 |
 |
Measure W would increase the vehicle license fee by $10 in Sonoma County. The money would be used to fill pot holes, build more bicycle and pedestrian safety projects, create a countywide Safe Routes to School program and sustain and improve local bus service.
Here are the official ballot arguments for and against Measure W. What do you think? Would you be willing to pay an extra $10 a year to fund these projects?
- Ted Appel
Watch Sonoma County
The argument for Measure W
Vote Yes on Measure W to relieve traffic congestion and create local jobs. Measure W will provide funding to repair ailing roads and fill potholes in Sonoma County. Sonoma County has some of the worst roads in the state and this local revenue will stay in Sonoma County to fix our roads.
Vote Yes on Measure W to fund transportation for senior citizens. Measure W will help fund para-transit programs giving our elders the ability to live in the community with dignity.
Vote Yes on Measure W to provide Safe Routes to Schools. Measure W will fund programs that help children travel safely to school. Our children go to school to learn, but too many of them face dangerous and even sometimes deadly trips to school. Measure W will help get children to school in a safer manner.
Vote Yes on Measure W to preserve and expand bus service in Sonoma County. Measure W will provide needed funding to keep buses running and expand routes including commuter service to help get cars off the road and relieve traffic during some of the worst traffic time periods of the day.
We support Measure W because it will provide much needed local funding for critical projects, programs and it will help our local economy. The best part of Measure W is the money can’t be taken away by Sacramento. Every dollar of Measure W money that is dedicated to programs in Sonoma County will stay in Sonoma County. Please Vote Yes on November 2nd to fix our roads and keep our county moving.
Signed
Noreen Evans, State Assemblymember
Gary L. Wysocky, Vice Mayor, Santa Rosa City Council
Cynthia Murray, CEO, North Bay Leadership Council
Shirlee Zane, Sonoma County Supervisor, 3rd District
Kellie Noe, Trustee, West Sonoma County Union High School District
The argument against Measure W
When is enough, enough? Voters passed Measure M, a quarter cent sales tax, to increase funds for transportation as recently as 2004. Now, a mere 6 years later they’re back asking for more, and in the midst of recession of historic proportions that finds families and business across the county struggling with their own budgets.
What’s being proposed here is a permanent new tax, to deal with a temporary problem.
True, revenues for transportation projects that flow from sales tax receipts and from the State and Federal governments may be reduced now due to the recession, but that will pass when the economy recovers.
The Sonoma County Transportation Authority tries to justify this ill conceived tax by earmarking most of the funds for bicycle and walking paths, bus transit and of late pothole repairs.We would hardly argue that these transportation activities are not a good thing, but the real question to ask ourselves, is this the time to further burden motor vehicle owners with an additional tax that has no expiration date?
Here is a fact to think about. The Sonoma County Transportation Authority’s Citizen Advisory Committee voted not to place this Measure on the ballot. Apparently the committee’s recommendation was ignored by the powers that be. The Sonoma County Taxpayers’ Association recommends a no vote on Measure W.
Signed
Jack Atkin, President, Sonoma County Taxpayers’ Association
Fred Levin, Executive Director, Sonoma County Taxpayers’ Association
Measure W supporters’ rebuttal
Voting Yes on Measure W means investing locally in efficient, accessible, green transportation solutions for all Sonoma County residents, whether you drive, ride public transit, travel by bike, walk or use some combination.
Voting Yes on Measure W means not relying on the state to meet our most urgent transportation needs. Our local Sonoma County Transportation Authority has a proven record of success in using our transportation dollars wisely on the projects that are most important to us and provide the greatest value.
The previous measure approved by voters — Measure M in 2004 — allowed us to dramatically improve our quality of transportation. This measure widened and improved Highway 101, including upgrading interchanges up and down the County. It improved and maintained local streets and roads, and supported transportation programs for seniors and the disabled.
The record is clear: Local funding has positively transformed how we get to work and school, and how we visit family and friends. Measure W will continue our record of success — following a transparent process, revenue from Measure W will stay in Sonoma County and be used for our local priorities.
