Extra letters: Readers offer final thoughts on Measure A

A blank check

EDITOR: My grandfather worked on the county road crew in the 1940s. The county roads were not built correctly then nor now. Most of the roads were built without foundations. The roads continue falling apart because the asphalt was laid directly on the dirt. Most public roads don’t meet the requirements you would have to meet to build a private road.

Some roads were built correctly. One example, Old Gravenstein Highway by Todd Road, still has a cement foundation but unfortunately wasn’t properly widened with cement. Interstate 80 toward Nevada is frequently being rebuilt to withstand heavy traffic and weather damage. If just a few of our county roads were rebuilt like that every year, instead of constantly being patched with asphalt, eventually our roads would be the envy of other counties.

Measure A is a blank check for the cities and county. The road crews fail to correctly repair our roads. This won’t change by giving them more money. Don’t reward failure. Vote no on Measure A.

RON SONDERGAARD

Sebastopol

Accountability plan

EDITOR: One of our local politicians said: “The truth is in the …” (see end of letter for final quote). Our individual county supervisors say trust us and the money from Measure A will go to roads. Here’s the timeline: three of our supervisors are up for re-election in 2016. The quarter-cent sales tax increase would go into effect on Tuesday. We will have 1½ years to evaluate the supervisors’ performance.

The right thing to do is to bond all the proceeds from the sales tax to the Sonoma County Transportation Agency. With that, the transportation authority will ensure, as a third party, that all funds go to roads and transit. That is the supervisors’ first test. Then, a citizens advisory group should be formed to review the required annual audits. That will give us more than ample information to vote the three supervisors out of office if they have not delivered as promised. Do the same with your city councils.

We can vote the other two supervisors out in 2018. On the other hand, if they deliver, then let’s re-elect them. So let’s fix our roads. “The truth is in the pavement.” Vote yes on Measure A.

ARTHUR DEICKE

Santa Rosa

Voting no on A

EDITOR: Shame on the Board of Supervisors for: 1) not trusting or knowing their constituents enough to believe they would pass a special road tax measure; and 2) for wimping out and bowing down to the special interests by putting a general tax measure on the ballot. All of the thousands of dollars this election is costing the taxpayers could have gone into fixing our roads.

I haven’t seen any supervisor put his or her hand on a Bible swearing to use the money just for our road repairs. Anyone who thinks this tax is going to be used to fix roads has not read the measure. Read Section 17 of Measure A. It’s a general tax, folks, and can be used “in the county’s budget for any lawful expenditure.” I, for one, do not want to wait five years to say no to this tax. Vote no now.

More than two-thirds of Sonoma County voters are vote-by-mail voters. Get your ballots to the registrar’s office so the signatures can be verified and they can be counted first on Election Day.

SCOTT BARE

Sebastopol

Regressive tax

EDITOR: I’ll be voting no on Measure A, a sales tax increase that disproportionately affects the working poor. Some of my progressive allies will be disappointed to hear me say this, but I cannot be silent as I see this regressive tax, which would increase the tax burden of those who can afford it least, being hyped as the solution to Sonoma County’s road repair problems. I’m disappointed that many of my progressive allies support the measure.

This is a general fund tax, and, yes, our county supervisors say they will spend the funds on repairing roads, despite what the measure itself says. But there’s no way to make them keep that non-binding promise. Furthermore, there is no certainty that our current supervisors will remain in office through the full five years that this tax increase has to run and no guarantee at all that future supervisors would honor such a non-binding promise.

Yes, our roads badly need repair. The end does not justify the means, however, and a general fund sales tax is the wrong way to pay for those repairs. Review the budget in light of today’s priorities; the funds will be found that way.

ALICE CHAN

Sebastopol

An easy choice

EDITOR: The facts are plain to see. Our roads are in a terrible state of disrepair. Supervisors have already spent millions of general fund dollars and have only been able to scratch the surface of what needs to be done for our 1,300-plus miles of road. I haven’t heard anyone who says they’re not supporting Measure A come up with a reasonable alternative. It just isn’t as simple as finding money elsewhere.

The truth is, the price tag will be a lot higher if we wait. Something needs to be done now. Considering the fact that almost two-thirds of our roads are in poor or very poor condition, it’s clear there’s an urgency that simply can’t be ignored.

A quarter-cent sales tax for five years, with annual audits to oversee how the money is spent, is an easy choice for me. I’m voting yes on Measure A.

DENISE SOZA

Monte Rio

A record of success

EDITOR: Our county roads are in need of repair. Our elected officials have given us a plan whereby we can address this issue.

To some this plan seems full of deceit and misinformation. The fact remains that when we - the voters - approved similar measures, such as open space and our rail line, those resulted in successful programs.

We are seeing our rail line progress, and we have reserved some of the most spectacular open space in the state. With Measure A, we - the voters - can take control of our roads.

We own the roads, we use the roads and we need to take care of same. One must ask the opposition if they are going to repair the roads.

Are the anti-tax people going to fix the roads? Who will fix the roads?

Our supervisors have given us this opportunity to start the process. If they fail to spend the allotted funds for road repair, perhaps they will hit the road during the next election. I have cast my ballot in the affirmative and would encourage all concerned citizens to do the same. It’s our civic duty.

BRAM GLAESER

Cloverdale

‘Never enough’

EDITOR: Regarding the new sales tax proposal, I remember when the sales tax was 3.5 percent. The roads were paved, the streets were as safe as they are today, utilities worked, and government functioned just fine. But 3.5 percent wasn’t enough for the bureaucrats, nor was 4 percent, nor 5 percent, nor 6 percent … You get the picture. So now, the bureaucrats want to raise the tax to about 9.75 percent. They claim the roads need repair, which they do, but I raise the reasonable question of why haven’t the roads been maintained with the additional 6 percent in sales tax increases over the past 60 years? Could it be the supervisors are just rotten at allocating the public purse? It is a financial pie, and I don’t like it when bad managers want more of the people’s share simply because of their continuing incompetence. A previous letter was spot on: It’s “never enough.”

CHICO BURMANIA

Santa Rosa