Editorial

The results are final for the county’s Measure A sales tax increase, purported to be a partial remedy for fixing local roads. The sharp split among voters at Tuesday’s ballot confirmed some serious doubts about county leaders’ tax mathematics.

Lytton

Two weeks ago, Cynthia Murray’s commentary published on our Tribune’s editorial page immediately captured my attention. Her opening paragraph spoke of the need for public discourse to depart from its extreme focus on rights and to emphasize more the importance of responsibilities. Because of the opening paragraph’s traditional and conservative tone I found myself nodding – yes, yes, as I read it.

Re: housing math

With our sincere thanks

Costly June ballot

To the Town Council

Here in Sonoma County we take our carbon footprint very seriously. Together as residents, businesses and local governments we have done much to lower our energy use, resource consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. We have been repeatedly recognized as conservation and sustainability leaders across the country.

Road tax response

In Measure A, Sonoma County voters are being asked to approve yet another general purpose sales tax. Members of the County Board of Supervisors and others out on the stump are promoting Measure A as a “roads tax” that if approved would be spent 90 percent for road repairs and 10 percent for public transit items such as free bus passes for students, seniors and veterans. Unfortunately, the ballot language itself belies a different intent. The plain language of Measure A identifies a list of spending objectives starting with public safety and concluding with the troublesome catchall “other essential services.” Roads don’t even top the list.