“This city is in deep trouble.” Sacramento residents voice concerns over city deficit | Opinion
Sacramento is in trouble
“Facing $50M budget gap, Sacramento manager freezes hiring,” (sacbee.com, Jan. 24)
In April 2019, Measure U took effect, raising the city’s sales tax revenue by $47 million, according to the city’s estimate at the time. City Manager Howard Chan, however, now reports a structural deficit of $50 million — a reversal of almost $100 million in five years.
The article implies that the deficit is due to an increase in city services. No, it is due to the incompetence of the city council and the city manager — about whom the mayor and council have spoken so worshipfully of when discussing his requested raise. This city is in deep trouble.
Brian Powers
Sacramento
Sickening
“Facing $50M budget gap, Sacramento manager freezes hiring,” (sacbee.com, Jan. 24)
Sacramento is floundering. Between homeless encampments and empty office buildings, plus a very expensive, shiny, obtuse sporting venue, we now face $50 million in debt. Meanwhile, City Manager Howard Chan is making almost half a million dollars a year ($420,000). This is simply astonishing.
And Howard is quibbling over office supplies? As a retired civil servant surviving on way less, this makes me sick.
Carol McElheney
Elk Grove
Opinion
Temporary solution
200 beds for 5,000 homeless people: Were promises made by Sacramento and the county pointless?
While the tiny homes facilities look nice, a lot more needs to be done to meet this crisis. Why can’t the city and county lease vacant lots, (even unused space under freeways,) around town and set up “camping” sites as emergency measures? The city and county could easily set up a trailer with washing and shower facilities, or, at the very least, porta-potties and handwashing stations. These could be set up a lot faster and less expensively than the “tiny home” communities and get more homeless individuals off the streets, and, hopefully, into a safer environment.
While I’m sure this isn’t ideal in the long run, at least it would be a temporary measure that could go into effect quickly to allow some dignity to our unhoused community while they are waiting for a more permanent solution.
Barbara J Harris
Carmichael
Living on the edge
200 beds for 5,000 homeless people: Were promises made by Sacramento and the county pointless?
I appreciated your focus on those who are housed but on the brink of losing their shelter. As a volunteer with a local non-profit, I have been tallying the types of calls received. Out of hundreds of calls, 37% are families or senior citizens asking for help to pay their SMUD, PG&E or rent bills. These callers are as close as one can come to the edge before becoming homeless.
This is the point where we need to step in. These are the people we need to help before they lose all of their belonging as well as their dignity. Can we not all find the funds — no matter how small — to contribute to a local organization working to keep everyone in their homes? We all need to “dig deep” to alleviate this immediate and tragic crisis.
Ted White
Elk Grove
Unbelievable insurance rates
“First of California insurance changes to be released soon,” (sacbee.com, Jan. 25)
Fixes to homeowners’ insurance can’t come soon enough. I just got my annual insurance bill, and it is triple what it was last year. I live in Granite Bay, and it seems the fire level rating has gone from a two to a four. My insurance agent says I should be happy they didn’t cancel my policy. I tried to look online to see if there were better rates and I was surprised to find that Granite Bay is now a hard place to get homeowners insurance.
I had to adjust my spending to absorb the hit when the federal government would not let me write off all my property taxes. Now, I’m hit with an unexpected property insurance increase. I was hoping to retire soon and enjoy my home for a while longer before I downsize. But it looks like I will need to work longer or do that downsizing sooner than expected.
William Bennett
Granite Bay
Harmful RTO policies
“CA state workers at EDD must work in-office 2 days per week,” (Jan. 27)
The return to office mandate for California state workers severely hurts the state. There is no transparency on this mandate from our leaders, and we have lost faith in our governor. There are obvious drawbacks to this mandate: Commuting to the office contributes heavily to traffic congestion and increases emissions and pollution — which do not align with the visions of CalEPA, one agency mandating office returns twice a week.
It costs taxpayers a lot of money to fund office needs as well as building leases. Allowing state workers to telework, however, will require them to use their own supplies. The RTO mandate also does not align with the Department of Finance’s goals to reduce state expenditures. We have a severe homelessness issue, and creating more affordable housing in Downtown Sacramento will go a long way.
With more housing, more people will live in Downtown Sacramento, thus creating demands for businesses.
James Fitz
Sacramento
