Measure B1 is also a Bond measure Around Town, posted by local, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 18, 2012 at 8:21 pm
I read the text of Measure B1, the transportation tax. Not only is this a tax with no sunset clause (meaning our descendants will be paying this forever), it is also authorizing the county to issue up to $1,000,000,000 (one billion dollars) in revolving bond debt.
Not only is this measure allowing them to issue one billion dollars in bonds, with the taxpayers paying the interest, when they make payment on the bond they can keep issuing more bonds to keep the debt at one billion dollars FOREVER! So we have issued a line of credit (credit card) our great grand-kids will be paying on. The county can max out the credit card, make the minimum payment, and keep charging to keep the debt at one billion dollars. Talk about fiscal irresponsibility!
So what will happen is they will borrow and the extra permanent sales tax will be used just to pay the interest in this bond, and nothing new will be built.
To make matters worse, the Yes on B1 committee is circumventing the mandatory campaign finance disclosures. They are required to post the contributions they receive but they are not doing this. Look at the glossy brochures we receive. They are costing a lot of money and they will not tell you who is paying for it. No Bay Area newspaper reporter has been able to get the campaign contribution information.
This tax is a huge scam!
Vote NO on B1 and let your neighbors and friends know the facts. Also, any politician who endorses Measure B1 because they think a tax in perpetuity and a one billion line of credit forever is a good thing does not have their head screwed on straight and should be voted out of office.
Posted by Just another taxpayer, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 18, 2012 at 11:15 pm
This perpetual, revolving bond, with no ending date is an assult on taxpayers. How could this ship of state ever right itself.
I just came across old 2003 bond listings, with maturity dates in 2 more decades, Not good, but at least they do have maturity dates.
2003 bond for purpose of California Infrastructure we're paying 5.5% until Dec, 2029 !!! State of California, GENERAL Obligation bond, issued in 2003, we are paying 5.3% until Feb. 2028 !! Another for Cal State U Hayward issued 2003, we're paying 5.25% until Aug 2025..
It is easy to see we can never get ahead, even with maturity dates.
This sampling is from 2003, but, of course we have bonds at many levels every year.
Normally, there are maturity dates, but B1 is basically an increase to taxpayers, forever. It makes these gross maturity dates of 2025 & 2028 look tolerable, compared to forever.
Posted by Bill, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2012 at 9:22 am
People are finally getting this mafia style takeover of taxpayer's money. Wall Street will jump at the chance to fund these bonds. The main benefactor of Wall Street's investment will be Calpers and Calstars. Out of every dollar you spend on funding this bond 50 cents will go to the California government pension plans. Why do you think every politician is for this measure, including the one running for Pleasanton Mayor, who happens to be on a government pension plan.
Posted by Jill, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Oct 19, 2012 at 11:48 am
Does anybody even know what the debt service cost would be for a billion dollars in bonds? I was surprised that the Tax Measure on the ballot had no financial analysis of the actual costs. I thought they were required to show for bond issuance what the expected total cost, including interest, would be.
I did some simple calculations it it seems that if you did a 1 billion dollar loan, interest only (which is possible since the voters would be allowing them to keep the bond at one billion dollars forever and no requirement to pay it down) at 3% that the interest alone would be $30,000,000 (30 million dollars) per year just for that loan. Not sure if anybody has better info on this. So in the first 30-year timeframe this would be $900,000,000 (nine hundred million) in interest charges.
How anybody could give the politicians a credit card with a $1,000,000,000 line of credit, and no provisions to cancel this credit card, forever, is beyond me. Some people have a lot more faith in their politicians than I do. There is absolutely no oversight on how the money is spent. Sure they say there is a committee that will be reviewing it but even if the committee finds it is not being spent well, there is nothing we can do as the tax and bond issuance is forever. You can almost be certain that the committee will be loaded with cronies of the politicians who will be receiving contracts from the county and benefiting from the tax so it will always look like things are hunky-dory.
Anybody who votes for this should be ashamed of themselves to pass this tax and debt to all future generations!
This is the worst measure I have ever seen in my whole life.
I agree that we need to vote "no" on this tax and bond measure and get rid of any of the politicians who support this scam.
Posted by Just another taxpayer, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 20, 2012 at 1:25 am
We'll have to track and remember just who supports such insanity and such cruelty to the next generation.... Are these the same people who always hypocritically talk about for "the children"...amazing, those 'me first' excuses from public employees.
No more public employee jobs, UNTIL there are enough private jobs to foot the bill!....needs a new president for that.
Posted by B-1, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 24, 2012 at 2:41 am
Even the liberal Contra Costa Times thinks this is a bad deal for taxpayers. While Cook Kaillo & Hosterman support this increased and Permanent TAX the CONTRA COSTA TIMES calls it a BAD DEAL for TAXPAYERS. Cook Kaillo told the CC Times Editorial Board that the tax could be repealed if people didn't like it, but she seems oblivious to fact it would cost 10's of millions to do so.
Cook-Kaillo also seems to think we need to pass this ballot measure because 'we need the money' (who is we?). She fails to realize that a more taxpayer friendly measure could be brought back to voters during the next election cycle. The CC TIMES editorial Staff wasn't impressed by Cook-Kaillo's responses to B-1, accountability of tax dollars, or the growing pension defecit/issue facing many communities.
After watching the video of Cook-kaillo/Thorne interviews it is clear that Cheryl lacks the basic understanding of the fiscal issues facing our community. Nice woman but wrong choice for Mayor.