CHICO — There were various take-aways from Measure A’s failure on the March 3 ballot, some of them local and others beyond the control of the Chico Area Recreation and Park District, which hoped for success in order to trigger improvements.
The last break-down in votes released by Butte County’s election office on March 6 was 18,440 votes against or 52.44 percent, compared to 16,724 yes votes, with 47.56 percent.
The measure would have put an $85 annual tax on every commercial and residential parcel in CARD’s district
CARD was proposing that a $36 million project fund be created by borrowing if the parcel tax was approved. The parcel tax would have raised $3 million annually, with $2 million going for debt service and $1 million available.
Two-thirds vote
CARD General Manager Ann Willmann was disappointed, but said she wasn’t surprised, although a campaign team worked diligently to answer questions and convince voters.
“Surprised it failed? I’m not because a two-thirds measure is tough no matter who or what is putting that measure forward,” Willmann said Wednesday in regards to the need for a two-third supportive vote among active voters.
Because the measure was a tax, it took a larger percentage of support to pass.
CARD Chair Tom Lando initially was against CARD pushing forward with the measure, with the city considering a sales tax increase and other community issues such as safety and roads. Lando said he came around, but was still doubtful of the two-thirds vote needed.
“I always thought two-thirds vote would be difficult to get. I still believe the improvements are extremely important to the community’s future,” he said Thursday.
Lando said he was surprised that the measure didn’t get a majority at least, but also attributed that to the change from polling to mail-in ballot, along with fewer participating voters, among other factors.
There was opposition from the start, from answers to the consultants’ telephone surveys last year to public feedback and comments at community meetings, along with a robust anti-Measure A campaign.
Asked about the factors in the failure, Willmann said. “Some of the public feedback I got included that people were not interested in paying more taxes, and that they would like to see other changes in the community before CARD’s projects,” she said in reference to public safety and roads.
That anti-tax sentiment was felt beyond Butte County, with tax measures in Shasta and Tehama counties, along with the Bay Area and statewide failing March 3.
Other challenges to Measure A included the fact there was no sunsetting of the tax, and its link to an ever-increasing consumer price index, which meant the tax would go up.
CARD’s board had originally wanted the parcel tax as high as possible — at $110 — but later adjusted the level to $85. It also established priorities to be taken that reflected the master plan, capital improvement plan, facilities age and changes to existing park needs.
One of the major benefits would have been the pursuit of an aquatics center to replace an antiquated public pool that had been closed.
Lando said he thought the emphasis was too much on the swim center, “and not enough about kids, adults, year-round sports etc. It was broader than the aquatics center.”
Lando noted that the issue of pensions and paying them off hung over CARD.
“Even though we said — truthfully — that there’s a plan to pay off unfunded liabilities, people weren’t sure. Pensions are hanging over people’s heads.”
Measure’s cost
Overall, CARD spent roughly $132,500 on creating the measure, with $24,500 for EMC Research on a public survey, and $18,000 to Clifford Moss for structuring the revenue measure and communications. It also will owe the Butte County about $90,000 for placing the measure on the Chico ballot, although the county’s bill has not come through.
By law CARD could spend no public dollars on promoting or marketing the tax measure.
Willmann participated in a private campaign of support that did not come from the CARD budget or work on CARD time. Residents for Safe Chico Parks and Recreation raised money and created a campaign team that helped promote Measure A. Willmann said she volunteered with this group, working nights and weekends outside of her general manager’s job.
“It’s important to follow the rules and regulations as far as public entities using tax dollars to promote something. I gave up (private) time to make sure I was not on work time or using district resources (for the campaign),” she said.
Funding that group raised was used on signs, advertising, mailers, the phone bank, texting, newspaper ads and a consultant’s time.
Regarding the possible success of the proposed retail sales tax increase that the city is examining, Willmann said, “A lot will depend on how the proposal is structured. They’ll learn from our mistakes.”
Lando acknowledged that issues such as public safety and roads towered over recreational needs in voters’ minds, but at some point, the district’s needs must be discussed.
Next steps
Asked about what’s next, Willmann said, “We’ll look at tapping into our own budget and reprioritize the projects that use funds over a longer period. Rather than doing 10 things at a time, only one or two at a time.”
“Where do we go from here?” Lando said. “I think we need to figure out how to move the improvements needed along
Good write up. I also have a blog post about this and just updated it. You can find it here
http://chicotaxes.home.blog
Measure A was a fraud and Lando and the rest of the CARD board need to go.
“…along with a robust anti-Measure A campaign.”
So did they spend anywhere near the $64,000 the special interest put into the passage of Measure A? Did they have telemarketers calling people and newspaper ads? Did they even have a Web site or facebook page like the special interests had to pass Measure A.
Maybe Urseny or Lando can put us in touch with the people behind that “robust anti-Measure A campaign” and they can help us defeat the sales tax increase.
CARD spent $265,000 of our tax dollars trying to get a tax increase and the special interests added over $64,000.
And for years CARD has siphoned off millions of our tax dollars to CalPERS that should have gone for park maintenance, programs and new facilities. And CARD and its board has no intention of ever changing that.
It just proves there will NEVER be enough money for the parks no matter how much CARD takes from us.
You know, I have to go through my notes – as you know, they’ve been hiring consultants for years, spending 10’s of thousands of dollars, and they didn’t include any of that in the figure they gave the paper. Your figure might be right, but I’ll dig, might be more!
