GOP Opposes Sheriff’s Jail Tax

This story is two days old and the Indy still gets the scoop!

This is quite the political spectator sport to watch.

The attack on Greg's life choice is a red-herring and an base and offensive attempt to play the bigot card. How dare the author! It says more about the bigotry of the author than it does about we Republicans. Readers should ask why the author thought discussions about Gandrud's sexuality was necessary in a piece covering opposition to the jail-tax?

We Republicans stand with Greg on this issue. He has been a dedicated servant to his community. He speaks to a sentiment opinion that is present in the majority of the county - and the country at large.

It is one thing to walk around wearing the badge of a Republican - it is another thing to practice what we preach. It's gut check time - and we are drawing a line in the sand. NO MORE TAXES - CUT THE BUDGET - PROMOTE GROWTH. Of course the Supervisors favor Measure S - it further delays the results of their terrible economic planning by pushing it on to their constituents once again.

Once we the people vote this down, we will start changing out the Board with responsbile supervisors, and handle the budget the right way.

What's a red herring is you reading in an account of Gandrud's past political history and challenges as an "attack on Greg's life choice."

The reporter covered the reality that the Republican party does have an uneasy relationship with gays; to avoid the fact would be to exhibit a reportorial bias.

During Gandrud's tenure on the Council his life choice, as you call it, was often a subject of conversation -- often at Gandrud's prompting.

And also, "californiumblog," some day you should try to think through and explain the mechanism which will magically "PROMOTE GROWTH" when you "CUT THE BUDGET" -- without using the thoroughly discredited ideas as invented by Laffer and the elusive "Trickle down."

I do not believe that Gandrud's life choice to be vegan has anything to do with this ballot measure and a sales tax.

If a new jail is such a high priory perhaps we would have we funded and built it before the new Emergency Command Center on Cathedral Oaks.

Never thought I'd side with a Republican much less a vegan but I'd say NO on S unless victimless crimes such as possession of marijuana for personal use are released. That act alone might decrease the need for a new jail significantly.

A suggestion to lower the rate of people in jail. Step one: legalize drugs. Step two: stop glorifying alcohol and educated people about it the same way people were educated about the dangers of smoking.

I meant to say "RE-legalize drugs".

I think the problem is there are too many victimless crimes and so too many people in jail. America locks up far too many people. So I will vote against it. Anyway, If they want a new jail, they can take my share out of my property taxes.

I am leaning toward a NO vote for many reasons. One reason is that I am tired of the north county blaming the south county for it's problems and continuing to make the south county pay for it! The problem has always been these manipulative, irrational and financially irresponsible agitators in the republican party, industrial and taxpayer associations.

These north county associations have been promoting tremendous residential growth and they haven't extracted the funding for a jail to accommodate their growing community! WHY, I AM SHOCKED!

I'd suggest the north county recall their republican county supervisors for all the financial mismanagement and the resulting problems of crime, gangs, graffiti, traffic, unkempt roads and other decaying infrastructure. And stop blaming the south county for all your problems and for providing you with jobs that your north county representatives failed to plan for!

Sounds like the Keystone Campaign consultants haven't scored big thus far.......

Greg represents conservative principles. The phonies who claim to be conservative are really just Republicans who started their careers in grade school as hall monitors. Greg believes in self-reliance and individual responsibility. Those other guys just like looking in the mirror. They remind me of the farmers and the pigs sitting around the table together at the end of Animal Farm.

Mr. Gandrud is correct. Poor planning by our elected officials is the root of the problem. Continually coming to the trough of the TaxPayer for a bailout has gotten old.

We are tapped out. It is time for Government to go on a diet and get its fiscal house in order.

Giving more money to spendaholics only enables them, time for them to enter a 12 step program.

Republicans need to wake-up Thomas Jefferson was right on the money, time to revisit his politics.

Greg, thanks for being a soldier of true conservative values and coming out in opposition of this BOGUS measure. I am vehemently opposed to a sales tax increase that will only hurt small businesses, further damage my pocket book, and force us to fill up a new jail with petty offenders.

VOTE NO ON MEASURE S.

Greg Gandrud is also a really good guy and I don't know why this article is trying to label him by talking about his personal life.

This is not a politically-partisan issue. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and persons of all political affiliations will be voting NO in order to defeat this fiscally-regressive and irresponsible tax increase.

