Don’t Let the Water Crisis Get Bad Enough
Yesterday on this site, Senator Dave Cogdill argued that it is “absolutely essential … that we pass a comprehensive water bond now.” In response, Jon Fleischman on his popular FlashReport website argued that the cost of the bond will be too high if it comes out of the legislature with an environmental agenda from a “Sierra Club wish list.” Instead of acting on a legislative measure now, Jon proposes we wait until the situation gets “bad enough” and then put forth by initiative a cheaper, more directed bond measure dealing exclusively with water storage and conveyance.
It is hard to argue with Jon’s analysis of how money has been ill spent in Sacramento. Government officials have been irresponsible in not adequately funding infrastructure to serve the water needs of the people. But I have problems with his conclusion that we allow the situation to get “bad enough” in hopes that the people will pass a leaner bond measure sometime in the indeterminate future.
While some would argue it is a principled stand to vote against a water bond that doesn’t exclusively provide for more water storage, watching principle crash into reality will not solve the pending water crisis.
Penny Foolish, Pound Foolish
Republican legislators in Sacramento seem willing to do anything to avoid voting for a tax increase—even if it means picking taxpayers’ pockets. The GOP push to siphon off more than a billion dollars in Proposition 42 funding—the sales tax on gasoline that is supposed to go for transportation—would do just that.
Traffic congestion is like a ball and chain on our economy. Most commuters spend hundreds of dollars each year paying for wasted fuel they burn up while stuck in traffic. It is estimated that the average California motorist is out of pocket more than $600 a year for excess repairs, wear and tear and poor vehicle performance as a result of our substandard roads and streets. And any time we delay a construction project, the cost skyrockets. The bottom line is that every dollar we don’t invest in fixing our roads and transportation infrastructure costs the taxpaying public a whole lot more.
Why is Government So Expensive?
California and its local governments are facing tough choices this fiscal year—basically cut services to balance the budget or raise taxes dramatically to pay for it. But why?
It turns out that revenue declines are only a small part of the problem. The real answer lies in the fact that the cost of government rises each year without any change in services—it comes in the form of salary increases and benefit increases.
These amounts are largely negotiated in secret and buried in public employee agreements that rarely if ever see the light of day. Does this mean that public employees do not deserve raises? Absolutely not—they should and do receive annual increases.
Most public employees automatically receive a three to five percent “step” increase each year. The raises we hear discussed in the limited public releases about these negotiations are increases on top of these basic increases — the so–called COLA or cost of living adjustment.
For example, in Vallejo, a city which recently filed for bankruptcy protection, some unions were scheduled for 21 percent COLA increases over three years—on top of their regular step increases of 3-5 percent.