City of Concord Placing Measure Q Back on Ballot – Leaders Look to Continue Citywide Half-Cent Sales Tax Increase

July 30, 2014 9:09 am · 78 comments

City of Concord

Last night, the Concord City Council approved placing the City of Concord Essential Services Measure, also known as the Measure Q Continuation Measure, on the Nov. 4, 2014 ballot to protect and maintain local city services.

Measure Q was passed by voters in 2010, and added a half-cent sales tax on retail goods to help close the city’s $5M budget deficit..

The following information is from the City of Concord:

Funding from Measure Q has helped the City stay solvent, maintain services and begin rebuilding its urgent reserve funds during one of the worst economic times of our day. Measure Q is scheduled to expire soon.

If enacted, the Measure Q Continuation Measure could generate funds to maintain city services that residents have identified as important, including 9-1-1 emergency response, neighborhood police patrols, gang prevention programs, street and pothole repair efforts, and youth and senior programs.

“Sacramento has taken more than $78 million from the City of Concord over the past 20 years. The slow economic recovery has forced the City to cut its workforce by 25 percent, defer road maintenance, reduce programs and outsource services,” said City Manager Valerie Barone. “Our City needs locally-controlled funds for local projects and services, with money that can’t be taken by the State.”

As with Measure Q, a Continuation Measure will require independent citizen oversight, mandatory financial audits, and yearly reports to the community to ensure the funds are spent as promised. Additionally, there would be no increase in the sales tax rate residents currently pay.

1 just a concordian July 30, 2014 at 9:38 AM

Not to mention that white fence that’s really adding up the maintenance costs.

2 No Way July 30, 2014 at 9:40 AM

I’m not going to vote for this! Were paying these councilmen & women to do their job. What’s Leone making in benefits, triple dipping isn’t he?
The only thing I want on the ballot is to be able to elect our own Mayor, not play ring around the rosie.
Concord is getting to be a rat hole, I’ve lived here all my life 60+ years and seen such a decline it’s disgusting. Yet P.H & W.C have vastly improved, so something is wrong with this picture.
You guys figure it out.

3 GoGo Gomez July 30, 2014 at 9:54 AM

No way!

4 What security July 30, 2014 at 10:02 AM

Concord is doing a great job at spending our tax dollars. Keep up the great work.

5 Aint never gonna give it up July 30, 2014 at 10:18 AM

You fearful sheeple gave us this money and we aint gonna give it up. How does the song go. Never gonna get it, never gonna get it.

6 First of all July 30, 2014 at 10:28 AM

These guys are NOT your leaders, they are your REPRESENTATIVES.

You, the voters have decided to place them upon a pedestal and call them leaders. They are elected to do the PEOPLES bidding, which includes management of City business, which cannot be done if they are your leaders.

It does not take a CPA to understand the budget. But what is really needed is a complete listing of the unfunded liabilities which are not listed.

No City (or anyone/anything else for that matter) should ever spend more than it receives. Your representatives are tasked with managing the city for you. Overall, they have failed.

Giving your representatives more money will only create more debt.

Your representatives need to get your house in order and if they cannot, they should not be your representatives.

7 Noj July 30, 2014 at 10:28 AM

Vote no.

8 Bruce July 30, 2014 at 10:32 AM

“Sacramento has taken more than $78 million from the City of Concord over the past 20 years…”

Wow, I had no idea Concord was the only city from which Sacramento took money over the last 20 years! Oh wait, they’ve done the same thing to every city and Concord is the only one using this as an excuse to raise taxes.

All of the surrounding cities have used their tax dollars to beautify their cities. This has increased property values, brought in businesses, and lowered crime… all of this is beneficial to their cities’ coffers. Concord, on the other hand, decided to hire more police officers. Property values have not increased at the same rate, the city has fallen into disrepair, and crime has increased.

Concord is a complete joke.

9 Don't tax be, Bro. July 30, 2014 at 10:34 AM

JUST SAY NO. Cut the exorbitant salaries and benefit packages of city leaders if you want more money to go around. In fact, for someone who has extra time on their hands why not dig up and post those numbers here? Pass the word! Then Edi can survey the fine folks of Concord to see who’s thrilled about paying more taxes.

