Hi All. Here is my argument for Prop A, the measure that gives the PUC
additional authority to issue revenue bonds for power facilities. It could
be better. If there's time, please help to improve it, as I don't mind and
encourage improvements in my ballot measure arguments. Clocks in at 263.
Prop A is part of the politicians’ power grab to get PG&E out of The City
so all residents will be forced to get their energy from CleanPowerSF. We
are no fan of PG&E, a government-sanctioned monopoly, but if the
bureaucrats get rid of PG&E, will a government-owned monopoly serve the
residents any better?
The PUC is supposed to ensure the safety of the public. *Why is it
allowing groundwater to be mixed in with our drinking water?*
It’s also supposed to be exercising financial prudence with ratepayer money.
*Why do water and sewer rates continue to soar upward every year?*
It would be better to have two or more companies vying for customers. But
why is The City slamming everyone automatically into CleanPowerSF, which is
rolling out one neighborhood at a time?
*Why is it wrong when companies in the voluntary sector slam customers in
but OK when a government agency does it? *
Prop A is all about more debt. With the additional authority to issue
bonds that this measure allows, only 2/3 of the Board of Supervisors needs
to approve new bonds for power facilities. *When was the last time the
Board of Supervisors voted NO on higher taxes or more debt? *
The PUC already has the authority to issue bonds for water and sewers, and
they haven’t done such a great job. Why let the politicians and
bureaucrats approve more debt for power facilities too? Only the voters
should be deciding if new bonds should be incurred or not.
*Vote NO on Prop A.*
Libertarian Party of San Francisco
www.lpsf.org
Thanks!
Aubrey
Thanks, Aubrey, for all your work on these! Here are my proposed edits for the Prop. A argument. I've included a "clean" version first, and then below that under a double-dotted line, a version showing my markups from what you wrote (suggested deletions in strike-thru, suggested additions in red). There's also one place in both versions where I include a note in blue suggested adding some data about rate increases.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Prop A is part of the politicians’ power grab to get PG&E out of The City so all residents will be forced to get their energy through the municipal “CleanPowerSF” plan. We are no fans of PG&E, a government-sanctioned monopoly, but if the bureaucrats get rid of PG&E, will a government-owned monopoly serve residents any better?
The PUC is supposed to ensure the safety of the public and safeguard the environment. Why is it depleting the aquifer by allowing possibly polluted local groundwater to be mixed in with our drinking water?
It’s also supposed to be exercising financial prudence with ratepayer money. Why do water and sewer rates continue to soar upward every year? [include some data on rate increases here?]
Having multiple companies vying for customers is better. But city officials are “slamming” residents by automatically switching them to the municipal-run CleanPowerSF, one neighborhood at a time. If it is wrong for companies in the voluntary sector to “slam” customers, why is it OK for a government agency to do it?
Prop A is all about more debt. It would let a Board of Supervisors super-majority issue bonds to build power facilities without voter approval. When was the last time the Board voted against higher taxes or more debt?
The PUC already has authority to issue bonds for water and sewers. Why let politicians approve more debt for infrastructure spending too? Only voters should be deciding whether new debt is incurred or not.
Vote NO on Prop A.
Libertarian Party of San Francisco
www.lpsf.org