Council says no to propositions

CITY HALL — Burbank residents will have to look outside the City Council for elected officials in support of the six state ballot propositions after a resolution from Councilman Dave Golonski supporting the tax measures failed to gain traction with his colleagues Tuesday.

The council voted 4 to 1 to reject the resolution sponsoring state Propositions 1A through 1F on the May 19 special election ballot, despite bipartisan support from the California Teachers Assn., League of California Cities and California Chamber of Commerce.

California voters will decide on the slate of propositions that, taken together, would increase the state’s rainy-day fund, extend temporary tax hikes by two years, backfill cuts to education spending, borrow $5 billion against the lottery and decrease voter-approved funds for mental health and early childhood education.

“I know that we are the elected officials of this city, but I don’t know if this is the time or the place for us to be doing this, to be honest with you,” Mayor Gary Bric said. “I think if a council member feels that they would like to write a letter on behalf of something like this, I don’t have a problem with that.”

Bric said he does have a problem with Proposition 1C, the Lottery Modernization Act, would raise $5 billion upfront by allowing investors to buy the rights to future lottery profits. At the same time, schools would lose their current claim on lottery revenues in exchange for $1.1 billion from the general fund.

“All we’re taking is from Peter to pay Paul,” he said. “This is, I don’t know what the expression is, a false budget, in my opinion.”

While Golonski acknowledged that the state budget was a “complete mess,” he argued that if the propositions failed, “I think there’s going to be a significant impact on our community.”

Golonski, recalling a recent meeting with Burbank Unified School District officials, said local schools would lose significant funding if the state could not finance the district based on the adopted budget.

While he agreed that the budget propositions were part of a “lousy budget deal” brokered in Sacramento in February, the alternative of sending the issue back to the state Legislature would only send California “into complete budget chaos.”

If the ballot measures fail to pass, the state would have to contend with a reneged plan to close a $42 billion deficit that was reached after a protracted partisan fight on Capitol Hill.

Still, Councilman Jess Talamantes and Vice Mayor Anja Reinke also rejected the resolution.

“You got a bunch of lawyers up there in Sacramento; they’re much more knowledgeable in word-crafting, let them go back, let them look at it,” Councilman David Gordon said. “But to add taxes, shift taxes, to take money away from people who were promised in different organizations, and say, ‘Well, trust us, we’ll give it back to you later,’ I don’t have a good feeling . . . I think the best place for this to be decided is in the ballot box.”