A
Health and Homelessness, Parks, and Streets Bond
Yes
Capital projects to maintain the city’s infrastructure on reasonable and necessary issues
B
Department of Sanitation and Streets, Sanitation and Streets Commission and Public Works Commission
No
Splits the Department of Public Works up. Yes there’s corruption there, but it’s unclear how this solves it and their ability to keep SF’s streets clean, all while costing an extra $2.5-6M/yr in a time of budget constraints.
C
Removing Citizenship Requirements for Members of City Bodies
Yes
Immigrants are an essential part of SF. Their expertise can only help these groups they may join.
D
Sheriff Department Oversight Board and Inspector General
No
Solves for a worthy issue ー oversight of the Sheriff Department, which is in need of it. However, the Sheriff Department was put under Department of Police Accountability (DPA) oversight and it’s unclear how this would be significantly than the current state while costing $3M/yr. Better is to continue strengthening the DPA.
E
Police Staffing
Yes
Removes minimum police staffing requirements. Instead, the city can now use other means (e.g. non-police) for public safety as it sees fit. (Nothing changes though; the city doesn’t hit these minimums today anyway)
F
Business Tax Overhaul
Yes
Simplifies the SF tax code as part of a broader transition from a payroll tax to a gross receipts tax (i.e. revenue tax), levied on businesses. Reasonable short-run carve-outs given COVID.
G
Youth Voting in Local Elections
Yes
I think 18 is a reasonable threshold for general election races generally, but I’m amenable to arguments that this will help increase lifetime voter turnout. Local elections matter a lot, so engaging younger folks in local issues feels useful.
H
Neighborhood Commercial Districts and City Permitting
Yes
Clears a bit of SF’s notoriously slow bureaucracy to support local businesses in the current climate.
I
Real Estate Transfer Tax
No
Would apply a higher tax rate to selling properties such as multifamily buildings (e.g. apartment complexes), depressing new housing construction, including low income housing, by adding yet another cost to these direly needed projects. The majority of the Board of Supervisors didn’t even vote for it.
J
Parcel Tax for San Francisco Unified School District
Yes
Funds SF schools for reasonable expenditures (e.g. teacher pay) and similar to how voters intended to in 2018, but due to the complexities of propositions, got tied up in litigation.
K
Affordable Housing Authorization
Yes
Allows the city to directly develop 10,000 units of affordable housing, a worthy and important need. There are additional hurdles for the city to tackle even if this passes to successfully develop those units, but it’s a useful initiative.
L
Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive's Pay to Employees’ Pay
No
Income inequality is an important goal, but the mechanisms to achieve it through a tax tied to executive pay does not seem likely to achieve the desired real-world outcomes given its only city-wide scope. Further, it seems more likely to disincentivize lower-income hiring than change executive compensation.