{"id":36887,"date":"2024-10-10T13:34:19","date_gmt":"2024-10-10T20:34:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/?p=36887"},"modified":"2024-10-10T13:34:20","modified_gmt":"2024-10-10T20:34:20","slug":"opposition-to-muni-funding-measure-raises-nearly-1m-from-uber-lyft","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/2024\/10\/10\/opposition-to-muni-funding-measure-raises-nearly-1m-from-uber-lyft\/","title":{"rendered":"Opposition to Muni funding measure raises nearly $1M from Uber, Lyft"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.sfexaminer.com\/users\/profile\/Troy_Wolverton\">By Troy Wolverton | Examiner staff writer |<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Oct 8, 2024\u00a0Updated\u00a020 hrs ago  (SFExaminer.com)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com\/sfexaminer.com\/content\/tncms\/assets\/v3\/editorial\/6\/25\/625445f6-69d2-11ed-87e9-bf96ee00ffc7\/637bd0df33fa2.image.jpg?resize=400%2C267\" alt=\"Muni Central Subway opens\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Muni riders during the new Muni Metro Central Subway\u2019s first day open to the public on Saturday, Nov. 19, 2022.Craig Lee\/The Examiner<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>A grassroots-sponsored, widely endorsed measure to shore up funding for Muni has drawn one of the best-funded opposition campaigns of any San Francisco proposition this election cycle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Given that Proposition L&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sfexaminer.com\/news\/politics\/sf-measure-taxing-uber-to-fund-muni-on-track-for-2024-ballot\/article_182be126-38d1-11ef-8e1d-039e0e8502f5.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">would tax ride-hailing giants<\/a>&nbsp;Uber, Lyft and Waymo to raise funds for the transit agency, that might not be much of a surprise. Although the tax is relatively small \u2014 at its highest rate, it would be equivalent to 45 cents on a $10 ride \u2014 Uber and Lyft are spending big money to defeat it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Lyft argues the proposition would hurt drivers and increase costs for its riders \u2014 particularly low-income ones \u2014 without closing Muni\u2019s looming budget deficit, spokesman C.J. Macklin said in an emailed statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Prop. L would \u201cmake it harder for people to live and work in the Bay Area,\u201d Macklin said. \u201cIt\u2019s the wrong move for San Francisco.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Uber spokesman Zahid Arab directed inquiries about the company\u2019s stance on the measure to the No on Prop L campaign. Waymo representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Although the opposition campaign didn\u2019t ramp up until after&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sfexaminer.com\/news\/politics\/uber-tax-funding-sfmta-heading-to-november-2024-ballot\/article_c6e76886-4ec3-11ef-9d87-1b9e79bb5d8c.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Prop. L qualified for the ballot<\/a>, supporters of the measure weren\u2019t surprised by the flood of money coming in to thwart their effort, said Cyrus Hall, the Yes on L campaign manager. Hall said he also wouldn\u2019t be surprised if Uber and Lyft used their ride-hailing apps to urge their San Francisco customers to vote against Prop. L. That\u2019s a tactic the companies used to promote state Proposition 22, which barred California from treating Uber and Lyft drivers as employees of those companies, in 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cThey have lots of tools at their disposal that we don\u2019t have as a campaign, just because they\u2019ve got the apps, they\u2019ve got the money,\u201d Hall said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But the yes campaign can counter that with the big team of volunteers it has signed up, who are out talking to voters nearly daily about the measure, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cReally, it\u2019s those conversations that are going to win Prop. L the election,\u201d Hall said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" width=\"4\" height=\"3\" src=\"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/image-51.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-36895\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Uber\u2019s headquarters building in San Francisco\u2019s Mission Bay district, as seen in February 2024. The company is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat Proposition L, which would tax the revenue it generates in The City to fund Muni.Troy Wolverton\/The Examiner<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>Prop. L would put an additional tax on the money Uber, Lyft and Waymo generate in The City. Unlike some of San Francisco\u2019s other business taxes, the levy wouldn\u2019t depend on how many employees those companies have in The City; San Francisco would tax them the same amount whether they\u2019re based here or not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Also, unlike the tax San Francisco voters approved with Proposition D in 2019, Prop. L\u2019s levy would be assessed on the aggregate amount of revenue the companies generate in The City, not on individual rides. It would be up to Uber, Lyft and Waymo whether to pass the tax along to riders or drivers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Prop. L would bring in about $25 million a year. Supporters acknowledge it wouldn\u2019t solve Muni\u2019s funding woes, not with the agency facing a budget deficit that could reach as large as&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sf.