Elections Show Surprising Support for Local Taxes

It seemed a taxpayer’s dream come true. Empowered by two newly implemented state laws, voters in cities around Los Angeles County trooped to the polls with the clout to slash the taxes that hit closest to home.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the ballot box: Voters chose not to wield their tax-cutting ax. Instead, most of the tax measures facing voters in Tuesday’s municipal elections won, many by landslide margins unusual even for issues without a pocketbook impact.

It was a remarkably consistent show of support for local levies in a state that gave birth to the modern-day tax rebellion. The results, observers said Wednesday, reveal a basic political truth: Voters may be mad as hell about taxes but they are also reluctant to jeopardize the bread-and-butter services that affect them most closely--the cop on the beat, the cleanup crew for the park down the street and the neighborhood library.

“You see trees and see parks maintained. You see streets maintained,” said Claremont Mayor Algird Leiga, jubilant after residents approved taxes accounting for nearly a third of the general operating fund. “You can rail against federal taxes or state taxes, but on the local level you can really see what they’re paying for.”

Analysts note that the results arose from a complex blend of the mood of voters, local political conditions and timing. Even in hotly contested campaigns such as one in Claremont, where tax foes fiercely opposed continuing the utility tax and a landscaping levy, voters sided with the city’s leadership in supporting the taxes.

The story was similar elsewhere in the state. In the Bay Area, voters in Sonoma and Marin counties approved all 12 property tax measures in votes that needed two-thirds approval.

So what gives?

These elections, after all, were the first big chance for local voters to decide whether to pay taxes that in some cases have been on the books for years. And it marked the first major test of two tax-limitation initiatives--one passed just last fall--that were pushed by anti-tax activists to give voters veto power over local levies ranging from utility taxes to special assessments for park upkeep.

Observers said city leaders were able to successfully make their cases to voters in those cities where taxes were approved across the board. Officials in several cities had warned that rejection could spell cutbacks in needed services. In Paramount, for example, City Council members backing a bundle of taxes emphasized the importance of funding for police and anti-gang programs. The tax measure won by a 3-1 margin.

“This election shows that when local officials make the case for a new or existing tax, voters will respond,” said Larry McCarthy, president of the Sacramento-based California Taxpayers Assn., a lobbying group.

Some analysts said improving financial prospects also made it easier to persuade voters to extend the taxes. “The economy appears to be improving. Quality of life issues are coming to the fore,” said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, senior associate at the Center for Politics and Economics at Claremont Graduate School.

Leaders of the taxpayers’ movement warned against reading too much into the vote. Joel Fox, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., had predicted passage of some of those taxes on the ballot, saying voters were already used to them.

Analysts said the taxpayer movement could claim some measure of victory just for getting the tax measures to the voters.

“I think, in essence, the tax revolt has succeeded,” Jeffe said.

It also is clear that some voter dissatisfaction remains. Voters in Hawaiian Gardens killed a 6% utility tax that city leaders said was crucial to keeping the city afloat, while San Dimas officials are trying to figure out how to cut $850,000 from the budget after failing to get two-thirds approval for a landscaping tax to maintain parks, medians, hiking and equestrian trails and 21,000 city-owned trees.

In Carson, voters refused a 1% increase in the city’s hotel tax but approved an annual business tax adjustment.

Tax measures in other recent elections have faced a difficult electorate. Los Angeles voters narrowly defeated a 1992 measure that would have raised property taxes to pay for an additional 1,000 police officers. Long Beach went to voters last November seeking funding to replace the city’s outdated 911 emergency system. The measure got 57% of the vote, but was short of the required two-thirds.

Voters in Bellflower sent mixed signals in Tuesday’s balloting. They approved two taxes--a business license tax and a 5% city levy on utility bills--but elected an ardent anti-tax candidate to the City Council.

“Voters want to feel safe. The vote shows people want law enforcement,” said newly elected Councilwoman Ruth Gilson, who signed the ballot argument against both tax measures.

Some analysts said tax measures rise and fall in cycles.

“There will be periods when 15 cities will pass 15 taxes and periods when none of them will,” said Jay Curtis, founder and past president of the Los Angeles Taxpayers Assn.

Most of the 10 cities with tax measures on Tuesday’s ballot would not have been seeking votes if not for the passage of Proposition 218 last fall and Proposition 62, an 11-year-old measure only recently implemented because of a court ruling. The two initiatives forced cities to ask voters to approve taxes already on the books or extensions of utility user fees and other special taxes and assessments. The measures were cousins of Proposition 13 and designed to close what anti-tax activists said were loopholes in the 1978 measure slashing property taxes.

Mindful of the commanding victory of Proposition 218, city officials awaited Tuesday’s municipal vote with some dread.

Officials in Norwalk and some other cities opted not to risk putting their taxes to a vote, hoping instead to be rescued by the state Legislature or the courts.

Norwalk Mayor Gordon Stefenhagen said Wednesday that he still feels leaders made the right decision in not putting a utility tax to a vote, but that he is heartened by results in nearby cities.

“The results show that people are realizing that city governments can’t keep running with no money, that they can’t keep expecting a high level of services without paying for them,” he said.

Observers said those who expected Proposition 218 to set off a frenzy of tax-chopping at the local polls misread the goals of taxpayer activists. In fact, taxpayer groups were among supporters of some of the tax measures, including a 5% utility tax in South Pasadena.

Lennie Goldberg, of the liberal-leaning California Tax Reform Assn. in Sacramento, said Tuesday’s results were in line with the goals of Proposition 218.

“People want the right to vote on taxes,” Goldberg said. “It’s also clear that the smaller the jurisdiction the more people can see what government is doing with their taxes.”

Still, city officials said Tuesday’s vote was hardly an open invitation for tax increases.

“Residents have shown they are willing to listen if public officials can make a good case for a tax,” Lakewood Mayor Bob Wagner said. “But it is not something I want to do very often.”

* LIBRARY RENEWAL: Librarians and patrons celebrate Pasadena’s passage of 10-year library tax. B1

Final returns from Tuesday’s elections. B5.