Hi All. I've struggled with this one since Sunday and here's what I came up with finally. Please go ahead and make any changes you want as long as it's ready for submission tomorrow morning at City Hall.
The best thing about Prop K is that it tightens up TheCity’s record keeping for properties that are lying fallow or underutilized sothe taxpayers can clearly see what they own. Improved accountability requirements are useful to everyone. However, we question the wisdom of locking up surplusproperties by deed restrictions for subsidized housing for at least the next 55years as stated in Prop K: “Theserequirements shall be contained in a covenant or restriction recorded againstthe real property at the time of disposition and be enforceable by the localagency against any subsequent owner” (Section 23A.10(c)). Who really knows what the future will bringto SF by the year 2070? Is it wise totie up all this property that cannot be used for other purposes like parks andschools for the next 55 years? Worst of all, how is all this subsidized housing going tobe paid for? Prop K clearly intends toextend subsidized housing to the middle class. While the dream of affordability sounds appealing, the reality ofexcessive money printing by the Federal Reserve, zoning, a laborious approvalprocess, rent control, special tax breaks for tech companies (but not all businesses),and NIMBYism will continue to feed the fire of rising prices. Promising to fulfill this dream to even morepeople without a reliable source of funding is unrealistic. Clearly the federal and state governmentscannot be looked to for help, so it will either be higher local taxes, moredebt, or reduced basic services. We suggest The City sell all of its excessive propertyand use the proceeds to reduce taxes for a change. That will actually help to make The City moreaffordable. Vote NO on K. Libertarian Party of San Francisco
Thanks!Aubrey