Gullixson: The five biggest myths about Measure A

How much do residents of Sonoma County really care about the condition of their roads? Some would say we're about to find out as voters decide on Measure A, a quarter-cent sales tax on the June 2 ballot.

But I have my doubts. When the voting is completed, it's possible we may find out something different — such as how unhappy the public still is with elected officials for bolstering pensions for employees and themselves and that they aren't ready to trust them with more funding. But that's for a later discussion.

What's clear at this point is that emotions are running high and, based on the discussions I'm hearing in the community and seeing on our opinion pages, so are the misconceptions.

Here are what I would consider the top five myths that have emerged in the debate over Measure A.

Myth No. 1: Voters should reject this and wait for the county to come back with a specific tax.

It's an attractive scenario, and there's a good argument for why this should be a specific tax. But it's not likely to happen. County officials are going with a general tax because it requires only a majority vote. Getting the two-thirds required of a specific tax is difficult if not impossible. Just ask supporters of Measure M, which sought just a one-eighth cent sales tax to support underfunded libraries. It received the support of 62 percent of voters in November but failed. Since 2001, two out of three majority vote measures have passed at the local level in California. But less than half of those needing a two-thirds have been successful, and most of those were to support schools or hospitals. Less than 40 percent of those for roads or transportation have passed.

Myth No. 2: The county can take care of its roads if it just spent its gax tax money wisely.

Not true. Because of the arcane way gas tax revenue is allocated to local governments, Sonoma County is, in a way, punished for its success in limiting growth and urbanization. The county has 1,384 miles of unincorporated roads, one of the largest systems in the state. That's more than double the next largest network in the Bay Area, which is in Santa Clara County, with 684 miles. But because gas tax allocation formula is heavily weighted toward population, Sonoma County gets short-funded. For example, Orange County, which has a little over 300 miles of unincorporated roads, gets 16 times more funding than Sonoma County. And because the gas tax hasn't been increased for 22 years, is not indexed to inflation and people are buying more fuel-efficient cars, the revenue is failing to keep up with the need. According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the gas tax has lost '28 percent of its value since 1997' as costs of highway construction and road repair work have climbed. Our infrastructure is a mess because of it.

If Sonoma County officials have been guilty of anything it's in realizing too late that it couldn't count on gas tax funds and needed to become one of the few counties in the state to dip into its general fund to fill potholes. In recent years, supervisors have made a concerted effort to find more money. They also have committed to spending more than $40 million over the next four years — but that won't get the job done. Measure A would provide an additional $8.7 million a year over the next five years which would help upgrade nearly 160 miles of additional roads.

Myth No. 3: It's a bait and switch. Measure A funds will just be used for other purposes such as pensions.

Yes, because it's a general tax, it's possible. But it's not probable. Not if any of the supervisors hope to be re-elected or if they have any hopes of seeing this tax renewed in five years to help with the additional road repairs. The fact is, if the supervisors wanted to spend money on other things, they could already be doing that with the $40 million they've dedicated to roads over the next fours. Those also are unspecified general tax dollars. One more note: Despite common perception, there are few examples of public agencies in the North Coast not using voter-approved funds for which they were intended. But there is certainly misinformation on both sides of the campaign.

Myth No. 4: There's a clear plan on how Measure A funds will be spent.

Yes and no. Supporters are between the courts and a hard place on this one. If they're too specific about how the money will be spent, they set themselves up for a lawsuit by those who claim they needed a two-thirds majority. But if they're not specific enough, they get hammered by opponents for being unfocused. In truth, the county has a clear commitment to spend the money on roads and transit programs. But the county only receives 44 percent of the money. The other 56 percent goes to the nine incorporated cities. Of those, only Santa Rosa and Petaluma have made a commitment to spend funds on roads and 10 percent on transit programs.

Myth No. 5: Measure A will be used to support public safety.

Not true. It certainly is curious that at the last minute the measure was changed to add those two words. It now says that the tax would be used for 'general governmental purposes such as public safety, local roads and pothole repair, senior, student and veterans transit and other essential services.' But all indications are this was just a way to manipulate voters. The authors knew this was likely to set off critics who would raise it as evidence Measure A funds would end up going for pensions and benefits. And they have. But authors of the bill were willing to take that chance because they know that public is still more inclined to approve something if it supports public safety. It's just election politics. But the only direct benefit that police and fire are likely to see is smoother roads en route to emergencies. No wonder voters feel their trust is being tested. The only real surprise is that the writers of the measure didn't try to slip 'clean water' into the ballot wording as well. Polls show that works as well.

Paul Gullixson is editorial director for The Press Democrat. Email him at paul.gullixson@pressdemocrat.com or call him at (707) 521-5282.