General Revenue Sales Tax Increase

Where I Stand:

○ This tax increase must be defeated.
○ It’s a very expensive exercise in lip service.
○ It’s being sold as a solution to our traffic and housing problems, but it will barely make a dent.
○This tax increase can’t be legally earmarked for traffic and housing.
○ This tax increase is displacing the popular SPET tax which allows taxpayers to have a say in big ticket spending.
○ SPET is the proper vehicle to fund important big ticket community needs.

The Challenge:

The General Revenue Sales Tax increase is big money grab by local government. There is no guarantee that it will be spent on transportation and housing, and there is no chance that it will make a significant difference in our traffic and housing woes. It’s being sold dishonestly to the public in the name of “we have to do something”, but spending hundreds of millions of dollars to give lip service to these issues is a big rip off.

Direct government subsidies of private sector workforce housing is corporate welfare, and at the rate of $100,000 to $400,000 in cash subsidy per unit we will waste millions barely scratching the surface of our deficit of thousands of workforce units.

START is a useful component of our transportation plan, but spending $100 million over 20 years in order to allow START to at best handle 3% of valley travel is not a good deal.

By displacing SPET the community will lose a valuable vehicle for funding big ticket items. SPET allows the taxpayers to vote on each project forcing government to have coherent reasoning behind each proposition.

The Solution:

Defeat the General Revenue Sales Tax increase. Force local government to bring individual housing and transportation projects before the voters through SPET where taxpayers can carefully examine the return on investment of each project and give it an up or down vote.

Questions, comments, concerns? Do you have a better idea? Contact Me.