Dear editor,

I have the feeling that Measure H has been designed to be all things to all people, especially after reading the full text of Measure H (Ordinance 06-01) in the Sample Ballot and Voter Information Pamphlet.

As I recall, this project started out, about a year ago, with an advisory vote relative only to widening Jamieson Canyon road to four lanes. There seemed to be a majority of the voters in favor and action was supposedly started to draft a measure for the voters to financially support that proposal with a half-cent sales tax increase. However, it now seems that this was simply a ploy to generate monies to also fund an airport interchange, a Soscol flyover, street repairs, a new Napa VINE transit center, a Fairfield-Napa Express bus service, a senior mobility service, something designated as Safe Routes to Transit and Schools and numerous projects in American Canyon, Yountville, St. Helena and Calistoga. Only 27.87 percent of the anticipated revenue from the half-cent sales tax increase will be allocated to widening Jamieson Cannon Road and the airport interchange and Soscol flyover!

Now, according to the Jamieson Canyon article in the May 18 Napa Valley Register, the projected completion date for these projects (Jamieson Canyon and two interchanges or all projects?) is 2014, per Mike Zdon, the local transportation agency's executive director. Just where are 30 years' worth of sales tax money coming from to accomplish these projects in seven or eight years? Section 10 of the proposed ordinance permits the transportation authority to float bond issues to complete the projects on a "pay-as-you-go" basis and then pay off the bonds, as the revenue becomes available over the 30 years, from the half-cent sales tax increase. (What happens if the sales tax revenue isn't sufficient to pay of the bonds?) As far as I know, the selling of bonds to more rapidly fund and complete the project(s) has never been mentioned but the Register article, on page A6, reads: "Napa County would sell bonds guaranteed by Measure H revenue over the next 30 years ..." I think it is common knowledge that paying off money borrowed through issuing bonds, just about doubles the amount of money borrowed. So, how much of the 27.87 percent (or the estimated $149.64 million cost) will be consumed in paying off the bond(s)? Will all of the money to complete all of the projects be initially financed by bonds?

I do not condone the use of subterfuge and chicanery to outwardly promote a popular project to secretly encompass a whole series of projects, no matter how worthwhile, in order to raise the money to finance these clandestine projects. I feel that Measure H should be rejected and immediate steps taken to prepare separate measures for the November ballot (if time permits) or the next election after that, so that we can vote on each project as we see fit. It is obvious that I shall vote no on Measure H.

Noble C. Emery

Napa