Measure E - Yes, No or Undecided - Let's Talk
Measure E, the controversial 1/2 cent sales tax hike that will be on the ballot this November will help plug a $4.8 million deficit in the City of Tracy's budget. I attended the forum on this measure on Monday night and both sides had interesting arguments. I want to hear your thoughts on this subject.
- Do you think you'll vote yes, no or undecided? Why and what questions remain for you?
Let's talk, this is a very important issue for our city.
Tags: Tracy CA Measure E
Views: 5
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Marlene S-B on -
I'm all for it. Most of us will hardly feel the pennies, and it can help at a time when help to maintain services is critical.
-
Permalink Reply by Forrest Whyte on -
Thanks for starting this discussion Joleen, I'm eager to read more on what people think of this Measure.
I am currently planning to vote "No" on this additional tax. When income decreases, so should expenses. It's starting to sound cliche, but I believe it's still true that we need to run the city/state/country budget like a responsible household. You can't spend more than you earn. Strategic cuts or delays in spending are required when revenues dip below spending projections.
It's an emotional and difficult thing to do, but it's the right thing in my opinion. We are all in this together aren't we?
-
Permalink Reply by Renee Riddle on -
This is so hard for me to say becuase I strongly beleive in our city workers but... I beleive the fireman and police officers are needed and I'm very thankful for them but 3% retirement at 50 and city workers have a 2.7%, nobody has a retirment plan as good as that. Will any of it go to education? NO! What about our teachers and school staff, they are dealing with job cuts, lay offs, our schools are in need of help but what does the city do? Build a bus statioin to no where. We have Delta on the hill and no bus to get to it. Before our children can work in our great city they need an education! (think of the gang shootings this year)I'm pretty sure my vote will be no, lets take care of the root of the problem before we leave bigger problems. Lets bring the city workers back down to 2% retirement I bet that will save a bigger chunk of money instead of making the citizens pay more.
We also have the most expensive water in the county that we can't even drink. Just wanted to throw that out there too.
-
Permalink Reply by Marlene S-B on
-
I too am glad to make this a public forum. The replies so far raise important issues about spending and who gets what piece of the pie. If Tracy citizens activate and participate in city government spending, allocations can change. Not overnight, but they won't change at all without it. This is our community; why wouldn't we add a little to the coffers to maintain and/or improve it? I definitely will.
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Miller on -
My wife & I oppose Measure E
Reasons include:
1) Public safety and executive management pay, benefits & retirement compensation appears to be excessive. Public safety members enjoy a 3% at 50 retirement and salaries comparable to those offered in cities where the cost of living is substantially higher than Tracy. A city safety employee that earns $125,000 in their highest year of pay (and that pay can be inflated when other compensation is wrapped in) with 25 years of service would begin to receive a lifetime retirement of $90,000 at age 50. That is a huge burden for Tracy taxpayers to bear. It should be noted that in 2009, dozens of Tracy employees earned more than $110,000 in that year.
2) City employees pay nothing toward their retirement. CalPERS retirements are designed such that an employer pays a recommended percentage toward employee retirements and employees also pay a share. The City of Tracy has agreed to pay ALL of the retirement costs -- both employer and employee. That costs the City about $2.8 million each year.
3) Unlike many cities the City of Tracy exercises very little control of overtime so dozens of public safety staff members take home $110,000 to $160,000 not counting their benefits & retirement. Until these excesses are corrected by City Council, no additional taxes should be raised to support theses costs. In 2009, several fire captains and some fire engineers earned $30,000 in overtime pay. Other classifications were also accessing a surprising amount of overtime. Some utility operators received $20,000. An accounting technician with a base pay of $63,497 was paid an additional $16,162 in overtime pay. Other cities with budget crises have eliminated overtime for non-safety personnel. The City of Tracy's cost for overtime -- JUST overtime was $2,700,007 according to freedom of information act disclosures.