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/2024-09\/Muni\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">$322 million in its 2026-2027 fiscal year<\/a>, according to a recent estimate from its finance chief. But they say the measure is a way to build support for a bigger funding measure that would assist multiple transit agencies in the region by showing that San Francisco is doing its part to address Muni\u2019s problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Uber and Lyft are spending up to defeat that effort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As of the beginning of this month, the No on Prop L committee had raised nearly $913,000, according to filings it made with the San Francisco Ethics Commission. Of that, Uber contributed about $30,500 directly and another $750,000 through a campaign committee. Lyft contributed about $128,000. The remaining $4,000 came from SF Forward, the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce\u2019s political-action committee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The amount the opposition campaign has raised \u2014 which includes about $53,000 in non-monetary contributions \u2014 is more than three times that of the Yes on L campaign. The tally also represents the second-highest amount raised by an opposition campaign to a local measure on the November ballot. Only the effort to simultaneously promote Proposition D\u2019s commission-reform effort and defeat rival Proposition E has raised more funds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So far, No on Prop L has spent about $216,000, not including the value of the services provided to the campaign for free, according to its finance filings. Of those expenditures, about $30,000 has gone to political consulting firm BMWL, which is running the campaign. Another $55,000 has been spent on online ads, and more than $57,000 on postage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Despite those expenses, the opposition campaign has a war chest left for the last few weeks until the election. As of Sept. 21, it still had nearly $709,000 on hand, although it had accrued some $105,000 in outstanding expenses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" width=\"4\" height=\"3\" src=\"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/image-50.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-36894\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">A Muni bus traveling along Great Highway by Noriega Street in San Francisco on Monday, June 24, 2024.Craig Lee\/The Examiner<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>John Whitehurst, a consultant with BMWL who is heading up the No on Prop L campaign, said the group plans to focus its messaging effort on digital and direct-mail marketing. Its message will also be on some voting slate cards put out by San Francisco political groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The campaign has already spent $5,000 to be on the United Democratic Club\u2019s slate mailer and $2,500 to be on one from the San Francisco Eastern Neighborhoods Democratic Club, according to its filings. It also expects to be on the slates put out by GrowSF, TogetherSF Action, the Ed Lee Democratic Club and the Raoul Wallenberg Jewish Democratic Club, Whitehurst said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re spending most of that money [that the campaign has raised] communicating directly with voters,\u201d he said. \u201cWe will be communicating right to the end, right up to election day.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The No on Prop L campaign doesn\u2019t plan to buy broadcast ads, Whitehurst said. And despite Hall\u2019s worry, Uber and Lyft don\u2019t plan to use their apps to promote the anti-L effort, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Instead, Whitehurst is going to focus his digital marketing on ads on Meta\u2019s services, such as Facebook and Instagram, on various websites and on online news outlets, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cWherever voters are on the web is where they\u2019ll see our ads,\u201d Whitehurst said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" width=\"4\" height=\"3\" src=\"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/image-53.