Saturday, July 25, 2009

County OKs GRT, election by VC citizen petition only

Julia M. Dendinger News-Bulletin Staff Writer; jdendinger@news-bulletin.com

Many of the county residents who attended Wednesday evening's public hearing before the county commissioners left the chambers dissatisfied with the commissioners' decision.

On a 3-2 vote, the commission passed an ordinance to enact a one-eighth of one percent gross receipts tax with no end date for the county's adult detention center.

To make the tax effective, the commission had two choices — take the question directly to a public vote, or wait for 5 percent of the county's registered voters to petition for an election.

"If we pass the ordinance, we can start on the referendum process tomorrow," Commissioner Ron Gentry said of the first option. "Or, we can go the other way if we want to force people to tell us they want an election. It's the situation of poking someone in the eye and saying 'how do you like that?' I think we could lose the whole thing."

After nearly two hours of input from residents, debate amongst themselves and a failed motion by Commissioner Ron Gentry to approve the ordinance and take the matter straight to a public vote, the commission voted 3-2 to approve the ordinance and wait the 60-day protest period to see if the public would gather the necessary number of signatures.

Call for a public vote

As the citizens addressed the commission before the final vote, they all acknowledged the need for the tax to alleviate overcrowding at the detention center, as well a support for the tax.

But many had one caveat — they wanted it taken to a vote.

"I know the need is there. We are currently paying this tax, and it is going to run out," said Bob Gostischa, a Meadow Lake resident. "But there needs to be a new vote for the new tax. I understand it won't cost more. If this is in the open, and not through the back door, I will vote for it, and so will my family, no problem."

William Dean of Los Chavez said the current tax was imposed on the people by the will of the people. "I am not against the tax," he said. "I just want to vote on it."

Noting that the detention center was in "desperate need for improvement," Clark Metcalf also called for the matter to be put to a vote. He cautioned that many in the public were already predicting which way the commission would vote on the matter.

"It is seen as a disregard for the people, and I hope we're not seeing that," Metcalf said.

Alice Torwirt of Rio Communities said she didn't feel that there was enough done to alert people to the proposed ordinance and tax measure. She noted that the agenda was published in the News-Bulletin's Community Databank, but in very small type.

"I don't think there is a doubt in the minds of the people of Valencia County after these recent meetings that we need to improve the jail," said Torwirt. "But this should only be renewed or extended by a vote of the people.

"Any time the commission adds a new tax, it needs to give the public the opportunity to vote."

Cost of an election

The cost of taking the question to an immediate vote or waiting for a public petition was something that concerned Commission chair Pedro Rael.

"Listening to the comments tonight, there is unanimous support. I don't think the public would have a problem with the commission initiating the tax, and then petitioning for an election," he said. "My understanding is that an election will cost anywhere from $42,000 to $80,000. If the commission passes the ordinance, the public can compel an election, but at that cost."

During an interview with county clerk Sally Perea Thursday morning, she said her office's calculations show an election costing between $43,000 and $46,000.

"We talked to AES (Automated Election Services) about the cost of an all-mail election," Perea said. "They gave us a figure of $43,000 for an all-mail election. That doesn't include postage."

The clerk said AES said the cost of setting up polling places for a special election would cost approximately $45,000, with Perea noting that it is not anticipated and that the cost of a possible election would exceed $46,000.

Even if the cost of an election doesn't reach the chair's estimate of $80,000, there is still the question of where the money will come from. According to county finance director Wilma Abril, neither the clerk's budget nor the budget for the bureau of elections contains money for an election, special or otherwise.

"It's not in the budget for the 2010 fiscal year," she said Thursday. "This year isn't on the usual election cycle."

The commission unanimously approved the final budget for the coming fiscal year at Wednesday's meeting.

Countering viewpoints

During the meeting, both Gentry and Commissioner David Medina argued for taking the matter to a vote immediately and not asking the public to gather the signatures.

"I am in support of this tax. I will go out and campaign for it, but we need to get the public's trust back," Medina said. "Let them decide if they want this. We have got a public that doesn't trust its commissioners."

After Gentry's motion failed, Rael made a motion to pass the ordinance with the same parameters set out by the other commissioner — one-eighth of one percent and no end date, but with the matter only going to a vote of the public if the requisite number of signatures were gathered.

