tv [untitled] October 23, 2011 8:00am-8:30am PDT
electrical, heating wat, water, security, and fire sprinklers. remove hazardous materials. improve accessibility for people with disabilities. make necessary seismic upgrades. replace permanent structures and perform other work necessary to apply closure -- codes and regulation . they can't pay for teachers and administrative salaries or operative expenditures.
>> i'm melissa griffin, i write about city politics and a member of the league of women voters. i am here to discuss a proposition g, voters will be faced with on november's valid. -- ballot. proposition g would increase the sales tax rate by 0.5% for a total tax rate of 9%. this would only happen if the state does not increase the sales tax by either 1% before november 30, 2011 or 0.75% before january 1, 2015. the city would pass a tax increase to pay for public safety programs and the other
half for programs for children and seniors. the city will start collecting this additional sales tax on april 1, 2012. it would apply for 10 years. prior to july 1, san francisco had the sales tax rate of 9.5%. the city decreased by 1% when it allowed to expire. san francisco only gets a fraction of this 8.5% sales tax. 7.25% goes to this day, the city receiving about 1%. -- goes to the state, the city receiving about 1%. i'm here with -- thank you for being here. please tell us why you are in favor of proposition g.
>> i believe the low income children, seniors, firefighters, and police officers are worth half a cent. it will restore funding that was cut from these programs. proposition g " restore $30 million so the children will have a better start in life and a better chance of succeeding in high school and college. >> san francisco has one of the highest sales tax rates. are you concerned that the passage will affect our tourism or adversely affect the economics? >> i am not concerned with that at all. tourism accounts for 40% of the revenue. it will still be lower than the sales tax prior to july 1 of
this year. >> my understanding is that it will be eliminated if the state raise the sales tax within the next year. in light of that, palace of the city is able to plan, budget, and expect those revenues if it passes. >> that's a good question. it is about local control. they can decide where their tax dollars go, in light of lack of leadership of politicians in sacramento, but we are not counting on that type of leadership occurring any time soon. it would be helpful that the politicians will listen to the need of san franciscans and act accordingly when they enacted the next sales tax. up next, we will be talking with an opponent.
i'm here with howard, former chairman of the san francisco republican party. he is an opponent of proposition g. thank you for being here. why should voters vote against proposition g? >> in this age of high unemployment and high high unemployment -- of high unemployment, a regressive sales tax will hurt everyone. just to give you an idea, in 2000, the budget was $4.2 billion. in 2010, the 2011 budget is 6.8 $3 billion. that is more than the budget -- $6.83 billion.
that is more than the budget of any other states. if you look at the way city hall is, there is over 100 commissions, boards, advisory boards, so on and so forth that overlap. they can combine a lot of them and save a lot of money. >> in light of the fact that this tax has already been proposed, it recently expired. how can you see consequences as a result of increasing the sales tax just .5%. >> it takes money away from the people that needed them most. if you are an upper-middle-class person, it won't harm you. but on lower end, it does harm you. that is why we should not pass if. >> proponents say that we have
to do this to offset the tax at the state level. how do you propose that the city deal with the extraordinary budget cuts that i've come from the state? >> proponent to are mostly public employees and employees of nonprofits will have you believe the sky is falling if they don't get this raised. if they go back to 0 base budgeting, do good budgeting, good management, they have plenty of money to run the city. >> we hope that that was helpful. for information on ballot measures, visit the web site of the league of women voters at sfvotes.org. early voting is available at city hall monday through friday 8:00 a.m. to 8 5:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 8 5:00 p.m. if you don't vote early, vote on
in america today? segregation still exists... racism... the repression and oppression of women the educational system stem cell research homeless people cloning government health care taxation announcer: so, is there anything you're doing to help make a change? i'm not really doin' anything. ummmm [sighs] got me on that one... >> i am a lawless said griffin. i cover san francisco city politics and the league of women voters. i am here to discuss a proposition c, a ballot that will be before the voters this november.
