Intimidation-This was touched upon in a previous blog, but the fact is the incumbents with the help of the Lincoln Club have secured the rights to have only their campaign sign posted at desired location throughout the city. These areas in past elections had been open to all candidates, incumbents and challengers alike, to post their campaign signs. The Lincoln Club endorsing the incumbents is no surprise since during the endorsement interview it was clear who would be selected as Mr. Wells and Mr. Ambrose are members of the Lincoln club and were sitting in the audience during the interview process. The fact that the incumbents have chosen this tactic to try and limit the ability for the challengers to reach the public must mean they are worried about the election results and cannot stand on their record alone.

Deception-The Wells and Ambrose campaign signs state “Balanced Budget” and “No New Taxes”. If they are basing it on past performance Mr. Ambrose really hasn’t been involved in any budget process as he was just appointed 4 month prior. He was a member of the planning commission for 23 years but that does not translate to overall city budget. So let’s take the last four years of budgeting for Mr. Wells and Mr. McClellan and look at the record. 

Budget 2008-2009
Actual Revenue $47,518,021
Expenditures $50,285,408
Difference -$2,767,387

Prop J  Sales Tax Funds $487,500

Budget 2009-2010
Actual Revenue $47,388,579
Expenditures $50,245,674
Difference -$2,857,095

Prop J  Sales Tax Funds $6,750,000

Budget 2010-2011
Actual Revenue $49,610,693
Expenditures $49,310,209
Difference $300,484 mainly due to higher property tax and sales tax revenue.
Note: Proposed budget that was actually signed up for was
Expenditures of $50,291,521, Revenue of $47,115,400 result would have been
-$3,176,121

Prop J  Sales Tax Funds
$7,300,000

Budget 2011-2012
Projected Revenue $50,088,402
Expenditures $50,017,545
Difference $70,854

Prop J  Sales Tax Funds
$7,400,000

Summary-Over the last four years there has been a deficit from City Revenues to Expenditures of $5,253,144. Yet they have been buoyed by $21,937,500 in prop J sales tax money. So, if you use 2007-2008 city budget as a baseline for city revenue (as this was prior to Prop J money
and prior to Wells being elected) the City revenue was $48,859,573 as opposed to this years (2011-2012) projected revenues of $50,088,042 minus the projected Prop J sales tax fund of $7,400,000 you would be at a base of $42,688,042. Thus, over the last four years city revenue has decreased by $6,171,531. The only reason there has not been a big uproar from the community was the prop J sales tax has been hiding the mismanagement of the city budget. When they say no new taxes can you believe it based on how heavily they rely on Prop J sales tax or does it matter that they just recently raised your sewer rates? Isn’t that a form of tax? It is definitely money out of yours and my pocket. Now is the time to say enough is enough.
Vote Swainston in November
The Clear Choice for a Better El Cajon


 


Comments




Leave a Reply