STAR is not opposed to transportation taxes, but we are in favor of transportation taxes well-spent, and Measure B does not meet that criteria.

Darrell Steinberg, Sacramento’s mayor-elect, and Susan Peters, Sacramento Board of Supervisors member, wrote a soapbox opinion for Sacramento Bee, published yesterday: Why Measure B is good for commuters (SacBee 2016-10-31). There are several instances of fuzzy or disingenuous thinking in the article.

• “It has support across the county, including a majority of voters…” It is true that surveys run by the Sacramento Transportation Authority (SacTA) have indicated majority support, which is more than 50%, but the measure needs 2/3, 67% to pass. The surveys indicated a very narrow margin, and only if a number of uncertain probabilities came to pass and there was no real opposition. However, there have been no independent surveys or polls on the measure, so claiming a majority of voters before the election is disingenuous.
• “Measure A, approved in 1988 and renewed by voters in 2004, was mainly for capital projects and will not cover anything close to the county’s needs, especially for maintenance and repair.” It was a decision made by the SacTA and its partners to fund capital projects in Measure A and to continue to defer maintenance, and we are now all suffering from that decision. Should we bail out the transportation entities by giving them more money to make up for the money they chose not to spend on maintenance?
• “…takes a balanced approach, committing 70 percent of funds for road and bridge repair and maintenance…” This is simply not true. While Measure B says “Local Roadway & Transit Capital, Operations & Maintenance” at 61%, if you look at the project list, it is heavy on interchanges and road widenings, light on maintenance, everywhere except Citrus Heights. Another 9% is just for road expansion, the Capital Southeast Corridor and widening Capital City Freeway. Judicious placement of a comma, right after the word road, might have made the statement defensible, otherwise it is not, and it certainly gives the wrong impression.
• “And the actual impact on county residents will be a quarter-cent, because the statewide Proposition 30 sales tax of one-quarter-cent expires in 2017.” While the overall sales tax rate is significant to everyone, claiming that Measure B has a smaller impact because another sales tax might change is nonsense. This sounds like grasping for straws. Whether you supported or opposed Proposition 30, it did a lot of good things, and we would either have to make it up with other tax sources, or do without. Proposition 55 seeks to extend the income tax but not the sales tax provisions of Proposition 30.
• “Accountability is critical, which is why Measure B would establish an independent taxpayers oversight committee to conduct an annual audit to ensure that all funds are spent according to the voter-approved expenditure plan.” It is important to remember that the oversight committee established under Measure A has rarely met, has not provided any oversight function, and does not have any citizen members. Will SacTA be more accountable and transparent under Measure B than under Measure A?

• Measure B 2016
• Uncategorized