Please join us and Vote Yes on Measure W to ensure we can continue to meet our local transportation needs and priorities by reducing traffic congestion and getting you where you need to go.
Signed
Valerie Brown, Supervisor, County of Sonoma
Ken Wells, Chair, Sonoma County Conservation Action
Ann Hancock, Executive Director, Climate Protection Campaign
Lisa Wittke Schaffner, Executive Director, Sonoma County Alliance
Bill Steck, Director, Service Employees International Union Local #1021
Measure W opponents’ rebuttal
Don’t be fooled by the misleading ballot argument in favor of Measure W. The list of so called benefits is nothing less than typical political pandering. It promises additional spending for projects that you are already paying a sales tax for through the passage of Measure M.
The proponents of Measure W don’t even bother to explain why they need more money so soon after the voters approved Measure M just six years ago.
The provision to allocate funds for potholes only arose after a special interest group did some polling that showed little interest by voters in the bike or bus projects. Again, Measure M had sales tax money set aside for pothole repairs.
Buses are running at a fraction of their capacity and yet the County wants more buses. Non governmental organizations are doing a great job of providing transportation services to seniors.
The proponents indicate the best part of this Measure W is the money can’t be taken by Sacramento. What they don’t tell you is with the passage of State Proposition 22 this fall, Sacramento will not be able to take transportation funding away from local governments.
It is particularly interesting to note that the Citizens Advisory Committee to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority advised against this measure, but the County went ahead with it anyway.
What is being proposed is a permanent new tax to deal with a temporary revenue problem. Voters should see through this charade and vote no on Measure W.
Signed
Jack Atkin, President, Sonoma County Taxpayers’ Association
Fred Levin, Executive Director, Sonoma County Taxpayers’ Association
- Details of how the money would be spent: See Agenda Item 4.3.1
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
$10.00 here and $18.00 there and so on, eventually you’re talking some hefty dollars. We’re already being taxed at the pump & Measure M & SMART and a couple years ago raised the registeration fees. 12% unemployment and the economy still in dire straights, is REALLY a good time to tax?
What REALLY gets me is the cost of administrating this new “fee” (fee – tax -same darned thing). Does one REALLY think that $200,000.00 a year a fair and reasonable cost to do this? I think its absolutely OUTRAGEOUS!
Sixty percent for mass transit (bus) and forty percent slush fund. Sound about right? This is a setup for waste, fraud and abuse. Also, it just became legal for the County to solicit this tax/fee from us. As soon as they can do it, they will do it. Vote this one down and they might come back with something else in the future where 100% of the money goes to something specific. Forty percent for other uses is unnacceptable.
I hear that most are complaining bicyclists not paying there fair share. Read the prop. 60% goes to the transit system 23% goes to the repair of the roads and bike lanes. 12% goes to whatever they meant by safe route. and 5% goes to the administration!
Think people! The majority of the money goes the public transit system. Not just the pot holes or bike lane. The writer of this article was vague and try to get a rise out of the uninformed.
OK let me understand this, we passed measure M a few years ago to add a extra tax to pay for our roads, we pay a tax for roads at the pump and we pay our property tax. Now you want more money! Where is all of this money going? We keep handing it out and we get less in return.
RE: John – “What I would question is how much of that $10 will actually get spend on the pot holes and pathways and not in the pocket of the administration.”
That’s exactly the point! With all the other taxes, impact fees and bonds that we already pay, getting some of the worst roads in the nation in return, why should we tax ourselves even further? If the money that is already collected goes to uses other than road repair, what makes anyone think that Measure W funds will go towards our roads? Come on, really?
As far as the ‘it’s only a dollar a month’ argument and ‘just give up your Starbucks’, do the math. Most people own two or more vehicles. (Husband works, wife works, kids in college; who’s paying the DMV fees here?) In my case, I have three older vehicles and a mid-size motorcycle, so that tax is really $40 per year. Then, lets add the State Parks proposition at $18 per vehicle. Now I’m at $112 per year, or $9.33 per month, or only ’4 latte’s a month… except, I can’t afford even one latte a month now, so there’s no latte’s to forfeit.
