HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/1/2023 Item 3, Smith
carolyn smith <
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:Citizens Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission - Agenda Item #3 -
Reallocation of Local Revenue Funds
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Chair Hamari & Commissioners:
I've been following the North Chorro Neighborhood Greenway project for quite some time. When this
project was approved, it was expected to cost far less than the bids have now revealed. Our city has
many other necessities that far exceed the need to expend the large amount of funds now needed for
this project.
As a long-time city resident, who has supported the sales tax increase measures over the past 10
years, I vehemently object to taking funds from unallocated Measure G-20 revenue funds and from
the other budgeted funds recommended by Staff on the table at Page 8 of the report to pay for this
over-priced bike way project. Even if the city's estimate of 8.3% bike ridership is valid, robbing large
amounts of revenue for a project that benefits so few, should be deemed unjustified spending of our
Measure G-20 revenue funds.
While the city has made it clear that they want more bike ridership, that goal shouldn't supersede
other essential needs. If the price tag for this project has gotten out of hand, then, just like the rest of
us when doing our home budget, perhaps it's time to re-think the project and either reduce its scope,
postpone it for a later time, or eliminate it.
You have an important job of making sure the funds collected under Measure G-20 are spent wisely
and pursuant to the promises made at the time it was presented to the public for a vote. The
language of Measure G-20 that was passed in 2020, and quoted on the city's website, state the
revenue would be used:
"To protect City of San Luis Obispo's financial stability, maintain fire/community safety, health
emergency/disaster preparedness, protect creeks from pollution, address homelessness; keep public
areas clean/safe/ retain local businesses; maintain youth/senior services, streets, open space/natural
areas, and other general services by extending voter-approved funding at a 1.5 cent rate, providing
approximately $21,600,000 annually until ended by voters; requiring audits/all funds used locally, be
adopted."
1
Nowhere in that language does it say tax measure funds would be used to build an overpriced
bikeway that would serve only a small number of users, but inconvenience a large number of
neighborhood residents. I, and I'm sure many others, certainly didn't think we were voting for this type
of limited interest large expenditure when we voted in favor of Measure G-20.
There are many "essential needs" that our tax measure funds could be used for and a multi-million
dollar bike path running through an established residential neighborhood is not essential to the
majority of residents. Perhaps it would be wiser to set aside some of these unassigned funds for
large yet-to-be funded projects like the Prado Road Overpass/Exchange that is anticipated to cost the
city nearly $60 million+ in the near future or putting aside more money into keeping our creeks and
culverts clear, as well as properly dredging Laguna Lake to avoid future flooding of homes in heavy
rains--avoiding another close call--or setting aside funds to acquire and improve open space which a
large majority of city residents feel is a top priority.
I ask you to please be judicious in your recommendations for spending our Measure G-20 funds.
They should not be used to provide a blank check to special interests whose projects are not
beneficial to a majority of residents.
Therefore, please do not approve Staff's recommendations for funding this obviously now over-priced
bike greenway project.
Thank you for your consideration.
Carolyn Smith
SLO City Resident
2