10 Doug July 30, 2014 at 10:40 AM

Mayor, can you go back into your archive and post the rationale the city used to get measure Q past in the first place? I thought I remember the city saying it was merely a stop-gap and that they simply need the economy to improve. The economy has improved… and now they’re talking about how Sacramento takes money from cities as their reasoning for continuing the tax.

11 mutts July 30, 2014 at 10:44 AM

No. Enough is enough.

12 lola July 30, 2014 at 10:49 AM

I agree with the majority of posters here–passing this measure will only encourage overspending and not sticking to our budget. City needs to make some hard decisions on its spending habits instead of looking to voters to pay more. I’ll be there with bells on to vote NO on this measure. Enough is enough — no matter how much we pay in state, local or federal taxes, it’s never going to be enough if we continue to spend more than we take in. The City of Concord has declined in a number of ways….and I don’t think this small tax increase is going to fix it….reassessing priorities and making hard cuts will, though. But I doubt that will ever happen…..

13 CLAYCORD.com July 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Doug, that was basically it. Check out these two stories to view the mailers that were sent out during the measure q campaign. Sorry the images in the story are not larger.

http://claycord.com/2010/10/20/the-measure-q-mailers-are-they-legal/

http://claycord.com/2010/09/02/latest-round-of-measure-q-mailers-7633/

Mayor

14 Nature Lover July 30, 2014 at 10:54 AM

I agree with #6. I want to see an analysis of salaries and compensation packages (compared to private industry) and a breakdown of all unfunded
liabilities before I vote yes on any tax increase.

15 @ Bruce #8 July 30, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Amen Brother…Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Taxes are way to freakin high in the bay area as it is. And for what? Concord has marginal services at best. 4 out of 5 council members just vote the POA a raise. 5 out of 5 County BOS members just voted to give the elected department heads a 15% raise on average and are set to give themselves a 50% raise. The insanity of paying top dollar for marginal services needs to end.
Concord wants money…..then bulldoze the freakin Monument Corridor and gentrify the thing so people of a higher socio-economic demographic will move in. That is how you get money, it called improving the socio econimic make up of a city. But as long as we have the section 8/welfare heaven that Concord has the working tax payers will continue to be bled

16 Chuckie's Wife July 30, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Unfortunately, most voters will go, “awww shucks…what’s a half cent anyway. Besides, we’ve been paying it for the last 4 years and it hasn’t hurt me, so yeah, let’s vote yes.”

Didn’t the city council promised to find ways to balance the budget, so Measure Q was a stop-gap measure that would for sure go away? Then, instead of doing that, they started paying out huge bonuses to retiring or departing employees.

I voted no last time around, because once a tax is approved, it NEVER goes away. If we vote yes this time, it will show up again in 4-5 years, but then it will be to make it PERMANENT.

We must send a clear message to the city council that we do not approve of their tactics and that we insist they be more judicious in their spending – that includes not paying out bonuses. Better yet, let’s just not re-elect them!

So guess how I’ll vote?

17 Anon July 30, 2014 at 11:03 AM

How much has this tax cost us per capita? A simple question.

18 @ Chuckie's Wife July 30, 2014 at 11:11 AM

You are correct. I just wonder what would happen if more people voted.

In Concord, a good voter turnout is less than 40% of the eligible voters.

I would really like to see and hear what the other 60% have to say and vote for.

19 No tax is ever temporary July 30, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Once you vote it in politicians will make any rationalization to keep a tax in place. You ppl should know that by now. STOP GIVING IT TO THEM! I agree that the cities around us have been looking better, even through what were supposedly the lean years. Concord looks same or worse, losing businesses, larger areas of disrepair lack of landscaping. Could it be the “leaders” representatives that keep getting elected? Maybe ppl should be more informed before they vote? Or maybe we have too many people in Concord not really paying taxes to care if they’re increased, and then they’re too uninformed or stupid to realize we ALL pay sales tax.

