The Practical Party Voter Guide for the June 2018 Election
It’s that time again! My bi-annual explainer on direct democracy is here.
Background: I am for making it easier to govern. A decade ago it was becoming clear that California was becoming impossible to govern because our state’s initiative system had spiraled out of control. Our elected officials are responsible for making laws and we should hold them accountable for that. To ensure they don’t shirk their responsibilities, I support initiatives, propositions, and measures that represent good governance. Likewise, I oppose putting into place budget set asides, patchwork taxation, and short term fixes to long term problems.
I live in San Francisco so I focus on San Francisco initiatives, Bay Area regional measures, and California propositions. I provide how I will be voting; you don’t have to vote like me, just as long as you vote!
Before we begin: Check your voter registration status here and re-register to vote before May 21st. Election day is June 5th!
San Francisco Measures
A: This determines whether the San Francisco Public Utility, generating their power from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir, can issue debt for capital investments. Currently any bonds that are issued would have to be put in front of voters. I am voting YES because ultimately revenue bonds are a better use of limited public resources and this would put decision making back in the hands of the Board of Supervisors.
B: This would require people serving on a city board or commission to resign from their seat before running for an elected office. These roles are largely volunteer and are a great stepping stone for non-traditional candidates to run for public office. I am voting NO because this is a politically motivated initiative that should not be codified within the city charter.
C: This is a tax on commercial rents in San Francisco to provide child care subsidies. I am voting NO because this is a patchwork tax for a specific budget set aside (two things I am against). To pay for subsidized child care (which I strongly support) the city needs to adjust the gross receipts tax and add the cost of subsidies to the general budget.
D: This is also a tax on commercial rents which will only pass if it gets 2/3 of the vote and more votes than initiative C. Again I am voting NO even though this is for a cause I am very passionate about — providing more funding for subsidized housing for very low to moderate incomes.
E: This is to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco. I am voting YES, not because I support the cause, but because the Board of Supervisors unanimously ALREADY PASSED THIS MEASURE. We elect them to make laws, they made a law, and now a monied group comes along and wants to reverse it. This is direct democracy at its worse.
F: This is to provide free legal representation in eviction cases, a cause that I 100% support! HOWEVER, this should (and is in the process) of being achieved by our Board of Supervisors. I am voting no out of principle, but I urge you to vote YES.
G: This is to provide a parcel tax to fund teacher salaries. Although they are a patchwork tax, parcel taxes are a workaround to solve a much larger problem: insufficient revenues from property taxes. They are a flat tax that are a higher burden on luxury single family homes rather than high density apartments and condos. Because of this, I am voting an inconsistent YES because, let’s be practical, prop 13 reform is still a far away dream.
H: This is a poorly timed policy for taser use for the SFPD. I fully support tasers, but am voting NO because this has a grossly unneeded budget set aside and the police association ALREADY REACHED AN AGREEMENT in March 2018 to allow use of tasers.
I: This is a non-binding statement proclaiming that, in the future, San Francisco “thou shall not covet” other city’s sports teams. It has a warm back story but is very poorly written. I’ll be voting NO.
Regional Measures
3: This is will increase all bridge tolls by $3 by 2025 to generate funds for much needed infrastructure investments identified by a Bay Area coalition in the state legislature an ensure tolls can keep up with inflation without voter approval. I will be voting an enthusiastic YES.
State Propositions
68: Authorizes a bond for investments in natural resource protection projects, water conservation and state/local parks. This is a smart, long-term investment and received strong support by the state legislature to be put on the ballot. I am voting YES.
69: This is a budget set aside so that the gas tax enacted in 2017 can only be used for transportation purposes. I do not like budget set asides so I am voting NO.
70: This requires that revenue generated by the state’s cap-and-trade policy be only spent on projects that receive a 2/3 approval in the state legislature. Super majorities are an awful way of legislating so I am voting NO.
71: This clarifies that when votes pass new propositions the new law goes into effect 5 days after the results of the election are certified. I really dislike our initiative system, but this makes the beast easier to manage. I will be voting YES.
72: This law changes our state constitution so that homeowners can invest in rain capture systems without the cost adding to their property value. I am voting YES, but it irks me that I have to vote on this at all since the entire legislature supported it.
If you have questions about individual candidates, let me know as I have a pretty good understanding of everyones positions on different matters.
Happy voting!
