Monday, October 16, 2006

Candidate says "we are being blackmailed!"

This is what City Council candidate Samuel Anderson says on his "platform" page:
Regarding the half-cent tax - I am reluctant and hesitant to support it because there is NO back-up plan, no plan B in case if fails at the ballot box. I feel like we are being blackmailed into accepting it and made to feel like we are noncitizen-like and unsupported of or police and fire if we don’t accept it and support it. I also question the language in it that does not sit well with me. I feel sorry for the police and fire chiefs in having to accept this because it is the only way for them to get funds.

Dear Mr. Anderson: You are feeling blackmailed because that's exactly what you you're supposed to feel. That's why the city hired the consultants who know how to manipulate. This is why the consultants stood before the council and told them if they say the new tax is for the "performing arts center" or other projects, people won't vote for it. That's why they said "tell the people it's for the police and fire."

Sure, there's some language in the measure that mentions public safety and the police and fire. Cleverly, they inserted that clause that lets the council remove that language the day after the election!

Don't feel sorry for the police and fire chiefs. For example, despite the fire chief's claim that he's asked for personnel "many times," which he has said over and over to the community groups, we can't find any evidence of even one request for more personnel actually being made by the chief. If you never ask for new personnel, what do they expect? The same is more or less true for the police chief. Any time the chief has actually asked for new personnel it's been granted. The city council has never turned down a request for more manpower.

I know what they would say if we asked them. They are sort of "told" ahead of time if the council "will approve a request" or not. But if the chiefs really felt more personnel was needed, shouldn't they make the request anyway? That's something that takes courage. Something they don't seem to have. They would rather see their departments fail in their mission, or people die rather than risk making a request and possibly embarrassing someone.

And, the a new tax is not "the only way to get funds." They get funds if they are allocated.

You're right, it is an attempt at blackmail. You should resent it. I do. So do most people. That's why we're voting NO on Measure M.

p.s. There is a "plan B" ... the consultants told them never to let people know that even if you don't vote for the new tax, it won't affect the police and fire. There are other funds available.

3 comments:

  1. Nice response, but you're wrong about 'they will get it regardless'. City of Vallejo is now Chapter 11 because of services.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your comment!

    Today the Sun Post tells us that Manteca is "dipping into reserves" or some such. And acting City Manager says it is due to the generous (I would say lavish) pay raises that were signed two weeks after the election raising the sales tax! And, we have NO more police and NO more fire protection. Regardless of how many press releases they give out saying "because of Measure M, Officer Jones was on patrol Saturday night and caught this criminal ... yadayadayada." It's simply not the case in any way. In fact, the lavish pay raises that were agreed to two weeks after the election cost just about, on average $3.9 million per year. And Measure M was supposed to "raise" $4 million per year! That means, in effect, the entire new tax revenue was spent in two weeks. This is why Measure M had no effect except making government more costly.

    One could say, well look at Vallejo. And maybe Manteca did "dodge a bullet" for a short time by raising the sales tax. But it was a short-lived fix! And now we read how Manteca is, once again, "running out of money!" No, Manteca is not "running out of money!" Manteca is spending more money than it takes in. The answer is to spend less money than it takes in.

    Can that be done? If you ask the union bosses, well they would say no, it just "can't be done!" But it can. Everyone else in the private world is being asked to sacrifice, to cut back. Some are losing their homes, jobs, futures. But government workers insist, no, demand that they won't do the job unless you promise them 90 percent of their pay for life at age 50 (for just one example) and exorbitant pay and easy work. So is it really asking too much for government workers to sacrifice just a little bit just like the rest of us?

    I probably was wrong when I said "they'll always get it from you somehow..." You can only keep "blackmailing" the people so much. Eventually, they say "enough is enough." I hope that's soon!

    ReplyDelete
  3. p.s that reminds me I have to upload the new photos of the candidates!

    ReplyDelete