20 ISCoffee July 30, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Another tax is needed just like a pain in the rear is needed. Put the tax idea on the chopping block.

21 No tax is ever temporary July 30, 2014 at 11:17 AM

@ @Bruce #8
EXACTLY! That area is also negatively affecting our schools which then negatively affects home values too! I have a feeling that area is soon to be more populated and expanded not made any smaller! (Like too many places right now. It’s an invasion!)

22 #15 July 30, 2014 at 11:21 AM

hit the nail on the head! 4 of the 5 gave cops a raise. Don’t ask us for money and then spend it on raises.

Remember this at election time. Get rid of Ron, Laura, Tim. Start fresh.

and the numbers you want to see are on the city website. Don’t be lazy look for yourself. I have no problem with wages for City Mgr and Chief but I do have issues with cops making more money then either on of them!

23 Craig Cannon July 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM

They Sure Do Waste Money. Maybe They Need to Tighten The Belt. This Cheap Skate Won’t Buy A Car or Big Items In Concord. I While Ago We Figured Out at Car, Household Appliances, and Shopping for a Year at a Little 1/2 Cent More is Thousands, Depending on Your Spending. We are Your Neighbors. I Support Concord at Times, it’s a Nice City, Good People. There Was Not Much Done Last Time Except Some Waste. I Hope You Make a Good Informed Decision. Remember, Cities Around You, Support Retail Too. Would People Want to pay just a Bit Less? You Betcha! The Economy Is Improving. Give Your Resident Supporters a “Little” Break.

24 funny man July 30, 2014 at 11:34 AM

dont worry folks its only temporary till the economy inproves!
maybe they will get rid of the tax after hillary gets elected

25 livininconcord July 30, 2014 at 11:42 AM

I’m with Chuckie’s Wife. Vote NO. I work in the non-government section (which is shrinking daily) I have gotten a 1-2% raise for the last 5 years. Yet I see bigger and bigger payouts to these government louts. It’s truly becoming a have and have not society.
Soon there will be no middle class, just us peons, all working away with nothing to show for it. And looking up to the Patron’s (Pelosi, Brown and Barone) Not to mention Leone.
VOTE NO and Kick them all out.

26 Buster July 30, 2014 at 11:51 AM

I was a big NO when this was passed in 2010 but since then I’ve been won over for a yes this time around. The difference is that I’ve now taken the time to do my homework on the issue. The current pole shows that 68% of Concord voters are for the extension.

27 Michelle July 30, 2014 at 11:55 AM

No funny man, the tax will stay and convert as it did before. Remember how boring it was.

28 Silva July 30, 2014 at 11:58 AM

Taxes, tolls, and rate hikes are never temporary. It doesn’t matter what they tell us to get them pushed through (down our throats).

29 milly July 30, 2014 at 11:59 AM

Walmart wanted to move here next to Lowes,which would have meant,taxes for the city ,200-300 jobs,good idea I thought ,but they city said no,why???

30 RANDOM TASK July 30, 2014 at 12:07 PM

wow lol you guys are really stirred up over something the dems have been doing for years 50 years in demifornia. When crooks see easy money they will not let it go ….even if you vote it down they will deem it necessary and put it in anyways the hands have been greased cant stop the flow now ……..enjoy your political choice embrace your demise

31 dilligafman July 30, 2014 at 12:10 PM

HELL EFFING NO!!!!!!!!!!!!

32 Monty Abblow July 30, 2014 at 12:13 PM

Of course many say NO now! They left out the part about, “Think of the kids.”

33 The Professor July 30, 2014 at 12:15 PM

A little 1/2 cent sales tax increase. What’s the big deal?!?!

Reminds me of the story of a frog in a pot: You put a frog hot water and it jumps out immediately. You put it into cold water and gradually turn up the heat and it never notices. Eventually it’s dead.

So….1/2 cent tax increase+(only) a $30 parcel tax+ (only) a small electric rate increase+ (only) a small sewer increase+ (only) a small bond servicing increase +++++. It all adds up to (only) a ton of money!

