I am a 50-year resident of Novato, a native of Marin, a member of the Novato Economic Development Advisory Commission and past president of the Marin Economic Forum. For many years, Novato has managed to operate on a tight budget having limited sources of income and a limited ability to raise more.
The city has grown in population. The cost of providing police and public works; maintenance of parks; opportunities for recreation; and meeting the demand for community development services has risen. In the past, Novato used one-time grants to help maintain existing services. Now, it has been forced to cut staff to a bare bones level.
Great demand exists to both maintain and increase existing city services. Long ago, the implementation of Proposition 13 limited Novato’s percentage of property tax revenue to seven cents per dollar. If passed, the Measure M sales tax proposal on the November ballot would provide the additional revenue necessary to maintain and increase city services.
I’ve listened to arguments against it, suggesting that the city can continue to operate effectively without its passage. I find those arguments weak. One suggests that funds be borrowed from the Hamilton Trust. Borrowed money must be paid back. Borrowing is not a solution.
Another argument claims that, because the city does not fund a fire department, comparing its tax income to other cities that do is misleading. However, a comparison of Novato’s budget to San Rafael, after adjusting for the cost of that nearby city’s fire department, Novato still receives millions of dollars less in tax revenue.
Please vote to pass Measure M. Common sense and the facts prove its need.
— Harry F. Thomas, Novato
I am one of the people who signed the ballot argument urging a no vote on Novato’s Measure M sales tax proposal in November.
The Marin County Civil Grand Jury reported that the City Council failed to execute its fiduciary responsibilities over taxpayer resources. The city has mismanaged Novato finances for the last seven years, costing millions in wasteful spending and private below market loans to favored charities.
The city lost millions of dollars in federal grants because Novato has not had its annual financial audits timely done from 2017. Then, following the grand jury report, the council doubled down by proposing a significant tax increase that has no expiration date. It’s a perpetual tax.
Measure M is a “general” tax. This council, which has a history of spending funds it doesn’t have, can and will spend the dollars raised by Measure M anyway it wants. Supporters can say whatever they want about how they will spend the additional revenues. Their history indicates they’ll ignore recommendations from their own finance committee, from staff, from learned citizens and from past members of the city council and do whatever they want.
There is no reason to believe that if Measure M passes and the current council obtains more tax revenues, that it will step up and adopt significant guardrails to ensure the additional funds are spent wisely and in the interests of the residents.
Novato voters should vote against any tax measure that doesn’t include an expiration date and specify guardrails to constrain future councils from financial mismanagement.
— Mike Arnold, Novato
Heather McPhail Sridharan, a candidate for a seat on the Marin County Board of Supervisors in the Nov. 5 election, is a dedicated advocate for the District 2 community. She is committed to listening to constituents, building consensus and delivering tangible results. Her top priorities include addressing housing needs, promoting fiscal transparency, enhancing community engagement and tackling climate change.
McPhail Sridharan understands that a thriving community is built on a foundation of both environmental health and the well-being of its residents. She is passionate about creating a sustainable future, focusing on policies that ensure clean air, clean water and safe, green spaces for families and children. As an advocate for healthy students, she supports initiatives that promote safe, toxin-free environments in schools, ensuring both physical and mental well-being.
In addition to her environmental advocacy, McPhail Sridharan is committed to addressing the housing challenges faced by District 2. She believes in creating affordable, accessible housing that meets the needs of all residents. Fiscal transparency is another priority — she champions open government and ensuring taxpayer dollars are used responsibly. She also encourages active community engagement, creating spaces where every voice is heard, and decisions are made collaboratively.
Her vision for District 2 includes not only strong environmental stewardship but also fostering a community where families and children thrive, and where future generations inherit a healthy, equitable, and vibrant community. With McPhail Sridharan, District 2 has a leader who is dedicated to creating a brighter, healthier future for everyone.
— Jinesse Reynolds, San Anselmo
I have known Brian Colbert personally since the first day his daughter started school. We connected immediately one day after school when, after learning that I had grown up in San Anselmo and attended Brookside Elementary School, he asked me a series of questions about how things have or have not changed. He asked what was working for me and what concerns I had. He came from a place of genuine interest and was a wonderful listener.
Colbert remains the same person today and this is why I’m proud to support him for the District 2 seat on the Marin County Board of Supervisors. He listens to the community and actively seeks out diverse perspectives to make decisions that benefit everyone.
Colbert consistently shows that he values transparency and consensus-building, ensuring that the voices of residents are heard on the most important issues facing our county. Watching him work within our county, I find his leadership style is collaborative. He has a unique ability to unite people around common-sense solutions.
I believe he is the right person to guide us forward with inclusive, thoughtful leadership.
— Rebecca Hutchinson Houser, San Anselmo
I urge voters reelect Larry Russell to the Division 5 seat on the Marin Municipal Water District Board of Directors in the November election.
Russell is the only professional water engineer on the board. His extensive expertise enables him to understand the complex system of pipes, pumps, tanks, pipelines, dams and spillways that constitute the district infrastructure, and to fully evaluate staff and consultant proposals, sometimes suggesting reasonable alternatives.
Russell supports conservation as an important given strategy, and carefully evaluates other options (including desalination and new dams) that could help secure a reliable water supply in an uncertain climate future. He may be the most cost-conscious board member regarding the financial burden that water security could place on the public. He is also strongly protective of the natural habitat and open space that comprise the district’s watershed.
On the five-person board now are three directors first elected in 2022, so they are less than two years into the daunting job of governing a water district charged with a mandate to increase supply; the winner of the open San Rafael seat for Division 2 faces a steep learning curve to get up to speed. Russell adds important balance to this board.
His professional know-how and historical perspective are invaluable on the MMWD board. Please vote for Larry Russell.
— Ann Thomas, Corte Madera
I am writing in response to the recently published Bay Area News Group editorial urging a no vote on Proposition 6 in November (“No, California inmates should not be entitled to refuse to do chores in prison,” Oct. 4).
I think the editorial board lost credibility by not mentioning the wages inmates currently receive. The most recent California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation regulations have inmates making, at most, $0.74 per hour, except for inmate firefighters, who can make, at most, $10.24 per day.
Were they to be paid a better minimum wage, inmates would have more satisfaction from earning more money. They could save it and spend it on reintegrating themselves into society, which could be expected to reduce recidivism.
I think the real reason many are opposed to the proposition is that paying inmates a reasonable minimum wage would raise the cost of running prisons considerably.
— Edward Clapp, Corte Madera
