Dear editor,

Questions about Measure H, regrading Napa street maintenance:

What is Napa's annual budget for road maintenance?

Why has the maintenance been deferred, and for how many years has this been going on?

Why is the city allocating $900,000 for a new park in the Oxbow rather than spending that money on the streets?

What are the top five priorities in the city budget? Where does road maintenance stand as a priority in the city budget?

Regarding Jamieson Canyon :

Is Solano County participating in the project for that portion of the roadway in Solano County?

The elected representatives of the Napa district should be aggressively working to have the state of California place Jamieson Canyon on the top of the list for safety improvements on state Highway 29. They are not doing their job of representing Napa County if they are not doing this.

If we pass H, will this not give the Legislature money to spend elsewhere?

What kind of surface is proposed for the roads being refurbished? The re-surfacing of many roads appears to be heavy gravel with tar and are rough, noisy and falling apart.

I believe that the city, i.e. the citizens of Napa, should be responsible for the city's streets. The state of California should be responsible for the state highways. The county has a budget for the county road system and should utilize it to maintain county roads. Placing a aggressively enforced 45 MPH speed limit on Jamieson Canyon will certainly increase safety and even conserve gasoline. This tax increase is regressive in nature and will impact those of lower economic means the most. This proposition will be paid by my grandchildren if they can afford to live in Napa.

C.E. Pickett

Napa