It’s easy to sell the numbnuts on the small number. I think the $5 million should still go to the services that they cite like senior programs and potholes. But the money should come from bloated expenses like city pay and retirement expenses. But that will never happen.

34 SKS July 30, 2014 at 12:21 PM

.. And yet executive staff members get entitled with lifetime medical benefits starting on day one of employment. That in and of itself is a crime.

35 Guap July 30, 2014 at 12:25 PM

They spent up to the new income level with the addnl sales tax, so its’ expiration is like asking them to cut.

VOTE NO!

NO NEW TAXES.

36 FunnyLady July 30, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Hey Funny Man – you are NOT FUNNY at all !!!!!!

37 MrDioji July 30, 2014 at 12:36 PM

I’m glad Walmart didn’t come to Concord. “200-300″ Walmart jobs aren’t even worth even 1 real job.

I’m voting yes on the Measure Q Continuation. It will help the City. Plain and simple.

38 WC July 30, 2014 at 12:37 PM

My wages stay flat and I have to find a way to survive, cut costs while the gov just keeps asking for more (e.g sales tax, bond measure, electric, gas, license fees).

39 Pete July 30, 2014 at 12:46 PM

@ #15,
You hit the nail on the head, and I’ve been enduring whiners calling me “mean”, “racist”, etc. for saying the same thing for 10+ years: GENTRIFICATION OF THE MONUMENT CORRIDOR CAN AND WILL SAVE CONCORD. It is PRIME real estate, close proximity to “upgraded” if not upscale retail, easy freeway access and near BART. Employment and tax receipts will go UP, crime will go DOWN. If Concord gave the signal that they want to re-develop the entire area, developers would beat a path to their doorstep.

But no, we’ll bumble along with city “leaders” more than happy to keep this swath of poor people to whom they can pander, and the oh-so-enlightened citizens amongst us who worship “diversity” and think it’s awesome having our own little slice of the Third World right here in our midst.

40 @ The Professor July 30, 2014 at 12:54 PM

Its not the amount, it is the PRINCIPAL.

The City Council PROMISED a temporary tax. While we all know there is no such thing, it is important that people show those representatives that such tactics are not acceptable.

I propose that we vote them out for even suggesting extending the tax. They are not working in the Peoples best interest, they are working for the City Staffs best interest.

41 BagsFlyFree July 30, 2014 at 1:13 PM

Concord voters.. Protect your city! Vote no on Measure Q2 and vote out Ron, Laura, and Tim for allowing the City Manager to campaign for an extension for a “temporary” tax. CPD has 57% of your taxes in their pockets. Do you feel safe walking most Concord streets at night?

Reasons why a City Council refresh is needed:

– If elected to another cycle, both Ron and Tim will receive lifetime benefits from the city.
– Laura has served in the City Council since the 90’s. If there is any one councilperson to represent the “descent path” the city has taken, it should fairly be her as she had influence over both the Council and various Redevelopment Agencies
– Tim has ties to CPD and the POA, so the piggy bank is always open to “liveable wage adjustments” whever CPD makes a money grab. The recent raise approval is proof.

Vote no on Q2!

BFF Out!

42 Toni July 30, 2014 at 1:40 PM

Nature Lover, why would you even CONSIDER voting “yes?” I voted “NO” the last time around, knowing that it would be a black hole. The last time, the officials used the threat of having to reduce the number of police and fire personnel, and the voters fell for it.

This tax is odious. We bought a used car from a broker in another city, and had to pay the Concord sales tax, merely because we live here.

I don’t care if they open up their books, and they threaten the voters that we would have NO police force if the tax doesn’t pass, I don’t trust them, and my vote would still be a resounding “NO!”

43 Fred July 30, 2014 at 1:46 PM

I support Edi Birsan in his efforts to extend Measure Q! Are we really going to sacrifice services to our city for a HALF CENT sales tax?! Really??

44 Concord Guy July 30, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Temporary is temporary. I voted for Measure Q and now I’m feeling hoodwinked. The city leaders and management should have been properly planning for the time when this funding source ran out.

Shame on the Concord City Council.

