Friday, October 28, 2016

Vote no on Propositions J and K

Vote

In spite of a record high city budget, City Hall wants more money. Heather Knight is keeping score for the Chronicle:

...The people in charge of our $9.6 billion want more money.

The biggest tax measure[Proposition K] before voters in November is a three-quarter-cent sales tax increase that would raise $150 million a year — $100 million for transit improvements, and $50 million for homeless services and housing. Lee and the majority of the supervisors support it.

A tax on sodas and other sugary drinks would raise prices by a penny per ounce. Designed with the hope of curbing obesity and diabetes, the money would go into the general fund (emphasis added).

Homeowners would also see their parcel taxes go up by $20 a year to benefit City College if another measure passes. The current parcel tax charges homeowners $79 a year for the institution, and it expires in four years. The new measure would up that amount to $99 a year through 2032. It would pay for faculty raises, libraries, technology and other basics.

The San Francisco school board will ask voters to approve an eye-popping $744 million bond measure to build a school in an undecided location, improve existing facilities, make technology upgrades and build an arts center on Van Ness Avenue. It would also include $5 million for affordable teacher housing, something the district has pledged to build for more than a decade but still hasn’t...

The legality of Propositions J and K is questionable, and the city avoids the 2/3 requirement for raising taxes by funneling the money into the general fund (See also the Voter Information Pamphlet, page 114-123).

Streetsblog and the Bicycle Coalition support Propositions J and K because some of the money will go for so-called "transit improvements." 

In a Streetsblog op-ed by Tom Radulovich, Walk SF's Nicole Ferrara, and the Bicycle Coalition's Brian Weidenmeiera feeble pitch is made for the propositions:

Proposition J would ensure that those funds are dedicated exclusively to two of the most important issues facing our city: fighting homelessness and fixing our transportation systems...Propositions J and K will fund improvements to Muni’s reliability and street upgrades to guarantee safe travel for all of us. They will also help prevent future Muni service cuts and fund affordability programs like Free Muni for Youth and Free Muni for Seniors and People with Disabilities–--programs San Franciscans rely on to be able to remain in this city.

Well, maybe. Since the money raised by Proposition K will all go into the general fund, the city can spend it anyway it wants.

The SFMTA already has a billion dollar budget and a bloated payroll

Heather Knight claims that there are 30,751 city employees, but the State Controller, using information provided by the city, says there are 38,101---one city employee for every 23 residents.

Vote no on these propositions. If the city wants to raise the sales tax, it should put it on the ballot for a 2/3 vote.

Labels: , ,

1 Comments:

At 5:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

After some research it's pretty much A to E nothing specific on how the money will be used. i to M again nothing specified. O to S again nothing specified. And also V to RR.

A B C D E i J K L O S V RR must all be shot down. They do nothing but raise people's taxes and the money all goes into the general fund so that the sfmta can grab more money. The general fund is where they get most of the money anyway. For instance the soda tax not one penny is allocated into some sort of health fund. Get it? There is zero specific allocations.

Also one of the measures above that has to do with development pretty much creates the sfmta of planning. Which would be working closely with if not for the sfmta. It's almost like a merger sfmta buying out the planning department.

Although parks are nice the parks and recreation pretty much deals with the sfmta. The money will be used for new "turn signals" on the same block as the park street signs, street designs so people have "access" to the park. That's the game being played.

The only issue in still 50/50 on is PROP L that will just give a progressive supervisor board more power with the sfmta. Considering board of supervisors they have all been silent on everything the sfmta has been doing as well as approving sfmta budget when they can easily vote to not approve and raise concerns. Prop L and the other measure not allowing the mayor to put in an intern sup seems like a double cross. Factoring in the history of this board of supervisors it wouldn't surprise me and seems highly likely.

Verify but reading the legal texts. It's just extra taxes and money on citizens while all the money from schools to park to health going into the general fund to pay for sfmta projects.

All should be shot down.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home