Dear Editor,
It’s government budget season. The usual stories about “scarcity” of public funds and threatened cutbacks build the case for tax increases, like another 30-year, half-cent sales tax for the county and VTA.
Missing is coverage of budget facts. An Internet search readily discloses data reported by those agencies. Measure A proponents believe more money is needed because they don’t know these facts:
Since 2001, County government’s revenue has increased every year; it’s up…
– 31.4 percent from 2001-05;
– $660,544,000 in 2005 alone;
– 13 percent last year;
– 125.1 percent (more than double) since 1996.
Irresponsibly high dependence on sales taxes drove VTA’s 2001-05 revenue down, but only 2.2 percent. Despite extensive service cut-backs, operating costs rose 16.4 percent.
VTA’s 2005 operating costs were $309.3-million. Forty-two percent was sales tax money. Despite charging the highest fares, VTA farebox revenue covered only 10 percent of operating costs in 2005, the lowest of Bay Area transit operators.
Measure A will encourage more of the same. Here’s why:
California requires transit agencies to derive a reasonable return from fares. Decades ago, legislators approved an exemption allowing us to add local sales taxes to farebox revenue, effectively relieving VTA from being cost-effective. Measure A would further subsidize operating inefficiencies.
Inflation has been low. County population grew only 0.2 percent since 2001. Why have government costs skyrocketed?
Spending by these two agencies is out of control. Cities, too. Look for sharply rising “fees” this year to cover spiraling cost increases. If operated efficiently, governments wouldn’t have to cry poor and beg for more of our money every year.
Santa Clara County voters established a statewide model: Successful sales tax measures must include a projects list, a defined cost, and a sunset for ending the tax and completing those projects. This formula was sweetened by adding citizen oversight. Until 2000’s BART tax, previous Measures A had sunsets of 10 years or less.
The proposed Measure A doesn’t follow that model. It’s a grab bag of money having undefined spending objectives. Because of this lack of definition, the $160-million in new taxes Measure A would raise annually will be quarreled over endlessly by tax-hungry county and VTA officials.
It’s dishonest to say that citizens’ oversight guarantees new tax money will be spent properly. What will well-meaning citizen oversight volunteers gauge spending against? There are no defined projects, no performance measures – only a 30-year sunset on tax collection.
Gasoline price increases pushed statewide sales tax receipts up 62 percent since last year. Not admitted to, but eagerly awaited by Measure A proponents, that windfall will be shared by local government. Add Measure A and they’ll have a sales tax bonanza.
Sales taxes fall hardest on poor people. Families, senior citizens and small businesses lose. Government wins.
There’s no end in sight unless we defeat Measure A. That will send a message for change. Proponents will likely add measurable performance requirements and specific projects, then come back again to voters in November. We’ll all be winners if that happens.
Hold government to the same discipline we face daily. On June 6, say “NO” to Measure A.
David Fadness
Former County Transportation Commission Chairman