45 Wayne Ritz July 30, 2014 at 2:09 PM

the way the City wastes money, really!

46 BagsFlyFree July 30, 2014 at 2:18 PM

@Fred When 57% of that money is going to the bloated CPD coffers I say vote No on Q2!! CPD is old school and needs a kick in the rear to step up how they manage the Monument corridor, Clayton Road strip, and Solano/North Concord Bart areas. Turn off the ATM card City Council!

BFF Out!

47 Anonymous July 30, 2014 at 2:43 PM

How much does this cost per person?

48 Sofa King July 30, 2014 at 2:51 PM

@BagsFlyForFree

1) lifetime medical benefits don’t take effect unless the employee is over 50
2) I don’t know about you, but I took a huge financial hit due to the recession and I have not yet recovered. I would imagine the city doesn’t have a fortune teller on staff to predict the future and they might also be slow in recovering
3) I am not willing to watch this city deteriorate ANY FURTHER due to additional service cuts
4) If you think crime and gangs are bad now, just wait until more PD cuts are made
5) Antioch rejected a similar tax (enough said on that)
6) I have nothing but respect and admiration for out officers and will support them in any way I can to ensure the safety and well being of my family
7) If the HALF CENT sales tax is gonna break ya or go against your morals, DONT SHOP IN CONCORD!

49 ChampagneKitty July 30, 2014 at 3:09 PM

to Anonymous #47–It’s part of the sales tax, so that depends on how much people spend within the city.

50 Toni July 30, 2014 at 3:24 PM

Fred and Sofa King, people like you are the ones who also believed that “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” How often do you have to hear your elected officials cry “wolf?” You are duped and low information voters. The propagandists know exactly how to jerk your chain.

It isn’t that the 1/2 cent will break me. It’s just that I pay enough in taxes, how much will break you, Sofa King? What is your threshold?

51 .. July 30, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Until Concord can show that they’re fiscally responsible…..NO!

52 @14 July 30, 2014 at 4:00 PM

and if lower than private industry are you willing to raise them to match.

53 Shelly July 30, 2014 at 4:38 PM

I agree with Mr. Dioji. Glad we didn’t get a WalMart.

54 BagsFlyFree July 30, 2014 at 4:39 PM

@ SofaKing.. Concord’s sales tax base will keep eroding if we pass Q and keep the same Council/Planning/Development teams in place. Why? Because you are rewarding failure from city hall.

Concord has long made due with being “good enough.” The complacency from city hall has aged Concord into looking like a town with no vision or true “core” to be proud of. Look at city hall itself, the library, the Terminal Shopping Center, Ellis Lake.. At what point do we say, hmmmmm We need to invest in Business growth or promote our best features? Why not buy some run down shopping centers, level them, then offer bids for new design? Why not do the same throughout Monument to modernize and create desireable properties people will pay a premium for? Why not bid on the land behind Orchard to utilize the wasted space that does nothing for anyone?

We can tax our selves to death, or we elect people with vision who will re-spark Concord’s economic vision and make it a better city than it is today. Q wouldn’t be needed if the city created a larger tax base. Which side are you on?

BFF Out!

55 Atticus Thraxx July 30, 2014 at 5:48 PM

I have a question. Does 57% of the city budget going to CPD for a city this size seem kinda high? And 9% for public works (where I presume our road repair comes from) seem way too low? And what is the city manager doing with 4%?
I don’t like the way the pie is sliced. I want to see some damn roads paved, Measure Q or not.
Sell some pot store licences, wack at that police budget and let’s move forward.

56 then get rid of Edi too July 30, 2014 at 6:08 PM

He wanted to raise parking fees across the city. Edi has got to go!

57 Larry July 30, 2014 at 6:10 PM

Hell no to more tax!Smarter spending is a better solution.Like that will ever happen with all these liberal stupid bastards running our once great Country.

58 Bobby July 30, 2014 at 6:32 PM

@BagsFlyFree-

First of all, I would venture a guess that most people posting here are 1) Not Concord residents or 2) Will not be voting on the next election anyway. It doesn’t appear the voting majority even read this blog.

