Folsom’s permanent sales tax hike Measure G is rampant with conflict of interest and tax proponents excessively coordinated/ colluded with the City of Folsom!
My name is Sarah Norberg, I am the Secretary of No on G – Citizens Against the Folsom Tax Initiative, and I am a proud Folsom resident who has the honor of calling Folsom my hometown.
Admittedly, I have completely thrown myself into the fight to defeat Measure G, the permanent sales tax increase on the ballot for the City of Folsom this November. I have donated excessive time, energy/ effort and money into trying to win hearts and minds, to vote down Measure G.
I can easily rattle off many reasons to vote No on G.
It was written to last in perpetuity rather than having any sunset date, in effect permanent.
Its increase in the sales tax rate from 7.75% to 8.75% not only puts Folsom at a competitive disadvantage compared to neighboring communities like El Dorado Hills, Granite Bay and Citrus Heights, but what sounds like a small “1%” increase amounts to a 12.9% increase in the sales tax rate, and so on.
What I want to impress upon Folsom voters now are two issues that they may not be aware of.
- Conflict of interest is inherent to Measure G, from its drafted language by its proponents, to now having received over $236,000 fundraised (as of 10/18/2024) from special interests like big developers, and other vested interests that stand to gain financially if Measure G is passed.
- The excessive coordination between the proponents of Measure G and City officials going back several years amounts to collusion, and rightfully deserves to be called out.
- Measure G was written as a wish list of six priorities. Less than half of the funds will go to police and fire, at 20% each, and 60% is allocated for other priorities- including “Economic Development” and other seeming developer/ Chamber of Commerce-type giveaways.
Yes, technically Measure G is “citizen-initiated,” in that the City Council itself did not draft the tax increase – but looking closely at those behind Measure G, at least 5 of them are retired or current city employees. Verify on their Team page for yourself: https://yesonfolsommeasureg.org/whos-involved/
The main proponents, Chair Cline and Co-Chair Goss, are the former Folsom City Attorney and Parks & Recreation Director, respectively.
Most unseemly of all, Firefighter Union leader Dan Carson is a Current City of Folsom employee who wrote two advocacy pieces in the local press, both published within 60 days of the election – see Carson and Cole’s Reader Commentary in the Folsom Times on 9/13, and Letter to the Editor in the Folsom Telegraph on 9/19.
While they are all technically citizens, they are not disinterested third parties with no stake in the outcome of Measure G, as all have their underfunded CalPERS pensions on the line – and the long-term costs of such pensions were discussed at a City council meeting, not long ago.
The Yes side insists that none of the tax increase money will go to pensions, but money is fungible, so the city’s operating budget will naturally service pensions more, even if the G funds do not do so directly.
By mobilizing as “citizens,” Measure G exploits the high court Upland loophole, in which “citizen-led” tax increases can pass with a simple majority vote, 50% plus one, undermining the decades’ long 2/3 supermajority otherwise required to raise taxes. This is why taxpayer groups support our opposition to Measure G.
The supposed “accountability” of the Citizens Oversight Committee would include several Folsom City employees.
Fast forward to today, of the $236,000 fundraised in support of Measure G, literally tens of thousands have come from major developers, Folsom City public sector unions, and others that will gain from the measure’s passage directly. It is Pay to Play: donate tens of thousands of dollars now, in return for millions more in perpetuity, if passed!
- Most concerning of all, the City Council was directed by Chair Bruce Cline himself, not to advance their own version of a tax increase in 2022, but to hold off until 2024, to allow more time for public outreach to justify a sales tax increase! Please see our website, NoFolsomTax.Com, for the PRA request showing the email thread dated 7/8/2022, titled “Now is the Wrong Time for a Sales Tax Measure.”
We partly agree with Bruce, in that now, 2024, is still not the time for a sales tax measure! Join us in opposition with a free yard sign at https://www.nofolsomtax.com/volunteer and like and follow our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/NoOnFolsomMeasureG.
Sarah Norberg, Folsom Resident
The above commentary was authored by local resident Sarah Norberg and submitted to Folsom Times. The views and opinions expressed in community commentary submissions are that of the authors and do not reflect the views and opinions of Folsom Times, its management, staff, stakeholders or advertisers.
Do you have an opinion or a viewpoint? Local residents are welcome to submit their opinion/commentary writings for consideration. All submissions MUST include writers full legal name, address and phone number for verification and legal responsibility of all content submitted. To be considered for publication, all Community Commentary submissions must include a high resolution headshot/portrait of the author with full permission for publication and be submitted to: folsomtimeseditor@gmail.com any submissions sent to other departments will not be forwarded or considered.
All submissions to Folsom Times are subject to guidelines, review and approval or disapproval by All Town Media. LLC and its legal advisors. Digital publication of future election related commentary and submissions will pause as of Oct. 31 on week prior to elections day and continue through November 6.