Our County has, for years, outspent their income. We've always needed the jail, but County spending choices have sent money other places.
Tax cuts will expire in January 2011. If you're earning any income at all, your taxes will increase no matter what.
Even the Death Tax will increase, and Obamacare is coming.
Measure S is a tax increase we cannot afford.

Nonsense.

"drdan93109" is peddling a number of talking points, not facts. Whether the Bush Era tax cuts will expire is still up in the air; the Obama administration is suggesting the following:

* The top tax rate will revert from 35% to 39.6%

Five of a dozen major provisions will change, but they won't go back to exactly what they were in 2001:

* Estate tax law ("drdan93109's oh-so-scary 'death tax') will revert to 2009 rates (not 2001 levels): exemption of $3.5 million and top rate of 45%
* Rate on long-term capital gains will revert to 2001 law (rate of 20%) but only for couples with over $250,000 in Adjusted Gross Income the year the gain is realized ($200K threshold for singles)
* Dividends will be taxed just like long-term capital gains
* The 33% tax rate will revert to 2001 law (rate of 36%) but the income threshold where that bracket starts will shift up to $250,000 in taxable income (couples) and $200,000 for singles
* The PEP and Pease provisions will be restored, rescinding from high-income people the value of some exemptions and deductions, but the income threshold where they start to pay more will shift up to $250,000 in taxable income (couples) and $200,000 for singles

So folks earning over $250k are paying more, and families fortunate enough to transfer over $3.5million in inheritance will also be dinged.

14 years of 1/2% extra tax -- $30M a year for a total of $420M. This is shocking.
There seems to be conventional wisdom that says if you are going to ask the voters for money ask for a large amount -- it they are going to vote 'yes' they will vote for a big amount as easily as a small amount.
Forget the money from the state - it will probably not happen and it should go to schools not jails.
I agree the city/county should have either been putting money aside for a jail or take out a mortgage to pay for the cost building a jail.
We should never be funding operating cost through temporary (or permanent) increases in taxes.
What about taking bids from private and other pubic jails -- send the inmates elsewhere, certainly we can find a lower cost solution.

Last time I saw the numbers we had about 800 inmates in SB county jail system even if it is up to 1,000 inmates $30M/year would be $30,000 per each inmate. Plus a possible $56M from the state, plus whatever we are spending today.. they is way too much money.

OK binky, are taxes going up or not?

No one is sure at this point in time, drdan93109; I'm cynically guessing the Democrats are too weak-willed to do what is necessary.

But what you said still remains untrue, no matter the outcome: "If you're earning any income at all, your taxes will increase no matter what."

It is not unusual for jurisdictions to fund major public safety projects in this manner. Perhaps one of the "just say no" crowd could name ONE jurisdiction, anywhere, that built a new jail or public safety facility and provided all the attendant services through their regular budgeting process.

Here are some straightforward statistics.
http://nicic.gov/features/statestats/...
California pays 37% more for inmate than the average US wide. The average is $28,489/yr and CA pays $45.045/yr.
Measure S alone cost over $30K /year/inmate for the 14 years.

There is something seriously wrong with the cost of measure S.
Outsourcing our inmates to another state seems like a good idea.

Vote NO on Measure S.

A new jail is not needed.

Don't buy the baloney that crime will skyrocket if a new jail is not built because that is simply illogical, if not outright stupid thinking.

hmmm still waiting for the "No Measure S" folks to give the example of where jail capacity and public safety have been increased significantly through routine annual budgeting---anywhere--please include details too!!

The fact that US wide the average per inmate prison cost is $28,489/yr and CA pays $45.045/yr. So we know we are paying too much in CA but what are we paying in SB? Measure S by itself alone cost over $30K /year/inmate for the 14 years, already more than the average in the US!

Why has SB not done this important analysis - What are we spending per inmate in SB, what would it cost if we outsourced it to a private company or to another public jail.
Hard to believe that we need to keep inmates in SB particularly ones that are in jail for a year or more.

Ha Ha....Brown.......nice try....but even the Republicans realize what a jerk you are.

Intellectually, the superior ballot measure is to let County voters determine how much of a percentage of the existing tax revenues will be allocated to all Public Safety departments.

Then from that pot of money let the Public Safety agencies pay for their needs because they will know best where those funds should be spent.

And it removes any rudimentary and senseless arguments about Public Safety being the top priority in the County.

Which incidentally it has been but there doesn't seem to be a cap on the priority leaving all other basic social and human services out in the cold all too often because the Supervisors cannot be trusted to make fair and honest budget allocation decisions.