With that being said, I am part the majority of recently polled voters who WILL be voting YES on a Measure Q extension

*There is no reasonable way the city council could predict how quickly the economy would recover after a devastating recession

*I am NOT WILLING to take a chance, out of spite, ill feelings, etc, to vote down a measure that directly effects public safety in Concord. If you live in this city and you vote this down, you are essentially shooting yourself in the foot. Trust me, I don’t want any additional taxes either but this is just a continuation of an already existing, majority of voter approved tax

*I continually read about gang violence increasing in Concord, burglaries increasing and crime in general increasing. This is NOT the time to be scaling back on police services. In fact, we should be doing everything we can to support the hiring of additional officers in the city!

*If you take a look at what is going on in Antioch with violent crime, this is what happens when a city shoots down a tax measure used for emergency services and the city is forced to scale back services and personnel.

Lastly, get off your high horse about only certain council members supporting this measure. They all support it, even Birsan, who I have personally spoken to about this!

59 Antler July 30, 2014 at 8:37 PM

What percentage of the existing Measure Q sales tax income …. If ANY… was spent on the Fourth of July festivities combined?

60 Tom July 30, 2014 at 9:02 PM

We don’t live in Concord, but I’ve seen 1/2 cent tax increases where we live, and I never noticed it. It adds up to the city, and hopefully everyone benefits.

61 @ Bobby 58 July 30, 2014 at 9:24 PM

I recognize a lot of “handles” here and know they are voters. I too am voter and will vote “no”.

And don’t use Antioch as an example as their downfall has to do with over building of over priced homes for the socio-economic population of the city and allowing large housing developments to covert to section 8 housing….note to Concord – this will happen at the CNWS.

The only people the city leaders give a rats butt about is the “diverse” population of the Monument (the same population that give Concord its low class, ghetto reputation in the county) as they sure as hell have their lip prints on that populations butts.

62 The Realist July 31, 2014 at 2:19 AM

This again? I remember vaguely reading about this in the papers last time and voted No.
So when does temporary become permanent? 10 years, 15 years?
I predict the contract cycle after Measure Q part duex gets rammed down taxpayer’s throats again…. the police department will enjoy nice raises in their union contract.
Gotta admit the potholes are getting bigger and more plentiful.
4% for the city manager… wow. I got the wrong degree. I could be fleecing you people instead of my boss!

63 Really? July 31, 2014 at 7:43 AM

The Concord, California sales tax is 9.00% , consisting of 6.50% California state sales tax and 2.50% Concord local sales taxes.The local sales tax consists of a 1.00% county sales tax, a 0.50% city sales tax and a 1.00% special district sales tax (used to fund transportation districts, local attractions, etc). Concord collects a 2.5% local sales tax, the maximum local sales tax allowed under California law. Concord has a higher sales tax than 89% of California’s other cities and counties. People forget where we stand for taxation. It is advertised as “1/2 cent”, it’s not, it’s a percentage. It’s only a “1/2 cent” if you buy a $1 candy bar.

64 Terry Kremin July 31, 2014 at 12:28 PM

There was that other little matter they also considered –

They moved the size of the font for ballot statements up a bit. Not that big of a deal.

Other than it moved the cost of a ballot statement for candidates up to over $2200. Oh – and the city requires payment when you file, or no ballot statement.

This after they decided this summer to move from 250 words to 300 words. Tiny change.
Except that that increased cost for candidates from ~$750 to over $1500.

Does 50 more words really matter?

If you are a small money candidate it does – but in a bad direction. That means the current ballot statement will cost almost as much as I spent TOTAL last election.

If any one wants to donate….

65 Pleasant Hill, You're next! July 31, 2014 at 1:26 PM

Voting in Ken Carlson to the city council wasn’t smart. Cops’ salaries don’t need to be more bloated. Are you listening to the fine people of Concord? Why not? You’ve got money to blow?

66 jtkatec @ Terry July 31, 2014 at 1:48 PM

I was just talking with the SO last night regarding the cost of filing. No one poor can afford to file and represent their neighborhood. It’s a way to keep the lower class out of being candidates. A Republic? A Demcracy?
.