4) The City has failed to take steps identified by the City's own consultant to reduce costs of operation or increase revenues. The City's methodology for assessing landscaping fees is out-of-date and inequitable. Some residents pay for the costs incurred by the City for landscaping in their areas, some residents pay a fraction of the cost, some residents pay nothing but get the service. The City could save money by privatizing services and adopting generally accepted competitive purchasing and service acquisition practices - but they haven't.
5) City executive management may be over compensated. Just one example: The City's finance director received a base pay of $175,675 in 2009 and "extra pay" that brought his entire compensation (not counting benefits or retirement) to $191,485. Tracy has about 80,000 residents and the average home price here, according to Zillow, is $236,000. It costs less to live in Tracy, yet our finance director appears to earns much more than finance directors in the San Francisco Bay Area where the cost of living is much lower.
Some public employer comparisons: the finance director in San Rafael, CA earns a top salary of $143,364. In San Rafael the median home price is $875,000 and the city has 56,063 residents. The finance director in Fairfield earns a top pay of $154,952. The average home price there is $268,155 and there are 106,000 residents. The City of Alameda just reduced compensation for it's finance director to a top pay of $145,860. Homes in Alameda cost an average of $576500 and the population is 74,405.
According to Joseph Michaels, a personnel services firm with a site on the web, the average CFO salary in the State of California is $119,050. But that covers both public and private employers.
I'm focusing on one official in the interest of brevity. My point is that before the City of Tracy asks citizens to pay higher taxes, the City should first look at opportunities to reduce costs. While the City of Tracy has reduced some costs, they have also carefully protected some employee groups and some City practices from undergoing scrutiny and accepting that changes are needed.
The Measure E campaign is funded by $40,000 in contributions from the fire employee's union and the Tracy mid-manager's employees association. This is not a proposition that comes from the citizens of Tracy. One must ask whether it would be the citizens of Tracy that would benefit from passage of this new tax. Or, would it be those groups that have contributed so much money to ensure that the measure will pass?
-
Permalink Reply by Susan Goulding on -
Knowing that the City has cut expenses as much as they say they can. I'm not willing to risk the lack of maintenance on the parks, etc.
With WinCo, Macy's etc coming into town, we should capitalize on the opportunity to utilize these tools to help our community.
Do you realize this sales tax provision has a sunset - 5 years it has to go away unless approved by voters. There will be an over sight committee, etc.
If you don't want a higher sales tax, then I hope you always shop and buy in Tracy. If you buy ANYWHERE else, movies, restaurants, gas, groceries, etc you are helping OTHER communities and paying a 1/2 cent more in taxes MINIMUM. Tracy is lower in sales tax than Manteca or Livermore.
Everyone has been affected by the decline in the real estate market which infused a lot of money into our economy. If we want to continue with the quality of life we have now, we have to pay for it somewhere.
The fire department did agree to cuts, furlough days, etc. Police across the state did not. Their unions are too large, there will be no cuts in the police department. Parks, medians, etc will all go away first.
We all live in Tracy, others stop here on their way to Yosemite, Discovery Bay etc, let's use that to our advantage. (Would you prefer a parcel tax?)
-
Permalink Reply by Marlene S-B on
-
Mark Miller said:My wife & I oppose Measure E
Reasons include:
1) Public safety and executive management pay, benefits & retirement compensation appears to be excessive. Public safety members enjoy a 3% at 50 retirement and salaries comparable to those offered in cities where the cost of living is substantially higher than Tracy. A city safety employee that earns $125,000 in their highest year of pay (and that pay can be inflated when other compensation is wrapped in) with 25 years of service would begin to receive a lifetime retirement of $90,000 at age 50. That is a huge burden for Tracy taxpayers to bear. It should be noted that in 2009, dozens of Tracy employees earned more than $110,000 in that year.
2) City employees pay nothing toward their retirement. CalPERS retirements are designed such that an employer pays a recommended percentage toward employee retirements and employees also pay a share. The City of Tracy has agreed to pay ALL of the retirement costs -- both employer and employee. That costs the City about $2.8 million each year.
