"First, this tax was conceived behind closed doors with no public discussion about whether it's needed. The tax was rolled out two days before the Board of Supervisors voted to put it on the ballot, which isn't enough time to let the public digest the pros and cons of the measure. Second, the county should have commissioned an outside independent audit to see if there's any fat in the government, and if so, how much can be cut. We're not talking about the typical annual audits which rubber-stamp normal spending, but an in-depth look by an outside accounting firm like Deloitte, PwC, Ernst & Young or KPMG."
"Third, the Board of Supervisors is pulling some sleight of hand by putting a tax on the ballot that only requires majority approval. The county doesn't have to designate how the $330 million raised by the tax over five years will be spent with a 50% tax. (A tax requiring two-thirds approval would require the county to say how the money would be spent.) So even though the supervisors claim the money will be going to Medicaid (Medi-Cal in California), it could actually go anywhere. Fourth, a sales tax is regressive, meaning it hits poor and middle-income residents the hardest because they spend a higher percentage of their money on taxable goods than the wealthy. Sadly, our elitist politicians believe in taxing the poor and sparing the rich. Why not tax the valley's biggest corporations like Google, Apple, Nvidia and Adobe?"
"We can't recommend Measure A. Too many problems. Too risky. The county's leaders need to spend a year rethinking this tax and, if it is really necessary, putting it on the November 2026 ballot."
Measure A is a 5/8ths-of-a-cent sales tax proposed for Santa Clara County that was conceived behind closed doors and announced only two days before the Board of Supervisors placed it on the ballot. The county did not commission an outside independent audit to identify potential savings or waste and relied on routine audits that rubber-stamp normal spending. The ballot measure requires only a simple majority so the county can avoid designating how the estimated $330 million over five years will be spent. The tax is regressive, disproportionately burdening poor and middle-income residents. The recommendation is to vote no and delay reconsideration until November 2026 after a year of scrutiny.
Read at Padailypost
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]