Vote no on Measure A

The more arguments that are presented in support of Measure A, the quarter-cent sales tax increase on the June 2 ballot, the stronger our opposition becomes. First it is called a “road tax.” Now “Yes on A” campaign literature features a firefighter and a public safety message. What is Measure A, really? It is a “free pass” for our Board of Supervisors and their labor union contributors to avoid fixing their unfunded pension problem and other budget imbalances.
Measure A would add $20 million per year in new sales tax revenues, collected from everyday purchases made by local households. But executing just a few minor adjustments to the county’s generous pension and benefit plan would equal many times over that amount.
Putting a cap on the very top wage earners’ pensions, requiring a one percent increased contribution from all county employees and eliminating double-coverage for Medicare-eligible retirees would help fix all our roads’ potholes decades faster than voting for Measure A.
Let’s be clear about what Measure A is, and is not. And, let’s be equally clear why supporting Measure A would be a horrible choice for voters and taxpayers. Yes, we all want our roads and streets repaired. Potholes don’t fix themselves. But, neither does a $1 billion unfunded employee pension crisis.
Measure A taxes would be added to the county’s general fund. By law, they are not allowed to be promised to any specific use like road repair. Because the county’s unfunded pension and retiree benefits liability is now almost $1 billion, county sales tax must continue to help pay for this runaway debt. That’s why we have potholes in the first place.
We’ve been waiting years for a majority of county supervisors to find the guts and gusto to fix these nagging government embarrassments. We already pay enough taxes. But, past and current supervisors keep putting too much of this revenue into county employees’ benefits, pension funds and too-high wages for top-level administrators.
Enough is enough. We’ve heard all the excuses why the pension fiasco can’t be fixed. When the county’s top-paid 50 retirees now receive $7.4 million every year and the total annual pension bill is $139 million, isn’t that enough? That almost equals the amount we pay for public safety and is four times the total for annual road repair and maintenance.
We are not-anti county worker, and we are not opposed to most pension benefits. In fact, we favor a “living wage” of $15 per hour for county workers and contractors. What we don’t favor is the high compensation and rich benefits packages now being paid to the county’s top administrators.
Sonoma County has the second highest pensionable wage among all California counties. Veronica Ferguson, the County Administrator, receives the fourth highest benefits among all county administrators in the state. Sheriff Steve Freitas is third-highest among sheriffs statewide and District Attorney Jill Ravitch is fourth among all DAs. The top three wage earners at the Sonoma County Water Agency are also the top three highest-paid public utility managers in all of California.
Once upon a time, public employee wages lagged way below comparable jobs in the private sector, and public employees traded good pay for the security of their pensions. Not anymore – now they have both, great pay and rich pensions.
At a time when many private sector pensions and health insurance benefits have been cut to keep businesses alive, most local public pension plans keep marching upward on pre-negotiated increases and steps.
Voting yes for Measure A will allow the county supervisors yet another excuse to avoid this unsustainable — and unequal — pay and pension problem.
The vote on June 2 is not about potholes, fixing roads or supporting public safety programs. It is not about free bus rides for veterans and students either, as other pro-Measure A literature touts.
Public pensioners already have been given their promises. Now it’s time for some promises for the rest of us — the taxpayers.
Make a demand. Vote No on A.
— Rollie Atkinson