Does anyone remember why Gray Davis was recalled? Because he
continued to raise taxes!
Does anyone remember why Gray Davis was recalled? Because he continued to raise taxes!
What is Schwarzenegger doing with Propositions 57 and 58? Raising taxes!
Politician Schwarzenegger and Gov. Schwarzenegger are two different people. Politician Schwarzenegger promises, Gov. Schwarzenegger threatens.
Based on my ongoing dissatisfaction with the State of California and the atrocious condition of the budget, I find it a major slap in the face for Gov. Schwarzenegger and Controller Westly to ask taxpayers for yet more money in the form of Propositions 57 and 58 on your ballot. If this weren’t bad enough, we also have Proposition 55 and Measure E asking you for more of our precious money.
The common thread through all of these issues is that those who are responsible for their existence seem to act as if they have no fiduciary responsibility whatever to those of us who MUST provide the funds to support them.
The current big spending legislators are out of touch with fiscal reality. It also points out that no amount of money will satisfy their appetite to spend your hard earned money.
Proposition 56 must be voted against, NO! This proposition would completely destroy the core of Proposition 13 property taxes and give legislators a blank check to raise sales, gas, liquor, tobacco and other taxes by a simple minority vote of 55 percent, there by stealing the taxpayers protection of two-thirds majority currently required.
It’s time we the people say enough is enough and rebel against the tax and spend mentality that must end NOW! Spending must be reigned in in order to regain control of the budget.
I’ve no doubt that you could all use a few extra bags of groceries in your kitchen or a necessary pharmacy prescription more than the government needs yet another free lunch on you. Keep your hard earned money in your pockets for yourselves, family and necessities you shouldn’t have to give up for the government.
We must take back control of our government.
Let’s all make the right and moral decision on March 2 by voting NO on Propositions 55, 56, 57, 57 and Measure E.
Noreen Martin,
Hollister
Measure E will help Gavilan College students
Measure E on Gavilan College meets the needs for the young students, handicapped and a very good senior health program there. It needs to be passed.
Robert Gila,
Hollister
Prop. 56 will be a disaster for San Benito County
Can San Benito County residents afford to pay an additional $80 million in taxes? If Proposition 56 passes, this could be the reality.
Proposition 56 is a Trojan Horse initiative that uses attractive language up front while downplaying its true intent, which is to lower the voting percentage needed in the California Legislature to pass a bill that includes a tax increase. Specifically, Prop. 56 will lower the percentage for passage from two-thirds to 55 percent. Prop. 56 effectively destroys the protections that were introduced with the passage of Prop. 13.
In the last legislative session, there were tax increase bills introduced that totaled $65 billion! That is an average of over $2,000 per citizen of California. Based on a population of San Benito County of 40,000, that is an ADDITIONAL $80 million in taxes from our county. That is what can happen if Prop. 56 is approved. Do not assume that there will be taxes increased only on high income earners. Yes on 56 means tax increases on everything. Car tax increases. Sales tax increases. Gas tax increases. The list goes on.
The make up of the current Legislature is such that in the Senate, Democrats hold 62.5 percent of the seats, while Republicans hold 37.5 percent. In the Assembly, the split is 60/40 for the Democrats. Translation: If the terms of Prop. 56 had been in place, the Legislature could have passed each of the tax increase bills proposed with just the Democratic votes alone. The Republican delegation in Sacramento was able to avoid these tax increases, but only because the percentage needed was 67 percent instead of the 55 percent that Prop. 56 mandates.
Our Assemblyman, Simon Salinas, consistently voted with the Democratic majority to pass these tax increases and our Senator, Jeff Denham, consistently voted to oppose the same tax increases.
Propositions 57 and 58 do not impose a spending cap and do not prevent taxes from being raised year after year. Only defeating Proposition 56 does that. Proposition 56 is a disaster for the taxpayers of this county. I urge you to vote No on 56.
Al Kelsch,
Hollister
Letter was vague, inaccurate, misleading
Recently, I was disappointed when my grandchildren brought home a letter by the superintendent that was given to them by the teachers. This letter was sent home with children of the district to parents under the guise of a budget update when in reality it appears that it was meant to exploit the district’s position on salary negotiations without presenting the teachers positions on negotiations. Doing so, I believe, was unfair and unprofessional. Many of the statements in the letter were vague, inaccurate and misleading.
Attempting to inform parents, staff and the community on the budget process is a noble idea, but how you proceed in doing it is another matter. The information provided must be accurate and unbiased. In this case, it was neither. The superintendent claims that the district incurred additional expenditures, yet provided no financial data to substantiate that claim. Additional district expenditures must be clearly presented and supported by verifiable financial data. That clearly was not done.
The superintendent claims that the only issue causing the district and HESTA to be at impasse is a dispute over salary. I don’t believe that to be accurate. The superintendent goes through the trouble to define the word “impasse” to the reader, yet fails to define what the district means by the word “co-pay” for medical insurance. To the unsuspecting parent or member of the community who has insurance and saw the word “co-pay,” they probably thought it meant the $10 a person pays when they take their children to the doctor’s office. That is not what the superintendent meant. Using the word “co-pay” without clearly defining the meaning could tend to mislead the reader. Why didn’t the superintendent fully explain the district’s offer? What did she really mean by “co-pay”?
