Opinion L.A.

Observations and provocations
from The Times' Opinion staff

« Previous Post | Opinion L.A. Home | Next Post »

The Times endorses Measure U

Los Angeles CountyMeasure Uphone tax

Telephone The Times editorial board today urged voters to support Measure U, which would renew and adjust the tax that Los Angeles County collects on telephone services. Among other things, it would lower the tax rate from 5% to 4.5% and apply it to mobile phones, VoIP services and other new communications technologies. What do you think?

In case you missed it, here's the editorial in its entirety:

Yes on Measure U
It's the right way to modify L.A. Country's phone tax.

Los Angeles County is asking voters in its unincorporated communities to ratify and modify an existing telephone tax in much the same way that voters did earlier this year in the cities of Los Angeles, Pasadena, Culver City and a number of other municipalities. In this era of financial uncertainty, when governments are starved for vital cash and voters are being asked to fund new services, this one is easy. Voters should keep their current services intact and their tax bills, on balance, the same. The Times urges a yes vote on Measure U.

There are some key things to keep in mind. First, only voters in unincorporated areas pay this tax, and only they will vote on this measure. The tax applies to residents and businesses that are billed for utilities in parts of the county that are not cities. If you're billed in the city of L.A., for example, or one of 44 other cities in the county with its own utility tax, this one doesn't apply to you. If you're billed in Lancaster, or one of the other 42 cities in the county with no utility tax, this one doesn't apply to you either.

But 65% of Los Angeles County's 4,084 square miles is not part of any city. If you're billed in one of those places -- communities without mayors or city councils, including Rowland Heights, City Terrace, Stevenson Ranch and about 100 others -- you currently pay a 5% tax on utilities, including telephone service. Measure U will be on your ballot and, if it passes with a simple majority vote, will lower your tax to 4.5% and make clear that it applies to cellphones and other "new" communications technologies.

In those unincorporated areas, Los Angeles County supplements its regular programs, such as child welfare and health, with the libraries, public works and safety services that cities usually provide. The utility tax helps pay for it by raising $65 million, although the Board of Supervisors spends just under a third of it to supplement the county's health services.

In fact, the board could spend the money any way it wants to, because it's a general tax, not earmarked for any particular purpose. That's why it needs only a simple majority to pass. But the supervisors have been prudent with the revenue, knowing that residents of the unincorporated communities demand basic services and will rebel at the ballot box if they don't get them.

Most utility taxes were imposed when there was only one telephone company, everybody had land lines, and it was easy to figure out how to bill for service and add a simple tax. Things changed when cellphones became common; counties and cities tried to extend their taxes to those services but discovered, in court, that intervening state initiatives on taxing required voters to approve or reject any changes.

Like similar ballot measures elsewhere in the state, this one makes clear that any call made with any technology is subject to the same tax. Federal law that bars taxing the Internet keeps this tax from reaching Internet access services, and if that law changes, voters would get to weigh in again. But to make it exceedingly clear, Supervisor Michael Antonovich insisted on adding language that clarifies that this measure, if passed, could never apply to Internet access.

The Times appreciates the honesty of cities such as Pasadena, which asked voters to ratify its tax as-is, without enticing them with a half-percent decrease the way the city of Los Angeles did. The county is taking the latter route. We urge county leaders to be straightforward with voters by explaining that Measure U will probably be revenue-neutral, lowering some taxes by extending the tax to other technologies. That said, it's a good deal for voters in unincorporated areas, who should follow the examples of their city neighbors and vote yes.


Comments () | Archives (1)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Lee Michaelson

I'm not so sure. While I think it's a good idea to pass tax measures, instead of bond issue after bond issue, to finance needed County services, I see no reason why residents of the unincorporated areas should be asked to pay a sales tax (and a sales tax on utilities, no less--one of the most regressive imaginable) for services that are NOT specifically designated for the unincorporated areas. As the payors of 65% of the County's property taxes, we already tote a hefty share of the County's tax burden, and I suspect, consume well below the average share of the County's general fund budget. What's more, as written, Measure U is pretty "grabby." It not only taxes your cellphone and propane bills, it taxes all the charges on those bills. Got a late fee--that's taxed too! Yet when you ask the County Sheriff's Department why there are precious few patrols in the unincorporated areas, they'll tell you it's because those areas aren't "paying for it," like the municipalities that have contract arrangements with them are. Either designate these funds to be used exclusively in the unincorporated areas, or apply them to everyone who shares in the benefits.



In Case You Missed It...



Recent Posts
Reading Supreme Court tea leaves on 'Obamacare' |  March 27, 2012, 5:47 pm »
Candidates go PG-13 on the press |  March 27, 2012, 5:45 am »
Santorum's faulty premise on healthcare reform |  March 26, 2012, 5:20 pm »


About the Bloggers
The Opinion L.A. blog is the work of Los Angeles Times Editorial Board membersNicholas Goldberg, Robert Greene, Carla Hall, Jon Healey, Sandra Hernandez, Karin Klein, Michael McGough, Jim Newton and Dan Turner. Columnists Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus also write for the blog, as do Letters editor Paul Thornton, copy chief Paul Whitefield and senior web producer Alexandra Le Tellier.

In Case You Missed It...