Santa Barbara County weighs sales-tax measure to close multi-year shortfall as jail expansion looms
Loading...
Summary
County staff presented two sales/use-tax options to close a projected multi-year deficit; supervisors debated whether revenue should fund operations or be used toward a proposed $50 million north-county jail expansion, and public commenters urged alternatives and protections for social services.
Santa Barbara County leaders on Feb. 3 reviewed proposals to place a local sales-and-use tax before voters to help close a projected structural budget shortfall and debated whether those revenues should help pay for a planned north-county jail expansion.
At a presentation to the Board of Supervisors, County executive staff laid out two options: a countywide measure that would continue until rescinded, and a time-limited measure (five years) targeted to unincorporated areas. Staff estimated the time-limited option would generate about $16–17 million per year and described a five-year cumulative projection showing the tax would reduce — but not eliminate — the county’s multi-year deficit. The staff presentation also modeled scenarios that included applying one-time funds and debt service tied to a previously discussed $50 million allocation for a north-county jail project.
“Those are the two options we’re asking you to consider today,” County executive staff said, noting legal and legislative constraints that affect whether a countywide or unincorporated-area measure can appear on upcoming ballots and the voting thresholds required to place measures before voters.
Supervisors pressed staff for additional details about alternatives to taxation, including whether cuts, reallocation of strategic reserves, reduced overtime costs, or other program changes could narrow the gap without a new sales tax. Several supervisors said they supported airing the proposal publicly but wanted more data on the distributional impacts, the ability to dedicate revenue to specific services, and the timing required to include the measure on primary ballots.
Board members also raised the planned north-county jail expansion repeatedly. Some supervisors framed the $50 million capital placeholder as a required response to court-ordered or regulatory obligations; others urged considering alternatives to a large expansion, including staggered construction, staff increases to reduce population, and programmatic investments to lower jail usage.
Multiple members of the public urged the board to protect social services that serve vulnerable residents. Commenters representing health and social services said reductions to mental-health programs, homelessness services and clinics would directly harm children, seniors and other vulnerable populations. Others asked the board to return with comparative cost studies that examine whether increased staffing or diversion programs would reduce the need for new jail beds.
The county will return with more detailed analysis; staff asked the board to authorize next steps that would include drafting ordinance language and scheduling hearings if the board elects to proceed.
