Help Prevent the Board of Supervisors From Expanding Their Power at the Expense of SF Taxpayers!

Libertarian friends,

  On November 3, 2009, San Francisco voters will once again be
presented with a plan concocted by the Board of Supervisors to change
the city charter in order to increase the number of aides they are
permitted to have. Three days ago LPSF Treasurer Marcy Barry and I
submitted on behalf of the Libertarian Party of San Francisco and
myself what I believe is a strong and compelling argument I wrote
against this costly and ill-timed ballot measure, but unfortunately it
was not chosen in the Elections Department lottery to be the official
opponent argument.

  There is one last chance to get this language placed in the Voter
Information Pamphlet, and that is to publish it as a paid ballot
argument. However the charge for this is $200 plus $2 per word, so I
estimate it will cost about $780 (the exact figure may be a few
dollars more or less, as the Elections Department has its own rules
for determining word count). Myself and three other Libertarian Party
of San Francisco members have so far pledged a total of $230 toward
this end, but time is short. If this language against the Supervisors'
power grab is to appear in the voter handbook, it must be submitted by
TOMORROW, Monday August 17, at noon!

  I'll be honest here -- I do not think Proposition B will pass. It is
difficult to imagine voters rewarding such chutzpah in this economic
climate. But this is likely to be a low-turnout election, and in
highly politicized SF, that doesn't necessarily mean a more fiscally
conservative group of voters! If by a stroke of ill fate Prop. B
*were* to pass, it would likely be *here to stay.* In 2002, voters
removed the language mandating that Supervisor be a part-time job.
Subsequently, the Civil Service Commission more than tripled the
Supervisors' salaries, from $37,585 a year to $112,320. Voter outrage
got their pay lowered again -- but only slightly. Today they still
"earn" a whopping $98,660, and there is no sign on the political
horizon that this figure will ever be cut to anything near what it was
before the dam was breached. The passage of Prop. B would constitute a
similar breach. Right now, each Supervisor is limited to two paid
aides. This measure would make it so there is *no limit* on how many
aides could be hired. Imagine within a few years, people like Chris
Daly and his colleagues having three, five or even more aides to help
promote their agendas, at an annual cost to SF taxpayers of millions
of dollars!

  While $780 is a good chunk of money for a short print ad, dollar for
dollar there is probably no better way to reach San Francisco voters.
Hundreds of thousands of Voter Information Pamphlets will be published
and mailed directly to the precise individuals who are legally
eligible to vote. No doubt the Board members and those who wish to
curry favor with them will be sure that their misleading
rationalizations are included for voters to read. Will you help us
raise the remaining $550 of this sum so that San Franciscans going to
the polls in November will have the opportunity to read the following
language as well?

PROPOSED PAID ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION B:

Starchild,

Count me in for $25. Thanks for taking the lead on this and being our eyes
and ears!

Cheers,
Peter Krembs
415-318-9194

It regrets me to say that although a number of people have generously
stepped forward in response to my appeal for donations to file a
ballot argument against the Board of Supervisors' measure to let them
hire additional aides, the total of $550 has not been raised and there
is a large shortfall remaining. I realize the time window for this
fundraising effort is a short one, but this is mostly unavoidable due
to the fact that the city government provides a very short window
between when ballot measures are listed, and when arguments against
them must be submitted.

    I just checked with the Elections Department and they say that
contributors to paid ballot arguments do not have to provide
individual checks or be individually listed at the time of filing, but
can be described en masse as members of a group for purposes of
disclosing the true source of funds (e.g. "members of the Libertarian
Party of San Francisco"). This being the case, I do not necessarily
need to receive actual moneys before filing today. However, I DO STILL
NEED YOUR PLEDGE, otherwise I am not going to file!

  Under other circumstances I might be tempted to contribute the
outstanding balance myself and hope that some additional money was
later forthcoming, but I have had some large unexpected personal
expenses myself recently, and am not prepared to do that at this time.

  So for anyone who hasn't offered a donation yet (or if you have but
would like to generously offer more), your help would still be
appreciated and could make the difference! I don't need the money to
be actually delivered today so you can simply mail me a check, but I
DO NEED TO HEAR FROM YOU BY 11:00 A.M. (i.e. in the next 30 minutes or
so)! I can be reached by phone at (415) 621-7932, or by replying to
this email.

  If I do not receive enough donations and pledges for filing to make
sense, all donations will of course be returned, and all pledges
annulled. Thank you for reading this, and to those who have pitched in.

Love & Liberty,
        ((( starchild )))
Outreach Director, Libertarian Party of San Francisco

Mike,

  Thank you very much for your generous pledge, much appreciated!

  Folks, I just added up the various amounts offered however, and the
total currently still stands at $380, i.e. I am about $400 short. So
unless as Rob puts it a "fundraising miracle" occurs very quickly, I'm
not going to be able to submit this paid argument.

Love & Liberty,
        ((( starchild )))

I know this is late but I'm in for $100.

Mike

[mailto:lpsf-announce@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Starchild