Yes on Measure X

[Mike O'brien]

I will also be voting no on Measure X. While the intent is very good when the city can spend general fund dollars to fight Dutra, the Roblar Quarry and the casino which all outside the city I can not justify spending any more money that will be squandered on issues that are not within city limits. If we have the money for this we should have money to maintian our parks first. Also the city has done nothing to promote the economic welfare of teh city while cowtowing to a small vocal minority of obstructionists.

[DLoozional]

The great majority of people in Petaluma will not notice one minuscule point of improvement in their lives if Measure X passes, but every homeowner will notice it when they pay their property taxes.

Love the idea behind X. Applaud folks for trying to do something positive for Petaluma. Admire their grit and drive. HATE the fact that what they're trying to do will simply bail out those who should be held accountable for what they've done with our tax dollars (or NOT DONE).

No on X!!!! I already pay for what it is funding.

[Petaluma Rosie]

Dloozional, you are wrong (as your name implies). Anyone who hikes, bikes, uses the playgrounds, swimming pools, community center or playing fields will notice a tremendous improvement in the facilities when Measure X passes. Anyone who owns a shop, restaurant or hotel in Petaluma will see increased business when Measure X passes. Anyone who owns a home in Petaluma will see increased property values when Measure X passes. Vote Yes on X!!!

[OB1]

Dloozional, you are wrong (as your name implies). Anyone who hikes, bikes, uses the playgrounds, swimming pools, community center or playing fields will notice a tremendous improvement in the facilities when Measure X passes. Anyone who owns a shop, restaurant or hotel in Petaluma will see increased business when Measure X passes. Anyone who owns a home in Petaluma will see increased property values when Measure X passes. Vote Yes on X!!!

Sorry Rosie, you are the one who is delusional.

This measure is done, vote NO!

[Bubba Man]

"Anyone who hikes, bikes, uses the playgrounds, swimming pools, community center or playing fields will notice a tremendous improvement in the facilities when Measure X passes. Anyone who owns a shop, restaurant or hotel in Petaluma will see increased business when Measure X passes. Anyone who owns a home in Petaluma will see increased property values when Measure X passes. Vote Yes on X!!!"

baloney.
Won't change 1 thing for me or my tennants except you gotta pay more for someones great idea for a handfull of folks.
No . Vote NO

[petort]

Petaluma Rosie I don't use the parks, playing fields,swimming pool etc. so why should I pay for something I don't use. There surely must be enough adults with children who can pay for these projects. If you don't smoke cigarettes you are not taxed so I feel if you don't use the parks you also shouldn't be taxed. My house is under water and I don't believe for a second that because the parks are upgraded my house will magically go up in value. Sorry that ain't gonna happen!! VOTE NO!!!

[The Watcher]

Reading the posts it's funny how folks come up with their own rationale on why something is good or bad.

Like some others who have posted I thnk the idea of fixing our parks and building new ones is a good thing.

The problem we have is we (the tax-paying public) would like to know where the existing funding is going, how that funding has changed, and how these very same people who can't manage what they currently have (hence this measure), would be expected to manage this additional funding better? No one answered these questions that I know of. It was always, "it's for the children".

And btw: The same is true of all these school measures, bonds, taxes. How is it we can be told we need another tax for schools? How does the state get off cutting jobs & funding, while increasing tuitions and (oh yeah) increasing administrator's pay? The lotto seems to be doing well. So where's this money going?

And btw: Whenever I see a tax being promoted as "for the children", well United Way said the same thing until we discovered 98 out of 100 pennies were spent on "administrative costs". Really, how about less administration and more teachers? How about less administration and more books and supplies? How about we get rid of the layer of bureaucracy known as the regents?

How about we change the system since the system doesn't work for the people, only a select-few persons?

[MyUserName]

I believe The Watcher explained it beautifully. If an added tax is necessary, then ensure that the taxpayer is provided with a clear and concise accounting of where and how our tax dollars will be spent. I believe that fiscal vagueness killed this Measure.

[JEH]

We're finding it kind of ironic that the Community Center on McDowell is being used as a refuge center during the storms/floods.

The building is leaking like a sieve. Buckets everywhere, wet carpeting, moldy falling ceiling tiles and damp hallways.

Too bad Measure X didn't pass. At least 61% of the voters were enlightened enough to vote yes.

[2182]

Perhaps this city council should have funded the repairs YEARS ago instead of passing stupid "feel good" ordnances? Don't blame the taxpayer, blame those who are elected to distribute the funds the taxpayers provide!

Perhaps all that voted for measure x could pool their funds and fix it? I'm sure the donation would be tax deductible............