Letter to the Editor: Caution for Measure L, Propositions 28 and 29

Dear Editor,

Much has been written about the good work accomplished by the Solano County Library system and the Library Foundation and the Solano County Taxpayers Association concurs that such recognition is deserved.

Major increases by all eight libraries in operating hours, book purchases, children programs, and public usage are a testament to the management and dedication of the managers and staff.  But, as investment managers say, “Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance.”

Measure L, designed to continue a minor tax to maintain the current level of support, would be difficult to oppose did it not contain two significant flaws, flaws that are overlooked in statements supporting Measure L.  These flaws were not identified in sufficient time to correct before the June 5 election, but contrary to what you have been told, this is not “now or never.”  Correction can be in a new ballot for the November 2012 election--far in advance of sunset of the current tax measure and in time to assure uninterrupted support.  Therefore, the Solano County Taxpayers recommends voting down the current proposal so that an unflawed proposal can be presented in November. 

The primary error is the total lack of legal control on the expenditure of funds. Section 11-301(e) states “provides for funding public library operations, programs, and acquisitions within Solano County.” Check the meaning of “acquisitions.”  Though the intention of the current managers is to spend tax funds for only library books, programs, and materials, the word “acquisitions” is an open door to fund anything—real estate for expanding libraries, exorbitant salaries, a consulting contract, or a GAO style conference for library officials. 

This is not suggesting that current staff is contemplating abuse, but sixteen years is a long time to predict complete integrity.  Bell, California is not unique in having officials spend public monies without conscience.  A local library spent $1.6 million for real estate that will never be used for library purposes.  A different city council approved annual salaries, with benefits, totaling $372,719 for three library staff members and probably believe they are to be commended for reducing that amount 10% next year.

Solano officials have squandered millions of tax dollars, sometimes for private gain, but more often only because the money was available to be spent and personal accountability is not acknowledged.  “Shell game” is recognized as a term for a criminal activity—bureaucrats play the same game by moving credits from restricted accounts to general funds and call it a transfer.  Whether the wasted funds are county taxes or a state or federal grant, waste is waste and does cost taxpayers their dinner.

Do you want to give a 16 year blank check to unknown future officials who have no limitations how to spend public funds because our current library board has done a good job?  Vote NO now and wait for the measure to return in November with adequate controls.

A second flaw is the lack of specificity for having an independent oversight committee.  It is worded to have strong appeal for a voter, but provides little protection for the taxpayer.  What are the prerequisites for the oversight member? A friend or brother-in-law? What authority will be given to the oversight board?

Will the oversight board provide periodic reports to the public?  California education law dictates that school boards have a taxpayer association member on all bond oversight boards—members under an oath to evaluate efficiency of government.  Why not establish the same requirement in this measure?         

The two flaws in Measure L can be removed only if it is defeated now. Vote NO on June 5.

SCTA members also recommend voting NO on Propositions 28 and 29. Opposing arguments are much more valid than those favoring.

Earl Heal, President

Solano County Taxpayers Association