Fall 2002 San Francisco Ballot Recommendations

Paul Haahr
30 October 2002

Candidates

Supervisor, District 8 -

Vote: Bevan Dufty Confidence: 80%

State Propositions

Proposition 46 - Housing and Emergency Shelter Bonds

Vote: Yes Confidence: 50%

I like the issues that this bond supports (battered women's shelters, low income housing, farmworker housing), and if it were free, I would support it enthusiastically. I'd prefer if these were programs the legislature paid for out of the budget and not from a separate bond measure. I'm also disturbed that the funding for the proposition's campaign didn't all come from the housing industry. I'm going to vote for it, but hold my nose doing so.

Proposition 47 - School Construction Bonds

Vote: Yes Confidence: 75%

Similar to Prop 46 above, the cause is fine, but this should be coming out of the general budget not a separate bond issue. This proposition makes a little more sense as a bond issue, because it is for capital improvements, but I still am less enthusiastic than I want to be.

Proposition 48 - Eliminate Municipal Courts

Vote: Yes Confidence: 100%

What a waste of time. Effectively, this has already happened. Why can't the remaining change be done without going to voters?

Proposition 49 - Mandate Funding for After-school Programs

Vote: No Confidence: 100%

I agree with the sentiment (what liberal doesn't like after-school programs?), but that should be a legislative decision, not one enforced by a charter initiative.

Proposition 50 - Water & Wetlands Bonds

Vote: Yes Confidence: 100%

This is what bond measures are for: long-lived, capital projects. It seems environmentally balanced and good for development. (That doesn't happen very often.)

Proposition 51 - Dedicate Vehicle Taxes to Transportation

Vote: No Confidence: 100%

Again, I think earmarking budget dollars with initiaves is wrong.

Proposition 52 - Election Day Voter Registration

Vote: Yes Confidence: 80%

I'm in favor of anything which makes it more likely that people will vote. Will this work? Possibly, but probably only a little. I'm not worried about the fraud issues -- this measure seems to have decent safeguards for them. The only worry I have is that it will make the voting process even messier; the people operating polls are rarely the most efficient people I've met.

City Propositions

Measure A - Hetch Hetchy Improvments & Water Tax Increase

Vote: No Confidence: 80%

If the Sierra Club and the taxpayer rights groups agree on a vote against this measure, how could I disagree with them?

Measure B - Affordable Housing Bonds (2/3 vote needed)

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure C - Veterans Building Seismic Bonds

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure D - Energy Self Sufficiency

Vote: No Confidence: 100%

I don't care how corrupt and incompetent PG&E is, San Francisco politics has been far worse. Ask yourself: would Willie Brown and Chris Daly do a better or worse job with a power company than PG&E?

Measure E - Water and Sewer Rates, Surplus Funds

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure F - Entertainment Commission Appointments

Vote: Yes Confidence: 20%

The scylla and charybdis of San Francisco's mayor and board of supervisors makes this a hard decision. The SF late night coalition endorses it and they seem like the right people to think about the issue. But, I'm only voting for it on the hope that we'll have a very different board of supervisors next year.

Measure G - Elections Assistance

Vote: Yes Confidence: 20%

After the confusion and mistakes of previous elections, I'm voting for this, and hoping that it won't hurt.

Measure H - Police and Firefighter Retirement Benefits

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure I - Paid Parental Leave

Vote: Yes Confidence: 80%

I hate doing this just in a city, when I think it should be national or, at least, statewide, but it's absolutely the right hting.

Measure J - Full-time Supervisor & Salary Increase

Vote: Yes Confidence: 50%

I'm probably being naively optimistic, but I can believe that San Francisco government will be better if the supervisors are full-time.

Measure K - Selection of Official Newspapers

Vote: Yes Confidence: 100%

This one is personal. My vote is entirely against the San Francisco Independent. I hate them throwing that rag in front of my house three times a week. They have the right to say whatever they want, publish whatever they want, but what they do is littering and it shouldn't be subsidized by city notices at inflated prices. If competitive bidding lets the ads move somewhere else, I couldn't be happier. (I wouldn't support this, because city policy on contracts shouldn't be set in the charter, but the city charter already controls this area, thanks to a Fang/Independent-sponsored initiative in 1994.)

Measure L - Real Estate Transfer Tax Increase

Vote: No Confidence: 100%

I disapprove of the real estate transfer tax in general, so increasing it, even in limited circumstances, seems wrong to me. In the end, this forces prices up for home buyers. I'd much rather see a general property tax increase -- there are already enough disincentives (Prop 13) to people changing houses. Self interest corner: We're not looking to sell our house, but if we were, this could affect us and I don't want to pay an extra tax.

Measure M - Economic Development

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure N - Care not Cash

Vote: Yes Confidence: 95%

Cash payments to the homeless don't make any practical sense to me. They haven't worked to alleviate the problem of homelessness and appear to create more problems than they solve.

Measure O - Anti-Prop N

Vote: No Confidence: 100%

Some people, of course, will vote for both N and O. Doing so is a waste of a vote and might just throw everything into the courts for years. Which, I guess, is the point.

Measure P - Revenue Bond Oversight Committee

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure Q - Use of City Funds

Vote: ? Confidence: 0%

Measure R - Condominium Conversions with Certain Conditions

Vote: Yes Confidence: 10%

Given the lifetime lease provisions, I'm not worried about the effects this will have on existing tenants. Converting apartments to condos would help some people and hurt others. I'm supporting it because I approve of encouraging home ownership, but I do wonder what effects this would have on San Francisco in the long run.

Measure S - Medical Marijuana

Vote: Yes Confidence: 80%

I belive that, since California has passed its medical marijuana intiative, voters should support it with measure like this. I usually hate voting for "declarations of policy," but I can't see a downside of this initiative passsing.

Measure BB - Seismic Safety -- BART Seismic Bonds

Vote: Yes Confidence: 100%

Again, the right kind of bond-measure: long-range and necessary.