FULLERTON : Recalled Trio Votes to Extend Utility Tax

Even though Mayor A.B. (Buck) Catlin and City Council members Molly McClanahan and Don Bankhead have been recalled over a 2% utility tax they voted for last year, they voted again this week to keep the tax to help balance the city’s $81.2-million budget for the 1994-95 fiscal year.

The action was reminiscent of the 3-2 vote taken last July, when the utility tax was initially approved. Council members Julie Sa and Chris Norby cast the dissenting votes both times.

Last July, Catlin, McClanahan and Bankhead voted to impose the utility tax for a year despite protests from hundreds of residents. The 2% tax was needed to help save police and fire department jobs, city officials said.

Keeping the utility tax, Catlin said, “is a responsible but difficult decision we had to make in the face of the general public’s unacceptance of taxes.”

The council is expected to give final approval to next year’s budget at a public hearing July 5.

Allan Morton was one of few residents who attended the council’s two sessions this week when it discussed the budget. He asked the council to consider cutting all city administrators’ pay by 20% rather than keeping the utility tax.

Leaders of the movement that staged a successful recall election against Catlin, McClanahan and Bankhead later criticized the trio for voting to renew the tax in place.

“It’s like their last stand,” said Thomas S. Babcock, chairman of the Fullerton Recalls Committee, which is interviewing 15 potential council candidates for endorsement. “They’re taking a strong stand even though they’ve been recalled. They’re going to do it their way until they are removed from office. That’s very selfish of them.”

Catlin countered, “A new council could rescind the tax but . . . right now, we are facing a very cloudy economic picture.”

Catlin, McClanahan and Bankhead said they will remain in office until a special election is held in November to replace them.

Norby, who proposed putting the utility tax on the November ballot, said he voted against the tax because he believes city services could be reduced.

Letting the voters decide whether they want the tax, he said, “would give the next council direction. There will be lingering divisiveness in the community unless the people vote for what they want.”

City administrators said the utility tax would generate about $3 million next year.

Even so, the city had to eliminate 20 jobs. Most of the positions are in the maintenance and community services departments and are already vacant, officials said. They consist of clerical assistants, tree trimmers, custodians and maintenance workers.