Government needs to learn to spend their tax revenues for exactly what they were collected for, and stop funding everything under the sun and then crying wolf, saying our roads are going to disintegrate unless government get more and more hand-outs.
To stop the insanity of excessive spending, you’ve got to get government to live within it’s means and to do that, you’ve got to eliminate unnecessary additional tax increases where the funding has already been provided.
Vote ‘no’ on Measure W.
$10 per car wont solve the problems, it is a slap in the face to all residents that they want more money from us and they’ve already said that they’re not going to maintain our roads anymore. Where is this $$ really going to go? Let my road that I pay taxes for to be maintained fall apart and I will see you in court to pay for damage to my vehicles. They were more than happy to take my $$ when I built my house 10+ years ago, over 8K in road impact fees alone, plus a bond I had to buy for them. Not to mention my property taxes they get annually. I’m done with this group of sup’s vote them all out!!!
Every single tax we have started out as only this or only that small amount, then it morphs into something else. When instituted the Federal income tax capped out at 7%!
I half support the measure in theory but until the board of supervisors deal with bigger issues that are bankrupting tax payers, like floating hundreds of millions in bonds for county pensions, I can’t see giving them anymore money to squander.
Clearly this is a selfish automobile driven county. All I hear from are those people who are whining about not wanting to pay for bike of pedestrian pathway. Guess what the pedestrian and cyclist are voters. It is less than a dollar a month people. You give at least that much to the bell ringer during X’mas or the “will work for food” person on the corner. It won’t even buy you a cup of coffee. Give a little to the county you are living in won’t hurt your wallet that much. How much did you save by not buying a newpaper at the stand and reading it online?. Not to mention that It would probably create some jobs. What I would question is how much of that $10 will actually get spend on the pot holes and pathways and not in the pocket of the administration.
Absolutely no on new road tax. The only ones supporting will be the PD as the unions will deliver the message to them.
Lets go back to using concert;it cost more but last 20x longer. On top of that we would lower are need for oil(tar).
So, I’m totally ok with paying the extra $10 to help our roads, however, I am not ok with paying for bicycle trails and such. When will the peace officers begin citing bicyclists that blatently disregard traffic laws? I recall that bicycles are to adhere to the same traffic laws that cars and trucks do, however, I constantly observe cyclists run red lights, run stop signs, not move from the center of the lane after 3 or more cars have piled up behind them… the list goes on and on and on… take money from fining cyclists to fund road repair and developing special trails for them.
I do realize that it isn’t all bicyclists that break laws all the time, but there is a large enough portion to observe these actions anytime I’m out driving and observe cyclists… rarely do I ever not observe at least one cyclist blatently breaking traffic laws.
Also, if they have the same rights as a vehicle, why don’t they contribute to road maintenance by paying a license fee for their bike? I realize that could be ridiculous, so, fine them for breaking traffic laws and put that towards the maintenance.
How many times are we voters are going to be asked to pay another “fee” to help our roads, our public transportation, our schools, etc. When we do approve of them where do our fees go? Do they go local? NO. Are they spent wisely for the very entities they were suppose to be used for? NO.
When I was working for a local environmental firm in the 1990s, the joke for Caltrans was – how many people does it take to fix a pothole on Hwy 101 — the answer 99. 98 people who are administrators/supervisors and one person actually doing the work. The same is true in government — ever call the EDD or DMV? Ever get a live person? So many people working for them yet no one answers the phone. Prior to computers, there were less people “administratively” working and more people answering the phones during the hours of 9-5. Now you have everything “centralized” and you have to press 1 for English.
VOTE NO – this is just another bureaucratic spenditure. Tell them that they need to reduce administrators to those who actually DO WORK and speak English.
This is an example of nickle and dime government at its best . . . . or worst.
After dividing up this small amount of money into so many slices, what will be accomplished? Little. This is what happens when our elected leaders try to attract the most votes with the most promises.
