No On G
Vote No on June 6 in Davis, CA
About Measure G
go to About Us go to A Short History go to Why Vote No on G go to Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of G go to No on G Links Page go to Contact Us

go to About Measure G
go to A Short History
go to Why Vote No on G
go to Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of G
go to No on G Links Page
go to Contact Us
go to Help/Join Us

The Truth About Measure G—It’s Not About Parks

What is Measure G?
Measure G is not a simple renewal of an existing tax. Measure G is a new, 5-page ordinance that would lock in, for six more years, an unnecessary and unfair parcel tax on every home, apartment and business in Davis and could not be repealed until we approved another tax to replace it.

Why do we oppose Measure G on the June, 2006 ballot?
  • Measure G is not about parks! It specifically allows the City to use this tax for many things other than parks, such as street lighting, medians and public facility maintenance.

  • This tax is actually a supplement to the City’s General Fund. Every dollar we pay for this tax frees up money in the General Fund the City can spend on anything it wants.

  • Measure G is unnecessary. Since renewal of this tax in 2002, the City generates nearly $2 million more per year in property taxes and $3 million more in sales taxes. With $5 million more per year now, how can the City possibly justify continuing this unfair tax or threatening to cut services?

  • The City’s mid-year budget report states that the General Fund reserve is now over $8 million or 22% of the entire General Fund. This is more than $2.7 million more than the 15% reserve target.

  • Measure G is regressive and unfair. A one bedroom apartment is assessed the same as a $2 million home. A 10,000 square foot business pays the same as a 137,000 square foot big-box retailer.

  • The proponents of this tax blame the state for taking money, but fail to mention that the state will begin returning this money at the rate of $660,000 per year beginning this July 1.

  • The parks tax makes up less than 1% of the City’s total budget. Surely it is possible to fund park maintenance without this special tax.

  • In 2002, when we last approved this tax, we were promised an end to this tax in 2006, if we passed another tax to replace it. In 2004, we approved a ˝ cent sales tax increase which now generates an additional $2.2 million per year, more than enough to replace the $1.3 million “parks” tax. Why is the City threatening to cut services unless we extend this tax for six more years?

Our City “leaders” are threatening to cut essential services unless we give them $8 million more by approving Measure G. The City cannot justify this threat when its own budget figures show huge revenue increases and burgeoning reserves.

This year, the City’s own Finance and Budget Commission, recognizing that this tax should end, recommended that the City extend the parks tax for only two years to give the City time to develop a sustainable fiscal plan and then permanently end this tax. We would not have fought that two-year extension, and asked the City Council to honor the Finance and Budget recommendation. Yet, the Council rejected the findings of their own hand-picked Commission, and voted to extend this unnecessary tax for 6 more years.

Please join us by voting NO on Measure G.

[ About G ]    [ History ]     [ Why Vote No ]
[ Our Counter ]     [ Links ]      [ Help/Join Us ]    [ Contact Us ]

This webpage was created as part of VME and DVM's Free Democracy
on-line project For more information, visit the DVM Political Arena
Updated 05/01/06