Vote on Jail-Tax Proposition Turns Into Election Cliffhanger

San Diego County voters Tuesday were divided over a measure that would raise the local sales tax by half a cent to fund construction of critically needed jails and courtrooms, early election returns showed.

Proposition A required a simple majority to pass and was billed as crucial by county leaders seeking to grapple with a jail crowding problem some have labeled “a crisis.” The measure would make most purchases in the county subject to a 7% sales tax and produce $1.6 billion over its 10-year life.

The placement of Proposition A on the June ballot was considered unwise by some because it came just seven months after voters approved another sales tax increase to finance highway and transit improvements.

Proposition B, which asked voters to raise a state-imposed spending limit on county government, was failing with nearly half of the vote counted.

Another ballot measure jumped out to a solid lead with less than half the vote tallied. Residents were favoring Proposition Y, a measure seeking to increase the proportion of property taxes used for construction of schools in the San Diego Unified School District.

Proponents of Proposition A keyed on the threat posed to the safety of citizens by the mounting problem of jail crowding in their effort to overcome voter resistance to tax increases and win passage of the ballot measure.

During 220 presentations to community and service groups across San Diego County, supporters of the tax increase told voters that packed detention facilities are forcing police to release accused criminals immediately after booking rather than jailing them until their arraignment.

“We tried to bring the debate down to the people’s level and show them how this problem affects them,” said Proposition A campaign manager Lance Abbott. “We told people, with complete legitimacy, that criminals are being released and that they pose a danger.”

Abbott said Proposition A backers--including police chiefs, judges and dozens of elected officials--raised an estimated $225,000, much of it from the legal community. About $210,000 was spent during the campaign.

Foes of the measure agreed that more cell space is chronically needed in San Diego. But they argued that raising the sales tax is regressive and the wrong way to go about funding such improvements.

A chief opponent of Proposition A was the San Diego Taxpayers’ Assn., which often advises officials on fiscal affairs. Among other things, the group criticized a provision that permits as much as 25% of the funds generated to be used for the operation--rather than construction--of jails and courtrooms. Such an arrangement, they argued, could either foster county reliance on the tax money or prompt officials to ask that voters extend the life of the measure.

Proposition A represented the county’s second stab at winning a tax increase for new jails. In November, 1986, a similar measure won a 50.7% majority. But at the time state law required that such measures garner two-thirds of the vote. Legislation approved since then changed the needed margin to a simple majority.

Backers of Proposition B tried to woo voters by arguing that passage of the measure simply meant tax dollars generated locally would be spent locally. The waiver is necessary to allow county government to skirt the so-called Gann limit contained in a 1979 statewide measure that restricted public spending under a formula based on population growth and inflation.

During the campaign, county officials and other supporters noted that Proposition B costs residents nothing while simply permitting government to spend all tax and state grant monies it raises. Without it, they argued, county revenues would be reduced by an estimated $8 million annually and $35 million in state funds available for courts would be lost.

Opponents countered that the measure was another ploy by officials eager to undermine voter-approved controls on spending.

Proposition Y asked voters to increase the allotment of property taxes funneled to schools to provide about half of the $350 million needed to build or reconstruct 24 facilities spread throughout the San Diego Unified School District.

School administrators, joined by civic leaders in supporting the measure, said Proposition Y was critical to help them deal with rising enrollment through the year 2000. They argued that the money is the key to combatting crowding in the classroom.

There was no organized opposition, but administrators expressed fears that voters might be prejudiced by lingering skepticism about the quality of public education.