Goodness knows, our roads need help. First step, stop spending gas tax money on brush clearing and cleaning storm drains. That’s not what the money was intended for.
This is GREAT timing! The County now says they will let the majority of the rural roads fall apart. So why vote for a tax increase to fix potholes?
Please notice that Noreen Evans is one of the people who signed the argument in favor of this measure. She wants to raise your taxes yet again! Oh yes, she also wants you to vote to put her into the State Senate.
Vote NO on this measure.
Vote NO on Noreen Evans!
How often and many times do we have to pay for projects that we have already paid for in taxes?
Didnt we get Stimulus money from the federal govt to fix roads and other shovel ready projects? Or was that just used to give all civil servants more salary increases and benefits, because everyone knows overpaying public workers really stimulates growth in a society?
Perhaps Santa Rosa can stop giving illegals sanctuary, free parades, and health care and we could actually reduce taxes.
California taxes, registratiion fees, and sales taxes are already among the highest in the nation now! The issue isnt revenue it is spending!
Enough is enough! NO MORE TAXES!!!
If these bicyclists and pedestrians want better paths, then let them tax themselves like hunters and fishermen do and pay a 10% excise tax on everything they use to support their chose method of transportation to pay for those paths!
VOTE NO ON THIS MEASURE!!!
I am laughing at the long list of promises that Measure W would bring.
Stupid and Bright people do the math and there will be no need for an argument.
Just estimate how much it costs to just maintain our deteriorating roads and compare how much revenue this measure will bring in?
And you are left with nothing!
They would have to raise vehicle fees to $75 to full fill all the promises measure “w” is offering.
Pass another measure and you bring what S.M.A.R.T Train has brought us. Nothing but a bunch of bickering, government employees with huge retirement packages.
Boo hoo people. It is less than a dollar a month.
The level of greed and selfishness of these tea partier, anti government so called “taxpayers” is truly astounding. Ten dollars for safe roads to schools or to help save our gorgeous parks and they cry and moan like spoiled children. The entitlement mentality of these people who have no idea of the public commons or the social contract reads like a Libertarian Horror story. As I read these posts I am struck by the repeated use of the words “me” “mine” and “I”. These folks wouldn’t lend you a nickel if you were starving. What has happened to our country? To see such bellicose selfishness, greed and meanness expressed with no shame or even self consciousness about the uglyness of their pettiness and anger. The spitefulness with which these people yell about their car collection or their right to not help anynone else’s kids or parents or family…I bet they go to church every Sunday though.
Just why do we want to pay another $10 for repairs on roads that aren’t done correctly the first time? Case in point: Commerce Blvd. and State Farm Rd. Last year both major roads had NEW pavement. Six maybe eight weeks later… guess what? It started coming right back up. So now the roads are forming pot holes and they’ve been marked for patches. Peanut butter roads should cost the same as peanut butter. Vote NO on W.
We’re never going to get the efficient (conservative) money management that we deserve if we keep allowing our politicians to ask for additional funds either by taxation or voter approved “Fees.” Our politicians need to understand that they’ve gone to the well too many times and that it is now time for them to start utilizing the tax dollars they already receive in a efficient manner.
Vote a big NO on these programs. If you think these taxes will go to fill pot holes, I have a fee to increase the Santa Rosa Police services to show you. That fee did not go to increase police services. It went to maintain the PD.
The County and the City of Santa Rosa politicans have no spending credibility. They say one thing and spend it somewhere else.
Don’t be fooled again.
RE: Chris Synder – “Long term unemployed workers need jobs deperately and the county needs infrastructure fixed what is so bad about that?”
Well, here’s the deal: the main premise of Measure W is about taxing ourselves, likely forever, to REPAIR our local roads, not EMPLOYMENT for any specific group at taxpayers’ expense. (Feel free to call President Obama if you didn’t get your share of the dole he called the stimulus package; your children, grand-children and great grandchildren have to pay it back, so make that call.)
The problem I have with this measure is that we all ALREADY pay taxes and special fees to repair our roads. This measure is to tax ourselves further for something that we have already funded.