proposition c will change the way that the city, current and future employees share their pension and health-care benefits. it will adjust employee contributions to the retirement system based on the city's costs. reducing benefits for future employees. adjust cost of living adjustments. decrease the city contribution to retiree health care costs for certain former employees. require -- changed voting requirement of the health service board and require election officials to make the same contributions. there are two charter amendments regarding pensions. if voters approve both measures, only the one with the
most votes will become law. i am here with the executive director at the san francisco labor counsel, and a proponent of proposition c. thank you for being here. why do you support the proposition c? >> the public-sector unions have been working probably most of this year to sit down and find a way in order to save city services and jobs during these economic times. this involves sitting down with the mayor's office and coming down with a comprehensive chart -- coming up with a comprehensive chart on how to save billions of dollars in san francisco. it stops pension spikes, it adjusts the rates that people will be paying during good times and bad times. it really does save money.
it is the consensus way of moving forward, it is supported by the board of supervisors, the mayor's office, and virtually every public official. i am proud of the public-sector unions for putting the measure on the ballot. it is really going to save the city money. this has been done in ways that i have not seen anywhere else. people are just attacking public workers, and in san francisco, i take my hat off to the unions that are going to be sacrificing and going to be paying more into the city funds in order to save these jobs. there are going to be more moneys coming in. i could not be prouder and i am urging everyone to vote yes. i think this is a san francisco way of doing reform. we have done many things and we
are urging everybody to vote yes to save over $1 billion and save cities of vergers -- city services. >> this number is based on a 7.75% investment return that people feel as unrealistic. how would you address that marke? >> we have sat down with the civil service unions that have endorsed this measure. is about the cycles that we go through during bad economic times. they will be contributing more than they used to. we factored in all of these assumptions. the city is doing better, they won't have to pay quite as much. the san francisco way of sharing
and moving forward, i will not get into the weeds. but we looked at the analysis of how the city budget works and what types of numbers will be needed. >> it also changes the makeup of the health care board that dictate to the cost and availability of various health care options for current and former city employees. can you please address that issue? >> absolutely, this is controversial and no way that it should not be. the mayor's office, during the course of negotiations, wanted to place for appointments on the board that have only three participants. they just kept pounding us all the time and we absolutely said no. we don't need to change any of that. the mayor's office backed down and said, the fourth person gets
to be nominated, but the electives, there has to be a majority for that person to come in. they will have their voice because they do not like who the mayor and the comptroller have nominated. that is the only piece of controversy that i think a small group of retirees are really arguing about. there are some misconceptions. there are not for people that the mayor appoints. >> we will be discussing this measure with a proponent. and now, we are here with jerry, the vice chair of a group calle d pob, it stands for protect our
benefits. >> i am actually representing about 3700 retirees. they come from the san francisco unified school district, of the city, the court system. we have one thing in common, that is the health services system. nobody knows very much about. our health services handle the health services system. we see a change being proposed that would change how the health service and system is run. the comptroller has said that it would not. it would change who is on the board. it will take away one that is elected by the san francisco
school system. we don't like that. since reform was passed by the voters, it has been an effective model. we can go back to the past where we have problems with political influence, attempts to change things, bringing political favoritism in to the department. we like the status quo in this case, and we feel very concerned that the change will not be positive. >> what changes are you fearful of happening? >> that there will be a change in the health service board, the
composition will be changed from four elected people and three appointees to be for appointees and if reelected. -- four appointees and three elected. and elected by the system. then you have five people. at this point, it has worked extremely well. most decisions are unanimous. it will be an artificially induced split that will be a change in the composition. that is the major reaction. >> what we spoke with the executive director of the labor council the claim that the seventh appointee would come from the comptroller's office. how do you not believe that that provides protection for your
membership? >> where were the appointee comes from as a little bit different from being able to elect the person. the comptroller is himself an appointee of the mayor. so you have an appointee of the appointee, and a 60 day limit before they have to decide on who the person will be. otherwise, the appointee becomes the person automatically. it seems little unfair. the of us who are retirees were ever involved in any of these discussions. >> we hope that that was informative.
