In a new twist on an old story, the city of Hanford illegally used public funds to oppose a sales tax measure on the June 2022 ballot, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) determined at its September 18 meeting. The campaign watchdog agency’s work typically involves disciplining local governments that spend tax dollars to support tax increases on the ballot.
The FPPC approved a stipulation reached with the city and imposed an administrative penalty of $18,000 for the violation.
Measure F, a sales tax increase, was on the June 7, 2022, ballot for Kings County voters. The measure asked voters to authorize the county to increase the sales tax 0.5 percent, costing taxpayers an estimated $11.7 million per year, to fund emergency and fire services. Although the measure called for a special tax with revenue earmarked for specific purposes, the county used the Upland loophole to determine that it required a simple majority vote for passage because it was placed on the ballot via the initiative process. Measure F failed, with 64.2 percent of the voters in opposition.
Weeks before the election, the city spent $1,958 to send a prohibited campaign-related mass mailing, the FPPC found. The mailing – labeled as “Measure F Facts” – “unambiguously urged voters to oppose Measure F,” the agency added.
“The Fact Sheet unmistakably communicates opposition to Measure F through bolded and repeated language, including the phrase ‘NO Measure F,’ which appears four times in the center of the page,” the FPPC wrote in its order. “[T]he use of ‘NO Measure F’ is a statement that is not susceptible of any reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote against Measure F. Further, these statements are immediately followed by negative commentary regarding the measure, such as ‘NO Measure F money will be allocated to the City of Hanford.’ The emphasis on ‘NO’ in all capital letters and bold formatting, paired with inflammatory language such as ‘PERMANENTLY increase your taxes,’ demonstrates the City’s intent to dissuade voters from supporting the measure. The document contains no neutral or balanced information. It presents only the purported negative consequences of the measure, such as lack of funding and improvement for city services, and permanent tax increases, while omitting any discussion of potential benefits. Additionally, it cites the lack of union support, a politically charged, persuasive point rather than an objective fact. … The content, tone, timing, and presentation of the Fact Sheet all point to a coordinated effort to influence the outcome of the election.”
The FPPC added that “using public funds for a prohibited purpose carries a high degree of public harm,” citing a California Supreme Court precedent that doing so “does present a serious threat to the integrity of the electoral process.”
(CalTax: Unfortunately, the fine will be paid out of the city’s coffers, so it essentially penalizes the taxpayers rather than the city officials who engaged in the illegal behavior.)