S2008 - Why Not For or Against?

I decided to vote tonight and after trying to decide whether State Superintendent Jack O'Connell was going to run for Governor and get tribal and gubernatorial support...might Arnold support him? Then I took a look at Measure S2008.

The measure seeks a $35.15 property tax assessment for emergency services. After doing some back of the napkin figures and wondering how a hospital can't afford a bit extra to the community, I had to also wonder why there were no arguments for or against the measure in my ballot statement.

Our friend from COLAB Andy Caldwell writes in The Lompoc Record to urge a "no" vote:

This unfunded mandate is costing our local hospitals millions each year. Additionally, there were some state funds helping to pay for the Cottage Hospital Trauma Center. These funds have temporarily been cut off. Before the county can reapply for state funds, it must first ask local voters to see if they would be willing to increase their property tax instead.

While I sympathize with our local care providers, I have no respect for our state and federal lawmakers, who already have enough of our money in order to deal with this problem. I therefore encourage you to vote “no” on Measure S2008.

I rarely agree with Caldwell and am not sure whether I agree with him now. Why though, when we are fighting health care costs, bickering among presidential candidates and producing movies like "Sicko" -- is this an issue? Is Cottage Health Systems not making enough money to give a bit back to the community in terms of care? Is this just a placeholder measure to meet a requirement to get some of the millions we will get from the Proposition 90's back to the hospital? Are they just going through the motions but figure there is no need to advocate for what they ask for?

There is something wrong with seeking democracy to cure an ill and not being willing to stand up for a $35.15 per parcel payday. What were they thinking?