My view is local government should be more fiscally prudent with the money they already collect. You didn’t explain why we have some of the worst roads in Sonoma County; it’s not like we’re getting a cash refund for the taxes we pay at the pump for every gallon of gas we buy. Where is that money being spent?
I find your admittedly self-serving comments far more heartless to all of us that just keep getting taxed and fee’d away for the chosen few like you, when in fact the tax revenue stream for road repairs and construction already exists.
Besides, I thought the SMART train was going to solve all of our transportation problems; isn’t that why we taxed ourselves even further, to get people off the roads?
Are you kidding me? This type of expense is as “General Fund” as it gets.
Politician 1: Hey, I have an idea, lets cut the pot hole money and then tell the taxpayer to step up, and give more pot hole money.
Politician 2: Great Idea! They dumb voters can cook their own goose.
Politician 3: Cool, it will all end up looking like the roads in West Petaluma anyway, we just have more money for pensions!
The way this state is going, I’m seriously looking for a four wheel drive, with or without this proposition.
The bigger picture is that rather than hold the government responisible for cutting some of these ridiculous jobs, we are asked to dig into our pockets once again. I already voted no way. We need to send a strong message.
Don’t tell me that highway construction workers are not working! Every highway in this state and in every western state has construction crews working on them. If you are in the highway construction business and are unemployed, it is your own fault.
How many times have we been told “it’s only $10, or it’s only a 1/2 cent, or it’s only for a few years”? We are taxed enough, the only way to make the politicians cut spending is to refuse any more tax increases. Not only no, BUT HELL NO! to this and other tax increases.
If you really are concerned about our infrastructure and the mess it is in then one Measure taking away another $10.00 from those that can not even afford the Registration costs now, is NOT THE ANSWER.
This measure, mixed up with other heart warming needs is just a way to get another $10.00 from us for eternity. Did you notice anywhere that this measure will expire after the infrastructure work has been done?
NO, this is an attempt to yet again raise the cost of Registering a vehicle. I sincerely doubt it has anything to do with us the public and improving our infrastructure.
IF you want a concerted Measure geared towards infrastructure improvement then create a SPECIFIC BILL FOR THAT REASON ALONE.
That way, we would know where our money goes. That way we would know our money was going towards what we voted for and paid for.
ONE BILL-Infrastructure Improvement.
It does not need to include unforeseen improvements to other areas such as elderly being able to cross the street in safty, etc.
Those are what are called HOOKS.
If we truly want our roads and infrastructure improved then create a Public Vote Measure.
ONE BILL-Infrastructure Improvement.
Then itemize the work and costs and let the people vote. Remember, leave the fluff and propaganda out!
It is about ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE.
Will
.
NOT one dime of this fee/tax would go to fixing potholes, 60% for administration fees, 30% for a Environmental impact report, and the last 10% would somehow have to go into the general fund because something else is more important. I have noted NO, and if it passes, I will register my vehicles out of this county!
I have already voted.
Even though I see everyday the miserable condition our roads are in, I feel it is not MY fault.
It is the fault of the City Council. There are plenty of money going into their coffers provided buy us spoofed citizens.
Each year the election process includes this provision. Most every year in the past we voters have approved those measures, such as Measure M some years ago.
It has not affected me at all. Where I live, near Roseland, I doubt this measure even mentions this area.
101 is still under construction after me being here for 5 years!
Even 101 isn’t finished yet! Why doesn’t the city finish the project that was approved and paid for before they start asking again for more money from us to continue construction?
All the time I have been living in Santa Rosa this has been a constant issue every year. It is a subject where voters are easily swayed via lies.
Where has all the money gone that was approved in Measure M?
Is Santa Rosa going to be under construction indefinitely?
It sure looks that way.
BTW; I VOTED NO to this new attempt to get more money from me for the same old reasons.
If you care to give your money away then vote yes to this measure. If you are sick of being taken as a fool, giving your hard earned money away for unsubstantiated reasons the VOTE NO.
