Palestine in Pictures: May 2018
Tell Congress: Support the Preventing Preemptive War in North Korea Act.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Poor People’s Campaign – Bay Area
Poor People’s Campaign Bay Area Transportation Signup & Info to Sacramento
Bus leaves West Oakland BART at 10:00am; returns at 8:00pm
Remaining dates and themes for actions are:
Week 4 June 4 – Ecological Devastation and Health
Week 5 June 11 – Systemic Poverty Everybody’s Got the Right to Live: Jobs, Income and Housing
Week 6 June 18 –Challenging the Nation’s Distorted Moral Narrative – A New and Unsettling Force
June 23rd – Mass rally in Washington, D.C. and Global Day of Solidarity
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
INFO ON SAN FRANCISCO & CALIFORNA PROPOSITIONS from 3 different sources – click the site for explanations
Broke-Ass-Stuart – Voters Guide on Local & State Propositions
Proposition A – Public Utilities Revenue Bonds: YES
Proposition B – Prohibiting Appointed Commissioners from Running for Office: YES
Proposition C – Taxes on Commercial Rents to Fund Child Care: YES
Proposition D – Tax on Commercial Rents to Fund Housing & Homeless Services: Sadly, NO
Proposition E – Prohibiting Flavoured Tobacco Products: NO POSITION
Proposition F – City Funded Representation for Tenants Facing Eviction: YES
Proposition G – Parcel Tax for San Francisco Schools: YES
Proposition H – Policy for the Use of Tasers by San Francisco Police Officers: NO
Proposition I – Relocation of Sports Teams: YES
Regional Measure 3 – Bay Area Traffic Relief Plan: YES
Proposition 68 – Authorizes Bonds Funding Parks, Natural Resources Protection, Climate Adaptation, Water Quality & Supply, and Flood Protection: YES
Proposition 69 – Requires That Certain New Transportation Revenues Be Used for Transportation Purposes. Legislative Constitutional Amendment: YES
Proposition 70 –Requires Legislative Supermajority Vote Approving Use of Cap-and-Trade Reserve Fund. Legislative Constitutional Amendment: NO
Proposition 71 – Sets Effective Date for Ballot Measures. Legislative Constitutional Amendment: YES
Proposition 72 – Permits Legislature to Exclude Newly Constructed Rain-Capture Systems from Property-Tax Reassessment Requirement. Legislative Constitutional Amendment: YES
Freedom Socialist Party Bay Area Site not known, rationalization provided. Prepared by Bob Price
Statewide Ballot Measures
Proposition 68 (Bond funding for parks, natural resources and water quality)—Vote NO
This measure authorizes the state to sell $4.1 billion in bonds for the above purposes as well as climate adaptation, water supply, and flood protection. While all of these improvements and safeguards are essential, working taxpayers, struggling to make ends meet, would be on the hook for the $8 billion to repay bondholders. Instead, tax the biggest corporate polluters to pay for these services.
Proposition 70 (Requires legislative supermajority for spending cap-and-trade reserve funds)—Vote NO
This proposition requires a legislative two-thirds supermajority vote to approve the expenditure of cap-and-trade Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund revenue starting in 2024. After the spending is approved one time by two-thirds, all subsequent expenditures will be by simple majority. This convoluted mechanism was a concession by Gov. Brown to secure Republican votes needed for an extension of the state’s cap-and-trade program. Under this, oil companies and other air contaminators must pay a fee to continue polluting. The revenue is used for programs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with global warming. This proposal gives a minority of conservatives and climate change deniers the power to limit spending on crucial environmental protections. The real solution is to prohibit industrial CO2 emissions in the first place.
Proposition 72 (Permits exemption of rain-capture systems from property tax reassessment—Vote YES
Rain capture systems collect, store, and use otherwise wasted rain water for landscape irrigation and similar uses, saving more conventional water for personal use. In a drought-plagued state, collecting rain water makes sense. This measure is a first step to protect homeowners who do the right thing. Even better would be tax rebates for such water-saving devices and government-funded programs to install them in poorer neighborhoods.
San Francisco and Bay Area Regional Ballot Measures
NO to regressive parcel taxes. NO to regressive toll and rate increases.
Often, local politicians put regressive tax and fee increases on the ballot to pay for sorely needed programs and infrastructure improvements. While we’d like to support better transportation, development of clean power, and higher teacher salaries, it’s wrong to pay for them with taxes and fees that eat into the subsistence wages and pensions of many San Franciscans. For the most vulnerable, creeping tax rates and fee increases can mean there’s only enough left to pay for food or medicine, but not both. Instead of squeezing workers for overdue improvements, elected officials need to tax corporate profits and investments of the very rich. With 31 billionaires in San Francisco, and profits from the likes of Uber, Wells Fargo, and Twitter, there’s plenty of wealth to draw on.
Proposition G (Parcel tax that increases teacher pay, but funds charter schools)—Vote NO
San Francisco Proposition G implements a $298 tax on each parcel of property in San Francisco to increase teacher and paraprofessional (classroom aide) salaries and enhance technology in the schools. Worthy goals, but the tax also supports “public” charter schools, managed by profit-making corporations. Add to this the fact that the tax bill is the same for a retired home-owning grandmother in Hunters Point as it is for Salesforce, and we have to reject this measure.
Regional Measure 3 (Raises bridge tolls by $3 over next three years)—Vote NO
This proposal raises bridge tolls on nearly all Bay Area bridges by $3 over the next three years to pay for needed highway and mass transit improvement. Why arbitrarily penalize only bridge commuters who already suffer through long lines and slow traffic just to get to work! Instead, tax the big companies who depend on roads and transit to bring in employees and send out products.
