Thanks for the recognition that there are many government employees who do work hard, and care a lot about their responsibilities -- just like there are in the private sector as well. I believe it is not only factually correct but ethically the right thing and the politically expedient thing to say.
I see this below may be too late, but my two cents is included below for what it's worth.
I do agree with Starchild to change it to "many" from "most", however. I knew enough in the /_State_/ bureaucracy (usually those at the top, not us worker bee type lower eschelon attorneys etc.) who diddled their time away until retirement. (Note I was not a City employee, but a State employee).
My few changes are suggested below as underlined in the second version so you can identify them, mainly to:
-- reduce verbiage,--be consistent in use of words (i.e., always use one term for Prop D for example, not three ways of saying it),
--avoid a few inflammatory words such as 'cronies' and 'revolution',
-- put in a few "our" words to draw alliances with the reader,
-- and be more direct in the active voice (less is more).
Thanks for the great job!
Paid Ballot Argument in Support of Proposition D
Many city employees are good workers and fairly compensated, but San Francisco pays all employees an average of $120,000 per year, while each resident earns only $56,000 by comparison. Why this substantial disparity? The problem isn't the rank and file worker: it's upper management and some public workers whose wages and benefits are busting our budget.
__Members of the public are angry,__ know something is wrong, and want the practice to stop. But union bosses and politicians they influence won't change the status quo without a fight. That's why the power brokers are initiating "damage control" with Proposition C.
Prop C WAS put on the ballot by the (delete this as unneeded: establishment) Mayor and influential union advocates. It's a watered down version of Prop D, but Prop C results in $400M less savings while at the same time the City is threatening to cut $243M in services and jobs. Why does our government always cut jobs and services to citizens rather than address the real cause of the problem --_overpaid workers earning excessive benefits?_
Aside from voting "yes" on Prop D and "no" on Prop C, real solutions include limiting the total budget for payroll and benefits to a maximum of 150% of an average employee's income and benefits, plus limiting total pay and benefits to no more than $100,000.
The time has come for real, not illusory, change. We cannot tolerate the continued plunder of current and future tax revenue by union bosses, their wholly-owned politicians and public worker supporters at the expense of vital services.
San Francisco is a technological leader and ready for web-enabled transparency in labor negotiations. We want open competition in the provision of civic services and payments with positive and measurable results.
Prop D is an important beginning step although it doesn't go nearly far enough. Vote YES on Prop D and NO on Prop C.
Paid Ballot Argument in Support of Proposition D
_MANY_ city employees are good workers and fairly compensated_, but_ San Francisco_pays ALL employees_ AN AVERAGE OF $120,000/year while_EACH resident_ earns ONLY $56,000 BY COMPARISON. Why THIS SUBSTANTIAL DISPARITY? The problem isn't the rank and file WORKER_: it's_ upper management and SOME PUBLIC WORKERS("elite"? MEANING? THIS WORD SEEMS A BIT INAPROPOS AND VAGUE; I WOULD LEAVE IT OUT) whose wages and benefits are busting_OUR_budget.
_Members of the_ public_are_ angry, know something is wrong_,_ and want_THE PRACTICE TO STOP._ ("their money back"- WE CAN'T EVER GET BACK MONEY SPENT ON EXCESS SALARIES AND BENEFITS). But union bosses and politicians_THEY INFLUENCE_ won't change the status quo without a fight. That's why the power_(omit hyphen)_ brokers are initiating "damage control" with Proposition C.
_Prop_ C WAS put on the ballot by the (delete this as unneeded: establishment) Mayor and_influential union advocates._ ("cronies" is a very inflammatory word and really demeans Mayor Lee whom many, many people like and may be voting for. To me this word would turn me off or discourage my further reading)_IT'S_a watered down version of_Prop_ D,_but Prop C results_ in $400M less savings_while at the same time_ the_C_ity is threatening_to cut_ $243M in services and jobs. Why does OUR government always cut jobs and services to citizens rather than address the real cause of the problem --_overpaid workers earning excessive benefits?_
Aside from voting_"yes"_ on_Prop_ D and_"no"_ on_Prop_ C, real solutions include_LIMITING_ the total budget for payroll and benefits_TO A MAXIMUM OF_ 150% of an average_EMPLOYEE'S_ income and benefits_, PLUS_ limit_ING_ total pay and benefits to no more than $100,000.
The time has come for_real, not illusory_. We cannot tolerate the continued plunder of current and future tax revenue by union bosses, their wholly-owned politicians and public worker_SUPPORTERS_ at the expense of_VITAL_ services.
San Francisco is a technological leader and ready for web-enabled transparency in labor negotiations. We want open competition in the provision of civic services and payments WITH positive and measurable results.
_Prop D_is a_N IMPORTANT_ beginning_STEP AL_though it doesn't go nearly far enough. Vote YES on_Prop D_ and NO on_Prop C_.