Battle lines are already forming on both sides of a potentially explosive November city ballot measure to increase the local sales-tax by a half-cent. Proponents hail the proposal as a means of carving into the projected $72 million deficit for 2011, while opponents deride the measure as a “bailout” placed on the backs of city voters with no real guarantees of reform. With the deadline looming to place the increase on the Nov. 2 ballot, the City Council voted 6-2 on Aug. 4 to give voters the power of endorsement. The plan involves a five-year hike in local sales tax and is tied to various financial reform measures. “It’s kind of a compromise and an agreement,” said Darren Pudgil, a spokesman with Mayor Jerry Sanders’ office. “We know that reforms alone will not enable us to protect and restore city services, so it’s essentially reforms before revenue. It’s a combination package.” The reforms tied to the potential sales-tax hike include changes to retirement plans for city officials, a second-tier pension plan for firefighters and kickstarting the process to privatize the city’s information technology services and the Miramar Landfill. Pudgil said the ballot measure would require the city to meet those reforms before any money is collected from the sales-tax increase. “It’s a very comprehensive reform package that must be put in place,” Pudgil said. Not even 24 hours after the City Council’s vote to place the measure on the November ballot, supporters called a press conference Aug. 5 at Fire Station 20 in Point Loma, using the setting as a means of demonstrating the need to restore critical services like fire and police protection. The opposition camp and subsequent anti-tax-hike campaign also began immediately. District 2 Councilman Kevin Faulconer voted against placing the sales-tax hike on the ballot, along with District 5 Councilman Carl DeMaio. Faulconer said the measure as presented doesn’t guarantee savings to citizens. “The reforms in this tax proposal are a wish list. We need an action list,” Faulconer said in a statement. “San Diegans need to know how much money the city will save before we ask them for more.” A particular item with the revised ordinance that Faulconer took exception to was the deletion of a sentence that said none of the reform conditions could be excused for any reason. Faulconer’s spokesperson, Tony Manolatos, said this allows the reforms to be pushed aside when convenient. The City Council had held three special hearings in a five-day span to discuss the increase. At the most recent meeting Aug. 4, the council approved a revised version of the ordinance presented by City Attorney Jan Goldsmith. Pudgil said the five-year temporary tax would raise an estimated $103 million per year that the city would put toward city services, including fire, police and street resurfacing. “It will be used to eliminate the rolling fire brownouts and it will be used to restore and protect essential city services,” Pudgil said. While the half-cent sales-tax increase will now appear on the ballot, the proposal for a new City Hall was removed from it two weeks ago. On July 30, Sanders vetoed the City Council’s plans to put the project on the November ballot. Pudgil said the developers for the project asked Sanders to remove it from the ballot, citing a lack of resources. “It’s a very complicated issue and communicating that effectively to the public would have taken a significant amount of money,” Pudgil said. — Kevin McKay contributed to this story