Proposition A (Public utilities revenue bonds)—Vote NO
San Francisco Proposition A issues revenue bonds to build and improve clean electrical power facilities. Such bonds are paid back with funds received from electricity consumers’ bills. That’s better than bonds that draw payments from taxpayer general funds, but there is still a danger of increasing electricity rates on some of San Francisco’s most struggling working people.
YES to a tax on the rich to fund childcare
Proposition C (Additional tax on commercial rents mostly to fund childcare)—Vote YES
This measure increases taxes on the gross receipts of commercial landlords bringing in $1 million or more annually. 85 % of the income generated pays for childcare for low- to middle-income families. Childcare, its costs, and the near impossibility of finding affordable quality care falls primarily on mothers. That’s why we, as socialist feminists, believe in free, public, universal childcare. This measure takes an important step in that direction, paid for by those who can most afford it. We join with the Children’s Council of San Francisco, Chinatown Community Development Center, and the SF Labor Council in urging a YES vote.
Beware of cynical political maneuvering
Proposition D (Additional tax on commercial rents mostly to fund housing and homeless services)—Vote NO
Proposition C got to the voters as the result of a grassroots initiative petition campaign. Upon learning of it, a group of pro-business SF Supervisors placed a measure on the ballot to compete with C. Their Proposition D goes after the same source of funds, but at half the tax rate, and designates the funds to help the homeless and provide housing for low- and middle-income households. If both C and D pass, only the measure getting more votes takes effect. This cynical, dastardly political ploy must be roundly condemned! Elected leaders should not be pitting the need for childcare against the plight of the homeless and poor, just to give landlords a lower tax rate. Instead, Supervisors should be raising corporate taxes to fund both necessities. We reject the political shenanigans behind this measure by urging a NO vote.
No to prohibition of tobacco products
Proposition E (Prohibiting retailers from selling flavored tobacco products)—Vote NO
Throughout history, prohibition has been used with the stated intent to protect people from harm and perceived danger associated with commodities like liquor, marijuana, and other drugs. In every case, the results have been disastrous, leading to disproportionate arrests, conviction and imprisonment of people of color who have not harmed anyone. While it is true that youth are targeted by sellers of flavored nicotine products, the solution to protecting children’s health is more effective health education, access to nutritious foods, and increased CalWORKS food vouchers. Tobacco companies are against this measure to protect their bottom line; we are against it for the harm it will do to already-marginalized people by giving cops another excuse to step up their presence in neighborhoods like the Bayview, Mission, and Fillmore.
No tasers for the SFPD!
Proposition H (Policy for use of tasers by San Francisco police officers)—Vote NO
This measure is sponsored by the Police Officers Association, the cops’ union, because they want tasers now, without any precautions and rules that the Police Commission and Chief seek to impose before issuing the weapons. We are against cops carrying tasers, even with guidelines. Tasers are not the nonlethal alternative they’re being sold as. Arrestees have suffered great bodily harm and have died from being tased according to studies carried out by UCSF. We should not be adding another lethal weapon to the arsenal carried by SFPD. We really can’t trust them or any other police force with lethal weapons of any kind. Along with Wealth and Disparities in the Black Community – Justice 4 Mario Woods, the ACLU, Bar Association, and Coalition on Homelessness, we ask you to vote NO.
Yes to publicly funded lawyers for people threatened with eviction
Proposition F (City-funded legal representation for residential tenants in eviction lawsuits)—Vote YES
Proposition F is a worthy attempt to protect tenants from eviction in a city where rents have skyrocketed while the Mayor and Supervisors have catered to high tech corporations. Third and fourth generation Black and Latinx San Franciscans are being forced out of a city they built and infused with rich cultures. Landlords eager to make a killing on higher rents employ all kinds illegal maneuvers to evict long-term tenants. Typically, 90% of landlords have attorneys, while only 10% of renters do.
What we really need is guaranteed housing for all, with subsidies for those of modest means.. But Proposition F is a reform that will bring relief to working San Franciscans in the meantime. We urge a YES vote along with the SF Tenants Union, La Raza Centro Legal, and the United Educators of San Francisco.
Prop 68: $4B Bond for Parks, Drought Protection, Climate Adaption – Yes
Prop 69: Require Diesel Tax to Be Spent on Transportation Stuff – Yes
Prop 70: Give Republicans & Corporate Dems Power on Cap’n’Trade Funds – No
Prop 71: Delay Effective Date of Ballot Measures Until All Ballots Are Counted – Yes
Prop 72: Rainwater Capture Systems Won’t Trigger Property Tax Assessments – Yes
Regional Measure 3: Raise Bridge Tolls $3 Over 7 Years to Fund Transportation Projects – Yes
Prop A: Authorize Public Utilities Commission to Issue Clean Energy Bonds – Yes
Prop B: Commissioners with Conflicts Can’t Be Candidates – Yes
Prop C: Commercial Rent Tax for Child Care & Early Education For All – Hell Yes!
Prop D: Divisive Commercial Rent Tax for Too Little Housing – Disappointed No 🙁
Prop E: Uphold the Ban on Flavored Tobacco Products – Yes
Prop F: Right to Counsel for Tenants Facing Eviction! – Hell Yes!
Prop G: Parcel Tax to Give Teachers a Raise! – Hell Yes!
Prop H: Let Police Use Tasers on Nonviolent People?!? – Hell No!
Prop I: SF Shouldn’t Steal Sports Teams from Other Cities – Sure ¯\_(ツ)_/¯