RM3 Ballot Measure Argument

Activists List
1

Hi All. Here is the revised version of the argument against the $3
increase in tolls for the bridges. It clocks in at 299. I ended up
changing more than I thought I would. As always, I have no pride of
ownership on my ballot measure writing, so improvements and recommendations
are always welcomed. Please try to review it in the next day or so, as I
might still try to get the Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods and
Zelda Bronstein to sign our argument. Everything has to be submitted on
Thursday morning at the Department of Elections.

Imagine you’re one of the thousands of waitresses, retail clerks, hotel
housekeepers, and other blue-collar employees who works in SF but can’t
afford to live here. You leave home at dawn to join all the traffic on one
of the bridges heading to SF crossing one bridge five days/week, which
currently costs you $1,560/year – just in tolls.

RM3 would raise bridge tolls $3.00 per crossing, increasing your annual
toll bill to $2,340, which is 8% of your salary. That’s on top of the
extra 12¢/gallon the politicians added to the gas tax last November.

Public transit is not a realistic option for many working parents needing
to drop off children in daycare. Nor is MUNI realistic for those who don’t
work downtown and need to get to work on time.

RM3 is disguised as a user fee. The more affluent who can afford to live
on the peninsula and use BART, Caltrain, and MUNI will get the promised
benefits from the higher tolls, which the working people living in the East
Bay will have to pay. Is this fair?

RM3 claims it will upgrade public transit by reducing truck traffic. Will
San Francisco stores start receiving their goods by bus or bicycle? Increased
trucking costs will add to the already sky-high costs of everything in the
Bay Area.

The agency promoting the toll hikes is the same agency that lost $120
million in risky investment deals and brought a new building for $257
million from toll fees. Its track record on projects like the Bay Bridge,
the Transbay Terminal, the Central Subway, and the Oakland Airport
Connector is appalling. Don’t give it more money to waste.

Give the folks already struggling to make it in the Bay Area a break. Vote
NO on RM3.

Libertarian Party of San Francisco

Thanks!
Aubrey

2

Excellent

Mike

3

Great, Aubrey! Thanks for sending it out early.

Just 2 quick comments:

RM3 is disguised as a user fee. The more affluent who can afford to
live on the peninsula and use BART, Caltrain, and MUNI will get the
promised benefits from the higher tolls, which the working people
living in the East Bay will have to pay. Is this fair?

The first sentence doesn't tie in very obviously to the rest of the
paragraph (how is it disguised?). It could be more explicit by adding:
"RM3 is disguised as a user fee, but the users won't receive the
benefits." (and the following sentence explains why). Something to
consider if you can work it in there. Otherwise I really like this part,
it is very convincing.
In the second-to-last paragraph, a typo (brought / bought)

... risky investment deals and brought a new building for $257
million ...

Nick

Excellent

Mike

*From:* lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com [mailto:lpsf-
activists@yahoogroups.com]> *Sent:* Monday, March 12, 2018 2:26 AM
*To:* ExComm LPSM <lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com>
*Subject:* [lpsf-activists] RM3 Ballot Measure Argument

Hi All. Here is the revised version of the argument against the $3
increase in tolls for the bridges. It clocks in at 299. I ended up
changing more than I thought I would. As always, I have no pride of
ownership on my ballot measure writing, so improvements and
recommendations are always welcomed. Please try to review it in the
next day or so, as I might still try to get the Coalition of San
Francisco Neighborhoods and Zelda Bronstein to sign our argument.
Everything has to be submitted on Thursday morning at the Department
of Elections.>

Imagine you’re one of the thousands of waitresses, retail clerks,
hotel housekeepers, and other blue-collar employees who works in SF
but can’t afford to live here. You leave home at dawn to join all the
traffic on one of the bridges heading to SF crossing one bridge five
days/week, which currently costs you $1,560/year – just in tolls.>

RM3 would raise bridge tolls $3.00 per crossing, increasing your
annual toll bill to $2,340, which is 8% of your salary. That’s on top
of the extra 12¢/gallon the politicians added to the gas tax last
November.>

Public transit is not a realistic option for many working parents
needing to drop off children in daycare. Nor is MUNI realistic for
those who don’t work downtown and need to get to work on time.>

RM3 is disguised as a user fee. The more affluent who can afford to
live on the peninsula and use BART, Caltrain, and MUNI will get the
promised benefits from the higher tolls, which the working people
living in the East Bay will have to pay. Is this fair?>

RM3 claims it will upgrade public transit by reducing truck traffic.
Will San Francisco stores start receiving their goods by bus or
bicycle? Increased trucking costs will add to the already sky-high
costs of everything in the Bay Area.>

The agency promoting the toll hikes is the same agency that lost $120
million in risky investment deals and brought a new building for $257
million from toll fees. Its track record on projects like the Bay
Bridge, the Transbay Terminal, the Central Subway, and the Oakland
Airport Connector is appalling. Don’t give it more money to waste.>

Give the folks already struggling to make it in the Bay Area a break.
Vote NO on RM3.>

Libertarian Party of San Francisco

Thanks!