Who can afford 10% of the salary for filing on some of these positions.

67 Terry Kremin July 31, 2014 at 2:25 PM

jtkatec #66 –

Couldn’t agree more. Why I was/ am trying to help with Represent.us. ( http://represent.us/ ).
Even more sad is how endorsing agencies follow others money instead of leading. Bring the most money to the table? endorsed!
sorry for sidelining away from OT.

68 Terry Kremin July 31, 2014 at 2:27 PM

And funny how two have yet to say they will refuse lifetime healthcare.

If they were really that worried about the city’s financial well being, shouldn’t they lead by example and sign a contract to refuse the coverage?

And the whole – “may not be enforceable” – EVERY contract MAY not be enforceable, however, if all parties comply, there is no need to enforce, is there?

69 Terry Kremin July 31, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Just received an update from the City, the county has agreed to keep it at only $1525. Slightly more than a months stipend for a city council member.

70 Anonymous July 31, 2014 at 4:14 PM

@atticus

Right and we could follow the Nevada model , open some whore houses, and build a nice casino on monument, license billboards on concord blvd. buncha things we could do to raise money.

71 R July 31, 2014 at 4:19 PM

I voted for the tax the first time so that the City could continue with its services through the big recession. What did we get? The streets are torn up and poorly maintained. Shopping carts are everywhere. Not going to vote for it again.

72 Miranda July 31, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Terry 68
That’s how it usually is, and most don’t get it.

73 Cautiously Informed July 31, 2014 at 5:48 PM

Only a fool would voluntarily give any government agency more money.

Regarding using the money for street and pot hole repairs, we already pay for that. Each time you buy gasoline you are charged a 39.5 cent excise tax for every gallon you buy. For me that adds up to approximately $300 a year. That money is earmarked for roads and transportation infrastructure, such as bridges. Where does all that money go? Why are our roads in such horrible condition? Because the government steals it and uses for their pet projects.

74 49ersFan July 31, 2014 at 5:58 PM

Count me in to continue this extension. I fully support keeping our services and if we can add to the reserves for another economic downfall, I say lets do it!

As for the police, why is there so much bagging on them? I have had nothing but positive experiences with them! With the garbage they have to deal with, we should all be supporting them and, in my opinion, they are underpaid for what they do!

I had a nice chat with Edi Bitsan not too long ago and he was very supportive of the Measure Q extension! I wasn’t too happy with his desire to increase parking fees, however!

75 Atticus Thraxx July 31, 2014 at 6:21 PM

It’s a manageable income stream #70, not Armageddon. And from what I’m reading a plentiful stream. Prohibition didn’t work, it’s time Concord kept some of that pot money in Concord.

76 The Realist July 31, 2014 at 6:37 PM

Still curious, may be some you old fogeys can fill me in:
When does a “temporary” tax become permanent?
Will they change their strategic name/plan for Measure Q at the 15 or 20 year mark?

77 Anonymous July 31, 2014 at 8:07 PM

@atticus
By your reasoning (usually good) any drug can be sold because someone can always get it. Here’s a question: people trot out prohibition of alcohol as a reason to justify marijuana. How do you test someone for driving under the influence of marijuana?There are zero standards, unlike alcohol.

I don’t think marijuana is a good thing for society. Lots of people disagree. Maybe the potheads filling the shelters in Denver would be bums anyway ,but maybe not.

78 Atticus Thraxx July 31, 2014 at 9:05 PM

Whether it’s a good idea or not is kind of irrelevant. The cat is out of the proverbial bag. Licenses are sold and the product taxed all within a short driving distance of Claycord. I want Concord to have a piece of that. A big piece.
I cannot speak to testing for sobriety with pot, and your right it’s a problem. but I would argue it’s already a problem and Concord allowing shops to open isn’t going to impact, statistically anyway, whatever those numbers are. At least I don’t see how. As far as the “Denver” model you point at, hell with 57% of our budget going to CPD, let them worry about it! More like, make them worry about it.
Thank you for the well reasoned discourse. Rare these days. These pages.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: