Sales tax bill stumbling to the finish line

The state bill, AB 2321, that would allow a half-cent sales tax increase to go to voters in November faces a hearing in front of the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Monday. From what I'm hearing today, all is not well with the bill.

Attentive readers will recall that the Metro Board last month already passed its own ordinance to put the sales tax initiative to voters. But this is a three-headed legislative monster and the Legislature, Metro board and Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors must all agree that the sales tax hike should land in the lap of voters. The Supervisors vote on Tuesday -- they'll likely follow the will of the larger Metro board -- and then the county and Metro have until Thursday to submit the initiative to the county registrar to get it on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Of course, it's all for naught if the Legislature doesn't go along. And whether AB 2321 is heard in committee Monday remains to be seen. It could be put in the so-called "suspended" file that would delay a hearing until Thursday. Why? Seems some senators on the appropriations committee still aren't happy with the project list contained in the state bill.

I can't say for sure who is or isn't happy because hardly anyone is calling me back. Senator Jenny Oropeza (D-Long Beach) didn't respond to a request for an interview Friday. Senator Gil Cedillo's (D-Los Angeles) office didn't return a call. The Metro board last month upped money for projects in both Oropeza's and Cedillo's districts to try to placate them. Cedillo, in fact, saw more than $700 million committed to the 710 tunnel project he has long sought -- here's a link to his bill, SB 1350, concerning how the project should be built/

A legislative deputy in the office of Senator Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) said that the office was still analyzing the bill. Vincent Harris, the chief-of-staff for Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles), called and said that while his boss hadn't made a decision on how to vote Monday, he is sympathetic to the sales tax and is well aware that it would fund three projects of benefit to the 26th district -- the subway extension, Expo Line and either a light rail or busway along Crenshaw Boulevard.

Lynda Glehill, a spokesperson for Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), said Friday afternoon no decision had been made whether to suspend the hearing of 2321 on Monday. I also checked in with the appropriations committee staff and they said 2321 was still on the Monday schedule.

If you're interested in this sales tax, here's what you should be watching: If the Legislature seriously alters AB 2321 so that it conflicts with the Metro board sales tax ordinance, there could potentially be two different laws on the books that have two different spending plans for sales tax revenues (assuming it passes muster with voters in November).

Voters would be left in the dark how their money would be spent and a lawsuit that would invalidate the election would be likely. And, remember, after Thursday the Metro Board can't alter their ordinance.

Much, much, much more next week.

--Steve Hymon

Comments

[Simon]

I plan to leave messages with a dozen state senate offices tomorrow urging a yes vote on this bill, and I encourage others to do so.

The phone numbers are freely available and if you're not a constituent, yes they won't value your opinion as much, but they will notice that you took the time to call and that the issue has salience across the state. Most of these people dream of running for statewide office, so some polite phone messages urging a yes vote will not be a waste of time.

[lsm]

Chuck,

Of course when we are stuck in freeway gridlock we should remember the names of those officials who tried to prevent us from voting to stay clear of the mess. More importantly, we must remember their names when we step into the voting booth; we must vote these myopic politicos out of office and make sure they never return to hurt us again.

[calwatch]

TonyR, that is an interesting suggestion, and one that could happen if the sales tax fails. You will start to see politicians play the blame game as to who didn't support the sales tax measure. Perhaps we will actually see the breakup of the MTA bus system (or rather an acceleration of it... as the San Gabriel Valley, South Bay, and SE LA County has very little MTA bus service).

[Karen]

Metro did the right thing in keeping the state out of the "local" sales tax. Go Metro!

[TonyR]

I hate to go for the nuclear option but is the MTA really necessary in its current form? The scope of the agency is so broad that sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't just be better to have it split into smaller agencies each with an individual focus. I believe this sales tax debacle makes this problem very clear. State/Regional politics is made difficult because we are always trying to balance widely disparate interests such as rural/urban, northern cal/southern etc. Unfortunately, that's politics and there's nothing we can really do about it. Here we have gone out of our way to create a specialized agency that suffers from the same problems.
There are certain transit modes that require an agency with a large geographic reach - Metrolink, freeway building, and strategic planning likely benefit from having a regional agency and can show benefits from taxing that regional tax base.
Mass transit such as local bus, light rail, the subway or bus rapid transit has no benefit for a large portion of the L.A. population. If I lived in the South Bay, San Gabriel Valley, Palmdale etc. I would wonder why I am paying quite a bit to fund these massive projects that will never benefit me. I have noted in previous posts on this blog that I have no interest in funding freeway projects in the high desert or pothole repair in South Gate. I would rather have the money for urban mass transit. Why are we forced into this countywide MTA bureacracy where we have to fund each other's projects? I'm willing to tax myself to build a subway. You're willing to tax yourself to build your local project. What benefit do we get by pooling our money and having a politician disburse it?
Here's an example. Let's say you are the mayor or city council of Los Angeles and want to builld a four billion dollar subway. Let's further say that you had the political will and public support for the project and to raise taxes to fund it. It can't get built. A countywide MTA is incapable of raising this money even with local public support. Instead, we have to raise 40 billion dollars, 36 billion of which has nothing to do with the subway, and hope for four billion to be set aside when it is finally dispersed and that's only if we can get state politicians, 100 local governments and 67% of county voters to agree.
So we have to play this political game to make everybody happy because the MTA was created as this mammoth organization that controls every program even remotely related to transit in the county. Why is the MTA even in charge of building freeways? Something tells me that an agency in charge of building a freeway in the high desert and running local buses in the south bay won't be very good at doing either. Just because sales tax is collected at the county level doesn't mean we have to have a transit agency at the local level.

[Chuck]

So many have worked so hard to put this to the voters, and we will remember the names of those that didn't let us vote every time we are in our cars stopped on the freeway!

[Flanders]

Why would Senator Jenny Oropeza and Senator Gil Cedillo want to make traffic worse in Los Angeles County? I thought this sales tax was up to the voters to decide. Are you telling me these two can take away the rights of Los Angeles County voters? I hope their salaries went down to minimum wage today. It will make their soon-to-be unemployment checks more palatable.

[SLR]

I can't wait to see which state legislator steps up to restrict voter's rights and actually make traffic WORSE in Los Angeles. I hope they kept their day job.

[James Adler]

I thought this was up to the Los Angeles County voters to decide. If the state legislature screws this up - well - I guess that would be expected considering how they are dealing with the state budget. That being said - this is a local vote and should NOT involve the state. The state (with it's 20% approval rating) is the reason local cities and counties are taking matters into their own hands and brining forward local tax initiatives. Any state legislator that restricts a voter's right to vote -
is not a representative of the people and should be not be in public office.