Sometimes local government can be boring.

I serve on the Turlock Measure A citizens oversite committee. Measure A was a ¾ cent increase in the local sales tax to help fund city services. While measure A revenue can be utilized for any legal city expense the ordinance putting this on the ballot stressed public safety, improved emergency response times, parks and road improvements and overall citywide financial health.

In November 2020, over 80% of Turlock’s voters participated in the election, giving measure A 56.7% to 42.3% victory.

I was not one of those yes votes and had sent a letter to Journal doubting the city would be able to stick to fiscal prudence during the covid emergency.

Measure A authorized an oversite committee charged with reporting to the city if measure A funds were allocated and spent as voters had directed. As a skeptic of the measure, I would see how it worked.

At every meeting the city finance director explains the latest figures and answers all of our questions.

I am happy to report that my skepticism was misplaced. In fact, the city’s measure A finances are excruciatingly transparent. And once you know how much money has come ins, and where it was subsequently allocated and spent, there isn’t much more for the committee to say.

Now, because of city leadership mandating measure A be spent as the voters directed, our police and fire departments are fully staffed, new modern fire trucks are in neighborhoods, our parks are better and the roads are being repaired. Geer road, one of our essential arteries, should be completely redone by the end of next year . We need to make sure our elected Turlock leaders adhere to the priorities that have guided Measure A spending to date.

Turlock does not have a “go along to get along” city council. There are occasions where a 3/2 vote sets the policy (and not always the same 3/2 split). But all five members of the council are respectful, professional and appear to be genuinely committed to working for a better city for all.

We are all aware that some regional agencies and some local governments in our area have had serious public priority and integrity issues in the last few years. That has not been the case in Turlock. In fact, most of our local government agencies here in Stanislaus County meet the transparency and priority tests with high marks.

A second local government agency, The Turlock Irrigation District, has been leading the fight to keep our water rights intact and power rates among the lowest in California. It stands in the forefront resisting the efforts to take water out of our area to serve others in our state, ignoring the fact that 100% of the cost of the Don Pedro reservoir were paid by the local agencies. Not one dime came from state or federal sources.

California has its own ironic contradictions. We are proud of having among the best agricultural productivity of any state, but then seemingly work full time to avoid insuring we can continue the economic marvel of California agriculture. Our state has not seen a federal or state construction of a major new reservoir since our statewide population was 20 million people. We now number around 40 million. We can’t conserve our way out of this water shortage with conservation only. It makes even less sense to take water that is well managed away from well-run agencies and let it run out into the ocean when other more successful efforts to preserve the salmon are available. Even when the voters approve new reservoir construction, like sites, ongoing legal battles increase the cost and delaying the actual construction for years. We should be thankful TID is standing so strongly for our interests.

The city of Turlock, and the Turlock Irrigation District have earned a strong “well done” for their work over the last few years.

Meetings of both jurisdictions are available to watch live or on tape. I warn you however, most of the discussions are polite, respectful and even boring. But when you are talking about local tax money and local programs, boring can be a very good thing.