THROUGH MY EYES -- RON DAVIS

Huntington Beach’s proposed sports complex is just that -- complex.

Currently, the estimated cost has jumped to some $17 million. But, to

be fair to the proponents, it is seldom fair to merely look at the costs

without looking at how they will be repaid.

Frankly, I couldn’t care less if the costs of the complex were $100

million, so long as the taxpayers weren’t paying for it. On the other

hand, if the anticipated costs were a mere $2 million or $3 million, I

o7 would f7 care if the source of the funding was the taxpayer.

Not because I want to deprive people of open space (which would exist

with or without the complex) or because I believe people don’t deserve

improved recreational fields, but because I think repairing sewers,

streets, sidewalks and block walls, and other aspects of our

infrastructure, are more important.

Call me misdirected, but I think if I have to make a choice, I’m

probably better off having great brakes and tires on my car than a

leather interior and state-of-the-art stereo system. To suggest that we

can have both ignores the condition of our wallets called the general

fund.

There is a suggestion by the city staff and the proponents of the

complex that the complex will pay for itself -- that it will sustain

itself from non-tax revenue sources. This conclusion is based on certain

financial assumptions and projections.

Another phrase for “assumptions” and “projections” is “educated

guess.” And, I don’t want guesses, I want guarantees.

We only have to look back two months to see how optimistic promises

and representations, even assuming they were made in good faith,

disappear like the sewage in a Downtown sewer line. Remember Wards coming

to the podium and assuring the City Council its was prepared to make a

substantial financial commitment to renovate its store and was prepared

to cooperate with the intended Crossings at Huntington Italian village

theme?

Things happen, and in this case, it is called a bankruptcy, leaving a

hollow store in the city filled with hollow promises, assumptions and

projections.

If the city’s projections and assumptions regarding the sports complex

are flawed, and I believe they are, we, the taxpayers will be left

holding that thing at first, second and third base, called the bag. We,

the taxpayers, are the payment guarantors. If the deal doesn’t work the

way the proponents expect it to, guess who gets stranded between first

and second?

The $800-million price tag for essential repairs to the infrastructure

isn’t going to get smaller, and the infrastructure won’t heal itself. For

that reason, I support covering our bases rather than constructing them.

The projections offered by the city include the anticipated, and I

emphasize the word anticipated, sales tax revenue from both Wal-Mart and

Lowes.

Presumably, this is based on last year’s advisory vote by the citizens

indicating that if Wal-Mart was permitted to build, the citizenry

supported use of the tax revenue for playgrounds, parks and sports

fields. But, in my mind, we were asked the wrong question.

If I asked you if you wanted a new BMW or Cadillac placed in your

driveway every six months, you’d probably say yes. But, if I also told

you that to do so you’d be charged $75,000 a year for the privilege, your

answer might be a little different.

What you should have been asked is whether you wanted the sales tax

revenue to go to playgrounds, parks and sports fields, with the

understanding that you would then have to tax yourself for the full cost

of infrastructure repairs.

I happen to believe that given a choice, you would have thought that

sports fields were less of a priority than repairing sewers, streets and

sidewalks.

I believe that you might have wanted to spend whatever tax revenue

Wal-Mart and Lowes generated to repair the infrastructure so that if you

decided to tax yourself to repair it, at least the burden would be less.

According to the city’s financial projections, the sports complex gets

thrown out at second without the sales tax revenues from Wal-Mart and

Lowes.

So, in effect, the taxpayer will be subsidizing the complex. This

issue should be stretched out on a couch and carefully analyzed to

determine whether I have a complex, or the city should have one.* RON

DAVIS is a private attorney who lives in Huntington Beach. He can be

reached by e-mail at o7 RDD@socal.rr.com.f7