Dear Editor,
As reported in this newspaper, it is outrageous that the Mayor is accusing the city council’s proposed transfer tax of being a slush-fund.
The council’s proposed transfer tax will be overseen by our city council, and thus by the voters. Is the Mayor is implying that the city’s general budget, that she has been in effective control of for the last four years, is a slush fund? If so, is she admitting that she is a slush-funder-in-chief?
Under the Mayor’s ballot measure an eleven member board of unelected appointees, who will be responsible to no one, will be in charge of a huge slice of city tax revenues. All of which appears to be just as slushy as it’s possible to get.
The city council, and thus us voters, are perfectly correct in wanting to keep control of a huge slice of city tax revenue, that would otherwise be lost forever to that board of appointees.
In a sign of just how awful the Mayor’s tax proposal is, all the other councilors voted to advance the council’s competing tax to the ballot. This included Kristin McCowan, a member of the same Santa Monica for Renters Rights (SMRR) organization. The Mayor’s proposal is so toxic that it failed to even get a single other councilor to support it - even one from her own political group.
Peter Borresen, Santa Monica