The superintendent also implies, using charts, that teachers received more in raises than the district received in state COLA’s. I don’t believe that is accurate. The superintendent does not provide financial data in dollar amounts to support the validity of the charts. To get a better picture, certain questions need to be asked. What was the total revenue in dollar amount for the 3.87 percent COLA that the district received in the 2001-2002 school year? What was the cost (dollar amount) to the district for a 4.87 percent raise for the teachers in the 2001-2002 school year? In addition, the 2002-2003 school year was left off the charts. Why?
If the COLA the district received covered the raises given to the teachers, then the charts the superintendent provided tended to mislead the parents, staff and community because they didn’t provide a true picture of what actually occurred.
But perhaps the most disturbing thing is that the superintendent attempted to exploit the teachers (the very people that are involved in negotiations) and the school children to promote the district’s position in negotiations in an inaccurate manner. That, in my opinion, was unfair, and above all, unethical and unprofessional.
I recognize that school districts face tough times and many hard choices will have to be made in upcoming years. In the future, if the superintendent wants to provide a budget update, I hope that it is fair, accurate and not vague. If the superintendent wants community support, exploiting teachers and children to promote the district’s position on negotiations is definitely not the way to go.
Aurelio Zuniga,
Hollister
We need better films at local theaters
As a lover of film, I am continually disappointed with what our local Premiere and Granada theaters present us with weekly. I find myself running to Monterey’s Osio and Santa Cruz’s Nickelodeon to satisfy my appetite for mentally stimulating dramas, cleverly consistent comedies and, of course, for the progressive, artful foreign films.
I would like to see more diverse selections at my local theaters. Films such as “Torque” or “2 Fast, 2 Furious” don’t captivate everyone. Don’t get me wrong, those films have their audience, and deservedly so. However, I feel we have an overwhelming abundance of these films at one time. And why must we wait two weeks or more until Premiere Cinema decides to feature a film? By that point I have already spent the cash in another county to see the film, when I’d rather have spent my “movie money,” as well as fuel, in Hollister.
I challenge the management team of Premiere Cinema (also the owners of the Granada) to appeal to a wider audience when selecting films. Why can’t they carry phenomenal, thought provoking films such as “21 Grams” or “The House of Sand and Fog”? I know that I am not the only resident who feels this way. Film is an art form, and comments on the evolution and practices of our culture – contrary to what the casual film patron may think. It is high time that Premiere Cinema starts embracing this idea, or at least considers it, upon making film selections.
Lindsay Arata,
Hollister
Measure G not about agriculture
I am neither a rancher nor a farmer. I have no land to develop. I resent the fraud that the proponents of Measure G are attempting to pull off. While they claim to be pro-agriculture, in reality their motive is to use the force of government to take away the land use rights of ranchers and farmers without compensation.
If they truly cared about agriculture, they would want level ground reserved for farming, with housing restricted to the hills. But Policy 32A of Measure G says just the OPPOSITE! No building on slopes over 30 percent and no building on any land whose access is over a similar slope.
In plain language, these environmental zealots won’t let you build a house on a hill even if the top is as flat as a pool table.
Measure G is not about agriculture. It’s all about forcing San Benito County to conform to the wishes of a small group of environmental extremists and to hell with the farmers and ranchers whose livelihood depends on their stewardship of their lands. Join me in voting NO ON MEASURE G.
John C. Buchanan,
Hollister
Elect Anthony Freitas in District 2
We need new leadership in our county and Anthony Freitas is the one that will provide what San Benito County needs.
He is honest and sincere and will listen to the people who have many concerns.
When going to the polls March 2, please vote for Anthony Freitas.
Fran Leonard,
San Juan Bautista
Sal and Tiny Spina,
Hollister
Government is killing small business
It’s no wonder our small business failure rate is so high. Tomorrow’s Wright Brothers, Hewlett and Packard, Jobs and Wozniak, etc., will never grow their businesses in this environment of governmental oppression. The ingenuity of government, circumventing Prop. 13 and Prop. 218 with fees rather than taxes is backfiring. Each government fee acts exactly like a tax.
As Mr. Justice Marshall said, “The power to tax is the power to kill.”
Government fees are just as lethal to small business. While we need the eggs, we’re killing the goose at ever-increasing rates. Storm drain impact fees, traffic impact fees, police impact fees, water impact fees, public facilities impact fees, etc., are really government impact fees. What about deaf, dumb and blind politicians’ impact fees? Public sector unions’ impact fees? Radical Socialists in our Legislature impact fees? How much longer can we keep sacrificing small business owners to Black Hole Government? Will its malignancy grow until it is the only employer?
Medieval physicians blood-sucking leech treatments were more logical than those applied by our local government leaders and the Radical Socialists in our Legislature. Government excesses are salting the soil, poisoning the water and fouling the air for small business, making it impossible to grow a business here in California. Until our leaders look into their mirrors, they will not come close to seeing the real problem.
Government oppression justified the Boston Tea Party, summarized by a subcommittee composed of Jefferson, Adams and Franklin in the Declaration of Independence. Will our new leaders change course, or will they steamroll ahead? How many small business failures and bankruptcies must we suffer before our tolerance limit is reached again? Small business owners’ beg: “Government, lay down your leeches. You’re killing us.”
Caveat viator!
Joseph P. Thompson,
Tres Pinos