"What I've seen here is overwhelming support for this," Rael said. "If the signatures are gathered, then I will see that as a lack of support."

Rael, along with commissioners Georgia Otero-Kirkham and Donald Holliday, via telephone, voted in favor of the ordinance and the petition process, and Gentry and Medina voted against. The commissioners split on the same lines on Gentry's motion, with him and Medina voting in favor of an immediate public vote and the remaining three voting "no."

After the meeting, Otero-Kirkham said she saw overwhelming support for the tax.

"If you are in support, then why do we need to spend $42,000 to tell us you support it?" she asked. "We all see the need, so let's move forward."

Gentry said he felt the decision put the public in a bad position by requiring that citizens go out and gather the necessary number of signatures.

"I'm concerned that if this goes to a vote, people may vote against it because they disagree with the commission's decision on how to implement this," he said.

Derek Williams, warden of the detention center, said he is concerned that will be the outcome. "The public supports this, and I appreciate that support," he said. "But I hope the public doesn't decide to use their vote against the tax out of spite of the commission's decision."

The next 60 days

One citizen, who was very vocal about how the petition process would work after the final vote was taken, is looking at both sides of that matter.

"I am honestly torn," said Rio Communities resident George Moscona.

After the final vote, Moscona loudly, and repeatedly, demanded that the commission explain how the public was to go about the petition process. Gentry told him, and the remaining members of the public, that copies of the proper petition form, prepared by the county attorneys, could be found at the county manager's office.

"I completely support the tax. I want us to vote for it," Moscona said Thursday afternoon. "I think the voters would have approved it. But now, there is a part of me that thinks if it goes to a vote it might fail just because the public is angry with the commission."

To facilitate the commission's decision, and to help the public gather the required signatures, Moscona said he is going to ask that the county either mail every registered voter a letter and copy of the petition explaining what the process is, or to designate areas across the county where people can come to sign the petition.

"I think this is a blatant disregard for people's rights to vote on being taxed," he said. "But if this fails because the public feels the commission went about it wrong, what is the expense to the jail?"

On Thursday, Gostischa said he was still in support of the tax and still wanted a public vote on the matter.

"This is one of those things that we are supposed to be voting for or against," he said. "It isn't something that takes a 3-2 vote that takes it out of everyone's hands. I support it, but there are some who don't want it. They (the commission) shouldn't be making that choice for them, just like I don't want them making that choice for me."

In order to take the matter to a vote, approximately 2,035 valid signatures, or 5 percent of the 40,606 people registered to vote in the county at last year's general election, must be gathered in 60 days. The clock started ticking on Thursday morning.

According to county attorney Adren Nance, the protest period runs the full 60 days, no matter what.

"If the petition is turned in early, the 60 days do not stop," Nance said. "This may be important in the case of there not being enough signatures turned in."

Once the petition is turned in, Nance said, he had not found anything in the state statute that requires the county clerk to verify the signatures inside of any type of strict timeframe.

Perea said this process is a new one to the county.

"I don't believe we've done this before," she said. "Our office is in contact with the state, and they are giving us guidance on how to handle this accurately and efficiently."

The clerk's office verifies the signatures on the petition by entering them into the voter registration database one at a time, Perea said. "Our job is to make sure they are registered voters as of the last general election," she said.

If the correct number of signatures is validated, then the commission must pass a resolution of proclamation for a special election. That proclamation is published in two consecutive weeks, no less than 50 days before the election is held, Perea said.

According to state guidelines, if the tax measure is approved the certified election results must be sent to the state taxation and revenue department at least three months before it will take effect.

If an election is held after the 60-day protest period because of the other publication constraints and time needed by the state to prepare its documentation and tax tables for the new tax, Nance said, it didn't seem likely that the new tax would take effect on Jan. 1, 2010, as the commission hoped. If that deadline were missed, the tax would take effect on July 1 of next year.

However, if a valid petition is not filed, the tax will take effect at the beginning of next year.

The petition can be found at the county manager's office in the administrative building at 444 Luna Avenue in Los Lunas. The office is at the far north end of the building on the first floor.

E-mail this story Printer-friendly version