Before Lani Lutar arrived at the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, the SDCTA was known mainly as a bunch of anti-tax zealots — good for the occasional mau mau, but one-dimensional and with little to contribute to actual governing. Lutar, I imagine, found that dull and limiting. She’s attempted since to remake the SDCTA into more of a local policy shop for fiscal conservatism and good governance. One problem: sometimes new revenue is the fiscally conservative thing to do. Having painted SDCTA into a bit of a corner, we now get “reform before revenue.”

Scott nailed it, I think. Until a realistic line is drawn with reform and revenue, SDCTA is not advocating, they’re heckling. I’d add an important, specific marker they need to identify: what level of retirement compensation do they believe is appropriate for city workers? Forget for a moment whether that is paid via pensions or another mechanism. The city should pay its fair share. So how much is that, SDCTA? Without a marker, taxpayers will always be paying “too much” and SDCTA will never have anything to contribute to a serious discussion of trash fees, property transfer fees, and so on.

I’ll be interested to see which SDCTA/Lutar wins out in the end: the “reform before revenue” rejectionists or the would-be policy wonk.

Leave a comment

We expect all commenters to be constructive and civil. We reserve the right to delete comments without explanation. You are welcome to flag comments to us. You are welcome to submit an opinion piece for our editors to review.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.