Did All for Transportation Unlawfully Appropriate Earmarks for 30 Years?

Earmarks are used to set aside funds for a specific purpose or allocate a specified amount of money for a specific project, program, or organization.

Earmarks in government are often associated with pork barrel spending, hand outs and wasteful spending without due diligence. In government, earmarks are handed out with little to no planning and the general public now has wary eyes on earmarks.

It may be after the election but the big mess All For Transportation (AFT) created is unfolding. While local media continues to ignore what is actually in AFT's charter amendment and all the issues swirling around it, we will continue to expose those issues.

AFT knew their transit tax hike did not fund any existing transportation plan. They knew it because the AFT tax hike is not just a tax hike referendum, it is an appropriations bill full of earmarks.

AFT, a political committee accountable to no one and funded by wealthy special interests, made up their own mandated earmarks with no transparent due diligence, planning or plan.

Tax Hike Lawsuit Raises Serious Legal Issues That Must Be Resolved

Commissioner Stacy White filed a lawsuit in December against numerous defendants related to All for Transportation's $16 Billion transit tax hike charter amendment challenging the language used in the charter amendment. It is case #18-CA-011749.

AFT, some county commissioners and others who supported the tax hike have called the lawsuit ridiculous, a political stunt and "nonsense".

But their rhetoric may be the "nonsense".