I just added up all the numbers Urseny listed in the article, including the $90,000 CARD now owes the county. My recollection was that prior to 2019 CARD had spent over $100,000 on consultants for consideration of a tax increase but that was over many years. So I think the figure might be upwards of $400,000, probably almost enough to have fixed the pool.
And then there’s the millions they been sending off to CalPERS but don’t get me started. It’s too early in the day.
OK, I had it wrong. It was $132,500 total. BUT that does not include all the money they spent in prior years on consultants for a tax measure. And I that believe was around $100,000.
I’m sorry I didn’t correct you on that – I was thinking how much they’d spent in the past few years. I don’t even have all the figures, but I know at one point they’d already spent close to $100,000, and that was before they hired EMC. They hired several different consultants, it’s in the blog.
That $132,500 should have been used to reopen Shapiro Pool. I still haven’t heard an apology from the mismanagers at CARD. Perhaps we should demand their resignation.
I think you’re right, let’s come up with two or more good candidates to take on Lando and Worley in November.
“CARD still won’t acknowledge the real reason they lost Measure A – the bond”
And that’s the most infuriating part of all this. They didn’t even mention that in the ballot measure or the voter information guide.
Before voters pass a regressive, permanent, ever increasing tax don’t they have a right to know that CARD would use the money to put the taxpayers on the hook for tens of millions in debt and spend 2 of every 3 dollars from the new tax not on the parks but on debt service?
NOT TELLING THE PUBLIC THOSE FACTS IS FRAUD!
I agree, I really think people need to take this agency more seriously and look for good candidates to turn out Lando and Worley. And then we need to take a good look at the General Manager.
If CARD had taken all the money they spent in the last year on Measure A plus the money they spent in the prior years on consultants regarding getting a new tax through plus throw in the over $64,000 of special interest money spent on Measure A, they would have had most of the money needed to fix Shapiro Pool.
And if they wouldn’t have sent all that money to CalPERS over the years for their crazy pensions they probably could have had more than enough money to build an aquatic center while maintaining all their infrastructure, not that I think this community needs an aquatic center. Fixing the pool would have been good enough in my opinion. Instead they wound up doing neither and wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money. NICE GOING CARD!
It just proves CARD’s board, bureaucracy and the special interests don’t give a damn about the kids, only taking as much money as possible from their parents to keep the gravy train rolling.
Especially when you realize, the repairs didn’t pile up over night, the pool was neglected for years. I remember being at PV Pool with my kids during that time, and listening to the head maintenance guy constantly complain about the board not wanting to pay for necessary repairs. They only had that one guy to fix everything, he divided his time between repairs all over the district, and had no budget to work with. That really makes me angry too.
Here’s an article about a REAL public servant, unlike Lando and CARD’s board and our city council members and the city administration.
He is blowing the whistle on unrealistic pensions in LA.
Chico sure needs its own Tom Moute.
These articles reflect an insider’s knowledge of LACERS as they are authored by Tom Moutes (photo left), the department’s retired General Manager. The articles are objective and well written, addressed to ordinary Angelenos without relying on industry jargon that can be exceptionally confusing.
Nevertheless, he is not bashful in outlining the financial issues facing LACERS as indicated by his opening sentence.
“In 2001, the Los Angeles Ci ty Employees’ Retirement System or LACERS was 100.4% funded, it had a surplus of $557.7 million (no unfunded liability), and its annual contribution from the City was approximately $70 million. In 2019 LACERS is 73.1% funded, its unfunded liability is $6.5 billion and its most recent annual contribution from the City was $676.7 million.”
Moutes first article stresses that the City’s elected officials need to be realistic about the serious financial issues facing LACERS and the City because they cannot continue to kick the can down the road. (The series, The Truth about LACERS, begins Thursday, March 17 … only in CityWatch.)
In his final article, he lists recommendations for the Mayor and City Council as well as the Controller, the City’s unions, LACERS’ Board of Administration, City employees and retirees, and Angelenos.
In between, he addresses the need for qualified and independent Board members who are not beholden to Mayor, the absolute fiduciary duty of the Board members and employees to LACERS’ members, the ever increasing annual contributions that will crowd out basic services, the unfunded liability that continues to increase and will be a burden on future generations (intergenerational equity), the attempts to raid the fund for pet projects, and the politics surrounding the investment rate assumption.
Moutes concludes:
“It is crucial that these conversations start right away. Delaying will only find both the not well-funded LACERS and the structural deficit prone City in worse financial condition and with fewer choices, especially when the inevitable recession hits.”
These articles a must read for our elected officials (and their staffs) and any Angeleno who is concerned about the City’s budget and finances, the Structural Deficit, the Service Deficit, and Intergenerational Theft.
INTERGENERATIONAL THEFT? GOT THAT? BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT CARD’S BOARD AND OUR CITY COUNCIL AND OUR CITY ADMINISTRATORS ARE – INTERGENERATIONAL THIEVES.
“…when the inevitable recession hits.”
Ooops, TOO LATE!
https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/la-watchdog-hidden/19440-the-truth-about-lacers
They are never going to admit that the “lone opponent” kicked their ass. Great work Nita! – John
Thanks John, good to hear from you! Hope you and all your furry friends are doing well.
Ha ha, they thought it was just me – they found out, you can fool some of the people, yadda yadda.