News is also an obstacle to technological advancement.

In 2013, then-Lt. “How to take Citizenville: Town Square Digital and Reinvent Government,” wrote Governor Gavin Newsom. The book promotes the idea of ​​how government can use technology to “address the needs, concerns, information and cooperation of bright digital citizens.” The book was well written and interesting.

In light of the new ideas in the book, it is sad to see the regime using technology to oppose two bills that will improve the accessibility of citizens to their government.

First, the Senate Bill 675 County Board of Supervisors could authorize property owners over the age of 62 or individuals on SSID to pay property taxes on a monthly basis, regardless of age. But the ability to charge monthly payments was widespread in the private sector and was already possible in states such as Idaho, Michigan, Ohio and Texas, and it was very difficult for the Golden State. He rejected the law, saying Californiaans struggling to pay property taxes had options and the bill had “significant administrative and fiscal burdens.”

Despite Proposition 13, many retirees and seniors still find it difficult to pay their dues in two large sums.

SB 675 simply gave homeowners the option of paying their taxes on time and at the same time allowed them to include property taxes in their monthly budget. However, the regime’s new acquisition of fiscal restrictions has hampered the government’s ability to invest in taxpayers’ benefits and to implement widely available technology.

Another example of a newcomer to Newsom Veto, which does not conform to its original text, is the collection bill 339. AB 339 City Council Public Meetings and County Supervisor Boards Increase Community Involvement by including options for people to participate online or by phone. Who can do it during the epidemic. Local governments’ objections to the law only apply to cities and districts with a population of more than 250,000.

Newcom rejected the bill, saying it “sets the conditions for connecting public access requirements to the public” but said the bill “would limit flexibility and increase costs for local officials trying to manage their meetings.”

The government controlled the technology at the time of the outbreak, but allowed people who could not go down to the municipal or county office on weekdays to interact for up to five hours before being allowed to spend three minutes. – Or less comment, simply asking too much.

Unfortunately, these two vetoes only reflect recent examples of California’s technological opposition. Exhibition A: Obviously, billions of dollars have been lost in EDD fraud. Years of the Auditor General’s reports highlight the technological and operational issues in the unemployment office, but the governor, his predecessors and the legislature chose to take action after the horse came out of the barn.

They also did not take action against DMV, leaving DMV’s secret DMV office in California to suffer until long lines and outdated technologies, leaving the governor and legislator to act.

The argument that California does not have the public resources to invest in technology that makes it easier to pay property taxes or increase public participation is not easy to dispel. Certainly not billions of dollars are still spent on bullet trainings. That project may have been a technological breakthrough under another Stanford governor, but it was not a technocrat Gov News.

John Kupala is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Leave a Comment