(CONTRA COSTA, CA.) –Mike Arata accused county leaders of mismanaging public money while pushing new sales tax increases.
The Bay Area activist told the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association the same. In a two-report series regarding county measures, Arata let the public know exactly what to watch for.
Beginning with Measure B,
Since 1937, the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association, known as CoCo Tax, has maintained a strong mission statement: to provide fiscal oversight of local government, resist unwarranted taxes and fees, and discriminatory regulations.
Not to mention rejecting ill-advised public expenditures, government secrecy, inefficiency, and waste.
(Photo: Mike Arata speaks about CoCo Tax at community event)
Longtime political activist and former educator, Arata delivered a detailed critique of Contra Costa County’s proposed Measure B sales tax increase and the Contra Costa Community College District’s Measure G bond proposal.
At the center of Arata’s remarks was Measure B, a proposed countywide sales tax increase that supporters say would maintain healthcare services and other public programs.
Arata disputes that claim, arguing county finances are stronger than officials have portrayed.
For example, he cited county payroll data showing that nearly half of the county’s approximately 10,000 full-time employees earn more than $150,000 in salary and benefits.
He also pointed to several top administrators earning total compensation packages exceeding $400,000, and rising to more than $500,000 with benefits, arguing that rising employee compensation is a major cause of future budget strain.
Photo Credit: OpGov.News
“The Chancellor here, starting with a base salary of $400,000 plus, makes more than the statutory salary for the President of the United States,” says Arata, speaking on the Chancellor of the Contra Costa Community College District. “Much more than Governor Newsom’s salary, of (approximately) $245,000,” he continues.
The Contra Costa Community College District’s proposed Measure G bond has also drawn criticism over long-term debt and falling enrollment. The measure would authorize about $920 million in borrowing, with total repayment costs estimated at $1.88 billion with interest over time.
The district already has more than $700 million in debt from earlier bond measures.
Arata also questioned the county's deficit estimates, saying officials presented a projected $37 million shortfall in a way that led many residents to believe it was a yearly deficit rather than a total amount spread over several years. He said existing surplus funds, including reserves from the county hospital system, lessen the need for new taxes.
Arata went beyond Measures B and G, bringing up Measure X, a previously approved sales tax measure that, according to the county website, funds regional hospitals and community health centers.
Additionally, the website county also states the measure provides timely fire and emergency response while supporting "crucial safety-net services; invest in early childhood services; protect vulnerable populations; and provide other essential county services.”
Measure X allegedly generates roughly $120 million annually and has accumulated significant unspent reserves.
These factors, Arata argues, weaken the rationale for additional sales tax increases.
Campaign outreach efforts have focused heavily on grassroots communication.
CoCoTax Social Media Representative and Board Member Susan Pricco encouraged supporters to use neighborhood platforms such as Facebook and Nextdoor, submit letters to local news outlets, and share informational videos to increase awareness of the measures before elections.
Photo Credit: CoCoTax Social Media Representative and Board Member Susan Pricco)
Supporters of Measure B, including county officials and affiliated labor organizations, have emphasized rising healthcare and service costs as justification for additional taxation.
These proponents of the measure argue that existing funds are insufficient to meet long-term demand pressures in public health and social services.
However, the opposing argument is that much of the money would instead go toward rising labor costs, employee benefits, pensions, administrative salaries and routine operating expenses.
Rather than creating major new programs or significantly expanding direct patient care and frontline services, the money would largely be used to sustain the county’s existing cost structure and growing bureaucracy.
There is only one thing to do as a Contra Costa County taxpayer, according to Arata.
Vote no on measures B and G.
Susan urges interested parties to visit the site Stop Measure B, for more information:
0
0
Comments