Mountain Views News Publisher Susan Henderson's Very Confused Defense of the UUT

It doesn't really matter whether you are voting for a renewal of the Utility User Tax (UUT) this April or not. Either way you'd have to be put off by the odd misinformation being put out by the Mountain Views News this weekend. Ostensibly an even-handed approach designed to give you the voter the information needed to make the right decision, it is rather a hodgepodge of cobbled together and contradictory nonsense that on the whole makes very little sense whatsoever.

Susan's article begins with the following explanations regarding the two different UUT Measures up for a vote this April. Despite previously published claims made to the contrary, this appears designed to reassure the voters of the necessity to reconfirm the 2008 decision to raise the UUT as much as 6%. The reason being it is all somehow connected to vital emergency services such as the Paramedics, Fire Department and Sierra Madre's Police Department. There is also a short section at the end of the article that discusses the "no" vote position, but outside of dropping a few names little corroborating information is supplied.

Sierra Madre will be faced with making a decision in April regarding two Utility User Tax Measures. Measure 12-1 will, if approved, extend the current "UUT until its sunset or reauthorization and provide funding for vital city services." Measure 12-2 if passed, will allow "voters to ask that the City Council use additional tax generated by the UUT to fund General Fund's Public Safety Services budgets, including maintaining the Paramedic programs."

Both are, in essence, an extension of the measures passed in April of 2008. A that time, Measure U proposed a temporary increase in Sierra Madre's UUT up to a total of a 12% tax and extending it to cover a broader range of taxable activities.

Measure UA also passed in 2008. It was an advisory question about what to do with any additional funds raised if Measure U passed, just as measure (sic) 12-2 will do if Measure 12-1 is passed.

The User Utility Taxes, which have existed in Sierra Madre since 1993, go to the general fund. With the passage of Measure U and UA in 2008, the specific purpose was to support public safety, i.e., the city's Police, Fire and Paramedic programs.

Susan Henderson then proceeds to supply information that contradicts what she has said in the first 4 paragraphs of her article. The cite can be seen below. That she claims to have a quote from 3 members of the City Council to buttress her assertions is equally troubling as it gives the appearance that their reasons for authorizing a vote on the renewal of the 6% UUT increases have changed after the fact.

Current Sierra Madre Mayor John Buchanan and Councilpersons Nancy Walsh and Josh Moran submitted the arguments in favor of the measures. Their justification says in part, "Today, the city is faced with even greater external financial challenges; the recent windstorms have placed a $500,000 (and rising) dent in reserves, the dissolution of the Community Redevelopment Agency leaves us with approximately $800,000 in potentially unfunded expenditures and the rising energy costs are draining our already whittled down budget."

So which is it? Do Measures 12-1 and 12-2 need to be passed to maintain emergency services such as paramedics, fire and police as previously stated? Or is that money required to help make up budgetary shortfalls caused by windstorm damage and the outrageous spending spree that preceded the shuttering of the CRA?

There is also the matter of Susan's chronology for these claims. The UUT language for the April ballot was completed and approved by the City Council on December 13, 2011 (click here). The news that the State Supreme Court issued a decision that would effectively end all Community Redevelopment Agencies didn't occur until December 29, 2011 (click here).

And the news that neither the Federal or State governments would be footing the bill for windstorm damage clean up in Sierra Madre, or anywhere else for that matter, did not even begin to break until December 30, 2011 (click here). Another unanticipated debacle, with this one leaving the City of Sierra Madre holding the tree and debris removal bag.

So how could the City Council have known that these untoward events would be the reasons for voters to renew the UUT on December 13 when they hadn't even happened yet? I was not aware that the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and Councilmember Walsh possessed any such powers of clairvoyance.

One more question. Can it be that the quote Susan credits to these 3 City Councilpersons is from the sample ballot mailer? Will this be their language justifying a "yes" vote on both the binding and advisory UUT measures? If so, it would certainly stand as proof that their arguments have been changed after the fact. Which certainly lends an air of deceptiveness to the entire mess.

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com