Countywide : Police Group Calls Prop. 134 Misleading

The California Council of Police and Sheriffs on Tuesday denounced the nickel-a-drink tax increase proposed on the Nov. 6 ballot, saying Proposition 134 would not fulfill its promises.

Up to three-fourths of the tax revenue earmarked for law enforcement could go instead to unrelated programs, the council said.

Mike Carre, an investigator with the county district attorney’s office and representative of the police group, said: “The reason I take personal offense to this initiative is that it seems to say so much money is going to law enforcement, but it’s not. I fail to see where in the world in that initiative it says money is going to law enforcement in Orange County.”

But Proposition 134 supporters, such as Californians for a Nickel a Drink, said the wording has been misunderstood. Whereas the initiative says not less than 3% of an available 17% of the total raised will be used for drunk-driving enforcement, foes have construed that to mean that just 3% will be used for that purpose, said Bob Reynolds, the group’s state campaign director.

“There’s a little warfare going on in law enforcement,” Reynolds said. “If they want to use it all, that’s OK. We said, ‘no less than.’ They are saying ‘only.’

“What’s tragic in all this is that they’ve convinced law enforcement that their loyalties lie with the alcohol industry. Law enforcement agencies know what alcohol does, and for them to oppose this initiative is embarrassing.”

Proposition 134 would raise the tax on beer from 4 cents per gallon to 57 cents, an increase of about 30 cents a six-pack. It would also raise the tax on wine from 1 cent per gallon to $1.29, a price increase of about 25 cents per 750-milliliter bottle. The tax on hard liquor would increase from $2 per gallon to $8.40, or about $1.27 on a 750-milliliter bottle.

Supporters say the $760 million expected to be raised by this tax increase in the first year would go for treatment and prevention programs, emergency and trauma treatment, treatment programs for women, children and disabled people and law enforcement programs.

Foes of Proposition 134 instead back Proposition 126, which would also raise alcohol taxes, to collect about one-fourth the money that Proposition 134 would, but would put the money into a general fund that could be used for law enforcement and prevention programs.

Proposition 126 does not promise that it will raise a certain amount of money, its supporters say.