Was I wrong? Is there enough money in the proposed budget that makes the need for Prop 1 and 2 unnecessary?
With all the hoopla about hard times, the City’s projected budget comes to $540 million, a 13.5% increase from their last budget, yet the Council claims they need more. Last year’s budget was adjusted to $476,099,164, some $26,726,229 over their adopted budget, that’s a 22% increase mostly due to annexation costs.
This year, annexation is again biting existing residents, new and old, in the butt. The Council always busts the budget and has the money left over to spend as they wish. Too bad it’s not on parks and roads.
It appears their claim about falling on hard times is not justified. Hard times are when the citizens have to balance their budgets when their fixed income source is only going up 1.7%. How does the Council expect their citizens to find the extra money so they can balance their own budgets? Their quality of life is harder to come by and the Council is not helping.
SS and Medicare costs will eat up whatever increases they get. That’s extremely bad on fixed income people and terrible on working people who will have 2% more taking out of their paychecks.
Council budgets go up every year, a whopping 13.5% this year. And yet funding Props 1 and 2 costs ($5.3 million) which is less than one percent (.009 of $540 million) and more than enough to cover the cost if only Council would do so.
The Council’s failure to meet the needs of the City comes at our expense, an expense we've already paid for. Asking for more money is inexcusable. The Council should fund City needs first out of existing resources, not raise our taxes.
Robert L. Style