Prop A
VOTE NO on Prop A: SFUSD $790M Bond
$744M + $790M = 0? Yep, that’s apparently the kind of math the SFUSD School Board is using for these bond measures. Public school parents (and anyone paying attention) get how crucial it is to fix the endless issues in SFUSD, but every time we throw money at the problem, it vanishes into a black hole, and the schools are still left needing more. Let’s hold off on more funding until we get a new Board of Education that knows how to manage a budget. Sorry kids, but we have to wait until the grown-ups stop acting like it's Monopoly money. Where does it go, anyway? We’re still trying to figure that out.
Prop B
VOTE NO on Prop B: Healthy, Safe, and Vibrant San Francisco Not to Exceed $390M
This prop had our NO BS alarm bell warnings going off loud and clear. A better name for it would be the “Uh Oh, I’ve neglected everyone and everything for 6 years better get off my butt and promise everyone everything because there’s an election in November!” Lots of promises, covering lots of issues and we know that generally with our current city government that translates into lots of disappointment and lots of questions about where the money went. So many of these issues probably should be baked into our city government budget but certainly they should not be shoved at us in a year where we are facing a $1B budget deficit.
Prop C
VOTE YES on Prop C: Inspector General
Give some power back to the people! Fed up with the recent years and years of corruption scandals, useless oversight committees, and road to nowhere investigations? Let's find our own fiscal batman and give them the actual power to shut grift down. Know anyone who HATES waste and thinks the SF non profit system is a greedy money generating lie? Send them the application! And the funding for this is already covered by the Controller’s Office.
Prop D
VOTE YES on Prop D: City Commissions And Mayoral Authority
Can someone hook us up with a spot on one of the 130 commissions in SF? I’d prefer one with little to no actual work or oversight, and the healthcare benefits, oh, and the generous stipend as well! Since we can’t get paid by CIty Hall to be lazy, nobody else should be either. Vote to drop the hammer on this massive boondoggle.
Prop E
VOTE NO on Prop E: Commission Reform (Peskin) TASK FORCE HAS UNTIL 2026 to make recommendations!
Peskin’s “task force’ would have until 2026 to make recommendations BUT NO CUTTING OF COMMISSIONS IS REQUIRED! We call this one “Let’s make a new commission under a new name so we can pretend we are looking into getting rid of some other commissions” Oh and we won’t start until 2026.
Prop F
VOTE YES on Prop F: Minimum Police Staffing Levels and Voluntary Deferred Retirement Option Program for the SFPD
Can we stop dealing with this issue already? We need more cops and this is the way forward. Letting cops defer retirement so they can keep working to fill the shortage sounds like a win/win for public safety. Let’s support SFPD so they can get back to keeping our streets safe.
Prop G
VOTE NO on Prop G: Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund for Seniors and Families
I love my grandparents but this prop is not the answer to getting me to provide them with housing. This prop is cramming over $8M dollars of years of neglect into one measure that our budget may not be able to absorb. It doesn’t even kick in until 2026 so check back with us then. For now we stick with a NO vote, and a promise to call them every Sunday.
Prop H
CONFLICTED on Prop H: Fire Department Service Retirement Pension
We adore SFFD. They’re our heroes. But, let's be honest: if the problem is cancer then this measure does literally nothing to solve that. It does allow firefighters to retire early which could reduce some exposure, but is that what is really needed? Leaving this up to you!
Prop I
VOTE YES on Prop I: Per Diem Nurse Retirement Credit and Public Safety Communications Personnel Plan
When I am hurt and call 911 I want sympathetic and competent people to answer my call and help me. That help might be a nurse. I want both the 911 operator and the nurse to be happy and stay at their crucial and demanding jobs. Just like I wanted for the cops. These first responders ALL deserve excellent pay and good retirement options. Pay these people who help save our lives! Vote YES
Prop J
VOTE NO on Prop J: Accountability for funding Children and Youth Services for City Departments and the SFUSD; Clarifying uses for the Student Success Fund
Why aren’t we shocked that we need a ballot prop to include measuring the success of services for City Departments? Silly voters, we just assumed those metrics were baked into the structure of the programs. When will we learn? Oh, wait - you mean accountability will cost $35-83 million dollars? How is that even possible?
Prop K
VOTE NO, NO, ABSOLUTELY HELL NO on Prop K: Permanently Closing the Upper Great Highway to Private Vehicles
NO WAY on Prop K!!
​
We’re kinda done with SFMTA screwing up our communities, sowing animosity among neighbors, killing small businesses and increasing traffic throughout SF.
Today, the Great Highway. Tomorrow Columbus, Masonic, Ocean…Cities need roads.
Vote NO on K - and you might want to rethink ranking ANY candidate in favor of it, because the autocracy behind the proposition indicates a broader mindset of ideology over constituency representation. These are NOT the people you want making decisions for you. You want to be heard, you want your community to have input, you want San Francisco to be accessible and WORK for everyone.
​
PROPAgenda K IS BUILT ON LIES. Know the FACTS before you vote:
​
-
K just closes a road - perfect for homeless encampments-
-
K doesn’t fund or build a park: all that pretty marketing is pure dishonesty
-
Closing the UGH is MORE expensive than keeping it open - yeah, the Controller’s report is ONLY accurate if we let the sand take over & don’t use UGH for ANY purpose, including bikes! Closing will cost $11M upfront & $1.7M annually vs keeping open will cost $7M upfront & $1.6M annually. And that doesn’t include the “park” part…-
-
2024: GH PARTIALLY closed 14 days for sand removal, NOT the 65 days Prop K says and the drifting sand isn’t going to magically disappear.
