June 2018 Voters Guide

Welcome to the first-ever voter guide produced by Indivisible SF! It covers the nine City propositions on the June ballot. They range from funding for early child care, to use of tasers by SFPD, to legal representation for tenants threatened with eviction, and more. There is also one regional measure on the June ballot. Official text, summaries and the Controller’s opinion for all propositions are available on the Department of Elections website.

YES on Prop A - Public Utilities Revenue Bonds
Proposition A would expand the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s bond-issuing authority to include bonds for clean power facilities such as solar energy storage systems or electric vehicle charging systems. The Proposition prohibits SFPUC issuing bonds for construction of fossil fuel based power plants.

YES on Prop B - Prohibiting Appointed Commissioners from Running for Office
Proposition B would amend the San Francisco charter so that an appointed member of a Board or Commission automatically forfeits their office upon declaring their candidacy in an election. 
This measure would not apply to elected members of the Retirement Board, Health Service Board, or to Retiree Healthcare Trust Fund Board. It would also not apply to members of citizen advisory committees. 

YES on Prop C - Additional Tax on Commercial Rents Mostly to Fund Child Care and Education
Proposition C would amend the tax code to provide approximately $146 million a year for child care, education, and support services for children whose parents are income-eligible, and increased compensation for early child education and child care providers. The money would come from an additional 1% tax on warehouse leases and a 3.5% tax on the lease of other commercial spaces.
NOTE: Proposition D also imposes a new gross receipts tax on commercial rents. If Proposition C and Proposition D both pass, only the one with the most votes will be adopted.
We urge our members to vote yes on this measure, rather than on Prop D. 

No Position on Prop D - Additional Tax on Commercial Rents Mostly to Fund Housing and Homelessness Services
Proposition D would impose a new tax on commercial leases to raise $70 million a year to support homeless services, including shelter and transition services for homeless individuals; acquisition and maintenance of SRO residences; acquisition and maintenance of rent-controlled apartments; creation of affordable housing; and subsidies to extremely low-income senior households.
NOTE: Proposition C also imposes a new gross receipts tax on commercial rents.If Proposition C and Proposition D both pass, only the one with the most votes will be adopted.

YES on Prop E - Prohibiting Tobacco Retailers from Selling Flavored Tobacco Products
This ordinance will amend San Francisco’s Health Code to ban the sale of flavored tobacco products in the city. Retailers who sell flavored tobacco products could lose their permits to sell tobacco. The SF Board of Supervisors had initially voted unanimously for this ban in June of 2017, but before the legislation could go into effect, tobacco companies collected enough signatures to force the issue onto the ballot. 

YES on Prop F - City-Funded Legal Representation for Tenants Facing Eviction
Indivisible SF is proud to endorse Prop F, which would ensure legal counsel to all tenants facing eviction procedures. Thousands of San Franciscans face eviction each year, often on trumped-up reasons, and most tenants are unable to afford legal representation. 70% of our homeless population had a home in San Francisco within the past three years, and most landlords will not rent to anyone with an eviction record. We urge all members to vote yes on this measure to help keep our most vulnerable residents in their homes. 

YES on Prop G - Parcel Tax for San Francisco Unified School District
Proposition G would institute an annual parcel tax of $298 to raise $50 million a year to help support teachers and staff of the SF Unified School District. The SFUSD, like all schools in California, is chronically underfunded, and the Bay Area is the most expensive place to live in the US. Additional funding is needed to recruit and retain qualified teachers and staff. 
The measure would exempt the primary residence of any citizen aged 65 years and older.

NO on Prop H -Police Tasers
Reprinted with permission from Wealth and Disparities in the Black Community - Justice 4 Mario Woods
Over the years it has become clear that our police department has a systemic brutality problem. From the release of racist text messages to the ongoing disparity in use of force on Black residents, it is clear the Department needs wholesale change and reform. That reform needs to start with systemic change, not with giving the police a new weapon with no accountability from the Police Commission. Studies show that access to both tasers and firearms does not reduce shootings. Let’s fight for reform, accountability and Justice. The police interaction with the African-American community should not come down to a choice between being shot or being tased. It should start with respect, and accountability for the racism and violence that needs to end. Please join us in voting NO on Prop H. 

No Position on Prop I - Relocation of Professional Sports Teams
Proposition I would set policy discouraging the future relocation to San Francisco of sports teams with an extensive history in another location. The Warriors owe Oakland $40 million in public debt, which they are trying to get out of paying, even as the owners are spending $1 billion on a new arena just south of AT&T Park. 

NO on Regional Measure 3 - Bay Area Traffic Relief Plan
This measure would raise the Bay Bridge toll by up to $3 over the next six years, resulting in tolls of up to $9/trip during rush hour. It would raise an estimated $4.45 billion for Bay Area transportation projects, including new BART and San Francisco Municipal Railway cars, extension and conversion of carpool lanes to express lanes, and the Caltrain downtown extension. We urge members to vote no on this measure. Although funding for public transit is needed, toll taxes are regressive and place a disproportionate and unfair burden on low-income commuters. Furthermore, the proposal is silent or unclear on a number of important issues: there is no timeline for completion of any of the projects; there are no performance metrics and there is no sunset provision to revert the tolls to current levels when the projects funded by these increases are completed.

How did we create this voter guide?
A questionnaire was sent to all our members, asking them to vote on each ballot measure: “Yes”, “No” or “No Position”. Each ballot measure had to get a majority of votes to get either a “Yes” or “No” recommendation. If a proposition received only a plurality of votes, we gave the proposition a “No Position”.

[last updated 4/27/18]