November 6, 2018 - Consolidated General Election - City and County of San Francisco - FINAL REPORT

Shall Associate Justice CAROL A. CORRIGAN be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Associate Justice LEONDRA R. KRUGER be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Presiding Justice JAMES M. HUMES be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Associate Justice SANDRA MARGULIES be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Associate Justice JAMES A. RICHMAN be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Associate Justice MARLA MILLER be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Presiding Justice PETER JOHN SIGGINS be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Associate Justice JON B. STREETER be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Associate Justice ALISON M. TUCHER be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

Shall Presiding Justice BARBARA JONES be elected to the office for the term provided by law?

<strong>AUTHORIZES BONDS TO FUND SPECIFIED HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Authorizes $4 billion in general obligation bonds for existing affordable housing programs for low-income residents, veterans, farmworkers, manufactured and mobile homes, infill, and transit-oriented housing. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to repay bonds averaging about $170 million annually over the next 35 years.

<strong>AUTHORIZES BONDS TO FUND EXISTING HOUSING PROGRAM FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Amends Mental Health Services Act to fund No Place Like Home Program, which finances housing for individuals with mental illness. Ratifies existing law establishing the No Place Like Home Program. Fiscal Impact: Allows the state to use up to $140 million per year of county mental health funds to repay up to $2 billion in bonds. These bonds would fund housing for those with mental illness who are homeless.

<strong>AUTHORIZES BONDS TO FUND PROJECTS FOR WATER SUPPLY AND QUALITY, WATERSHED, FISH, WILDLIFE, WATER CONVEYANCE, AND GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AND STORAGE. INITIATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Authorizes $8.877 billion in state general obligation bonds for various infrastructure projects. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to repay bonds averaging $430 million per year over 40 years. Local government savings for water-related projects, likely averaging a couple hundred million dollars annually over the next few decades.

<strong>AUTHORIZES BONDS FUNDING CONSTRUCTION AT HOSPITALS PROVIDING CHILDREN’S HEALTH CARE. INITIATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Authorizes $1.5 billion in bonds, to be repaid from state’s General Fund, to fund grants for construction, expansion, renovation, and equipping of qualifying children’s hospitals. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs to repay bonds averaging about $80 million annually over the next 35 years.

<strong>CONFORMS CALIFORNIA DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME TO FEDERAL LAW. ALLOWS LEGISLATURE TO CHANGE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME PERIOD. LEGISLATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Gives Legislature ability to change daylight saving time period by two-thirds vote, if changes are consistent with federal law. Fiscal Impact: This measure has no direct fiscal effect because changes to daylight saving time would depend on future actions by the Legislature and potentially the federal government.

<strong>REGULATES AMOUNTS OUTPATIENT KIDNEY DIALYSIS CLINICS CHARGE FOR DIALYSIS TREATMENT. INITIATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Requires rebates and penalties if charges exceed limit. Requires annual reporting to the state. Prohibits clinics from refusing to treat patients based on payment source. Fiscal Impact: Overall annual effect on state and local governments ranging from net positive impact in the low tens of millions of dollars to net negative impact in the tens of millions of dollars.

<strong>EXPANDS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS’ AUTHORITY TO ENACT RENT CONTROL </strong><strong>ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. INITIATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Repeals state law that currently restricts the scope of rent-control policies that cities and other local jurisdictions may impose on residential property. Fiscal Impact: Potential net reduction in state and local revenues of tens of millions of dollars per year in the long term. Depending on actions by local communities, revenue losses could be less or considerably more.

<strong>ESTABLISHES NEW STANDARDS FOR CONFINEMENT OF SPECIFIED FARM ANIMALS; BANS SALE OF NONCOMPLYING PRODUCTS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. </strong>Establishes minimum requirements for confining certain farm animals. Prohibits sales of meat and egg products from animals confined in noncomplying manner. Fiscal Impact: Potential decrease in state income tax revenues from farm businesses, likely not more than several million dollars annually. State costs up to $10 million annually to enforce the measure.

SAN FRANCISCO SEAWALL EARTHQUAKE SAFETY BOND, 2018. To protect the waterfront, BART and Muni, buildings, historic piers, and roads from earthquakes, flooding and rising seas by: repairing the 100 year old Embarcadero Seawall; strengthening the Embarcadero; and fortifying transit infrastructure and utilities serving residents and businesses; shall the city issue $425,000,000 in bonds, with a duration up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated tax rate of $0.013/$100 of assessed property value, and estimated annual revenues of up to $40,000,000, with citizen oversight and regular audits? The City’s current debt management policy is to keep the property tax rate from City general obligation bonds below the 2006 rate by issuing new bonds as older ones are retired and the tax base grows, though the overall property tax rate may vary based on other factors.

Shall the City amend the Charter to include privacy guidelines and require the City Administrator to propose a privacy ordinance consistent with the guidelines to the Board of Supervisors?

Shall the City impose additional business taxes to create a dedicated fund to support services for homeless people and prevent homelessness, including one tax of 0.175% to 0.69% on gross receipts over $50 million that a business receives in San Francisco, and another tax of 1.5% on certain administrative offices’ payroll expense in San Francisco, raising an estimated $250-300 million in combined tax revenues annually, and with no expiration date for these taxes?

Shall the City impose new cannabis business taxes beginning in 2021, at rates ranging from 1% to 5% on gross receipts of cannabis businesses in San Francisco, where the Board of Supervisors could decrease those rates, or increase them up to 7%; and shall the City apply many of its business taxes to businesses with over $500,000 in gross receipts in San Francisco that do not have a physical presence here; raising an estimated $2-4 million annually in combined tax revenues in 2019 and 2020, and an estimated $7-16 million annually beginning in 2021, and with no expiration date on these newly imposed and applied taxes?

Shall the City annually distribute up to 1.5% of the current base hotel tax for specific arts and cultural purposes, without increasing the existing hotel tax?