Our 41st Annual Dinner on April 18th, celebrating the League's continued service to the taxpayers of Sacramento was a tremendous success. The success, in a great measure was made possible by the following groups who sponsored the event:

• John O. Bronson Company, Inc.
• E. A. Grebitus & Sons, Inc.
• Rental Housing Association of Sacramento Valley
• Snider Leasing
• A. Teichert & Son, Inc.
• Cavalier and Associates
• Florin Road Toyota
• Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
• Law Office of Lori M. Merserseau
• People's Advocate
• Pettigrew & Sons Casket Company
• Senator Ford
• Suburban Ford
• The Sullivan Family
• Winter Volvo Lincoln Mercury

The evening's highlight was the keynote speech by County District Attorney Jan Scully who made an excellent presentation covering issues related to present conditions regarding structuring and financing of a number of elements and programs within the law enforcement community. She also described efforts made to make her office both more effective and efficient. Our thanks to District Attorney Scully for attending the event, and by her presence, helping make it a success.

President Mersereau presented Directors Carl Burton, Bob Creedon, and Tom Hiltachk Outstanding Achievement Awards for 2002, in recognition of the extra work and support they extended this year that made the Taxpayers League's efforts a resounding success.

Vice President Jon Coupal presented the Annual Taxpayer Advocate of the Year Award to the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association's Attorney Tim Bittle, who spent four long years fighting on the League's behalf for the right of County voters to vote on two illegal taxes created by the County of Sacramento. As a result of Mr. Bittles' successful fight, by Superior Court decision, the County's illegal Utility Tax and the last increase to the Transient Occupancy Tax (Hotel Tax) will be on the November ballot.

ATTENTION - ATTENTION - ATTENTION

Starting in May, the League's Executive and Regular Board meetings will be held in the conference room across from the League's second floor office at 1832 Tribute Road, Suite 210, Sacramento. The J. O Bronson building's Farmer's Market Café' is closed, and consequently the Executive dinning area is no longer available for meetings. Meetings will still begin at 12:00 sharp, as in the past.

PROGRESS ON CITY UTILITY TAX

Plans are being completed for the campaign the League will conduct in support of its November 2002 ballot Measure which gives City voters the opportunity to lower the City's 7.5% Utility User Tax (UUT) over a 4-year period to 2.5% beginning in 2003, and to expand the rebate program to all City taxpayers and families with a yearly income of less than $25,000. Our city volunteers and Arno Political Consultants are completing the gathering of the 5,545 valid signatures required to qualify the ballot Measure.

The League's SACRAMENTANS FOR A FAIR UTILITY TAX Recipient Committee, Identification Number ID 1240152, is handling the campaign and its finances. The Committee needs donations to help finance the campaign. We encourage all members to help by donating money to our Recipient Committee, as the Committee will face strong, well-funded opponents of the ballot Measure. Checks should be made out to SACRAMENTANS FOR A FAIR UTILITY TAX, and mailed to the League office.

ANOTHER WIN FOR THE HOWARD JARVIS ORGANIZATION

The Sacramento Bee, in an April 13th article "Appeals court upholds ban on Roseville's utility fee", covering the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association's successful lawsuit against the City of Roseville for applying an illegal 4% in-lieu franchise fee against city services for water, sewer, and garbage collection, resembles an action by the League and the Jarvis organization, involving the City of Sacramento. The City of Sacramento had an 11% in-lieu franchise fee charged against the same type services. In both Cities' cases it was recognized that the fee is actually an add-on tax, unrelated to cost-of-service requirements of Proposition 218. The difference however, is that when the League and the Jarvis organization challenged the City of Sacramento fee, then City Manager Bill Edgar recognized the fee was illegal, met with League representatives, and agreed to recommend putting the fee before the voters as a tax, rather than engage in a legal battle. He made the recommendation to the Sacramento City Council, which they wisely approved. The tax was presented to the voters as a revenue neutral action, which simply changed the name from fee to tax. The Sacramento City voters approved the change. The 11% tax is called the Enterprise Fund/General Tax, which according to the City Budget brings in $11.7 million each year legally. Serious negotiation is oft-times wiser than starting a war, something the new Sacramento City Manager, Mayor, and Council are about to learn.

