|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A sales tax measure that a majority of Contra Costa County supervisors decided earlier this year to present to voters in the upcoming primary election is set to appear on ballots that begin going out next month.
Measure B would increase sales tax across the county by 0.625% and generate an estimated $150 million in revenue annually over the next five years. The measure aims to contend with federal cuts to social services funding and bolster health care, food assistance, and other county services.
Debate over the measure raged during and after the Board of Supervisors’ 4-1 vote last month to bring the measure to the upcoming ballot, with a judge ruling April 1 that some ballot language must be changed during an expedited hearing in a case brought forward by Sandra Kallander and David Minor against Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder Kristen Connelly less than two weeks after the board’s vote March 5.
District 2 Supervisor Candace Andersen cast the only dissenting vote against the resolution to bring the ballot measure forward, urging the board to “slow this down” after she clarified that language in the resolution referring to a $300 million annual deficit through 2029 was referring to a cumulative, not annual projection.
At that meeting, attorney Jason Bezis said that he had clients, including someone from the county’s Libertarian Party, who were prepared to sue if the measure was placed on the ballot. He went on to represent Kallander and Minor in the complaint filed March 16.
Nonetheless, a majority of supervisors and a campaign in favor of the measure have continued to urge its passage in the June primary, pointing to grim financial circumstances amid cuts to health care spending in the current federal budget, which county officials have been sounding the alarm on for months.
The county’s health system is facing a more than $1 billion deficit by 2031, according to projections from staff. If passed, the temporary tax measure is projected to only partially soften that blow, with the $150 million annual projected revenue amounting to $750 million over the course of its five-year run.
County officials estimated in December that changes to Medi-Cal and CalFresh eligibility requirements and reductions in federal funding could leave 93,000 residents without healthcare and 17,600 without food assistance by 2029. The former figure represents more than a third of the 270,000 residents currently served by the county health system, with reduced Medi-Cal enrollment combined with cuts to state funding estimated to reduce the department’s funding by a total of $300 million in the coming years.
“These changes mean fewer people covered and fewer dollars coming into the system at the same time,” Andersen said in a press release from the county in December. “Our responsibility is to face that reality head-on, plan carefully, and ensure the county continues to provide essential care for residents who have nowhere else to turn.”
Budgetary impacts are already evident on the ground with 46 nurses laid off since the December announcement and further discussions and 3,650 patients cut from county health programs, according to a statement from the Contra Costa nurse’s union, who called on the Board of Supervisors at its Tuesday meeting to put a stop to the cuts.
According to the Yes on Measure B campaign from Safe and Healthy Contra Costa, estimated budget shortfalls for the county health care system have only increased in the months since alarm bells were sounded in December, with the sales tax measure necessary to ensure its financial viability.
“If Measure B fails, emergency response times will increase,” supporters wrote on the Yes on B campaign site. “Since brain damage can occur after just three minutes without oxygen, stroke and heart attack victims could be at risk. Wait times for all patients receiving critical care will increase at every hospital in the County. If we don’t act, lives will be lost.”
Meanwhile, the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association has registered as the opposing campaign.
The Stop Measure B campaign’s points on their website include the error that Andersen identified at the March 5 board meeting on $300 million being a cumulative number rather than an annual number, questions about the timing of when the sales tax increase would go into effect if approved – which they said would be prior to the full impact of federal funding cuts in 2027 – and previous cuts to the county health department that weren’t driven by federal funding cuts.
The Contra Costa Taxpayers Association is hosting a discussion on its critiques of the ballot measure on April 24, headed by executive committee member and longtime local activist Mike Arata. Registration is available at cocotax.org.
A third campaign not registered with the county elections department has also emerged. Contra Costa Plan B’s website is described as offering a “resident-led analysis” of the measure and a “transparent, phased alternative” that the group is urging the board of supervisors to consider.
According to early campaign finance reports, the Yes on Measure B campaign is bolstered so far by a total of $100,000 in contributions from the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers Local 21 Issues PAC, with no records of spending yet available.
The Contra Costa Taxpayers Association has reported no contributions so far, but one independent expenditure of $7,601 as “set up costs for VotersAI” on April 6.
