Cities Should Ante Up

There’s nothing like a lopsided David-and-Goliath battle to remind you of how noble it can be to struggle against long odds.

However, in Ventura’s sales-tax struggle with the county, we’re glad David has reconsidered.

Last month the Ventura City Council surprised both the county and other cities by opting out of a 44-year-old agreement on sales taxes. Under the arrangement, which Ventura had never before protested, cities give the county $3.30 for every $1,000 of sales taxes collected by their businesses. The money is aimed at compensating the county for its services.

Spurred by City Manager Donna Landeros, Ventura came up with a different approach to this voluntary quid pro quo: That is, don’t do it. By withholding the money, the city would gain $572,000 for badly needed street repairs.

Understandably, the county viewed this prospect with alarm. Fearing that other cities will follow Ventura’s lead, county officials loaded the heavy artillery: If Ventura went through with its plan, they warned, the county would kill its 1.25% sales tax, depriving cities of $85 million each year. The result would be massive layoffs and dramatic cuts in municipal services.

On top of that, county supervisors suggested--perhaps more realistically--that Ventura could be more accommodating to its top industry, which happens to be county government. Many more of the county’s 7,500 employees could be quite happy working in other cities, they warned.

We’re confident it won’t come to that. After a week of tough talk, Ventura city officials have retreated from their hard line, and asked to negotiate with the county. Perhaps the cash wouldn’t be necessary, city officials said, if the county could provide additional services. For their part, county officials were eager to talk, defusing a volatile situation. Officials from other cities say they have no plans to make demands--and face risks--similar to Ventura’s.

We think that’s just the right approach.

The city’s attempt to reclaim sales taxes may be legal--but it’s also unfair. While the city approved the arrangement so long ago that the Dodgers still played in Brooklyn, it has stuck to it for 43 years. To abandon it now should require reasons more morally compelling than the need to fix the streets.

Candidates for local office invariably try to persuade voters that they’ll “run the city like a business.” However, none of them go on to characterize that as scrapping long-standing agreements that seemed equitable until just the other day, when we really needed the cash.

Ventura County residents have too much at stake to sanction warfare between their city and county governments. Cooperative effort won’t solve all of our problems but prolonged hostility will only derail efforts to improve our juvenile justice system, care for the mentally ill, channel welfare recipients into meaningful work, improve mass transit, and on and on.

Ventura officials justify their proposed move by pointing to Ojai, which quietly bowed out of the tax-sharing business in 1973. Today, that action is saving Ojai--and costing the county--roughly $30,000 a year. We suggest Ojai rejoin the Ventura County cities that currently ante up; nobody wants to let go of cash, but we think that all of Ventura County’s cities should pay their due to the county in a uniform fashion.

Meanwhile, David and Goliath would do well to join forces against a state government that each year dumps more functions on cities and counties without providing more funds. That would be one David-and-Goliath battle where we wouldn’t be cheering on the big guy.