COUNTY UTILITY AND HOTEL TAXES

Superior Court Judge Joe Gray's favorable decision in our lawsuit against the County of Sacramento for illegally passing its Utility Tax, and an increase in its Transient Occupancy Tax (Hotel Tax) during the 1990s, without putting them before the voters, which violated Proposition 62, resulted in negotiation of terms of a settlement. The Board of Supervisors is to take action, as agreed in the settlement, to place ballot Measures on the November ballot asking the voters to approve the two taxes.

THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET AND FISCAL PERFORMANCE

The estimated shortfall for the 2002-2003 state budget has risen from $12 billion to $20 billion since we reported on it last month. Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill's says the increase resulted from lower than estimated income tax receipts. Governor Davis' must present his budget this month, and must come up with an additional $4.5 billion of either budget cuts, or borrowing, over what he proposed in January. The Governor is opposed to any tax increase. Betting is on that his solutions will be aimed at borrowing rather than budget cuts. Bee reporter John Hill gives an edge to the bet when he wrote that Senator Steve Peace, Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee said: "You've got to come to the realization that a significant part of this will be borrowing. Low interest rates and investors in search of high-quality government bonds make that strategy particularly attractive. This is what makes sense to borrow." Peace's statements imply that heavy long-term bonds and short-term lease payment bonds will be floated. Couple that with the Governor's penchant to consider tapping retirement funds, future tobacco settlement revenues, and special funds, simply results in pushing the problem into the future. Then, at heavy additional cost to future taxpayers, some not yet born, future Governors will inherit the repayment problem fostered on them by our so-called state leaders. And in the end, to misquote Winston Churchill: "Never in the field of human events has so much been owed by so many because of so few."

Remember that Steve Wampler, radio talk show host, in a Sacramento News and Review Opinion piece pointed out that Californians now pay the highest taxes in the state's 150-year history. And in the three years since Davis took office the general fund budget ballooned from $57 billion to $79 billion, a jump of 37 percent, while the population only rose 5 percent. In one year the size of state government increased by 20 percent. Ninety percent of a three-year, $25 billion surplus was spent adding thousands of new employees to state government. But our fearless leaders say they don't know where to cut!

ATTACKING THE INITIATIVE PROCESS

If there is one thing elected officials throughout California fear, and hate, it is the power of the Initiative. And both directly, and subversively, over the years Legislatures and Governors have attempted to kill, or hamper the Initiative process. The power of the Initiative was given Californians by Governor Hiram Johnson in 1911. Bee Opinion writer Daniel Weintraub, in early 2001, discussed the pros-and cons on use of the Initiative, pointing out Californians love the process as it is the only way they can check the powers of government. However, it is also a tool also used by special interest groups, and the wealthy, to obtain what they want. Proposition 39 is a classic example, wherein Silicon Valley millionaire Reed Hastings and his wealthy friends changed the California Constitutional's 121 year old protection of property owners by reducing the voter approval level for local school bonds from 66.6% to 55%.

At the end of last year Governor Davis quietly approved a Legislative Bill aimed specifically at paid signature gathers used to qualify Initiatives. Simply put, it requires that the individual who signs the Declaration of Circulator at the bottom of the Initiative, in the course of gathering signatures, must be a registered voter in the political jurisdiction involved, whether paid signature gatherer or volunteer. In the case of the Initiative the League presently has on the street to reduce the City of Sacramento's Utility User Tax, we were scrupulously careful to assure that all our Circulators and volunteers are registered voters of the City. It made signature gathering more difficult, as the League could not use its County members as signature gathers. However, it did not make the task impossible. We have passed the number of required signatures and are now gathering a substantial number of "safeguard signatures" to assure the final count of registered city voters is surpassed handily.

