 d
|
Things
Are Not Always What They Seem . . .
by
Peg Pinard
As
another election cycle approaches, we begin to hear the rumbling of
frustrations about 'government'—sometimes followed by "What's
the use? Nothing's going to change." And, while the national scene can
be daunting, the local elections are the areas where an informed public
can make a huge difference. At the local level we still have the
ability to influence the kind of government we want.
However,
based on my experience as a mayor and county supervisor, I have some
observations that I'd like to share.
We
have all come to witness the growing power of money and power in
politics but what has also become a relatively new factor, are the ways
that even local governments have evolved to manipulate voters.
We
are conscious of the euphemisms we see in some areas like the real
estate ads where a property is described as having a "low maintenance"
yard when it really means it's covered in concrete. Reading between the
lines has become a bit of an art form. While we are "onto" those, there
is a whole era of tactics and manipulations that have now become
entrenched at the local government level. What is particularly
disturbing, is that they are using our tax dollars to pay for the
manipulations. In last month's column I tried to describe some of the
manipulations used by the County of San Luis Obispo when it tried to
hire a public relations pollster to find out how to "pitch" information
to reporters in order to get them to write a positive story about the
(then) proposed Nacimiento pipeline.
The
same thing is happening with local government's "education" about what
is on the ballot measures. Since it is illegal for local governments to
be outright "advocates," they have developed an interesting jargon that
allows them to skirt the law. Instead of calling it propaganda, it's
now called "education." It's a disturbing twist of words. While we can
acknowledge the need for educating residents on ballot issues, when
does the use of taxpayer monies to "educate" cross the line and become
simply an euphemism for propaganda and advocacy? There are companies
who coach local governments in how to skirt the law. They tell them
what words not to use. . . . all the while advertising themselves as
being very effective in 'educating' the voter to pass these new tax
measures.
We
want to believe that the ballot measures mean what they say . . .
especially when it's our local governments who want more money. Central
Coast residents are particularly generous when it comes to paying for
public improvements. In fact, that is the source of the problem. What
is hard for most of us to accept is that it's not just strangers who
would engage in scheming and manipulations.
One
of the warning signs that a scheme is afoot is when a government agency
hires a public relations firm to shape the "message". We are used to
government agencies saying they need money for this or that project. We
decide whether or not we support that project, and then expect that if
the tax is passed, the money will be used to make that project happen.
The problem is that there are so many things going on these days that
we lose track of what was promised. We lose track of what we actually
thought we were voting for, and what actually happened to the money.
The "powers that be", literally, bank on that memory gap.
How
do they do it? The tactic goes something like this: the government
agencies use our taxpayer money to hire polling firms to conduct
surveys. The polling companies ask voters a series of questions
designed to gauge not only what is important to residents, but also
their degree of support (i.e.; is this very important, somewhat
important or not-at-all, etc). Then comes the key question - whether or
not the voter would be willing to tax themselves to pay for it. The
item is then put it on the ballot and residents are told that what
turned up highest on the list of "will support and pay for" poll is
what the government agency intends to do. The government agencies are
under no legal obligation to actually do it...after the original
Measure Y tax increase passed, SLO city hall repeatedly said that they
can use the money for whatever they want!
Surveys
would not be inherently bad if the information was to gauge what was
really important to people and the government agencies actually
followed the priorities of the residents they swore to serve. But
that's not what's happening. The agencies simply find out the words to
say to voters to get your vote, (the 'trigger' words) and then do
whatever they want with the money.
Special
purpose" taxes need 2/3 of the voters to approve it, while a "general"
tax (a we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-the-money tax) needs only a
simple majority. That policy assures that very few agencies will put a
special purpose tax on the ballot, thus encouraging the less
accountable "general tax." Backed by the numerous polls, government
agencies just tell voters what the voters want to hear. There is no
obligation for the agencies to actually use the money for what they
told the voters they would. In preparation for Measure G, the new SLO
city sales tax increase, city hall used taxpayer dollars for not one,
but 6 such surveys in order to get the language of what the voters were
willing to support "just right."
SLO
city hall's "under-lying" agenda is so transparent that, when the
pollster said that voters would be more likely to support the sales tax
increase if the city council tied the tax (even in a 'general' sense)
to only being spent on what voter's said they wanted, city hall refused!
Since
the polls also showed that the public had become suspicious of how the
original tax increase (Measure Y) money was actually spent, city hall
formed a so-called "accountability commission" thinking voters would be
satisfied with the use of the word "accountable" in promoting Measure
G. But, here's where the "word-smithing" comes in again - the
"accountability" isn't for spending the money on what the voters said
they wanted, it's simply another new (paid) commission that would
verify the money was spent where city hall determined it would go.
The
Shell Game
Here
is where the second part of the deception comes in, it's call the
"shell game." The agencies are prepared to tell you that a particular
project was paid for by whatever purpose the tax was "sold" to the
voters and switch it with the regularly budgeted item..
Most
often, voters are not familiar enough with an agency's budget to see
when a shell game is happening. The existing, regular tax base, is
still there. What the agency does is to eliminate listing the regular
expenditure and use the new tax measure money for the very same
expenditure. That way, the agency has just 'freed-up' the regular
budget money for whatever they want and the public is none the wiser.
What the public sees is a new sign in front of a project claiming "Your
Measure Y tax dollars at work!"
Yard
signs supporting the Measure Y tax increase claimed it was to "keep SLO
green" when in fact, only approx. 3% of Measure Y money went for that
purpose.
These
were funds and programs in the regular budget, but all of a sudden,
they are being claimed as a Measure Y expenditure. That's the "shell
game."
Broken
Promises
In
spite of the promises made to neighborhoods, the amount the city spent
on sidewalk repair actually went DOWN after Measure Y passed. Before
Measure Y, the budgeted amount had been about $30,000 a year; after
Measure Y, $10,000 a year. The promises made to residents in getting
them to originally vote for Measure Y simply didn't happen.
What
DID increase? Well, the amount of additional tax income from Measure Y
was approximately $6 million - and the amount of increases in
bureaucratic pensions and salaries after the tax increase was passed
was approximately $6 million! The SLO's city manager makes 28% more
than the Governor of California! SLO's city attorney makes more than
the state attorney general! That additional tax burden has fallen on a
population of only 45,000 people.
According
to the Chamber of Commerce, every household in the city wrote a check
for approximately $1500 in additional taxes to city hall as result of
Measure Y. Now, residents are being asked to write yet another check to
city hall with Measure G.
I
am presenting this article as a caution for this upcoming election.
Different localities and agencies have tax measures on the ballot.
Especially at the local level, those who seek power and money, cannot
do so without the cooperation of the voters. In addition to the City of
San Luis Obispo, I understand that Cuesta College and Grover Beach also
hired the same pollsters.
When
the descriptions of where the money really went start to get fuzzy -
with explanations that it was "absorbed into the general fund" (the
inference being that it is therefore virtually untraceable), then we
need to be aware that is a huge red flag.
Just
to be clear, I am not against all taxes. I do believe that we need to
pay for the services we expect from our governments. In return,
however, government representatives need to honor the feedback of the
residents they swore to serve, the very ones who voted to tax
themselves, and use that money primarily for the priorities those
residents have set.
No
more pollster-driven manipulations, no more shell games, and no more
broken promises.
|
