Measure P…we hardly knew ye?
“No on P” continues to bring in the money. The second cash filing shows them getting another $9,000 from the CA Realtors Association (their slogan “You fight for your clients, We fight for You,” kinda says it all.) This recent donation (10/14) is from the Berkeley, Oakland, Contra Costa IMPAC account which has now raised $28,000 for “No on P.”
On the “Yes on P” side of things, signs started going up this weekend and a mailer has been produced by the Democratic Club. One has to wonder if it’s not too little, too late. In June 50% of Alameda voters voted early, one can only imagine that that number will be higher this election.
With all the doom and gloom from the council dais. One hopes that the council will actually follow through with the needed cuts they’ve been suggesting are needed. There are two reasons, one: if the cuts (The Yes on P signs have a fire helmet and a police hat) don’t materialize after the campaign, voters will rightly have more reason not to trust future tax initiatives in dire financial times. And second: things are not getting better financially, so we need to act now. (Councilmember deHaan made this point well last Tuesday).
I’ll leave you with this uplifting piece from the Sacramento Bee:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today said he would call a special legislative session for Nov. 5 to tackle a budget problem that “is much worse” than the $3 billion shortfall previously projected.
Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata said the gap has stretched to $10 billion.
Mark Irons
October 28th, 2008 at 8:43 am
What happened to $16 billion? Is this another $10 billion after the phony “balancing” of the budget?
The stats on Lauren’s blog indicate no on P has raised massive amounts and little of it has been spent. For a group that is struggling so hard those realtors sure have a lot of $$$ to toss around.
Denise Lai
October 28th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
It is entirely illogical to increase taxes at the outset of a recession. And we ARE at the sudden beginning of a recession. The downward pressure of doubling property transfer taxes on home sales, on those who wish to move here—attracting home buyers from other towns or those moving up from an apartment—, is untenable in this current economy and will offset much of the expected revenue. Combined with the unfair hardship placed on residents who need to sell–elder, infirm, job loss, etc.—this is a bad idea. Plus it unfairly places the burden of revenue on those leaving Alameda and those arriving, and places none on long time residents who stand to benefit the most. Moreover, I have some real concerns that the City will fail to make the hard decisions to towards optimized leaness and efficiency—that’s where we should begin. Then, once that is done, maybe revisit a taxation method that is more fair and balanced on all Alamedans. But NO on P now—no new taxes on anyone at the start of a recession.