Letters to the editor | Friday, Oct. 16, 2020: A look at both sides of Turlock’s Measure A

Measure A can save Turlock

I have lived in my hometown of Turlock for over 60 years. I’m supporting Measure A because I care about our community.

All the monies raised will stay local, for improvements to roads, recreation facilities, police services, and homelessness issues— vital services needing immediate attention. There is no reason our city should not have an adequately staffed police force and immediate response to our 911 calls. We also need immediate attention to the repair of our roads, and homelessness must be addressed in a feasible, responsible, manner. We are currently not fiscally able to fund these priorities. Measure A will put us in a position to do so.

In order to provide assurance of accountability and transparency, an oversight committee is absolutely necessary and Measure A requires this. We need to know that our monies are being well spent and directed solely at what it is intended for: roads, police, fire, parks, and public facilities. I would ask that we think beyond today and look to the benefits provided in the future.

Anthony Rojas, Turlock

Higher tax won’t solve problem

The proponents of Measure A would want you to believe that it is about fixing roads, improving 911 emergency response, and solving the homelessness problem. If approved, Measure A will increase sales tax revenues 84% with no guarantee where and how this windfall will be spent.

Turlock does not have a revenue problem. From 2012 to 2019, General Fund revenues and expenses increased 48% while the population grew only 4.7%.

The current city of Turlock pension and benefit program for its employees is unsustainable, and throwing more money at a broken system does not solve the problem. Without meaningful reform, costs will continue to grow with no relief in sight. In FY 2015-16 annual pension costs were $5.7 million and by FY 2024-25 are forecast to grow to $14.1 million.

Residents of Turlock need to hold our elected officials and staff accountable for controlling expenses and spending tax funds wisely by eliminating waste, reigning in burdensome benefit costs, and finding more efficient and effective methods to deliver services.

Jim L. Theis, Turlock

CA lockdown is just wrong

In March, the governor locked down California in response to the pandemic to prevent hospitals from being overrun with cases. At some point, without notice or hearing (in free countries, known as “due process”), the lockdown changed to protecting us from ourselves.

We have since learned to survive the virus by isolating those with risk factors or comorbidities, and by following the 3Ws: Wear a mask; Watch your distance; Wash your hands. We have also learned that COVID-19 will likely be with us indefinitely. Even if there is a vaccine, many will not take it and the virus will continue to mutate.

In the meantime, businesses are failing, families are impoverished, and depression, alcoholism, and abuse are increasing. Despite the 3Ws, our schools and churches remain essentially closed. On Aug. 19, Real Clear Science published its study that 17,000 Catholic parishes in America following the 3Ws held roughly 1 million Masses over 14 or more weeks with no outbreaks of COVID-19.

The governor has instilled tremendous fear in Californians, which allows him to control those who cower. There are many who fear not living more than they fear dying. It is time for those Californians to speak up.

Ross W. Lee, Modesto