Patrick Siegman – California issues

@patricksiegmanca.bsky.social

22 Followers 1 Following

Transportation planner & economist. Founder, Siegman & Associates. LinkedIn: tinyurl.com/5cekhrjh. This is my account for issues primarily of interest to San Franciscans & Californians (e.g., local elections). My main account is @siegman.biz

SPUR's Recommendation Federal budget cuts could impact as many as 50,000 San Franciscans who rely on Medi-Cal and CalFresh to access health care and food. Developing sound fiscal strategies to mitigate those budget cuts is critical. However, Prop. D could undermine San Francisco’s ability to attract private investment at a time when the city’s economy is vulnerable. Some retailers, including grocery stores and pharmacies, have plans to close their San Francisco locations if the measure passes. Furthermore, Prop. D would increase risk to the city’s revenues by relying on a small number of companies for business tax revenues. The comprehensive reform under 2024’s Prop. M maintained a progressive tax policy that reduced the tax burden on small businesses while protecting the city and taxpayers from volatility and unpredictability. It was developed with rigorous policy analysis and won strong support from a broad coalition. Because the new tax structure only became effective in January 2025, it’s too soon to know what its impacts will be. SPUR believes that the efficacy of the newly adopted tax structure should be thoroughly evaluated, and further analysis should be conducted in partnership with business and labor before returning to the voters with a new revenue proposal. Vote NO on Prop D - Business Tax Increase
SPUR's Recommendation The comprehensive business tax reform under 2024’s Prop. M was developed after months of policy analysis and engagement and has broad support from business, labor, and other stakeholders. Prop. C would not make significant structural changes that warrant another voter measure. It was placed on the ballot primarily to defeat Prop. D, a competing tax measure to increase business taxes. Significantly, it would have a negative net impact on San Francisco’s budget, reducing revenues by an estimated $30 million to $40 million per year at a time when the city is already scrambling to fill a $169 million budget gap for the next fiscal year. Vote NO on Prop C - Small Business Tax Cuts
SPUR's Recommendation San Francisco already has term limits. The existing limits balance the goals of reducing incumbency advantage and preserving voter choice. Lifetime bans permanently remove voter choice to elect representatives, and stripping that choice should require a more deliberate and robust process, which this measure did not undergo. While term limits can increase competition and reduce incumbent power, this measure is unlikely to achieve these objectives on its own and may produce unintended negative consequences. Term limits alone do not fully address the structural factors that shape political power and electoral outcomes. Additionally, while regular turnover can promote competition, it may limit elected officials’ ability to build long-term expertise, particularly in a city with a complex governance structure like San Francisco. The rarity of political candidates returning after a break in service suggests this measure is designed to address a problem that barely exists. For these reasons, this measure is not a comprehensive solution to the challenges of incumbency power, electoral competitiveness, and equitable representation. Achieving the desired outcomes of generating new ideas and leaders requires reform related to campaign finance and pathways for political leadership development. Vote NO on Prop B - Lifetime Term Limits
SPUR's Recommendation The seismic resilience of public safety infrastructure deserves continued public investment because it’s critical to disaster response. That’s why SPUR supported the 2010, 2014, and 2020 ESER bonds, which have already invested $1.4 billion in earthquake safety. The proposed 2026 ESER bond would ensure that the city’s first responders are prepared to save lives, would help keep residents safely housed and public transportation infrastructure running, and would limit the social and economic burden of disasters on households and public institutions. Vote YES on Prop A - Earthquake Bond