• Printer friendly
• E-mail to a friend
• 21 comment(s)
• Recommend

  ( 0 )

• 

Subject:

Body:

Poster:

Enter text seen above:

Party of NO : 7/30/2010

So typical to say no to everything. I wonder what the good reasons will be to stop this project.

concerned

Party of NO : 7/30/2010

The answer: 1/2 cent

Finally the GOP is on the RIGHT TRACK : 7/30/2010

It's about time they oppose something from the POLICE UNION. Shoot this moronic proposal down, legalize marijuana, and there will not be jails filled with docile offenders.

SIMPLICITY

Teabaggers don't know what they're doing : 7/30/2010

So they want the jail but not the 1/2 sent increase? How are they going to pay for it then? Cuts to programs that keep people out of jail? And therefore a need for more jails? Republicans are whack.

: 7/30/2010

I knew the Republicans wanted a new jail but want to take the money from the existing budget. That's no solution. Measure S actually sounds like it addresses the jail overcrowding problem and the need to keep people out of the jails in the first place. And I agree we should legalize it.

Defesnse Attorney : 7/30/2010

I think we need to decriminalize marijuana. But if you think jails are full of people who are there for that reason you're plain wrong. We need a criminal justice system that doesn't just recycle the same people in and out of jail. I'm supporting Measure S because we need to money to reduce dramatically recidivism. We're not getting out of this mess without it.

: 7/30/2010

i thought even dale francisco and helene schneider agreed on this. the republican party really is the party of NO.

single purpose tax : 7/30/2010

If Brown really wanted to pass this tax, it should have been for the jail only. Not the jail + police budget / union support + fire budget / union support + general law enforcement support + whatever else they decide to use it for. You want a jail? Only ask us to pay for the jail.

: 7/30/2010

Republicans are hypocrites because they say they support law and order but when it comes down to it they won't fund it. They'd rather pass up 56 million in state funding than do what the Blue Ribbon Commission recommended and fund both enforcement and prevention and intervention.

Jail Answer... : 7/30/2010

No state of the art prison... Spend $2 Million in New Cuyama at the exsisting airport property and build tent city's like the U.S. Military builds in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Those tent have medical facilities, kitchen and eatting facilities as sleeping areas- that is ALL the prisoners should be given by taxpayers... They can beat weeds on HWY 166 from 101 all the way to the I-5. Problem solved. It's time some of the Administrators in the Corrections Department as well as the County start thinking outside the box, we can't afford anything less.

New Sheriff in Town!

No on S : 7/30/2010

Yikes - this may be the first time I agree with the local Republican Party -- if for very different reasons. This whole tax is ill concieved. Do we need more jail space?probably. But at what cost. We spend more money on jails/prisons than we do on schools -- that's nothing new. This takes State money (that isn't going to schools) adds local money and gives a small amount to "reducing recidivism" -- which looks like it's going to go to the probation department (more county employees) - not to non-profit organizations or programs that really do work to help keep mentally ill or substance abusers or at risk kids. And what happens if the state keeps the $56 million that Brown "secured" -- does the whole tax go to construction, then who pays to staff it?

No on S

crack team : 7/30/2010

looks like Browns handpicked mutt and jeff team of lanny and lindeman kind of got run over on this one........keep your eye on the ball, boys, cause you never know what's coming next

not surprised

cost : 7/30/2010

If we need a jail it should be paid for out of current revenue. If for some out of the ordinary reason current revenue can not pay for it then maybe a bound to cover the build cost -- but NO money to cover operating cost.
Maybe 1/2 cents for 2 years --- $60M for the building but NO to a long term tax.

taxpayer

Huh? : 7/30/2010

Because once you build a jail there's no cost in operating it?

Really? : 7/30/2010

I can afford 1/2 cent to keep criminals off the streets.

NO Party of No. Yes on S. : 7/30/2010

: 7/30/2010

Why is the current law enforcement involved in a policy of only identifying dangerous illegal immigrants and deporting them back to Mexico? If any jail inmate is an illegal, why are they not all sent back to Mexico? Imagine the money that would be saved with a simple immigration check and ride to the border.

Re: Huh? : 7/30/2010

Mr. Huh?
Then saying this is a "temporary tax" is dishonest if this money is NEEDED to operate it. How will be in any different position in 14 years? What's wrong with expecting the County to live within their means?
15 million a year is for the jail construction and operation, that represents less than 2% of the County's current budget.
Why can we devote 17 million to new buildings and re-models, but a tax is the ONLY way to fund this?
Fiscal Responsibility First! No on S!

No on S

we need more mexican housing : 7/30/2010

all the drug dealers and thieves need housing. we could put up a tent city for them, certianly for the the rapist and river jumpers from hondurass and tiajuana.
i think the sheriff should donut his wages for a year or two.

jack cracker

Another Lanny-Lindaman Production : 7/30/2010

The tent camp version of a jail probably can be built for $1 million.

Dig the live links in this article. A first?

Gang Slang for Gangs? (lifted from another post form) : 7/31/2010

There are several provisions about this tax increase that just don't make 'cents.'
For instance, one item justifying this increase argues that programs will be instituted as deterrant against crime by way of education, etc.
However, currently the Victim Witness Protection Fund State policy require victims and witness to be independently leveraged economically to relocate, if a situation merits.
That means families of victims or witnesses MIGHT be reimbursed after a relocation takes place for testifying against offenders.
Many offenders know this already and leverage their terror against society knowing full well that victims are typically poor working class citizens .. making it virtually impossible for the DA to get actual conviction, or victims and witnesses to benefit actual assistance.
Yet, the Victim Witness Protection and Advocacy Fund has been operating at a surplus in excess millions of dollars for over a decade.
Commissioner Talmadge tells defendants in traffic court that the first $100 garnered and collected in fines and penalties from infractions (like a seatbelt ticket) goes to pay the Victim Witness Protection trust fund.
And the ACLU recently broadcast that $50 Million was suddenly slashed from that very fund!
Where did the money go?
This is a dialogue which needs to be discussed further, without imposing further burdon against the tax base.
Too bad the Sheriff never mentions it. Because frankly, if people can't get the protection they need against aggressive criminal oppressors, they will organize a militia to protect themselves and their families - which the Sheriff casually refer to as, "gangs."

No new taxes necessary..