Following publication of the primary arguments for and against Concord’s 67% sales tax increase that will appear in the ballot statement, we post the respective REBUTTALS. The Pro Q side rebuts the Primary Argument Against and vice versa. Measure Q requires a simple majority to pass and will appear on the ballot November 2, 2010. See arguments below the break.
REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE __Q__
Vote Yes on Q to prevent even more severe cuts to the vital services we all need. Never believe confusing arguments. Opponents are using bad math and funny figures to scare you. The FACTS speak for themselves:
FACT: Concord has cut $18 million in essential City services.
FACT: Strict fiscal stewardship and cutting 25% of the workforce have balanced the budget. ALL Concord employees, including police, have taken significant salary and benefit cuts.
FACT: Additional cuts will be to the bone! Without Measure Q, Concord needs to cut $5 million more — including severe cuts to public safety, youth programs, street maintenance, and senior services.
Our community will LOSE:
– Downtown and school police officers
– Neighborhood patrols
– All crossing guards
– Youth after-school/summer programs
– Street/pothole repairs
– Senior nutrition services
Measure Q means the community monitors City finances with independent oversight, mandatory audits, and yearly reports ensuring all Measure Q money goes directly to local services.
Measure Q is just ½ a penny — a bargain to support local critical services! It’s not levied on food/medicine and expires in 5 years.
Unfortunately, Sacramento has used Concord to fund their bail-out, taking $33 million over ten years to deal with the State deficit! We can’t afford to pay for the State’s problems.
Yes on Q will give Concord local control over local funds for local needs and provides protected, reliable revenue to prevent cuts.
We need Measure Q to maintain our community and safety – Vote Yes on Q.
The Pro Q rebuttal was signed by: Beri Kasper, CPA, Concord Police Association, Thomas Wentling, Todos Santos Business Association, and Concord Councilmember Bill Shinn.
REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT FOR MEASURE __Q__
Defeat Measure Q
Proponents of Measure Q can only sell their sales tax increase by misleading voters and promoting scare tactics.
They say, “Sacramento took our money!” But the City Manager and Mayor have denied this claim. Yet, proponents still blame Sacramento while ignoring City Council’s lack of financial discipline and independence from special interests.
Council, not Sacramento, is responsible for recent promises of no-layoffs, back-door 3% wage increases for the highest paid, and millions in unfunded pension and healthcare liabilities.
Instead of cutting spending, Council made sure Measure Q cannot be rescinded, even if the economy improves. Meanwhile, Council hands out $90,000 going away gifts and subsidizes a golf course while cutting neighborhood policing.
Council is responsible for labor costs that dominate the City budget (70%+). 154 employees take more than $100,000, plus generous benefits. Despite Council claims of deep cuts, these unsustainable costs remain virtually untouched!
Instead of reducing bureaucracy, Council holds hostage programs for seniors, recreation, and youth, unless a tax increase is passed. Given its record—like Bell, CA—Council is more likely to fund government salaries, benefits, and pensions, instead of services for the poor and elderly, who will be hit hardest by this tax.
A tax increase means more lost jobs and foreclosures, while illustrating Council’s feckless leadership. Instead of raising taxes, City Council must make the necessary cuts to balance the budget instead of asking voters to bail out special interests.
Defeat Measure Q
The rebuttal to the argument for Measure Q was signed by: Keith McMahon, Richard Colman, Richard Eber, Bill Gram-Reefer, and Richard Soderholm