REGISTRATION OF PUBLIC ADVOCATES

The League is investigating the possibility of establishing a statewide campaign fund repository, similar to a fund established by a Political Action Committee (PAC). Its purpose would be similar as money raised would be used to fund taxpayer advocate campaigns, but the campaigns would be different as most, but not all, would be used to fund legal battles in local political jurisdictions below state level. Another use could be supporting local Initiatives needed to overcome an identified problem involving a county, city, or local district abuse of a tax, fee assessment or rate. Presently, the capability of local tax advocates to fight an abuse is hampered by the lack of money to begin and sustain an action, or campaign to right a wrong. The fund would used to help the local Taxpayer organization.

During internal discussions, it became obvious that identification of "Real Taxpayer Organizations" would be essential. As Taxpayer Advocates for over 41 years we have encountered, and been confronted with, many single issue groups gathered to sponsor or fight and an individual cause, who use the "Taxpayer" identification in some fashion, and disappear as soon as the issue is resolved or abandoned.

The worst of the lot are hacks, who surface before every election, pick some name such as "Taxpayers for Citizen's Rights", imply they represent long standing (actually non-existent) organizations which have carefully reviewed each issue and made a grave decision as to what and who a voter should vote for. Actually, they canvas backers and opponents of Propositions, and campaign committees of candidates for money to put their positions, and names, in a flashy, slick, slate mailer, paid for by whoever puts up the buck first.

Our sensitivity to the use of spurious titles was greatly sharpened when the League encountered a flagrant misrepresentation of Proposition 26 prepared by its supporters. They never mentioned their aim was to change the state's Constitutional protection of property owners. Instead they threw in everything, kids, mom, apple pie, feeding the family pet, and the grand old flag in support. Interestingly, their name changed after Proposition 26 was defeated. Originally they were the "National Taxpayers Alliance" a phantom group unknown to any major taxpayer organization in the U.S. We investigated and found the "Alliance" was formed by the Yes on Proposition 26 campaign, who contracted with Voter Connections Communications in Salina, Kansas. When they rolled over to support Proposition 39, effectively the same bunch reinvented themselves as "The Taxpayers for Accountability and Better Schools." Membership? Millionaires Reed Hastings, John Doerr and few of their friends.

We have decided that true Taxpayer Advocate organizations have many things in common, and can be classified.

Normally they are legally incorporated, file state and federal tax reports, their officers and board members are identified, and their organizational names appear in a local telephone directory. If they have full time offices, the addresses are available. Most have e-mail addresses, and some have operating websites. These organizations can be listed, made public, and can be contacted. We are considering a formal, recorded identification system for the state of California, accessible to the public at large, who can then check, and weed out the spurious.

FIELD OF DREAMS

The Mayor is becoming a believer of "Build it, and they will come." She, and a few of our elected officials have been traipsing to some of the major cities in the "States" to look at millionaire's amusement facilities dependent on taxpayers backs, and fans wealthy enough to support other millionaires who play in the arenas. The officials want to find out how and where the stadiums were built, and how they were financed. The only trouble is our Mayor will undoubtedly discover, as Dorothy did when she landed in Oz, that: "This isn't Kansas Toto!"

Reporter Tony Bizjak of the Bee, in the first of a three part series described what the group saw, had a table describing the 4 (best) stadiums in the nation, whose introductory statement is ominous to taxpayers. Tony wrote, in the box titled Moving arenas downtown: "For nearly a decade, a long list of academic studies has shown that downtown sports arenas do not boost the regional economy. But urban policy experts say there is probably a broader reason for the cities embracing them - they are the latest weapon in an urban war with the suburbs to lure crowds downtown and re-establish downtown as a region's metropolitan center. While results have been mixed, the efforts have involved a huge investment of public funds and creation of new taxes."

