The bitter controversy over City Hall’s plan to implement new trash collection fees on 233,000 households at a far higher cost than San Diego voters were told before they approved such fees in 2022’s Measure B is fueled by the perception that this was an obvious bait-and-switch. In an interview last month, Mayor Todd Gloria rejected the idea that anything untoward was going on. He said the expected standard rate for newly billed homeowners of $53 a month — not the city’s previous forecast of $23 to $29 — reflected residents’ input on the level of trash services they wanted to receive.
But now the debate over Measure B has taken on another dimension that should aggravate all San Diegans, whatever their view of the mayor’s argument: Exactly what does Measure B allow or require the city to do? This has sparked a sense of déjà vu among residents familiar with their city leaders’ long history of not sweating the details on ballot measures, especially on a 2012 pension reform initiative later scrapped by state courts.
The question emerged when residents upset with the city’s fee plan inquired about whether outsourcing trash service to private companies to reduce bills for residents was an option. City Attorney Heather Ferbert says no. “Charter section 117(c) gives the City a choice between engaging in managed competition or using City forces,” she wrote in an email to a U-T reporter. “In the case of Measure B, that choice was given to the voters. The clear language of the ballot measure specified that City forces would continue to provide trash collection for eligible residences.”
But Republican Jan Goldsmith — city attorney from 2008 to 2016 and a state Superior Court judge from 1998 to 2008 — says the City Charter takes precedent over Measure B, which amended an existing law, not the charter. Goldsmith says the California Supreme Court has found that any city law that is at odds with that city’s charter is void.
Given how often such charters have been likened to the local equivalent of the U.S. Constitution, Goldsmith’s analysis carries obvious weight. The nonpartisan League of California Cities’ formal guidance to its on charter cities’ authority backs him up.
Ferbert has indicated she may take a more formal, in-depth look at this issue. This step is badly needed. Without it, the cynicism about city leaders’ devotion to municipal employee unions — which hate outsourcing of government services — will only keep building. The city attorney, the mayor and the entire City Council are all Democrats.
But this detail shouldn’t — repeat, shouldn’t — matter to Ferbert. So San Diegans need to hear the city attorney cite what court precedents she believes validate her view — and as soon as possible.
