For years, city leaders and advocates have repeatedly claimed that the city’s failures are someone else’s fault, criticisms are personal attacks, and demands for accountability are acts of oppression.
I like when voters have the option to approve taxes for specific purposes or projects. I have managed numerous sales tax and bond programs in my career. I might suggest eliminating the “eject” option that allows the city to use the funds for any purpose in the event of a fiscal emergency. These tax programs should be managed separately from the general fund. Emergencies should be managed separately as well.
This article sparked a memory. I served on my local school board’s facility and technology committee. We had a large number of roof replacement projects at specific schools that were being paid for by a sales tax program. We had a tropical storm move through Atlanta and damage the roof of a school that was not part of the replacement program. We could NOT use the funds from the voter approved sales tax program to address the emergency because the emergency project was not on the project list approved by the voters. The public was quite harsh with us over this matter. We followed the rules, which was the sole purpose of the committee. There was no “eject” for emergencies. When everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency.
Among these anti tax articles being spewed out here is very little in suggestions of what would be a solution. Oh I found this but it’s about it,
“A healthy city requires empathy, yes—but also discipline, integrity, and competence”
Very vague! Can you find one of these fantastically employed writers to maybe make some competent suggestions? My guess would be it’s along the lines of no new taxes, right? Not gonna be enough, an easy prediction.
Tom—this is the standard dodge: demand “solutions,” ignore the ones already implied, then default back to “more taxes.”
Fine. Here they are, plainly:
• Enforce existing fiscal controls before asking for new revenue
• Stop reallocating voter-restricted funds under “emergency” pretexts
• Tie compensation growth to actual revenue—not projections
• Audit contracting and no-show work orders
• Prioritize core services over ideological programming
The City often ignores recommendations from our own elected City Auditor—that’s a matter of record. So asking for “solutions” while existing oversight is sidelined isn’t serious.
And yes—until we get the forensic audit Barbara Lee promised, and a full report on waste, the answer is no new taxes.
Once that’s done—and we have trustworthy stewards of public money—then we can move forward. You keep glossing over that part.
So here’s a question for you:
Do you trust the current administration to be honest and competent with our money?
I like when voters have the option to approve taxes for specific purposes or projects. I have managed numerous sales tax and bond programs in my career. I might suggest eliminating the “eject” option that allows the city to use the funds for any purpose in the event of a fiscal emergency. These tax programs should be managed separately from the general fund. Emergencies should be managed separately as well.
This article sparked a memory. I served on my local school board’s facility and technology committee. We had a large number of roof replacement projects at specific schools that were being paid for by a sales tax program. We had a tropical storm move through Atlanta and damage the roof of a school that was not part of the replacement program. We could NOT use the funds from the voter approved sales tax program to address the emergency because the emergency project was not on the project list approved by the voters. The public was quite harsh with us over this matter. We followed the rules, which was the sole purpose of the committee. There was no “eject” for emergencies. When everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency.
Good points- the tail has been wagging the dog far too long…
Among these anti tax articles being spewed out here is very little in suggestions of what would be a solution. Oh I found this but it’s about it,
“A healthy city requires empathy, yes—but also discipline, integrity, and competence”
Very vague! Can you find one of these fantastically employed writers to maybe make some competent suggestions? My guess would be it’s along the lines of no new taxes, right? Not gonna be enough, an easy prediction.
Tom—this is the standard dodge: demand “solutions,” ignore the ones already implied, then default back to “more taxes.”
Fine. Here they are, plainly:
• Enforce existing fiscal controls before asking for new revenue
• Stop reallocating voter-restricted funds under “emergency” pretexts
• Tie compensation growth to actual revenue—not projections
• Audit contracting and no-show work orders
• Prioritize core services over ideological programming
The City often ignores recommendations from our own elected City Auditor—that’s a matter of record. So asking for “solutions” while existing oversight is sidelined isn’t serious.
And yes—until we get the forensic audit Barbara Lee promised, and a full report on waste, the answer is no new taxes.
Once that’s done—and we have trustworthy stewards of public money—then we can move forward. You keep glossing over that part.
So here’s a question for you:
Do you trust the current administration to be honest and competent with our money?
Thanks in advance for answering.