Community Commentary:

Costa Mesa faces a $19-million deficit. At a recent City Council meeting, we made some very difficult decisions to balance the city budget.

We suggested solutions to close the deficit, which included: proposed cuts in salary and benefits (subject to agreement by the unions), early retirement incentives, cuts in services, charging fees for some services provided, and, unfortunately, some proposed layoffs. Some of this could be adjusted before the budget arrives, in two or three months, and is in part dependent on whether the unions agree to cuts.

More than 70% of our budget goes to employee salaries and benefits, so we cannot neglect to look there. When times were good we were able to pay highly competitive wages. Now that times are lean, we must take responsible steps to rein in spending.

I opposed a colleague’s suggestion that we raise our hotel tax. Increased revenues could help bridge the budget gap, but I oppose increasing taxes, specifically, the hotel tax. Why increase the tax burden on a specific group in difficult economic times? When large groups book hotel rooms by the hundreds, the lower transient- occupancy tax saves them a lot of money and is an incentive to spend money in Costa Mesa, which benefits the residents and generates tax revenue. Raising taxes and growing government does not always have to be part of the equation.

But this got me thinking about the difference in how the fiscal crisis is being handled at the state level compared to locally. State government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. The limits of state government and what we expect from them need to be clearly defined in terms of what money is spent on.

According to a city staff report from 2003, every year for the past 12 years (prior to 2003) the state had seized city property tax funds statewide, costing cities more than $9.6 billion in lost revenue. Costa Mesa lost more than $55 million over the last 10 years (prior to 2003) based on shifts, diversions and taking of revenues by the state.

The staff report illustrated that the $55 million would have been enough to partially fund some of the following components of the city’s seven-year capital improvement plan: the street maintenance program ($51 million), citywide traffic improvements ($29 million), all parkway and median improvements ($4 million), and all planned park improvements and community programs, including construction of a 50-meter pool and lighted soccer and youth baseball fields ($4 million).

Plenty of your money has been sent to Sacramento and Washington. At the federal level, they passed a bill to borrow unprecedented trillions to bail out corporations with our tax dollars. President Obama made a campaign promise to put these bills online for the public to see, but this did not happen nor did it go through the normal committee process. Now new taxes are being proposed to pay for this. At the state level, budgets have been passed based on borrowing and taxes that have not yet been approved by the voters.

Now we are being threatened by the governor that we must approve the tax increases because “we can’t fix this with cuts alone.” Our federal and state elected officials must say “no” to any new expenditures without identifying a way to pay for those expenditures, and the voters need to say no as well. We cannot rely on bonds (borrowed money) or continually expect more programs from the same general fund dollars.

So the feds and the state borrow and tax, but local government cuts. Additionally, in Costa Mesa we post all of our budgets online for public review, as well as all of our staff reports. We also have a study session on the budget as well as public input sessions. We also read our staff reports and meet with the city manager and budget analyst. Moreover, locals have access to their local elected officials through phone and e-mail, and can watch proceedings on cable or the Internet, which provides for greater accountability.

If we did not read our reports before voting on the budget, the voting citizens would not put up with it. If a council member had brought forward a bond proposal to borrow $19 million and keep spending at the same or higher levels and with increased taxes as the “solution,” we would likely have recall on our hands.

So why do we allow this at the federal and state level?

We have got to return to limited government and spend only what we take in. Until we do that, it will be business as usual.

ALLAN MANSOOR is the mayor of Costa Mesa.