.
Feedback

County Supervisors Discuss How to Spend Measure A Funds

Despite at least 25 people who spoke out against funding the new jail, the supervisors avoided the topic during Tuesday's meeting.

The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors met Tuesday to discuss how to spend more than $60 million in added tax revenue the County will receive from the passage of Measure A last year.

More than 30 members of the public addressed the board with ideas on how the money should be allocated. Suggestions included new mental health intervention services, upgraded library programs, public art projects, a bicycle program coordinator and restoring an independent county parks department.

A contingent of speakers holding pink signs that read "No Jail Tax" brought up the county's new $155-million jail, and accused the board of designating Measure A funds to bankroll the project, which will require an estimated $30 million annually to operate.

Leading up to the November election, county officials maintained that Measure A's half-cent sales tax increase, which takes effect April 1, was necessary "to preserve essential county services."

At this morning's meeting, Occupy Redwood City organizer James Lee said the costly new jail was among the county's "menu options" to receive Measure A funding.

"We're here to basically ask the board to prove us wrong," Lee said. "We don't need this jail to begin with."

San Mateo County resident Nathalie Fowler implored the board to use Measure A funds to bolster community programs, instead of building a new jail complex.

"Make me proud of the place where I come from," Fowler said. "Use Measure A funds for progression, not regression, if for no other reason than - you promised."

Isaac Ontiveros of Californians for a Responsible Budget (CURB) said the board asked for community input, but no one in the room was asking for a new jail.

"You can abandon this project," Ontiveros said. "You could save the county millions of dollars."

Supervisor Adrienne Tissier was the only board member to address concerns over the jail, insisting that "public safety is a number-one priority for the community" and that a new jail was necessary to house many of the re-entry and treatment programs that some speakers were asking the county to back with Measure A funds.

"Clearly, the jail is already underway," Tissier said.

Supervisors Dave Pine, Warren Slocum, Don Horsley and Carole Groom brought up their preferences for Measure A funding, which ranged from bolstering health services for the isolated community of Pescadero, to restoring the county's faltering park system.

On suggestion Groome made was school safety, and the idea of using funds to place police officers at school sites for increased safety. The suggestion elicited shocks and gasps from many in the audience.

After the meeting, Lee said it was "disappointing" that the board members chose not to address what so many community members showed up to talk about.

"It was clear that the board thought avoiding the question of the jail tax was the best strategy," he said.

Lee said that he and a broad coalition of community stakeholders will continue to attend future board meetings and lobby in opposition of the new jail.

"There are still other avenues to pursue," he said.

In particular, Lee said many Occupy members have environmental quality concerns about the site for the new jail. He also suggested the county could explore alternative options to a new jail, such as electronic monitoring systems.

What do you think of the Board's ideas on how to spend Measure A funds? Tell us your thoughts in the comments below.

- Bay City News contributed to this report

Keep up with local news — follow Patch!

 

Follow us on Twitter here | Like Half Moon Bay Patch here | Sign up for our daily newsletter | Blog for Half Moon Bay Patch here

 

Follow Pacifica Patch on Twitter | Like us on Facebook | Sign up for our daily newsletter Blog for us

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Half Moon Bay Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Jon DeLong May 18, 2013 at 06:45 pm
With so many good Mexican restaurants in the area, why bother?
Cid May 17, 2013 at 06:14 pm
I enjoy an occasional Taco Bell, but in the same shopping center as Happy Taco with far better,Read More authentic LOCAL Mexican food! Nah! I do enjoy the Combo locations that have KFC & TACO BELL. (Face it, Americans like to have choices!). With no drive-through, perhaps it will be better than the average suburban stores along the El Camino. As for another chain restaurant in Half Moon Bay...What did you expect? Demographics will continue to dictate that we can still expect to keep our "Fast-Food-Free-Zone" between Linda Mar and HMB while "City Councils or Planning Departments in the Cities will attract them....for their tax base.
Dee May 15, 2013 at 08:07 pm
Seriously? Taco Bell? Next to New Leaf? How did this happen? Not happy about this addition and notRead More looking forward to seeing Taco Bell trash all over the place. Not sure about KFC ... we already have a fast food chicken place at Popeyes so we certainly don't need another. The high school students will probably frequent Taco Bell the most and keep it in business but I will not be going there that's for sure.
Carol Wexler May 18, 2013 at 02:42 pm
I would consider volunteering at the California State Parks but dogs are not allowed and I wouldRead More need to bring my dog.
pae May 18, 2013 at 11:22 pm
Misha, I understand where you're coming from, but that's what we don't want to do. One reason thatRead More all dog owners are being discriminated against is those few who don't follow the rules. It doesn't matter that there are bicyclists and horseback riders who don't follow rules, they're "OK," it's the dog owners who pay the price. We want an area where our dogs can exercise freely and legally, where we won't be bothered by people who are afraid of dogs or dislike them, and where they're not at risk from horses who spook. For those of us who live surrounded by Rancho land especially, we don't want to have to drive miles to a small, fenced lot with crowds of others seeking to exercise their dogs in the same small area. We're paying for this open space with our tax dollars, and we want to have access to it. There's plenty of room for everyone.
Misha Flores May 17, 2013 at 09:35 am
To be honest I would probably just let my dog run around without a leash anyway, except there's soRead More much darned poison oak around these hills. I don't want her to get contaminated and then I hug her and trouble ensues.
Anne Martin May 16, 2013 at 04:29 pm
I don't own a dog now but empathize with the dog owners who have been deprived of the right toRead More allow their dogs to run free in the national recreation area that we as taxpayers own. As a taxpayer, I want to know the rationale for this policy. If it is to protect horses from being frightened by dogs what is the basis for that? How many horses use the open space? It appears that dozens of people who have been able to enjoy walking with their dogs in the open space adjoining their neighborhood are now being grossly inconvenienced because some faceless bureaucrats are creating rules that may have no basis in reality.
Chris Vance March 23, 2013 at 03:00 pm
What are you doing with the excess Undaria pinnatifida that is found? Can we get some of it for ourRead More compost piles at the Pacifica Sanchez Library Garden?