PS; In this Election/vote time, do some research before throwing away your money.
RE: Ricardo Sorentino
I am wondering if you know who builds the roads you drive on? The construction industry has been devestated 30+% unemployment hundreds of people in this industry in Sonoma County are losing everything they own. I find your comments heartless. The economy works best when you have a state of the art infrastructure for commerce to buzz along. Business does not want to exist in an econmy where you cannot get your goods and services in or out. It is an absolute tragedy that we have thousands of highly skilled unemployed workers who could be working on the crumbling infrastructure that is so needed for recovery. There is a societal need for roads, bridges etc.. and there are people that could be fullfilling this need but instead they are idle. It is sad that you seem to take pleasure in other peoples misery. Long term unemployed workers need jobs deperately and the county needs infrastructure fixed what is so bad about that?
Cars/trucks create potholes…not bikes and pedestrians. A vehicle license fee for the travel mode whose impacts are the highest/most intense on the roads is totally appropriate. However the amount of the fee is debatable.
You are not paying for the cyclist. I own 2 cars and 2 bikes. When I am not driving I am on my bike which means that I am not wearing down the road like automobile does.
I am tired of supporting / paying for bicyclists to have more bike paths and take away lanes from crowded streets when they dont pay ANY road taxes.
Vote yes. Good transportation improvements will not only help us on our drive, but maintain the infrastructure our economy relies needs. Roads move people and goods. Maintaining them and increasing our transportation funds is good for both residents and business.
NO. I have more than 1 vehicle, so it isn’t a simple $10… it’s 10 times the number of vehicles… I pay enough taxes of various forms and seems like everybody around me is getting some form of hand-out… I’m not asking for anything to be given to me, but please stop TAKING FROM me!
To Moo’s point, yes we are all being viewed as money cows.
When your family finds it is spending more than it is earning, wouldn’t it be nice to tell your employer you’d like to have another $10 or $20 a month in your paycheck!
I think not Sonoma County, the time has come to manage your budget rather than trying milk more money out of your residents.
This bovine is voting NO
Well isn’t this great. As a car collector who drives a total of 5,000 miles per year, I’m asked to pay an extra $50 for my toys with this measure, plus another $90 for the parks measure.
Sure would be nice if we had a breakdown of where the funds go without wading through umpteen pages of legalese.
Join me this week and vote no on each and every one of these fee increases. Time for state, city, and county to live within their means.
If you want to see what your money went to on measure “M” just look in the corpyard of the city of Petaluma. They have pavement grinder (uesd less then 10 times) that cost over $500,000.00. City of Santa Rosa has more potholes then roads. I need the $10.00 to keep up on repairs on my auto;that the bad roads caused.
Vote NO…
NO MORE TAXES OR FEES!!! I have no more money for the state. @Lisa, do you think politicians are not among the wealthy?
RE: Chris Synder – “Measure W will also help put some of the 400+ unemployed Operating Engineers that live in Sonoma County back to work producing the asphalt and laying it down on the paths and roads.”
So it sounds like your ‘yes’ vote is a little self-serving. A ‘yes’ vote to YOUR recovery is a ‘no’ vote to everyone else’s recovery. It’s another tax that we can’t afford, and don’t need, with the addition to all the other taxes and fees already mandated for road construction and repair.
Vote ‘no’ to the Operating Engineers Local #3 self-serving ‘recovery’ and any other tax increases in this economy.
This is so funny it is sad. They want 10 bucks to fill the pot holes…..yeah.
They have more than they if they quit pissing down the toilet.
They promised measure O money would go specifically for more cops…..look what happened to that. They will tell you anything to suck more money out, and then it will get diverted to the general fund to pay for bicycle lanes…..
Enough is enough. Trip and cut the programs that reward people for not doing anything. I am positive there are tons of programs that could be cut, and have the responsibility fall back on the families and relatives….