3) Unlike many cities the City of Tracy exercises very little control of overtime so dozens of public safety staff members take home $110,000 to $160,000 not counting their benefits & retirement. Until these excesses are corrected by City Council, no additional taxes should be raised to support theses costs. In 2009, several fire captains and some fire engineers earned $30,000 in overtime pay. Other classifications were also accessing a surprising amount of overtime. Some utility operators received $20,000. An accounting technician with a base pay of $63,497 was paid an additional $16,162 in overtime pay. Other cities with budget crises have eliminated overtime for non-safety personnel. The City of Tracy's cost for overtime -- JUST overtime was $2,700,007 according to freedom of information act disclosures.
4) The City has failed to take steps identified by the City's own consultant to reduce costs of operation or increase revenues. The City's methodology for assessing landscaping fees is out-of-date and inequitable. Some residents pay for the costs incurred by the City for landscaping in their areas, some residents pay a fraction of the cost, some residents pay nothing but get the service. The City could save money by privatizing services and adopting generally accepted competitive purchasing and service acquisition practices - but they haven't.
5) City executive management may be over compensated. Just one example: The City's finance director received a base pay of $175,675 in 2009 and "extra pay" that brought his entire compensation (not counting benefits or retirement) to $191,485. Tracy has about 80,000 residents and the average home price here, according to Zillow, is $236,000. It costs less to live in Tracy, yet our finance director appears to earns much more than finance directors in the San Francisco Bay Area where the cost of living is much lower.
Some public employer comparisons: the finance director in San Rafael, CA earns a top salary of $143,364. In San Rafael the median home price is $875,000 and the city has 56,063 residents. The finance director in Fairfield earns a top pay of $154,952. The average home price there is $268,155 and there are 106,000 residents. The City of Alameda just reduced compensation for it's finance director to a top pay of $145,860. Homes in Alameda cost an average of $576500 and the population is 74,405.
According to Joseph Michaels, a personnel services firm with a site on the web, the average CFO salary in the State of California is $119,050. But that covers both public and private employers.
I'm focusing on one official in the interest of brevity. My point is that before the City of Tracy asks citizens to pay higher taxes, the City should first look at opportunities to reduce costs. While the City of Tracy has reduced some costs, they have also carefully protected some employee groups and some City practices from undergoing scrutiny and accepting that changes are needed.
The Measure E campaign is funded by $40,000 in contributions from the fire employee's union and the Tracy mid-manager's employees association. This is not a proposition that comes from the citizens of Tracy. One must ask whether it would be the citizens of Tracy that would benefit from passage of this new tax. Or, would it be those groups that have contributed so much money to ensure that the measure will pass?
-
Permalink Reply by Marlene S-B on
-
include:
1) Public safety and executive management pay, benefits & retirement compensation appears to be excessive. Public safety members enjoy a 3% at 50 retirement and salaries comparable to those offered in cities where the cost of living is substantially higher than Tracy. A city safety employee that earns $125,000 in their highest year of pay (and that pay can be inflated when other compensation is wrapped in) with 25 years of service would begin to receive a lifetime retirement of $90,000 at age 50. That is a huge burden for Tracy taxpayers to bear. It should be noted that in 2009, dozens of Tracy employees earned more than $110,000 in that year.
2) City employees pay nothing toward their retirement. CalPERS retirements are designed such that an employer pays a recommended percentage toward employee retirements and employees also pay a share. The City of Tracy has agreed to pay ALL of the retirement costs -- both employer and employee. That costs the City about $2.8 million each year.
3) Unlike many cities the City of Tracy exercises very little control of overtime so dozens of public safety staff members take home $110,000 to $160,000 not counting their benefits & retirement. Until these excesses are corrected by City Council, no additional taxes should be raised to support theses costs. In 2009, several fire captains and some fire engineers earned $30,000 in overtime pay. Other classifications were also accessing a surprising amount of overtime. Some utility operators received $20,000. An accounting technician with a base pay of $63,497 was paid an additional $16,162 in overtime pay. Other cities with budget crises have eliminated overtime for non-safety personnel. The City of Tracy's cost for overtime -- JUST overtime was $2,700,007 according to freedom of information act disclosures.