As the campaigns ramp up, vote-by-mail ballots are set to start going out throughout Contra Costa on May 4 ahead of Election Day on June 2.
• Measure B’s forerunner was 2020’s Measure X, a 0.500% sales-tax increase with similar advertised purposes — back then, an urgent, COVID-time focus on healthcare and “life-saving services.” Now, allegedly, “lives will be lost” without Measure B. In fact, Measure B is another sky-is-falling scam to generate massive new County revenue.
• Measure X, only 5 years into its 20-year run, already supplies $120 Million annually — not just the $81 Million the County projected in 2020.
• As with Measure X, Measure B’s official authorizing ordinance makes no mention of health care, food assistance, or any other specific objective. Instead: Measure B’s own ordinance again exposes this new tax scheme as “solely for general governmental purposes and not for specific purposes.” County supervisors and administrators could spend Measure B’s millions on whatever they consider “governmental” — as they’ve irresponsibly been doing in Measure X’s first 5 of 20 years.
• Since Measure X’s sales-tax increase passed in 2020, total County spending has risen from $4.51 Billion (FY20-21) to $7.37 Billion (FY25-26) — a 63.4% increase. That’s 3½ x the 18.4% Bay Area CPI inflation rate (Dec. 2020 to Dec. 2025), while population growth was flat.
• County salaries/benefits have meanwhile risen 47.5%. With a majority of the County’s 15 union contracts expiring in June, Measure B will predictably facilitate or directly bankroll more such disproportionate increases.
• As is, the State Controller’s Office shows total Contra Costa County compensation for 2024 (last year available) exceeding $200,000 each for 3,041 employees. 1,005 exceeded $300,000; 252 exceeded $400,000. The County’s tax promoters want their first-class rides on the gravy train to continue.
• Meanwhile, Measure X funds politically driven spending allocations for pet projects (example: a $3.25 Million “Guaranteed Income Pilot” scheme), further illustrating the illegitimacy of Measure X, and thereby the unreliability of Measure B claims.
• County Supervisors initially justified Measure B’s five-eighths percent (0.625%) sales-tax increase scheme (extracting at least $750 Million over five years, and likely much more) as partial makeup for allegedly ANNUAL $307 Million healthcare-funding deficiencies, FY25-26 through FY28-29.
• It was the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association which showed that the $307 Million was in fact the County’s (outside firm) analyst’s own CUMULATIVE estimate for those fiscal years, thereby leading Supervisor Andersen to request a delay in bringing a new tax measure forward .
• On March 3rd, the analyst (his firm the beneficiary of an $8 million County contract) then introduced new state/federal funding-loss estimates, totaling $219 Million instead (with only a net $35 Million “Estimated Ending Fund Balance” deficiency), by FY28-29! Four irresponsible Supervisors then voted to proceed with what became Measure B anyway.
• Most of the County’s “$1 billion” projected deficit by 2031 is a $596 Million total for FY29-30/FY30-31 — in a new Presidential administration, two Congressional sessions from now, by which time things will change considerably.
• But County tax promoters want to bake in 5-year, new Measure B revenues of $150 Million annually anyway (likely going much higher, given Measure X’s 50% revenue growth in its first 5 of 20 years).
• California’s statewide 7.25% sales-tax base rate is the nation’s highest. Counties, cities, and special districts can seek local additions, with a statutory 2.00% cap, total permitted under law = 9.25%.
• Unfortunately, lobbyists and on-call politicians have contrived and rigged larger add-ons — violating the 2.00% cap — while falsely proclaiming these abuses as “declaratory of existing law.”
• Thereby, ten Contra Costa cities already exceed the statutory 9.25% sales-tax limit. Measure B would take all ten above 10% — and the entire County above the statutory 9.25% limit.
• Added atop already rising prices, Measure B is itself inflationary. It’s also regressive, disproportionately burdening the County’s poorest, most vulnerable residents.
Like Measure X, Measure B is an elaborate deception. Now, instead of funding new pet projects and facilitating more compensation increases with Measure B, Contra Costa County should redirect Measure X’s mis-allocated hundreds of millions to counterbalance any healthcare deficits, to whatever extent they ever actually develop.
Sensible, attentive voters will meanwhile reject Measure B.
More information is available at StopMeasureB.com.