Opposing campaigns launched over west county tourism tax

With early voting for the March 2 special election rapidly approaching, proponents and opponents of a controversial tax measure on west Sonoma County hotels are squaring up to make their cases.

Measure B, placed on the ballot by the Board of Supervisors in December, would increase taxes on hotel and vacation rental beds in unincorporated west Sonoma County by 4 percentage points, with the goal to raise revenue for the region’s cash-strapped emergency services and its high school district. Campaigns launched in recent weeks pit lodging providers opposing the tax after a difficult year of restrictions brought on by the pandemic against public agencies fighting for budget relief to serve visitors and residents alike.

“Most of the folks in west county recognize that tourism has a couple different sides to it,” said Denny Rosatti, consultant with the Tax Tourists Fairly Yes on Measure B campaign. “One is that it brings a lot of resources and economy to the region. But with that comes burdens on the systems.”

He said increased tax revenue will enable firefighting agencies to recoup some of their costs accrued in providing services to visitors, who represent a sizable portion of emergency calls each year. The money available to schools, Rosatti said, would help mitigate losses due to declining enrollment. An increase in vacation rentals, whose visitors would also pay higher tax if the measure passes, has contributed to fewer students attending west county schools.

Supervisor Lynda Hopkins, who spearheaded the effort in the fall to include public schools in the measure and get it on the ballot, expressed optimism about voters' attitude toward the proposal.

“To me, this just aligns with west county values,” she said. “And it’s at a time when the community feels a need to support one another.”

Hoteliers and restaurant owners leading the “Save Sonoma Jobs” opposition campaign, however, argue that increasing the tax on lodgings will hurt a cross-section of businesses already struggling as a result of shutdown orders that have barred them from hosting non-essential travelers for much of the past year.

“Now, right now, when we’re in our second shutdown?” asked Joe Bartolomei, managing partner of the luxury Farmhouse Inn in Forestville, about the timing of the proposed tax. During the latest ongoing stay-at-home order, Bartolomei said, he’s furloughed his entire staff.

“We’re not just a bunch of hoteliers that are complaining about a tax that we don’t want to collect,” he said. “We legitimately are concerned that the impacts on the tourism industry will be big.”

Save Sonoma Jobs sought research from other areas of the country to affirm that bumping up the tax from 12% to 16%, the highest rate in the county and one of the highest in the state, would deter tourists from choosing accommodations in the west county. Visitors, the opponents said, will take the increased cost of their stays into account.

Crista Luedtke, who owns three food and drink establishments in the region in addition to a boutique hotel, said that any drag on overnight lodging numbers will inevitably affect other employers, as well.

“I see this as being really devastating for not only the hotel group,” she said. “In the hospitality sector, we’ve been pummeled with the fires and the floods and the fires and the pandemic. And now this potential tax hike I think would put the nail in the coffin for a lot of small businesses out here.”

Luedtke and Bartolomei, both of whom sit on the Sonoma County Tourism board of trustees, said Hopkins spent negligible time gathering input from industry professionals before presenting the details of the measure to the Board of Supervisors for consideration.

“There was no conversation before this was too late,” Luedtke said.

Hopkins pushed back on the claim, asserting that she had reached out to Sonoma County Tourism during the brief number of weeks in which she assembled her proposal. She also pointed to public comment periods at three Board of Supervisors meetings as opportunities for opponents to have voiced their objections.

“We invest heavily in continuing to attract visitors,” Hopkins said. “I’m confident in Sonoma County Tourism’s ability to do their job and continue to support that visitorship.”

The opposition campaign, pointing to research by economics professor Robert Eyler at Sonoma State University, also questions the expected annual revenue that the tax would bring in, saying the county projection of $2.7 million is based on inflated numbers. Hopkins said her staff looked at multiple years of data to arrive at that figure.

“$1 would be better than the no dollars that we are currently getting,” she said.

The tax, if approved by a supermajority of voters, would also cement the county’s first foray into funding public schools, with half of the incoming revenue earmarked for school districts in Hopkins’ district.

Her addition of schools as recipients of the tax revenue came in November, as the Board of Trustees for the West Sonoma County Union High School District was considering consolidating its two large high schools onto a single campus.

Parents spoke up in protest throughout October and November about the possibility of El Molino and Analy High Schools being combined as soon as the following fall.

After the Board of Supervisors added schools to the tourism tax, the high school district’s trustees agreed to hold off on its consolidation plan in the event that either the county tax, or a separate parcel tax also on the March ballot, passes.

“As soon as August 2021, the idea of losing a high school campus? That was jarring for people,” said Debbie Ramirez. She’s chairing the Yes on Measure A committee, pushing to get a $48-per-parcel, three-year tax approved.

Seeing Measure A pass this year, Ramirez said, “doesn’t make the need to come up with a solution disappear, but it gives us the time to do it with purpose.”

Voters last March approved a parcel tax proposal from the West Sonoma County Union High School District that was also called Measure B. That tax aimed to keep programs from being cut and boost teacher salaries.

Some community members who pushed for the school board to consider the new tax measure are hoping a reunification study commissioned by the Sonoma County Office of Education will provide a way that would avoid closing El Molino High School. That study is expected to be complete sometime in 2022.

In the short number of weeks before Election Day, the campaigns will focus on reaching west county voters through pandemic-appropriate means. That could include virtual information sessions and other outreach, such as handing out pamphlets and yard signs.

“I can’t emphasize enough that our message is going to be that tourists should pay their fair share for the services they impact when visiting West Sonoma County,” Rosatti said. “I think now is as good a time as there is because of how serious it is.”

Opponents such as Luedtke, however, will push for more collaboration to find another way.

“I very much want to fight this thing all the way to the end,” she said. “And (I) hope that we can bring more education to all the folks in the area to understand all the dynamics of this and come up with a solution together.”

You can reach Staff Writer Kaylee Tornay at 707-521-5250 or kaylee.tornay@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @ka_tornay.