Politics

Sponsored: SF Taxpayers Assoc. Election Recommendations

SF Taxpayers Assoc graphic

NOVEMBER 3, 2020 ELECTION TAXPAYER RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Proposition A – NO – $487 million for MORE homeless, streets, and patronage parks money. This isn’t the time, with declining tax revenue, to incur more debt.
  • Proposition B – NO – To fight City Hall corruption, the Supervisors propose TWO CITY DEPARTMENTS. MORE growth in government and more political commissions to do the job we already pay City employees to do.
  • Proposition C – NO – This reward even illegal immigration, removing citizenship as a requirement for appointments to City Boards and Commissions.
  • Proposition D – NO – More bureaucracy for an elected sheriff’s duties under state law plus another Commission to the present 123 existing ones at a Controller estimated $10 million dollars annually.
  • Proposition E – NO – Police staffing doesn’t belong in our City Charter. Vote NO.
  • Proposition G – NO – It’s a flawed and flagrant attempt by the Supervisors to fatten voter rolls with impressionable adolescents.VOTE NO.
  • Proposition I – NO – Real Estate Transfer Tax – After selling real estate, recording the deed of transfer takes about 10 minutes, even at City Hall. Recordation of a deed is required by state law. The transfer tax has been illogical since enactment by a non-unanimous Board of Supervisors before state constitutional law required voter approval. Prop I should eliminate the transfer tax not double it! Eliminate Prop I by voting NO!
  • Proposition J – NO – Parcel Tax – Treating multi-billion-dollar property corporations the same as cottage owner in the outer Sunset with a “parcel” tax which is the same for each separate parcel in San Francisco debases striving homeowners. While this lowers the 2018 tax by $22 per parcel, it doesn’t erase the inequity of taxing billion-dollar downtown buildings the same as a widow’s little home.
  • Proposition L – NO – CEO Tax – Our Socialist Board of Supervisors wants to redistribute wealth. Unless of course, it’s their favorite celebrities or sports stars who can keep their money. But if you’re a business CEO, educated, confirmed by a Board of Directors, often times with SEC oversight hand over your money! This is their sad attempt at revenue rather than fairness or fiscal discipline. Vote No on this volatile, unreliable tax.

State Ballot Taxpayer Recommendations

NO on Proposition 15 – In 1978, San Francisco and California revolted against high property taxes by establishing a baseline for real estate value and changing tax assessment to an inflation rate. Cities and counties were forced to improve effectiveness. Tax and spending legislators have moaned ever since and are now trying to regress by changing assessment of commercial and industrial property, assuring voters they would never do so with residential property. Landlords and tenants can’t believe them. Proposition 15 is a Trojan Horse and a warm up for doing the same in two years to homeowners and tenants. Vote NO ON PROP 15!

NO on Proposition 16 – This reinstates discrimination on account of race, sex, or national origin in California which we prohibited in 1996. Voters banned preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, or national origin in public employment, public education and public contracting.  The Legislature now wants to restore reverse discrimination and quotas. That’s reactionary in critical times in California and elsewhere. Reject Proposition 16!

NO on Proposition 21 – Reject Prop 21, another example of politicians trying to control the private market on residential rentals. Their interference will not lower rents, and may very well raise them! Preserve private property rights, Vote NO!

NO on Proposition 25 – Public safety undermining legislation passed the Legislature in 2018, eliminating money bail, a state and federal constitutional right with a system based on technology in the form of algorithms. Instead of allowing lawyers for those accused of crimes to present testimony and other evidence to a Superior Court Judge on a client’s predictable appearance for Court hearings and low risk of criminal conduct before trial, the Legislature forced judges to use an algorithm eliminating personal sworn testimony from family, friends, and employers.

Prop 25 says “NO” by repealing that fanciful law with a restoration of money bail and constitutional rights before trial.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s