Supervisors Back Library Parcel Tax

Giving up on hope the state Legislature would help with the problem, Los Angeles County supervisors Tuesday set out to resuscitate the floundering county library system by coming up with a way to impose new property taxes.

By a 3-1 vote, with Supervisor Mike Antonovich opposing, the supervisors tentatively endorsed a proposal to raise $30 million annually by charging property owners in areas covered by the county library district a maximum fee of $30 per parcel.

The library district, which serves 3.3 million people in 52 cities and the unincorporated areas with 87 branch libraries, would use the revenue to restore more than $30 million a year in state cutbacks that have forced the county to close 10 branches, lay off nearly 300 employees and left dozens of libraries open only two or three days a week.

The supervisors acted after the failure of a two-year effort to pass state legislation to raise the county’s library revenues. Those efforts are continuing, but even if they succeed, the money would be received too late to help the libraries this fiscal year.

The delay in state legislation means the county’s tax increase is now “the only viable option for the libraries,” said County Administrative Officer Sally Reed.

But although the county has the authority to create a Mello-Roos district and impose the tax in the unincorporated areas, in incorporated cities the tax can only be collected if the local government agrees to it.

Under state law, Mello-Roos districts can be created by local governments to levy special tax assessments on property, with the money commonly going to finance public improvements such as streets and sewers.

Cities that refuse to join the tax district would continue to experience cutbacks in library hours and services, County Librarian Sandra Reuben said. But their refusal could also create headaches for the county in cases where residents of a recalcitrant city continued to use a nearby library in the unincorporated area without paying for the restoration of services.

To win support for the proposal, library officials plan to mount an intensive lobbying effort, including a series of public meetings in communities from Agoura Hills to Lakewood. The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the issue Aug. 20.

“It’s only eight cents a day,” Reuben told the board Tuesday. “We think that’s a lot of value for that amount of money.”

But Antonovich, whose district includes the Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys and part of the San Fernando Valley, opposed the proposal, saying residents of the library district should be given a chance to register their opinions on the tax in an advisory referendum in November.

Supervisors Ed Edelman, Gloria Molina and Yvonne Brathwaite Burke declined to support such a referendum. Supervisor Deane Dana was absent.

County officials had long pinned their hopes on several different proposals in the Legislature, including a measure--vetoed last year by Gov. Pete Wilson--which would have allowed the county to tax all residents of the library district, including residents of the 52 cities.

The Assembly earlier this month rejected by only three votes a bill that would have allowed residents of the library district as a whole to vote on whether they wanted to pay a library tax. That bill is expected to pass when the Legislature reconvenes in August, but would not go into effect for at least a year, leaving the libraries short of funds in the meantime.