We are waiting breathlessly, for the next chapter.

MEMBERSHIP

Our Members constitute the League's strength and Members provide coverage on many issues we try to resolve. We welcome new Members Gordon Tomsic and David Toland to our 41-year old tax fighting organization.

Over 120 taxing and rate based agencies in Sacramento County and its six Cities handle billions of taxpayers' dollars yearly. The League's constant surveillance of their activities has been our mission for 41 years. We have been successful in rooting out many illegal uses of taxpayers' money, and have defeated the last three attempts to raise sales taxes in the city and county of Sacramento. The last alone has kept $120 million in the pockets of taxpayers over the last four years. It is estimated that our work during the past year offset $15 million in rate costs alone for County and Cities services.

We receive no outside funding. Funds are raised in the form of membership dues and donations to our Taxpayer Defense Fund. This year the League is part of, or in charge of, two serious battles in involving protection of the taxpayer, the reduction of the City of Sacramento's Utility User Tax (UUT) being just one example. These fights are local. In addition we are joining with a lead taxpayer organization sponsoring a statewide fight for all taxpaying property owners. To win these endeavors we ask all members to help by recruiting new members. And now, in view of the campaign we are waging in the City to reduce the UUT, in addition to contributions to the Taxpayer Defense Fund the League asks that campaign contributions be made to SACRAMENTANS FOR A FAIR UTILITY TAX, the Recipient Committee we created to put the City of Sacramento UUT Measure on the November ballot.

LETTERS TO THE LEAGUE

We seek "Letters to the League" from members on present projects and issues on which we are working, and recommendations on those we should look at. Letters may be edited and republished in any format, primarily in the interest of available space. Send letters, faxes, or e-mail to the Sacramento County Taxpayers League. Our e-mail is Sactaxleague@prodigy.net; our phone/fax number is (916) 921-5991, and our address is:

Sacramento County Taxpayers League
1832 Tribute Road, #210
Sacramento, CA 95815

TRANSPORTATION

By Director Carl Burton

May is National Bike Month, and the League views the bicycle as a viable and environmentally sound form of transportation, as well as an excellent form of recreation for the whole family. May is also National Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month, and we want to remind the driving public that a good rule to remember is not to follow a motorcycle too closely.

In proclaiming May 12-18 as National Transportation Week, Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta said, "It is most appropriate that we take one week each year to celebrate the achievements that we have made in transportation and at the same time reflect on the challenges that lie ahead." This is appropriate as California is holding on to its lead as one of the most congested metropolitan areas in America. And because of Sacramento's location, and its proximity to large markets (virtually the entire state of California is within one day's driving distance, and we are at the hub of several highway interconnections) it's not unusual for us to inch along Business 80, or be stopped on our way up Hwy 50 toward the foothills, or trapped in gridlock along Hwy 99 or Interstate 5, or come to a dead stop in cross-town traffic.

According to the Texas Transportation Institute, Sacramento is the 15th most congested city in the Nation. In terms of wasted fuel and productivity, the economic toll of this congestion is estimated at $830 million a year. Further, the population in the six-county Sacramento region is expected to grow by almost a million people, an increase of more than 50%, between now and 2025 (the total population in the region is expected to exceed 2.8 million). We know traffic demands will increase and it will become a greater challenge for us to solve. The League recognizes that challenges face the Sacramento region and believes that transportation has one of the greatest impacts on our quality of life and our economic development. Congestion and delay not only waste our time, but also creates air pollution problems for individuals, burdens the region with inefficiencies that causes higher costs. The League takes the position that we have an interest in ensuring that the public transportation needs of Sacramento are met within the existing stream of tax revenue flowing to Sacramento area governments. The League believes the Sacramento region needs to develop a transportation infrastructure that can accommodate the coming dramatic changes, a system flexible enough to meet future needs. Sacramento has not yet upgraded our transit systems or services to reflect a changes in commuting patterns from a "hub and spoke" to a "spider web" system.

