Supervisors to Consider Keeping Taxes From State : Budget: The proposed ordinance is a retaliatory measure for possible cuts in assistance to local governments.

The Ventura County supervisors will decide today whether to withhold property taxes from the state, joining a revolt against Gov. Pete Wilson’s plan to slash funds to local governments.

Supervisor Maggie Kildee will ask board members at their meeting today to adopt an ordinance that bars the county’s auditor-controller from turning over nearly $50 million in property tax revenue next year to Sacramento--a move state officials call illegal.

At a time when the state is considering cutting its assistance to local governments by $2.6 billion, Kildee said the county must take dramatic action to hang onto its funds.

Normally, the county collects the property taxes and funnels the funds to Sacramento. The state then returns some of the tax revenue to the county with some stipulations on how the money should be spent.

“Maybe we’ll get the state’s attention this way,” Kildee said. “We collect the money here, we ought to be able to use it for local services.”

So far, Contra Costa, San Francisco and Alameda counties have adopted similar ordinances to protest the proposed funding cuts.

*

Without the property tax revenue, Ventura County officials say they will be forced to slash county programs services and lay off employees.

“This is a protest,” said Supervisor Vicky Howard. “We feel our local taxes should be spent within our jurisdictions.”

But Supervisor John K. Flynn and state officials have blasted Kildee’s proposed ordinance, saying it is illegal.

“I would like to see a more cooperative approach with Sacramento and the state Legislature,” Flynn said. “This is confrontational and it won’t work.”

Kevin Eckery, a spokesman for Gov. Wilson, also urged the county to find a more diplomatic way of dealing with state lawmakers.

“The issue is how to provide services to the public,” he said. “The issue isn’t squabbles like this.”

However, Eckery said the governor’s office has not yet decided if it will fight the ordinance in court.

“Right now our attention is in Sacramento,” he said.

In January, Wilson unveiled a Spartan fiscal plan that calls for an 11% spending cut to offset deep losses of tax revenues caused by the persistent recession.

As part of this plan, Wilson wants to shift the $2.6-billion in property-tax funds from local governments to the schools. The cut would come on the heels of a $1.3-billion reduction for cities, counties and special districts, part of last year’s budget agreement.

“I’m sure counties and cities are going to find all kinds of ways to try to turn the heat up on the Legislature and the governor so they don’t suffer more than absolutely necessary,” said Verne Walton, an official with the state Board of Equalization. “It makes sense that everyone is going to try to protect their own turf as well as they can.”

But he predicted if the local officials decide to proceed with the ordinance, it will be invalidated in court.

“I suspect that Ventura County’s approach, while it is unique, may not stand much legal scrutiny,” he said.

County Counsel James McBride, however, said that while state law requires the county to turn over the property tax revenue to the state, a court could find the law unconstitutional.

“The courts are going to have to deal with this issue,” he said.

Kildee said the county should at least give the ordinance a try.

“It’s time to take some action,” she said.