4) The City has failed to take steps identified by the City's own consultant to reduce costs of operation or increase revenues. The City's methodology for assessing landscaping fees is out-of-date and inequitable. Some residents pay for the costs incurred by the City for landscaping in their areas, some residents pay a fraction of the cost, some residents pay nothing but get the service. The City could save money by privatizing services and adopting generally accepted competitive purchasing and service acquisition practices - but they haven't.
5) City executive management may be over compensated. Just one example: The City's finance director received a base pay of $175,675 in 2009 and "extra pay" that brought his entire compensation (not counting benefits or retirement) to $191,485. Tracy has about 80,000 residents and the average home price here, according to Zillow, is $236,000. It costs less to live in Tracy, yet our finance director appears to earns much more than finance directors in the San Francisco Bay Area where the cost of living is much lower.
Some public employer comparisons: the finance director in San Rafael, CA earns a top salary of $143,364. In San Rafael the median home price is $875,000 and the city has 56,063 residents. The finance director in Fairfield earns a top pay of $154,952. The average home price there is $268,155 and there are 106,000 residents. The City of Alameda just reduced compensation for it's finance director to a top pay of $145,860. Homes in Alameda cost an average of $576500 and the population is 74,405.
According to Joseph Michaels, a personnel services firm with a site on the web, the average CFO salary in the State of California is $119,050. But that covers both public and private employers.
I'm focusing on one official in the interest of brevity. My point is that before the City of Tracy asks citizens to pay higher taxes, the City should first look at opportunities to reduce costs. While the City of Tracy has reduced some costs, they have also carefully protected some employee groups and some City practices from undergoing scrutiny and accepting that changes are needed.
The Measure E campaign is funded by $40,000 in contributions from the fire employee's union and the Tracy mid-manager's employees association. This is not a proposition that comes from the citizens of Tracy. One must ask whether it would be the citizens of Tracy that would benefit from passage of this new tax. Or, would it be those groups that have contributed so much money to ensure that the measure will pass?
-
Permalink Reply by Marlene S-B on
-
Hello, Mark,
I think your last questions hit the mark. Who will benefit? Do we know the answer to this?
The ballot measure reads:
Measure E: To help prevent additional budget cuts and maintain City services, including: police (patrol, 911, command, gang/narcotics enforcement, crime investigations, other police services); fire protection, emergency services, and other fire services; park/sports field maintenance; support services; senior, teen, and youth services; art programs; and other general services, shall the City of Tracy enact a ½ cent sales tax, expiring in five years, with resident oversight, annual independent audits, and all funds used for City of Tracy services only?
This covers much more than public servant salaries and pensions. The "resident oversight" is vaguely stated, but general city services such as these are essential to maintain and advance a thriving community. This is money that could make a difference for everyone who has kids, loves art, likes clean parks, and wants to feel safe.
-
Permalink Reply by Matt Cordua on
-
Thanks for initiating this Joleen. First of all, I must say that it does absolutely no good to compare to other geographical medians. Tracy is its own little unique community with many advantages over other cities in the tri county area. This alone should inspire city planners to design transportation, safety, housing around this issue instead of putting this here and putting that there, and calling it a "balanced community". I have worked for municipal Fresno for 18 years, and am now with the state, and have made Tracy my home. So I am very familiar with political agenda and waste which comes from greed and poor planning. I recommend a NO vote. The city needs to work the project, not the taxpayer. We have already invested our lives into this community. There are many of us who contribute our time and love to those in need. If more of us were to do this, then the city leaders would know what it is like to live in a community instead of controlling it.
-
Permalink Reply by Renee Riddle on
-
How many of us pay enough in "cofers" our property taxes goes to county and city.. NO WAY on E, E should be enough is enough! Where can I get a Vote no on E sign for my house?
© 2012 Created by Tracy Island.
