one of five Bay Area jurisdictions with a average pavement condition index of “poor.”

City officials appeared solemnly frustrated in trying to reconcile the persistent community concerns over street conditions with the tepid polling results. Several noted that the results still reflected majority support – just not enough to pass.

“You have a solid majority of the community willing to support this, but it’s not enough,” said Councilman Mike Healy, who first kicked off public talk of a possible tax in a 2015 Argus-Courier editorial co-authored by council members Kathy Miller and Gabe Kearney. “I really think the community lost an opportunity here.”

A formal process to explore the idea of a tax began in February, when Petaluma hired Oakland-based political consulting firm Lew Edwards Group to help with the effort. Early polls incorporated a wide range of possible tax structures and spending plans, with a desire for road repair ranking highly in the results.

The measure under consideration this week was shaping up as a special tax, meaning revenue can only go toward a specific, predetermined purpose. Such taxes must exceed the two-thirds majority to pass, while “general” taxes, which have fewer strings attached, need only a simple majority.

Though general taxes face that lower threshold, such measures have failed multiple times in recent history in Sonoma County, ostensibly over public concern over where the money will be used. A general tax measure aimed mainly toward roads in Petaluma, Measure Q, failed in 2014, and a similar county roads measure, Measure A, failed last year.

Brown said the proposed tax that came into focus for Petaluma was one that sought to take lessons from the failure of Measure Q. An independent committee would oversee the spending plan, independent audits would occur each year, and the accounting for the tax would be presented separately to simplify public review.

The measure would focus squarely on roads as a specific tax, and a corresponding spending plan would show how the money would be used over the years, he noted. The latest round of polling presented several durations and sizes of a specific tax focused on roads.

“At no point did we reach the point that the pollsters considered viable,” Brown said.

Councilman Kearney noted that the spending plan for the first five years of the proposed tax amounted to several multiples of Petaluma’s entire general fund budget. He lamented a sense that negative perceptions of national politics could have played a role in the viability of Petaluma’s measure.

“There’s a perception we’re squandering money at the local level. But there’s no money to squander,” he said.

City officials suggested that the meticulous repair plan presented during the workshop could form the basis of a renewed public outreach campaign, an effort that could perhaps win over enough voters to pass a measure at a future date.

Unlike general taxes, special taxes can go to the ballot outside of a general election. A general tax would need to wait until November 2018.

“We’ll work on it,” Mayor Glass said. “We’ll get it over the top.”

(Contact Eric Gneckow at eric.gneckow@arguscourier.com. On Twitter @Eric_Reports.)