Measure W needs to pass, but a compromise in the future is needed

We probably overstated things a couple of weeks ago when we said there is a consensus of support for Brawley’s Ballot Measure W.

The mood in some circles regarding extending the city’s 4 percent Utility Users Tax might better be characterized as resignation rather than support.

At stake is approximately $1.9 million in General Fund revenue when the current tax expires May 31. City officials say loss of those funds will necessitate cutbacks in several public services, including reductions in police and fire services, elimination of graffiti removal, closure of both Fire Station No. 2 and the Senior Center, and extensive restructuring in Parks and Recreation operations.

In all, the equivalent of 23 full-time positions are on the block, including a part-time janitor.

There’s always a janitor.

Even among the staunchest critics of Measure W, not many seem eager to see that worker go. They aren’t keen on losing those police officers and firefighters, either.

Nevertheless, they are feeling bamboozled over what they say are poor planning and leadership, as well as unmet promises to find an alternative to the UUT when it was up for renewal in 2011. Instead they find themselves days away from having to consent to another five years of the tax or accept Draconian cuts in many essential public services.

There are good arguments why a UUT may be a necessary strategy for helping fund these services. For one thing, it’s probably more predictable than, say, a sales tax, especially as traditional brick-and-mortar retailers struggle in a world increasingly embracing click-and-ship.

What’s more, Brawley lacks the population and interstate access that might make it attractive to most larger restaurant and retail chains.

Attracting new tax dollars to a rural community requires outside-the-box solutions, and these have proven elusive throughout the Valley, not to mention most of the nation.

Just so we’re clear, critics of Measure W haven’t been offering these kinds of solutions, either. There are a few angry swipes at it, such as suggesting cuts in the finance department personnel and eliminating “wasteful” spending. But the finance department has already been cut by 20 percent over the past five years, to the point where there’s probably no one left to spare. There isn’t enough money to be found by cutting back on supplies and services, either.

Payroll accounts for nearly 79 percent of the Brawley’s General Fund. And the two city departments with the most personnel are police and fire, so they’re the ones from which it’s easiest to slice payroll if Measure W fails.

And we agree: Circumstances being what they are, it shouldn’t fail.

That said, we also believe another five years should not pass without presenting Brawley voters a viable alternative to a tax plan that’s starting to look like it’s trotted out as a habit.

The city began levying a UUT in 1991 in response to the loss of sales tax and property tax revenues redirected to state use.

Urgency Ordinance 91-07 set the tax at 5 percent for the first year and at 3 percent annually with the start of the second year. When the second year rolled around, the 3 percent rate was scuttled in a second Urgency Ordinance, and the permanent rate was fixed at 5 percent. A 1996 ordinance dropped the rate to 4 percent.

That same year, California passed Proposition 218, which subjects local taxes to voter approval. Brawley voters have approved ballot measures to retain the tax three times since then, most recently in 2011.

One of the key talking points regarding Measure W is the UUT is not a new tax. That should not make it immune from scrutiny.

And we’re finding it difficult to ignore that it’s always offered as an all-or-nothing solution. Yes, it may be hard to replace the $1.9 million the UUT contributes to Brawley’s General Fund.

But what about replacing some of it? At one point, the city appeared to believe it could get by with a 3 percent tax. And maybe it could, simply by adjusting the fees for certain services.

For instance, there’s probably no reason why the cost of admission for children to the city pool can’t be more than 50 cents, especially if the current fee structure isn’t covering maintenance costs.

Higher fees is a solution that exists as part of — as one reader put it — “the doomsday scenario” if Measure W fails. Perhaps it’s time to look at it as part of a compromise solution as well.

We believe Brawley voters going forward should insist five years hence they won’t again be asked to rubberstamp a stop-gap solution to the city’s revenue issues.

But, for Tuesday, we recommend they agree not to go backward.