-
Website
http://thedistrictweekly.com/ -
Original page
http://thedistrictweekly.com/daily/writing-shotgun/foster-wont-debate-but-ex-rda-board-member-jensen-still-in-for-press-clubs-measure-i-forum-friday/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
He's proven very available to answer questions from the public at many other venues and before many other groups. Unfortunately many of his responses deserved follow-up questions that were not permitted, at least not at the event I attended.
Here are just a couple of examples:
CLB Resident: How can we be assured that you wont divert existing infrastructure funds to other projects once you start receiving Meause I funds?
Mayor: You have my word that as long as I'm in office, that wont happen.
Follow Up That Could Not Be Asked: "Your word is all very good but many would prefer to see an expressed prohibition against that possibility written right into the proposed ordinance. Would you be willing to do so and, if not, why not?
CLB Resident: How much will this cost residents, per month?
Mayor: About $10 per month plus adjustments for CPI increases.
Follow Up That Could Not Be Asked: Since CPI increases at an average of 3% per year, by 2044 your "About $10 a month" will be more like $27 a month. Thats 270% more per month than you are currently quoting us, so, in the interest of accuracy, why not simply quote the correct figures?
The money must be spent on infrastructure projects. A backfill scenario is possible but highly unlikely as it would result in significant backlash against the Mayor and council. Further the amount that could be backfilled is minimal.
The council (particularly DeLong) has worked to streamline gov't spending this year and eliminate waste and return to core services. Is there still room for improvement? Absolutely. Stopping the investment in subsidized low income housing is a particular pet peeve of mine, but they are moving in the right direction.
Both the Mayor and DeLong have said they will work to renegotiate pensions for city employees. This seems to be a significant sticking point for Measure I opponents.
The $10 / month amount will escalate but when inflation is accounted for it is not material. $35 or whatever it will be in 30 years is still not much considering the potential return.
There is no guarantee that all the projects will be completed but even if half of them were completed we would be a much better city, quality of life would drasticlly improve, and property values would rise.
Given the need is so great, and this measure would solve many of the problems now, not in 10 years when detractors are satisfied with pension reform, etc., measure I warrants passing.
While I appreciate that you feel CPI increases are "not much" in the way of financial burden, you really aren't in a position to make that determination for others. The point is not that the cost will necessarily go up but, rather, that Mayor Foster is not reporting these costs accurately. If he wants our support for this new tax, he needs to be more accurate when reporting the facts surrounding it.
Guarantees are tough in any aspect of government but not, by any means, impossible. The Mayor would better assure success of this measure by setting realistic and measurable benchmarks for some of the infrastructer projects planned and then designing a reliable and trustworthy method by which the City will be held accountable to those benchmarks. This approach is both reasonable and achievable and would help us to feel more comfortable about taxing ourselves still further for infrastructure improvements that should rightly have been budgeted for all along.
In my humble opinion, Measure I needs a lot of work before it's ready to bring before the electorate.