Pringle, Stanton Officials Trade Barbs Over Tax : Budget: Assemblyman answers council critics of state funding shift with letter calling city’s new utility levy ‘outrageous.’

A war of words between the City Council and Assemblyman Curt Pringle (R-Garden Grove) over a new city tax has escalated, with Pringle mailing 400 letters calling the tax “outrageous.”

At a March council meeting, Stanton Mayor Don Martinez blamed the 6% utility tax--intended to plug the city’s $1.4-million budget deficit--on the “bums” in the state Legislature for shifting property taxes and other money from the city.

“I’m not going to stand and be bashed for any financial problems that Stanton has,” Pringle retorted Friday. “For them to place the blame of a utility tax on me personally is something I will not accept. Particularly since I have spent the last few weeks doing everything I can to mitigate whatever reductions Stanton would have in this budget.”

In his letter to local businesses and the council, Pringle said state figures show Stanton faces only a $72,000 tax shift in fiscal 1993-94. He questions why, therefore, the city needs a tax to raise $1 million.

Martinez said he will speak with Pringle about the issue.

“This is not a personality thing. This is financing for local governments,” Martinez said.

The mayor said that city officials “have not attacked anyone individually. We just don’t agree that the state should should be shifting local property tax to the state.”

Councilman Harry Dotson, who opposed the tax, said Pringle “doesn’t realize that we’ve cut every damn thing.” But he also said he has “thought all along that Don’s been overzealous in his complaints.”

Fellow Councilman Sal Sapien, who supported the tax, said Pringle should “be up in Sacramento fighting our cause, instead of here trying to make us the scapegoat of state problems.”

But Pringle said he is the one being made a scapegoat.

“I could not sit back and listen to Stanton’s leaders using the state budget crisis as an excuse for these revenue schemes and for raising taxes to such an outrageous level,” he wrote in the letter.

“I can’t remember a time that I had to respond to council criticism like this before,” he said. Pringle was elected to office in 1988, lost in 1990, and was elected again in 1992.

At the heart of the debate is Stanton’s financial situation. According to Finance Manager John Hartman, the damage from state property tax shifts and a decrease in income from sales taxes over the last three years will reach at least $1 million annually in 1993-94. The city’s budget is $12.4 million for the 1993-94 fiscal year.

“We’re falling farther and farther behind,” Hartman said, referring to the state tax shifts. “It’s like we’re running backward.”

Hartman said he has received a few calls this week about Pringle’s letter, as has Sapien.

“We’re just trying to answer the citizens’ questions,” Hartman said. “No one’s happy about a tax. But they understand that we’ve done just about everything we can do to keep this city alive and provide basic services.”

Business people in the city had mixed reactions to Pringle’s letter.

“He has substantiated his allegations,” said Victor Conkle of California Glass & Screen Inc. “People are trying to draw business back into Southern California. The last thing we need to do is tax them away.” Conkle called on the council to cut spending further.

But Gina Davis, president of the Greater Stanton Chamber of Commerce, said she believes the city has managed the budget well.

“We feel they honestly have strived to figure a way out without implementing the tax,” she said. “It’s very hard for a small city to come up with money.”

The council in May gave final approval to the utility tax, over the opposition of many residents. Sapien and Councilman Joe V. Harris are now targeted for recall, in part for their support of the tax.

Sapien said the council will discuss Pringle’s letter at Tuesday’s meeting.