Maybe they will have kids only when they can afford them, or perhaps they can sell the nice chrome wheels or get rid of the cell phone and cable tv.
this is just another general fund grab. Pot holes were supposed to be done with gas taxes, then we get all kinds of booster taxes for the same thing. I’ll start believing what they say when eachitem has it’s own account, money goes into it, it gets spent on it. Even when that’s done, they jimmy up some numbers claiming costs to administer the account, and drain the account before a dime gets spent fixing one pothole. The gov’t is at war with the tax paying public. i could rant, but the only people who know it to be true are laughing.
@Lisa Maldonado
Fact check: A Democrat controlled house and senate bailed out Wall St, and Woolsey voted for it as well.
Measure W sounds like a good idea to me. For less than a buck a month, I am willing to invest in our transportation system. Also, it looks like a really good group of supporters. Not often these folks agree on the time of day, glad to see them agreeing on important investments in our community.
What do they think I am a MONEY COW!.
(quote)It is particularly interesting to note that the Citizens Advisory Committee to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority advised against this measure, but the County went ahead with it anyway. (unquote)
Not only that, this very same measure was voted down by the SCTA for inclusion on last June’s ballot. It only made the grade this time by a few supporters on the SCTA pressuring those against it to cave in. Measure W is very poorly worded and offers NO guarantees that $$$ generated locally will stay locally. Besides, we are already paying via Measure M.
However, I wholeheartedly support Prop 21 which would fund our state parks and eliminate the parking fees that they charge.
The bottom line is that I am voting NO on W and I hope that it fails.
The Operating Engineers Local #3 fully suppports this measure. Sometimes fees or taxes are put in place and they are beyond the control of the taxpayer. In cases like Measure W we know exactly where this money will be spent…here in Sonoma County. Road work and bike paths are things that everyone in this county benefits from. Measure W will also help put some of the 400+ unemployed Operating Engineers that live in Sonoma County back to work producing the asphalt and laying it down on the paths and roads. A Yes on W is a Yes to Revovery.
@Woolsey Haters.. What is forcing Working people into poverty is years of Republican “trickle down” nonsense and their endless tax breaks for the rich and bailouts for Wall Street. You guys want to keep shilling for the wealthy who are robbing this country blind then go ahead, but as the great Mollie Ivins said “a working man (or woman) who joins the Republican Party is like a deer joining the NRA”.
$10 here per vehicle, $18 there per vehicle, along with increased DMV fees a year ago. An additional .25% sales tax for this, another .25% for that.
Sounds good to say ‘yeah, I’ll do that for better roads’, except we never get the better roads in return, only more taxes and fees down the road to make good on promises made years ago, for road work that just never seems to get done. Didn’t Sonoma County recently win the award of having some of the worst roads? So, where did THAT money go?
Vote ‘No’; others that want to pay for non-existent road improvements can just mail in a check directly, no proposition-approval needed to do that.
I am not willing to pay $10 more for anything and pretty soon none of us will be able to afford to vote. There is $840 of extra fees, assessments, voter approved taxes on my property tax bill as it is. I’m done.
Further, I do not believe that the money collected by these measures is used for the reported purpose as we’ve seen happen time, and time again. The government is going to have to figure out to do business in a reasonable and responsible way with the funds they have. Try that for once.
$10 here, $15 there, $20 over there. It all adds up. All these tax increases force working class Americans into poverty. Folks like Lisa Maldonado will never understand that.
This $10 would be on top of a proposed hike of $18 additional vehicle license fee to help state parks maintenance, for a potential total of $28 per vehicle. This is not a major chunk of change for an individual, but it adds up. When that registration comes in the mail, it’s already a stretch for a lot of people who are already struggling to pay. And for what? To provide services that should already be funded with current tax revenues, but the state and counties somehow can’t afford because they’ve become bloated with mid level and upper management and increased administrative costs. Sonoma County could hire 6 road maintenance workers which would be enough to fill the potholes by eliminating 2 management positions.
Ten dollars is basically a trip to the movies(just admission, no popcorn!) or 2 packs of cigarettes or a couple of coffees. Yes I would gladly pay that for better roads,reduced traffic and safer routes to school for kids.