ENCINITAS — City Council voted 3-2 on June 25 to put a failed sand tax measure back on the ballot. The city’s Proposition G, the so-called “sand tax,” failed to receive a two-thirds majority on the June 3 ballot.

Proponents of the measure argued that the 2 percent transient occupancy tax applied to short-term vacation rentals designated for sand replenishment projects would have passed.

Steve Aceti, executive director of the California Coastal Coalition, said he supported giving the voters another opportunity at the same ballot measure. “Prop. G never had a campaign,” he said. “It never had a chance.” Aceti told the council that the perceived voter confusion could be remedied by educating residents on the need for sand replenishment and stabilization projects. Aceti said the city’s sand tax fund has approximately $2 million.

However, other speakers opposed bringing the measure back at a cost to the city of as much as $25,000.

Robert Nanninga, a local business owner and candidate for City Council, said he opposed bringing the measure back so soon. “This is the part where I say ‘I told you so,’” he said. “We the people voted,” he told the council. “What part of (Proposition) G failed don’t you understand?” Nanninga asked the council.

Leucadia resident Chris Carrico, who manages several short-term rentals, said she opposes the tax. “Is it really fair to have just a targeted number of homeowners pay for all of the beach and sand usage?” she asked the council.

She said the do-over should extend to the companion Proposition F, which imposed an 8 percent tax on short-term vacation rentals that passed with a simple majority. Guests at hotels and motels in the city currently pay a 10 percent transient occupancy tax.

“This election is going to attract a huge number of voters,” Aceti said. He volunteered to be on the committee to write the ballot statement. “It should take about two minutes. We’ll just take the same one and put different names on it,” he said.

Deputy Mayor Maggie Houlihan said she supported the initial ballot measure. “I felt it was an equity issue,” she said. “Whether it was a fair shot or not, I do have to respect this vote.” She said the council should take some time to consider other options and bring the measure back at a later date.

Councilman Dan Dalager said the increased turnout in the November election would bode well for the passage of the measure. Councilman James Bond said he supported the measure but wasn’t convinced that putting it back on the ballot so soon after its initial failure would lead to passage. He eventually voted in favor of putting the measure on the November ballot.

“I don’t think it’s worth $25,000,” Councilwoman Teresa Barth said. She suggested waiting until the next election cycle.