Aubrey

Links:

   1. Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
   2. mailto:mike@dennz.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Blpsf-
      activists%5D%20RM3%20Ballot%20Measure%20Argument
   3. mailto:lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com?subject=RE%3A%20%5Blpsf-
      activists%5D%20RM3%20Ballot%20Measure%20Argument
   4. Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
   5. Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
   6. Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
   7. Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
   8. Yahoo Terms International | Yahoo
   9. mailto:lpsf-activists-
      unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe
  10. Yahoo Terms International | Yahoo

4

Terrific argument:)
Thanks,Aubrey
Francoise

5

This is great! Can we get permission to edit it appropriately for San Mateo and submit it signed by Libertarian Party of San Mateo officers?
for freedom
Harland Harrison
Chair, Libertarian Party of San Mateo County CA

6

Hi Harland. Yes, go ahead and use it and just be sure to get something in
to your Registrar's Office in time. The best argument in the world will do
no good if it doesn't get in on time. Nick pointed out some minor changes
to be made--no spelling bloopers like mine! I know folks from the Nine
County Coalition who are submitting a similar argument in each county. I
can refer you to Tom from the GOP in San Mateo County who has been very
active on this ballot measure. Since only one opposing argument will be
selected in each county, and there are no paid arguments on regional
measures, maybe you want to coordinate with him?

Thanks!
Aubrey

7

I agree, this is great stuff Aubrey! Of course that didn't stop me from editing, once I got started... :slight_smile:

  Hope you'll agree these tweaks improve your already excellent argument (see below). This version comes in right at 302 words (which the Elections Dept. should clock in at 300, since they count "San Francisco" as one word).

  I've attached as an MS Word document the version showing the details of my proposed edits, with deleted text in strikethru and added text in red.

Love & Liberty,
                                ((( starchild )))

RM3 is another tax disguised as a user fee. It hurts the working poor who are the backbone of San Francisco’s many service industries.

If you’re not one of the thousands of restaurant workers, retail clerks, hotel housekeepers, or other blue-collar employees who works in SF but can’t afford to live here, imagine you are.

You leave home at dawn, joining the traffic on the bridge heading to SF. You do this five days a week, and it costs you $1,560/year in tolls – never mind gas and car maintenance. You’ve thought about taking mass transit instead, but if you did, you couldn’t drop your kids off at daycare and make it downtown to work on time.
  
You’re still reeling from the 12¢/gallon gas tax hike the politicians imposed last November. If RM3 passes and they make you pay $3.00 more per crossing, how will you manage? That would increase your annual toll bill to $2,340, or 8% of your entire salary! That’s on top of the extra 12¢/gallon politicians added to the gas tax last November.

Or imagine you’re a trucker bringing goods to the city. RM3 proponents claim taxing your trip will reduce truck traffic and help mass transit. Will San Francisco stores receive their goods by bus or bicycle? Not likely! Increased trucking costs will simply increase prices and add to already sky-high costs of living.

The agency pushing these toll hikes is the same agency that lost $120 million in risky investment deals and recently bought a new $257 million headquarters. Its track record on projects like the Bay Bridge, Transbay Terminal, Central Subway, and Oakland Airport Connector is appalling. Don’t give it more money to waste! Give folks already struggling to make it in the Bay Area a break. Vote NO on RM3.

Libertarian Party of San Francisco

RM3-Aubrey’sDraft (24.5 KB)

8

Hi Starchild. Thanks--I always know when you get involved, it comes out
better! All, please note the original argument was written by Tim Bittle
from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and I liked his focus so much
that I just tweaked it to come out with my version.

By the way, the Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods has agreed to sign
on to our argument, which is a great contribution, since it includes both
progressives and also property owners. Zelda Bronstein of progressive fame
said she might sign on to our argument if CSFN signed on, so I have just
sent her the argument with a note to see if will agree to sign. That could
really sway some voters since she has a large progressive base. I'm
thinking that I could shave out part of the 12-cent gas increase sentence
since it's kind of redundant, and we have to make room for additional
signers at the bottom, since the elections folks do count the signers'
names and organizations as part of the word count.

Now let's move on to our other arguments, since this one is pretty much put
to bed. Tons to do before Thursday morning!

Thanks!
Aubrey

9

Thanks Aubrey, but I totally screwed up and left the sentence about the gas tax in there twice in two different forms! The second one was meant to be deleted. Which is good, because if we have additional groups signing on, we will need the extra words.

Love & Liberty,
                                ((( starchild )))