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-36897\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\">Uber and Lyft protesters driving by Uber headquarters at 1725 Third Street in San Francisco on Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2024.Craig Lee\/The Examiner<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>The No on Prop L campaign is pushing the message that L will drive up costs without fixing Muni\u2019s problems. It\u2019s also arguing that the proposition doesn\u2019t include any kind of accountability provisions to ensure the money it would raise is spent as intended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The funding Prop. L would provide is enough to save 10 bus lines and would help Muni avert bigger cuts in coming years, Hall said. Additionally, the measure specifies how its funding would be spent \u2014 on continuing or improving service, or discounted fares \u2014 and SFMTA already has both a board and a citizens\u2019 advisory council that oversee its spending, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The anti-L effort could be boosted by another ballot measure \u2014 Proposition M, which would streamline San Francisco\u2019s business taxes by essentially removing several provisions similar to that proposed by Prop. L that voters have added on over the years. Some proponents of Prop. M see Prop. L as counter to the reform effort and oppose it on those grounds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Additionally, there\u2019s a provision within Prop. M that will make it&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sfexaminer.com\/news\/politics\/conflict-with-business-tax-reform-measure-threatens-muni-funding-effort\/article_a16be796-7d2e-11ef-96b8-2b6b63e91103.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">harder for Prop. L to win<\/a>. That condition mandates that Prop. L will need not only a majority, but will also have to attract more votes than Prop. M to take effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But Whitehurst said he\u2019s not counting on that provision or support from Prop. M backers to win.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cThe job of the No on L campaign is to &#8230; convince voters to vote no on L,\u201d he said. \u201cOf course, it\u2019s great if the Yes on M campaign has a robust effort, but &#8230; those are two different efforts.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Including the value of the non-monetary contributions that have been made to the campaign, the No on Prop L effort has spent about $269,000. That\u2019s just $20,000 less than the Yes on L campaign has raised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Unlike the opposition campaign, most of the contributions to Yes on L have come in the form of relatively small donations ranging from $100 to $2,000. In addition to those, the campaign raised $30,000 from Laura Yakovenko, $40,000 from Jessica Summer Jenkins, about $28,000 from Kat Siegal \u2014 one of Prop. L\u2019s cosponsors \u2014 and about $29,000 from Hall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As of Sept. 21, the Yes on L campaign had just $49,000 in cash left. But the campaign has other things in its favor. For one, it has garnered widespread support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Mayor London Breed and three of her rivals in the mayoral race \u2014 Daniel Lurie and supervisors Aaron Peskin and Ahsha Safai \u2014 have endorsed the measure, as have eight of the nine other city supervisors, House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi and state Sen. Scott Wiener. It also won the backing of the local Democratic Party and numerous other groups, including the San Francisco League of Women Voters, San Francisco YIMBY and the Rose Pak Democratic Club.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Yes on L also has the volunteers who are talking to voters, Hall said, and public sentiment on its side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cMuni is very well loved in San Francisco,\u201d Hall said. \u201cIt\u2019s very popular, and people want to make sure it thrives.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>If you have a tip about tech, startups or the venture industry, contact Troy Wolverton at&nbsp;<a href=\"mailto:twolverton@sfexaminer.com\">twolverton@sfexaminer.com<\/a>&nbsp;or via text or Signal at 415.515.5594.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p> the volunteers who are talking to voters, Hall said, and public sentiment on its side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cMuni is very well loved in San Francisco,\u201d Hall said. \u201cIt\u2019s very popular, and people want to make sure it thrives.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>If you have a tip about tech, startups or the venture industry, contact Troy Wolverton at&nbsp;<a href=\"mailto:twolverton@sfexaminer.com\">twolverton@sfexaminer.com<\/a>&nbsp;or via text or Signal at 415.515.5594.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A grassroots-sponsored, widely endorsed measure to shore up funding for Muni has drawn one of the best-funded opposition campaigns of any San Francisco proposition this election cycle. Given that Proposition L&nbsp;would tax ride-hailing giants&nbsp;Uber, Lyft and Waymo to raise funds for the transit agency, that might not be much of&#8230; <a class=\"continue-reading-link\" href=\"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/2024\/10\/10\/opposition-to-muni-funding-measure-raises-nearly-1m-from-uber-lyft\/\"> Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr; <\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36887"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36887"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36887\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36900,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36887\/revisions\/36900"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36887"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36887"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36887"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}