BY DAVE PRICE
Daily Post Editor
Nobody expects political advertising to be honest, but given all of the respected community leaders who are on the Yes-on-J bandwagon, you’d expect more from that campaign.
Measure J would permanently raise the sales tax by a half cent so the city could pay the school district $65.5 million for a piece of the Cubberley Community Center.
Last week, the Yes-on-J side released an ad that made it sound as if former Palo Alto Mayor Lydia Kou favored Measure J. She favored the acquisition in 2024 but she doesn’t like the sales tax hike that was proposed this year, long after she was off council. The ad didn’t say that.
Among her objections:
Measure J has no expiration. It’s a regressive tax that hits the low- and middle-income people the hardest. And while it’s said to be a tax for Cubberley, there’s nothing stopping the city from using the money for other government activities.
And she points out that the ballot language says the tax will be in effect “…until ended by voters.” But Kou said she questions how many voters understand how much money and effort it would take to repeal a tax.
Some of the Yes-on-J people wish Kou had raised her objections in 2024 when she was part of the committee negotiating the Cubberley deal. But how could she? The tax hadn’t been decided back then. At that time, they were talking about a bond measure.
The issue isn’t whether you’re for or against renovating Cubberley, though some of the “Yes on J” proponents try to position it that way.
The issue is, “at any price?” That’s a reasonable, even critical question.