My interest in transportation issues began three decades ago while serving on the San Joaquin County Economic Development Association Board of Directors. I found that efficient transportation makes a difference in any community, and that nothing else has a greater impact on economic development, on growth, or on quality of life. Now I represent the League on the Sacramento Transportation and Air Quality Collaborative, a joint effort by nine public agencies within the Sacramento area: the County of Sacramento, the Cities of Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, Folsom, and Sacramento, the Sacramento Regional Transit District (RT), the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), and the Sacramento Transportation Authority (STA). The Collaborative is working to promote better transportation links between people and their jobs; improvements to major travel routes; expanded use of mass transit; developing air quality initiatives to meet legal emission limits; and gathering momentum to extend the local Measure A transportation sales tax past 2009. The Collaborative meets weekly to discuss county transportation and air quality needs. The Collaborative's annual budget is $1,000,000.00.

My role is to ensure the taxpayer interests of the Sacramento region are fully represented in all of the Collaborative's discussions, such that we get full value for our tax money.

WHO'S IN CHARGE? WHO'S BEING HELD RESPONSIBLE?

In the League office are files in which newspaper articles, letters and notes accumulate, and the accumulation is part of the resources I use to research activities in the State and County involving use and abuse of public money. In the abuse category, except for the state budget, the electrical crisis, and the Auburn Dam, no files are as compelling as City files covering City Developments, and City Cost Overruns.

At the end of 2000, talk was about bonds for theater and Music Circus improvements on H street whose cost increased from $8.2 million to $11.3 million in one year. County Supervisors and the City Council approved the increase, and formed a Joint Powers Authority to issue the bonds. Arts groups are to pay off the bonds over 20 years, but taxpayers are liable for defaults if payments are not made. In January 2001 discussion involved an $8 million upgrade "to add more character" to a proposed civic center behind city hall. The question posed was "should the city go for budget or elegance?" The decision was to add the extra $8 million over budget. In the same month the city gave developers $650,000 in loans for the developments on the K Street Mall, after having previously given them a $6 million tax rebate. In February the City Council voted to help Arden Fair Mall pay for a $30 million expansion, possibly using redevelopment money. This, after they had already approved about $2 million to improve Arden Way freeway ramps at Interstate 80, which since has developed a cost overrun. Also in February the Council learned of a 24% increase, some $3.8 million, for renovation of the Crossroads Shopping Center into the City's public safety administrative building. Then in April an audit revealed the Olympic Track and Field Trials left organizers over $1 million in debt, and the audit complained about oversight. The City Council and County used hotel tax funds to bail the organizers out, including forgiving $500,000 owed to the City and County. The biggest problem was the estimate of $1.34 million for new tracks at Sacramento State jumped to $2.05 million. Fortunately Alex G. Spanos covered most of the first $1.34 million with a donation. Also in the mix, the garage across from the Music Circus was running 30% over budget. Finally, the City Council began to become concerned about cost overruns and began to complain. City Manager Bob Thomas defended the City's handling of construction projects, yet said the City is changing the way they will be managed, involving more cost analysis before construction begins. That certainly should be done.

In December cleaning of mold in the delayed City's public safety building cost an extra $380,000, and the 9 month delay will increase total cost by about $2 million. In December, the golf cart barn fiasco hit, and it is a shambles involving construction without competitive bidding, no written contracts, and no City inspections. This story is still unfolding and will certainly cost much more than the $800,000 estimate.

Now new stories are unfolding about contract discrepancies and unlicensed contractors. The lack of knowledge by City Council Members and the City Manger concerning these costly construction projects is clearly demonstrated. Questions should be asked whether anyone in the City is in charge. And more importantly, what actions are being taken against those responsible for failing to safeguard taxpayer's dollars.

Joe Sullivan

<< Back to Index

Officers