PD Editorial: No on Q: Too big, too open, too long

The hard task for California cities in this post-redevelopment age is to find new sources of revenue if they have any hope of seeing major infrastructure projects completed. But not all revenue sources are equal.

The Petaluma City Council has placed on the Nov. 4 ballot Measure Q, a 1-cent sales tax increase intended, in part, to build the long-needed cross-town connector at Rainier Avenue.

There’s no question that Petaluma needs the east-west connector, and it needs roughly $88 million to build it. But Measure Q is not the answer. Simply put, Measure Q is too much, too open-ended and it has no sunset provision. Forever is too long.

At the moment, Petaluma has the lowest sales tax rate in the county at 8.25 percent, matching those of Windsor and Cloverdale. Measure Q would boost Petaluma to the top of the pack, ahead of Santa Rosa (8.75 percent), ahead of Sebastopol (9 percent) and on par with Cotati (9.25 percent.)

Given that it’s a general purpose tax, it requires only a majority vote for approval. But it also is open-ended, meaning once this tax is approved, there are no real guarantees on how the money would be spent. And there’s plenty to be spent.

The tax would generate an estimated $10 million a year, boosting the city’s general fund by more than 25 percent. Supporters say the purpose is to use the revenue to secure bonds to pay for the Rainier project. It’s a reasonable plan. But given the uncertainties of how soon Caltrans would be ready to widen the highway at Rainier, whether it would agree to an interchange there, and how much of the tax would be needed for bonding and how soon, there are too many unknowns.

Meanwhile, details of where else the money would be spent are fuzzy. City leaders say some will go toward a new fire station. Some will go toward repairing city streets, upgrading storm drain systems, creating playing fields and addressing other infrastructure needs. And some will go to restoring 13 police officer positions that were lost in the recent economic downtown. But there’s also concern that it will be siphoned for other purposes.

For example, given that Petaluma is in the middle of contract negotiations with police and fire unions, the risk is high that Measure Q will end up bolstering salaries and benefits and further committing the city to retirement packages that in the long run are unsustainable.

The city’s unfunded pension liability stands at $55 million and is expected to only grow in the near-term. The city has adopted a second retirement tier for employees and benefited from reforms mandated by Sacramento lawmakers. But beyond that, Petaluma’s efforts to confront its pension crisis have been modest at best.

The temptation will be great to direct Measure Q funds to pay for pensions rather than do the hard work of bringing benefits back down to sustainable levels.

Finally, Measure Q comes with no expiration date. The timeline for the Rainier project may be unknown. But what’s certain is that there will, at some time, be an end point. Measure Q should have an end point as well.

Petaluma needs the funds, and it needs infrastructure improvements. But it doesn’t need Measure Q. The Press Democrat recommends a no vote.