Ballot Measure Argument - Changing Purpose of Bond for Acquisition of Affordable Housing

Hi All. Here's Ryan's argument for this one. Just needs a little
different wording on the part about returning the unused portion to the
taxpayers (a great Libertarian thought) since this money has not actually
been collected--the bonds were not sold yet. Perhaps closed out or
something like that limiting possible tax increases in the future? Also
not sure if gentrification needs to be addressed.

Opponents Argument Against Proposition C - Amending Earthquake Loan Bond
Program to Finance Acquisition and Rehabilitation of Affordable Housing.

We can all agree that finding a solution to the problem of sky-high housing
costs in San Francisco is a serious issue. Rent in San Francisco is among
the highest in the world and the gentrification of our city needs to be
addressed. Proposition C however, goes about addressing this problem in a
highly circumspect way. The original funds were allocated to the city by a
bond passed in 1992 to create a low-cost seismic-safety retrofit loan
program. Instead of returning unspent portions of this fund to the
taxpayers however, Proposition C seeks to “expand” the uses of the unspent
funds in ways not envisioned by the original voters.

When the government raises money through the issuance of bonds, the people
have authorized the government to raise money for a specific purpose. In
this case, the original measure was passed to provide loans to property
owners of unreinforced masonry structures to allow for seismic safety
upgrades. The seismic safety loan program is still ongoing but, the large
amount of unspent money has politician’s fingers itching.

San Francisco county already has a mountain of debt. If the city wanted to
create a program to purchase housing units and subsidize their cost, the
city should be required to draft a proposition to that effect and allow it
to be voted on. Here, that is not the case. Instead of maintaining the
current program as-is, or returning the unspent portions of the bond to the
taxpayers, the city would be spending more money in ways it was not
originally authorized. Vote No on Proposition C and force the city to
remain accountable to its taxpayers.

*Libertarian Party of San Francisco.*