June 2008

View on Election


State Senate, District 3:  In this competition between three Democratic Party stalwarts there is no truly bad choice, but we recommend Mark Leno as the best candidate to help lead the state to a more just, environmentally-friendly, and fiscally-sound future.

State Assembly, District 13:  His voice may be high, and his jokes may be low, but Tom Ammiano is capable of doing a fine job for us in the assembly.

School Parcel Tax, A:  We’ll vote Yes, but not without some grumbling about the intergenerational inequities caused by Proposition 13’s restrictions on property tax increases, which has transferred wealth from our schools to long-time property owners, and which this initiative attempts to replicate by providing a tax exemption for seniors.  Still, our schools need the money, and our children deserve the investment.

Changing Qualifications for Retiree Health and Pension Benefits and Establishing a Retiree Health Care Trust Fund, B:  Yes to this technical fix.

Forfeiture of Retirement Benefits for Conviction of a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude in Connection with City Employment, C:  Nobody wants to reward city officials for bad behavior, but numerous scenarios can be imagined in which stripping an individual of their retirement pay could be unduly harsh:  the city librarian, who, after 30 years of superlative service, steals some old manuscripts; the firefighter who grabs a valuable token from a burnt-out building.  And in most cases retirement monies are used to support long-time partners, who may have nothing to do with the crime.  No.

Appointments to City Boards and Commissions, D:  How about a requirement that board and commission members be competent?  San Francisco already tends towards flash over substance, and bends over backwards to accommodate any host of individual preferences and differences.  No.

Requiring Board of Supervisors’ Approval of Mayor’s Appointments to the Public Utilities Commission and Creating Qualifications for Commission Members, E:  Anyone who’s had to tilt against Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and the San Francisco Public Utility Commission (SFPUC) has lived to regret it. A critical difference in railing against PG&E, though, is an analytically-based California Public Utility Commission which relies on quasi-judicial proceedings open to all comers to render decisions on complex resource issues affected the state’s investor-owned utilities.  Which is to say, it’s the decision making process that’s broken and needs reform at the SFPUC, more than the decision-makers.  No.

Affordable Housing Requirement for the Candlestick Point and Hunters Point Shipyard Mixed-Use Development Project/Mixed-Use Development Project for Candlestick Point and Hunters Point Shipyard, F/G:  The poisons aren’t just in the old shipyard’s soil.  This decades-long land use imbroglio features enough characters to fill a Deadwood episode:  neighborhood shake-down artists, “evil” developers, clueless and calculating city officials, and just plan poor people trying to get by in a complicated world.  You could vote no/no, yes/yes, yes/no, or the opposite.  We’ll yield to the Potrero Hill Democratic Club:  Yes/Yes.    

Prohibiting Elected Officials, Candidates, or Committees They Control from Soliciting or Accepting Contributions from Certain City Contractors, H: The only thing controversial about this one is that there’s any doubt that politicians shouldn’t take payola.  Yes.

Eminent Domain, 98/99:  Rent control may be a fundamentally-flawed way of creating affordable housing; and local governments may occasionally use their powers poorly, but these sets of initiatives aren’t the right solutions.  No/No.

 Subscribe to The Potrero View

All rights reserved. Copyright © 2006 The Potrero View.

Content on this site may not be archived, retransmitted, saved in a database, or used for any commercial purpose without the express written permission of The Potrero View or its Publishers.