-
The traffic isn’t going to magically disappear either. Prop K makes local residential streets more dangerous and diverts traffic from super safe UGH to Sunset Blvd that’s already on the High Injury Network. Sending 100,000 cars per week to parallel Sunset Blvd and 19th Ave has huge problems.
-
20K drivers NEED GH each weekday vs. a few walkers/ bikers: use the existing paths
-
Creates a perfect storm of traffic as 2025-2027+ 19th Ave repaving collides with the closure of one of three north/south routes serving the West Side of over 200K people also sending traffic to Sunset Blvd as an alternate route. What could POSSIBLY go wrong here?
-
The Compromise is working - and the BOS can extend it: there is no need for this poorly drafted, dishonest, destructive measure
-
Sunset Blvd is on the SFMTA High Injury Network: but the UGH is one of THE SAFEST roads in SF
-
Dirty little secret in Prop K: closes the UGH AND the UGH Extension to private cars (until now just a BOS command, not voters' choice), but doesn't eliminate the road which must legally be accessible for emergency vehicles, sewer pipe and “park” maintenance. AND there is no going back: no matter how FEW people may use this, the road will not be re-opened unless voters reverse this during an election.
-
Prop K has no environmental benefit - it just moves smog inland into residential areas & increases with more side-street and Sunset Blvd idling.
-
Prop K involved ZERO community process. It was launched without notice and with expensive fully-baked marketing plans launched the same day as the legislation was submitted, right at the cutoff so no one could mount a competing proposition...
​
PROP K DOESN’T FUND OR BUILD A PARK.
Prop K closes a road used by 15-20,000 commuter, family, and veteran cars per weekday for a few lucky, self-righteous (elitist) people who have nothing better to do all day that might visit it during the week when it’s most often foggy and windy. If only 4,000 on average use it as a “park” per weekend day, how many will truly use it during the week? (That’s right: 8000 avg. weekend users get to screw over 75-100,000 weekday road users with multiple riders) KEEP the COMPROMISE: it works the most, for the most, and for how/when they want to use it. Proponents of Prop K are trying to sell you a roadway masquerading as a “park” next to one of the largest urban parks in the country, when there are over 2,000 acres of adjacent parks PLUS huge Ocean Beach. AND there are existing, car-free walk/bike paths on BOTH sides of the UGH. See our website and get all the FACTS you’ll need to confidently vote NO on gaslighting Prop K.
Prop K forces all that traffic onto adjacent residential streets and far less-safe, Vision Zero High-Injury Network Sunset Blvd. which is near multiple schools. It will further exacerbate traffic increases on Sunset Blvd. from 19th Ave for the next 2-4 years during Cal-Trans 19th Ave repaving, starting Summer 2025. This will worsen even more with 7-10,000 new housing units slated for construction in the Sunset.
​
Prop K includes no budget for a park or for UGH traffic diversion costs at a time when BOTH SF and SFMTA are facing massive looming deficits ($1-2b and $1b, respectively). There are ZERO cost savings, per the SFCTA study done prior to the current compromise: it’s CHEAPER to keep it open to cars on weekdays! Tunnel Tops park cost $118 million for 14 acres. UGH is LARGER and needs a 3200 foot SEA WALL to be built by the Army Corps of Engineers. If SF is looking to spend hundreds of millions for parks it can’t afford then why here, in the most park-rich region of the City? Why not build parks on the East side of SF where they’re REALLY lacking and needed?
This ain’t about a prospective, undefined, unfunded, unaffordable “park” amid 2000 acres of park space and a massive beach, in the most "parked" region of the City. This is an anti-car, anti-family, anti-commuter proposition and it’s really about upzoning the coastline. That’s why Breed and Wiener are fighting so hard for a Coastal Commission carve-out for Ocean Beach…
Vote NO on this elitist land grab that’s overwhelmingly rejected by businesses and residents in the Richmond and Sunset Districts. NO WAY on Prop K.
Lovely, another private carriage road for the elite San Franciscans who have nothing to do all day but bask in the glory of the Pacific Ocean while not having to work all day. Apparently the compromise that’s been working just isn’t enough for these entitled twits. We too would like to manifest the utopian society where we all get to ride our bikes around all day and never have to get kids to school or activities, have emergencies that need us to get somewhere faster than our little legs can peddle, or gosh, some of us don’t even have the mobility to enjoy what’s being proposed! In this elitist nirvana being proposed, the ONLY things it does is close the road and the extension to cars. It doesn’t propose or fund some amazing parkway with rollercoasters and a petting zoo, it just closes the road so the 10 foot wide bike and walking paths (already existing on both sides) can have four lanes to meander in also!
What a joy! We cannot fathom the self righteousness of a small group of people who want to enjoy MORE of an already amazing path and view, that they need to cripple traffic flow for hard-working families to take a necessary road for their enjoyment. This is overwhelmingly rejected by the residents and businesses of the Sunset and Richmond and we hope you’ll stand with them in rejecting this elitist land grab!
Prop L
No on Prop L: The ComMUNIty Transit Act
We’ll say it louder for the folks in the back of the bus: “Businesses pass their increased tax rates onto the consumer!” This is a no brainer, MUNI is forever incapable of trying to close the gap in their budget or stop wasting money on everything BUT MUNI and this is a last ditch attempt to bring in money, when mismanagement and ideological vanity are the cause of all their problems. SFMTA is the mafia, going unchecked and roughing up the corner store owners who don’t pay what they demand. It’s time we all woke up and stopped supporting their self -manufactured crisis. If rates go higher on rideshares, only we suffer, and this won’t even “mind the gap.”
Prop M
VOTE YES on Prop M: Business Tax Reform
​
We are not economists or mathematicians so we will keep it short. This measure takes a bad approach to business and makes it better but not perfect. We DO understand that financially incentivizing businesses to stay here and to bring their companies here is good math.