County officials were caught off guard by lawsuit filed earlier this week that would block June’s scheduled vote on a half-cent sales tax.
“Were we surprised? Yes,” said County Supervisor Liz Kniss.
The suit, filed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, argues that the county violated Proposition 218 by placing a general tax on the ballot during a special election. But county officials pointed out that they did not call a special election, which was already scheduled in order to pick a supervisor from South County. (Incumbent Don Gage is running unopposed).
County counsel Ann Ravel derided the suit as “more of a media event than a legal issue.” Said Ravel, “While on the face of it, it sounds good, in reality, under state law, this is a regular election and there is a board member who is being reelected.”
Plantiff Doug McNea would not comment on the case. McNea is the Republican candidate for the 24th Assembly District and president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association. That group is affiliated with the Howard Jarvis association, named for the man who authored Proposition 13, which drastically altered the state’s tax structure in favor of longtime property owners.
Opponents of the county’s tax proposal have complained that the supervisors used the “general tax” designation to smooth the path for a specific proposal: a BART extension to San Jose.
The Valley Transportation Authority had considered a quarter-cent tax for a list of projects, especially the BART extension, but a tax for specific purposes requires two-thirds approval. General county taxes only require majority approval.
A ballot argument in favor of the measure, filed last week by the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, listed BART as a potential use of the tax revenues. Lobbyists with the group say they did not strike a deal with the county, but that they are simply hoping to be able to convince the supervisors to spend the money on BART.
E-mail Jon Wiener at jwiener@mv-voice.com
