The tax revolt continues in Southern California…not.

David Dayen made the point in the aftermath of the May 19th special election that even in conservative Palmdale, an occupancy tax passed with an overwhelming 64% of the vote.  Dave Johnson of Speak Out California made a similar case: In the May 19 special, only 31% of Los Angeles County voters supported measure 1A, whereas 68% supported Measure R in November of 2008, surpassing the 2/3rds threshold required.  Measure R imposed an additional 1/2 percent sales tax to fund much-need transportation projects in the County.

What’s the bottom line behind all this, of course?  That the May 19 special was not a tax revolt and that people will actually vote to raise revenues for services–a fact which makes the acquiescence of our Democratic leadership to the “tax revolt” frame distinctly unhelpful.

And now, even more evidence is coming in of the utter lack of a tax revolt mentality in the California electorate.  This month, Los Angeles County has a series of parcel tax measures to help fund various school districts.  Last Tuesday was the turn of the Pasadena Unified School District.  And the results?

With a turnout of nearly 41%, the voters of South Pasadena decided they actually want a functioning school system and passed the measure, 67.6% to 32.4%.  This tax increase is not a negligible amount of money: a surcharge per individual parcel of $288 per individual parcel and $95 per unit in multi-unit parcels for four years.  And it passed by more than 2-1. Again, this would be a landslide in most elections, but since this type of thing requires a 2/3rds vote in the State of California, this type of statement that indicates the clear will of the electorate is actually a squeaker.  Let me repeat, though: Voters in South Pasadena voted to give themselves a tax increase of over $1000 over four years in many cases to have decent public schools for their children.

There are other parcel tax measures coming up: tomorrow, voters in the Palos Verdes Peninsula USD will vote on whether to impose on themselves a $165 tax every year for four years.  Next Tuesday, voters in the La Canada USD and the Rowland USD will get the chance to weigh in.

And if these results go the way of South Pasadena, it will only serve to strengthen the previously existing evidence that Californians are willing to pay for government services.

8 thoughts on “The tax revolt continues in Southern California…not.”

  1. I’d sure like to put the cost of taxes for the prison-industrial system up for a vote, with dedicated taxes to pay for our prison system, parole system, and court system up for a vote, instead of just giving people the option to vote on harsher punishments.

  2. But these people who are supposed to represent the voters don’t seem to listen to clear signals like these. And, as you point out, willfully misinterpret other signals.

    I didn’t vote against taxes. I voted against a spending cap and some really lousy tradeoffs for a short-term revenue increase. Anybody who heard the floor fight on the May 19 budget propositions at the Democratic convention would know that a lot of Democrats voted no for the same reasons. Essentially the same reasons Calitics gave when they urged a no vote on these propositions. But the GOP doesn’t seem very interested in finding out about any of that. After all, it might introduce a note of reality into their cherished world of delusions.

  3. It seems to me that those tax increases represent not so much a general acceptance of taxes, but an acceptance of taxes for a very specific, consistently supported system (education) by an entity that the voters trust, in this case their local school board.

    I think one could also draw the conclusion that rather than  the voters being duped into voting against the special election propositions, it’s that they may support some taxes, but not in a proposal from the state legislature.  California voters seem at this point to trust their local or regional governments to best utilize tax money over the state, whether that lack of trust if well founded or not.

  4. And I would vote for certain tax increases if they came from my local government.  The distinction is that I can’t possibly trust this dysfunctional state to handle one red penny of my money and I’ll vote against any spending and tax measure they put out there.  What my local government does is a different matter entirely.

Comments are closed.