columnist the rights of the san francisco city politics. i am also a member of the league of women voters. i am here to have a discussion of proposition d on november's ballot. proposition d is a charter amendment that would change the way that the city, current and future employees share in funding. it will also require an elected officials to pay the same contribution rates as a city employees. it would increase retirement contribution rates for most current city employees based on city cost. for future city employees, and prohibit the city from paying any employee contributions.
proposition c and d, if voters approve of measures, only the one with the most votes will become law. >> i am here with the treasurer of the campaign and a former member -- why should voters vote for proposition d? >> it had its origin a year ago. the origin of proposition b started with a grand jury investigation of the retirement system in san francisco. i was a member and during those years, i worked with other members of the grand jury. we issued reports in 2010 and
2009 with the expectation that public officials to propose legislation. there is only one public official that approached us and was willing to work on crafting legislation. and that was a public defender. 115,000 voted yes last year. a very strong constituency. we hope they will be back. the difference between proposition c and d is basically cost savings. d will save over $400 million over the next 10 years. prop d was crafted with
exempting lowest paid city workers from any increase in contribution, at the rates that are part of proposition d are progressive. proposition d is also a disruptive force in city politics. there is a very strong special- interest group that has fought against any pension reform in san francisco. that is later. we hope that they will look at it in a positive way. >> opponents argue that it was done not in a collaborative lateway.
that it was done unilaterally. how do you address concerns? >> the origin of proposition b and d was a civil grand jury investigation, a group of 19 residents of san francisco, who had a very diversified group of people representing unions, representing retired people, representing middle-class and minority groups. the fact that this is a criticism is not valid and the collaboration of the opposition talked about who was a collaboration for special interest groups. >> opponents have alleged that even if it is passed, it will be held up in court and perhaps not even implemented.
how do you respond to concerns about proposition d? >> i read about prop c, 8225 page document that was totally incomprehensible to me. i am familiar with legal documents. the d measure is 25 pages, simple to understand. i fully expec tboth me -- expect both measures will be challenging. especially those that oppose proposition c, and there are many, it will be brought forward. >> up next, we will talk to an opponent of proposition d. i am here with the executive director of the san francisco
labor council and an opponent of proposition d. why should voters voted against proposition d? >> i was telling people why they should vote yes on measure c. d is the opposite way of the way people should be doing business. this is a scott walker wisconsin initiative. it was done with no input from the workers. it was financed by a key party republicans that have financed the this and got $5 a signature to put this on the ballot. none of the city workers were involved, it was unilaterally put on. it is the wisconsin way of doing things. it does not accomplish what is supposed to do. it is legally challengeable. i am asking everyone to vote
because there will be legal challenges with what it purports to do. >> proponents say it will save $400 million more than a proposition c. why should they not go with a measure that is going to save more money? >> the process was done without any input on those numbers. they are way over bloated in terms of the numbers, it probably does a little bit more money than what we did, but it was done by the same type of republicans that are attacking public workers and wisconsin, san jose, other areas around the country. it will not save that type of money. we worked with the city comptroller, we talked to workers, we had major analysis. everybody agrees, this is the
way that the city will run better, it will save money and jobs. yes on c commonality. -- no on d. >> the increments they used to determine a contribution are smaller >> is a bogus argument. people claymore during bad times and not so much in good times. it is sensitive to workers that make -- police and fire and up paying more. it was done with a thorough analysis of different employee organizations in the city. >> thank you so much, mr. paulson. for information about this and
other ballot measures, go to the san francisco league of women voters website at sfvotes.com. early voting is available at city hall monday through friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. >> i am columnist who writes about san francisco politics, and a member of the san francisco league of women voters. i am here with the league and sfgtv to discuss proposition e on this november's ballot. ♪