1/ Hello: Every San Franciscan should vote for Prop C. I've examined the opponents case closely and it is very weak. It's an objection mostly about going through the same channels that have failed this city for 20+ years.
3/ Prop C would tax the city's absolute biggest businesses, and no one else, to raise $350 million in annual funds for homeless and housing. It would make 1,000 new units, keep another 7,500 from slipping into homelessness, plus 25% would go to mental health services.
4/ The tax on those largest businesses, btw, is a tiny fraction of what they were just given by the Trump tax cuts. Which are related to massive federal cuts in homeless/housing services. So this would be a small grab back of some of those funds.
5/ San Francisco HAS been making strides in housing veterans (federal program), families (mix), but it ALSO has to make up for the massive cuts that Trump has made to homeless programs, and housing more broadly. It sucks but the city/state CANNOT just sit back while Trump cuts.
6/ And, SF has simply not made the investment in permanent housing for the homeless that it should. Or even temp shelter housing, which in other, colder, areas is mandated. Like NYC.
7/ San Francisco has, nominally, adopted a "housing first" policy (ie don't make demands on sobriety etc). Which has overwhelming been shown to work. Here's a bid cover story we did on that: motherjones.com/politics/2015/… BUT ONLY NOMINALLY
8/ San Franciso says, and not without good reason, that the barrier to providing more units and services for the homeless is that housing costs in SF are so high. Which...yeah. PROP C GETS OVER THAT.
9/ Is there redundancy in homeless service organizations in SF, yes. Should there be more consolidation, yes. But do either of those concerns mitigate the desperate need for more units, mental health care, and other services. Hell no.
10/ I'll add to this thread if folks have real questions. But essentially the case is overwhelming for.
11/ ok I see people are repeating the scare tactic that opponents have trotted out, that more money will attract homeless from elsewhere. It’s BS: 75% of SF’s homeless were previously housed IN SF itself.
12/ "Why shouldn't this money to go general fund?" B/c a) it targets the industry that has been a big contributor to housing crisis b) we need a moonshot push to fix the problem.
And we've raise separate money for important things like raising teachers salaries.
And we've raise separate money for important things like raising teachers salaries.
13/ Also vote yes on state Props 1 & 2, which issue bonds to raise money for affordable housing and homeless services:
14/ And the projections for what PropC could do get better and better: sfpublicpress.org/news/2018-11/p…
