POLITICS: Taxpayers can’t be LA County’s backup plan

When government faces financial pressure, the reflex too often is to reach for the taxpayer’s wallet.

That is exactly what is happening with the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors’ decision to place a half-cent sales tax increase on the June ballot. I voted no because backfilling federal funding cuts on the backs of county taxpayers is just plain wrong.

LA County residents are already stretched thin. Inflation has driven up the price of groceries, gasoline, utilities, and insurance. Housing costs remain among the highest in the nation.

According to data reported by Bloomberg News, LA now carries the highest sales tax rate of any major metropolitan region in the country.

In several cities, consumers already pay 10.25 percent at the register. In Lancaster and Palmdale — two communities that were once considered amongst the most affordable in the region — the sales tax rate is now 11.25 percent.

This proposal would push those rates even higher.

Supporters argue that the county faces real healthcare funding challenges. That is true. But acknowledging a serious problem does not justify a flawed solution.

Raising taxes should not be government’s first response, especially when those taxes fall hardest on working families and seniors living on fixed incomes.

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters

A sales tax increase does not distinguish between someone barely getting by and someone well off. For many families and individuals, there is no cushion left to absorb another increase.

There is also a broader economic consequence. Los Angeles County is already struggling to retain businesses. Employers weigh tax burdens when deciding where to expand, hire, or relocate. Increasing the sales tax further risks making our county less competitive and less attractive for consumers to shop and for businesses to operate. The result could be fewer jobs and less economic activity.

That is clearly the opposite of what we need.

Fiscal responsibility means setting priorities and exhausting every other option before asking taxpayers to pay more. It also means demanding stronger commitments from our state leaders, who play a major role in funding health care systems that serve vulnerable populations.

The California Post is here. Sign up for Morning Report.

Get the perfect blend of news, sports and entertainment delivered to your inbox every day.

Thanks for signing up!

See also

Politics

·01/19/2026·0

POLITICS: Reforming the UN seemed impossible — until President Trump came along

Local taxpayers should not automatically become the financial safety net for funding gaps created elsewhere.

Equally troubling is the structure of the measure itself. If the county is going to ask voters to approve a tax increase, it should be a special tax with a clearly defined purpose, enforceable spending restrictions, and meaningful oversight.

The measure placed on the ballot is a general tax. That means the revenue can be used for a variety of county needs, not solely the health care purposes cited in public discussions.

Under the California constitution, a general tax can be passed by a simple majority vote. A special tax, in contrast, requires a two-thirds vote. Perhaps that is why my colleagues only proposed a general tax. It has a much lower threshold for passage.

But taxpayers deserve specificity. They deserve transparency. And they deserve accountability.

Good governance is also about good stewardship. Our north star should be protecting the public’s hard-earned dollars and ensuring that when government spends, it does so wisely and with discipline.

My vote was grounded in a straightforward principle: Government should live within its means whenever possible, and when it asks for more, it must make a clear, accountable case to the people footing the bill.

Kathryn Barger is the supervisor for the 5th district of LA County, representing 2 million people.