My choices for San Francisco Supervisor (District 8) and various city initiatives:
District 8 Supervisor: While Scott Weiner has run a strong campaign to represent Harvey Milk's old district, my first place vote goes to
Rafael Mandelman. A supporter of tenants rights, logical immigration reform, and economic and social justice, Mandelman holds near and dear the policy positions of his Castro/Noe Valley district. His are truly "San Francisco values."
While Weiner has run a spirited and tireless campaign, his connections to big-money donors raises a red flag. In SF's three-tier voting system, I'll cast my #2 vote for him, but in the end, Mandelman is far and away my guy.
Prop AA ($10 increase in vehicle registration fees): YES. Municipalities across the country are desperate for income to keep streets repaired and city infrastructure maintained. This small increase in vehicle registration fees is badly needed.
Prop A (Seismic retrofit bond): YES. As the Giants begin their third shot at a World Series championship, I am reminded of the devastating earthquake that struck this great city as the team took to the field at the 1989 series. This proposition authorizes the city to issue up $46 million in deferred loans and grants for retrofits to various wooden buildings in San Francisco.
Prop B (Requires city workers to pay more for health and pension benefits): NO. I've been on the fence with this one for a while, and could still change my mind before Election Day. My thought process? On the one hand, we have
this:
In 2009, San Francisco's deputy police chief earned $516,000 in cash compensation and retired with a $230,000-a-year pension—a package that could cost the city $8 million over the balance of his life.
In order for the city to dig its way out of its current budget predicament, sacrifice must be asked of all, including government employees. Proposition B would increase contributions to their pension plans by about 2%, and it would require an increase contributions to their health care premiums.
On the other hand, it's those health premium increases that, ever so slightly, put me on the "no" side. The increases being proposed in this measure are too harsh, and in a city that provides basic universal health care to its residents, unaffordable insurance premiums for the people who help run the city shouldn't even be on the table. That's not to say city workers shouldn't have their private plan contributions increased. Rewrite this proposition with a smaller increase for the next election and I'll be all ears.
Prop C (Requires the Mayor to appear before the Board of Supervisors for "question time"): NO. This has been on the ballot twice over the last few years. The fact that it's back highlights how easy it is to put trivial non-issues to voters time and again. I voted yes last time. This year, the proposition is a waste of time and money, and I'm voting no. Let it rest this time.
Prop D (Allows non-citizens with SF school children to vote in school board elections): Umm...
NO. Period.
Prop E (Election Day voter registration): YES. Same-day registration seems to work quite well in Minnesota.
Prop I (Opens polling places the Saturday before the 2011 city election): YES. Participation in elections can only benefit if moved from Tuesdays to the weekend. This is a step in that direction.
Prop J (Hotel tax increase): NO. I know I asked for sacrifice in my Prop B argument, but this tax increase (in a city where the hotel tax is already sky high) would hurt tourism, which in turn would hurt San Francisco. This one is a no-brainer.
Prop N (Property tax increase on homes worth $5 million or more): YES. This proposes to increase the tax rate from 1.5% to 2%. Any logical argument at restoring fiscal sanity to local and federal governments will have to include minor tax increases such as this.
