County Guaranteed Income Program a Misuse of Taxpayer Money
"Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
Our Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, feeling themselves flush with cash from Measure X funds, have decided to give a large amount of this money to non-working people in our county. For now, at least, it is just a short-term gift—only 18 months.
On July 8th, they are expected to approve $4.266MM for a THRIVES Guaranteed Basic Income Pilot Program. According to the most recent agenda, they would serve just 170 people over an 18-month time period. The program would be administered by the Employment and Human Services Department for an estimated payment issuance period of January 2026 through December 2027.
Most of the money will come from Measure X, but they are also taking $1MM in AB109 funds (establishes the California Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 which allows for current non-violent, non-serious, and non-high risk sex offenders, after they are released from California State prison, to be supervised at the local County level.), and some funds from the Voluntary and Emergency Services team, who probably need the money to help the very same people.
What’s Wrong Here?
It can sound good to give money to people who really need it, but it’s a quick fix that isn’t a fix at all. Why is this? Look at your teenagers (and some older folks too). Many have never learned to manage money in a way so as to be able to keep feeding themselves, paying bills and saving money for an emergency. Some don’t know how to use a checkbook, how to look for sales and deals and to put off purchases as long as possible. Basic financial skills are critical to help someone in need thrive in the future. Those who don’t have them never really succeed in getting out of debt, need and often, homelessness.
With no requirements to get training and work towards getting a real job, 18 months of payouts just pushes the problem forward. As we discovered during President Obama’s two terms, extending unemployment benefits simply made people take a LOT longer to get a new job. It’s like “found money.” Too many people get a raise or a bonus and splurge, instead of spending a little of it and putting the rest away for savings or required large purchases. It’s a little like winning the lottery; momentarily, you feel rich.
What Should the Money Go For?
If we want to really make a difference, the money should go for financial and job training. Help people learn how to manage money wisely and how to function effectively at a workplace. If their parents didn’t know or didn’t teach them, you can understand how they could find themselves in dire straits. Education can transform them. I remember getting a savings account as a school field trip. They got us excited about seeing the balance grow as we added gifts to the balance. (Well, and the interest was a bit better back then too).
Handouts don’t empower people. In most cases, they can make the person just more dependent, which doesn’t do anything for self-esteem. And yet, so many are capable of bigger, more interesting lives. I’ve had people say, “What about the handicapped?” Many people we might consider too severely handicapped DO work; they are proud to be able to take care of themselves in some way. I’ve worked with quite a few, and even some quadriplegics are delighted to exploit the capabilities they still have.
Sadly, too many politicians are looking for quick fixes, to make them look good at election time. But empowerment is better than a handout. Don’t believe me? Supervisor Candace Anderson notes some of the comments in favor of the project. “Well, it shows others that we care, it would show that we like pilots for guaranteed income, it would bolster (the likelihood that) maybe the state would come up with (its own plan.)” Is that a valid justification?
Constituents mostly don’t like this program. If we had to vote, it wouldn’t pass. But we’re not being asked to vote. Supervisor Diane Burgis highlighted her concerns over helping a limited amount of people.
“I’ve said over and over, I really want to leverage these dollars to help the most people. And I do recognize that a $1,000 can help 250 households, it really could. But I am not sure it’s the best use of our money. I do like the idea of engaging with those who are getting services and trying to lift them up and keep those services for them,” stated Burgis.
Other counties and states are testing out basic universal income, so why not wait to see if they achieve anything. For too many, there isn’t a real goal, just a “feel good” moment that really achieves nothing, except, perhaps, disincentivizing people from working.
Who Would Get the Money?
The Supervisors begin by speaking about foster kids, who likely had little help understanding money management across frequent family changes. But apprenticeships would help them more.
The Supes also want to “help” housing-insecure older adults, but this doesn’t solve their problem unless they are terminally ill in the next 18 months. If you buy them 18 months, what happens then?
Demand Better
If you agree, let’s start a write-in campaign, demanding a better option than short-term, basic income. We should insist on the right to vote on this program, and to also have major input into the choices they are making with the rest of the money. Write to your supervisor, write to the newspaper. This is OUR money; we have a right to govern it.
“What comes easy won't last long, and what lasts long won't come easy.” —Unknown.
Many thanks to CoCoTax Executive Committee Member Denise Kalm for contributing this article.
Upcoming Events at CoCoTax
This Friday, June 27 - Oakland Mayoral Recall Leader Seneca Scott. Register via this link.
July 25 - School Finance with AUHSD Superintendent Jon Nickerson and Education Expert Gus Mattammal. Register via this link.
September 26 - Local Government Fiscal Health Dashboard with Boomer Shannon from California Policy Center (also: possible presentation from Lafayette School District)
October 25 (New Date) - Steven Greenhut on “The War on Suburbia”