Ten reasons to support Measure L
Here are 10 important reasons to vote “Yes” on Measure L:
1. Measure L will not stave off a much larger pension problem caused by Sacramento. But it will save us from financial disaster for a few years until hopefully, legislative politics change.
2. A vote either way will have no effect on the cost of the pension system. The city council has no power to change its present pension plan. Our town does not have the $450 to $500 million required to exit this state-controlled benefit.
3. There is a belief that voting “no” will stop reckless financial decisions being made in the California state legislature. But the truth is, a “no” vote won’t hurt anyone in the Capitol. It will only hurt those of us who live in the city when public safety positions are needed and can’t be filled.
4. Lodi is not the relatively crime-free city it once was. Increased murder rates, homelessness, assaults and property crimes have led
to rate Lodi as only safer than 13 percent of U.S. cities. When compared to other cities, Areavibes.com gives Lodi a grade of “F” for crime.
5. Stockton had to learn the hard way, but their citizens got the message. “The All American City” crime rates made national news. But the people saw the light and responsibility raised their sales tax to nine percent — more than our city council is asking in Measure L. As a result, they now have a fully staffed police department with at last count, 20 additional positions yet to be filled. Unfortunately, their decision has drawn potential police recruits away from Lodi, thus leaving at present, 6-10 positions unfilled.
6. Even if these vacant spots were staffed, Lodi would still be below average for the number of police officers required for a city its size, according to City-Data.com.
7. The vast majority of city workers, especially those in public safety, deserve our support. Although many other cities and municipalities offer higher salaries and better benefits, many of our public safety employees have chosen to remain with our communityeven when it means contributing up to nine percent of their pay for pensions, as well as foregoing modest cost of living raises.
8. A half-cent sales tax is a far better solution than what other cities have chosen to do.
For example, Elk Grove has a “Community Facilities Districts” additional tax burden, which increases charges on developed property by as much as $840 per single family residence and far more on multiple dwellings! With the Lodi proposed solution, property taxes stay the same. Twenty-five percent of sales taxes are paid by people who do not live in our community.
9. In a little more than two years, disaster for this city will strike when the statemandated minimum wage of $15 per hour goes into effect. This will increase city salary costs for part-time workers by as much as 30 percent! Others with more years of experience and higher skills will need to be raised as well.
10. It would be great if we could cut here and there, but a number of problems exist with this thinking. If all nonessential services were cut, including parks and library services, it would not be enough to cover the costs of state-mandated requirements. That would leave only roads, fire and police services. Streets are bad enough in Lodi. Do we want to see further reductions in police and fire than what we have now?
If you want to stop runaway costs of government in California, then challenge those whom you send to the state legislature. That’s where the root of the problem lies. Hold financially extravagant state lawmakers responsible and accountable. Shooting ourselves in the foot locally, will only make Lodi’s fate far worse.