| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Ballot Measures 2012-2022: Housing/Taxpayer Impact | https://ballotpedia.org/San_Francisco_City_and_County,_California_ballot_measures#2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | https://sfpl.org/locations/main-library/government-information-center/san-francisco-government/san-francisco-1/san | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition C: Homelessness Oversight Commission | $350000/yr | Annual salary and operating costs approx. $350,000. | Shall the City amend the Charter to establish a Homelessness Oversight Commission to oversee the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing and require the City Controller to conduct audits of services for people experiencing homelessness? | |||||||||||||||||||||
4 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition D: Affordable Housing – Initiative Petition | Need retain resident voice.lower assessed values or as taxexempt properties, result in loss of property tax revenues | Shall the City amend the Charter to streamline approval of affordable housing that provides (1) housing for households with income up to 140% of area median income (AMI) but where the average household income is no more than 120% of AMI, (2) additional affordable housing units equal to 15% of the required number of affordable on-site units, or (3) housing for households that include at least one School District or City College employee, with certain household income restrictions; and to no longer require Board of Supervisors' approval for those types of projects if they use City property or financing? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition E: Affordable Housing – Board of Supervisors | Shall the City amend the Charter to streamline approval of affordable housing that provides (1) housing for households with income up to 120% of area median income (AMI) but where the average household income is no more than 80% of AMI, (2) additional affordable housing units equal to 8% of the total number of units in the entire project, or (3) housing for households that include at least one School District or City College employee, with certain household income restrictions; and to continue requiring Board of Supervisors' approval for those types of projects if they use City property or financing? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition F: Library Preservation Fund: Shall the City amend the Charter to renew the Library Preservation Fund for 25 years, allow the City to temporarily freeze the annual minimum funding for the Library when the City anticipates a budget deficit over $300 million, and require the Library to increase the minimum hours the Main Library and its branches must be open per week? | 25yrs parcel tax | 25yrs parcel tax; need library hours/ svc efficiency | A "yes" vote supported the following: renewing the Library Preservation Fund for 25 years, funded through an annual parcel tax of $25 per $100,000 in assessed value, otherwise set to expire on June 30, 2023; allowing the city to temporarily freeze the annual minimum library funding amount when the city expects a budget deficit over $300 million; and increasing the minimum hours the main library and its 27 branches must be open per week. | |||||||||||||||||||||
7 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition G: Student Success Fund – Grants to the San Francisco Unified School District | $11mil/$35mil/$45 million to 2038 | social/emotional wellness??, need better mgmt | Shall the City amend the Charter to provide additional funding for grants to the San Francisco Unified School District for 15 years to improve student academic achievement and social/emotional wellness? A "yes" vote supported creating the Student Success Fund to provide additional grants to San Francisco Unified School District through 2038, with the city allocating $11 million to the Fund in 2024, $35 million in 2025, and $45 million in 2026. | |||||||||||||||||||||
8 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition L: Sales Tax for Transportation Projects | $1.91 billion in bonds | one-half cent sales tax to 2053,Lots of money already, need better mgmt | Shall the City continue a one-half cent sales tax to 2053 and generate estimated annual revenue of $100–236 million to pay for transportation projects described in a new 30-year spending plan, allow the Transportation Authority to issue up to $1.91 billion in bonds to pay for these projects, and increase the total amount of money the Transportation Authority may spend each year for the next four years? | |||||||||||||||||||||
9 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition M: Tax on Keeping Residential Units Vacant | $20–37 million/yr | Stop punishing owners! Too much public housing, need relax rental regulations | Shall the City tax owners of vacant residential units in buildings with three or more units, if those owners have kept those units vacant for more than 182 days in a calendar year, at a rate between $2,500–5,000 per vacant unit in 2024 and up to $20,000 in later years with adjustments for inflation, to generate estimated annual revenue of $20–37 million, with the tax continuing until December 31, 2053, and use those funds for rent subsidies and affordable housing? | |||||||||||||||||||||
10 | 11/8/2022 pending | Proposition O: Additional Parcel Tax for City College | $37 million/yr | Lots of money already, need better mgmt | Shall the City establish an additional parcel tax on some San Francisco property owners based on the square footage and use of their properties, at rates between $150–4,000 per parcel with adjustments for inflation, to generate approximately $37 million in annual revenue, beginning on July 1, 2023 and continuing until June 30, 2043, and transfer those funds to City College for student and workforce development programs? | |||||||||||||||||||||
11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
12 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition A: Health and Homelessness, Parks, and Streets Bond (November 3, 2020) | $487,500,000 | Bond on property tax, general obligation bonds with a duration of up to 30 years | HEALTH AND RECOVERY BONDS. To finance the acquisition or improvement of real property, including to: stabilize, improve, and make permanent investments in supportive housing facilities, shelters, and/or facilities that deliver services to persons experiencing mental health challenges, substance use disorder, and/or homelessness; improve the accessibility, safety and quality of parks, open spaces and recreation facilities; improve the accessibility, safety and condition of the City’s streets and other public right-of-way and related assets; and to pay related costs; shall the City and County of San Francisco issue $487,500,000 in general obligation bonds with a duration of up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated average tax rate of $0.014/$100 of assessed property value, and projected average annual revenues of $40,000,000, subject to independent citizen oversight and regular audits? The City’s current debt management policy is to keep the property tax rate for City general obligation bonds below the 2006 rate by issuing new bonds as older ones are retired and the tax base grows, though this property tax rate may vary based on other factors. | |||||||||||||||||||||
14 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition B: Department of Sanitation and Streets, Sanitation and Streets Commission, and Public Works Commission (November 3, 2020) | (being reversed 2022) | Shall the City amend the Charter to create a Department of Sanitation and Streets with oversight from a Sanitation and Streets Commission, and to establish a Public Works Commission to oversee the Department of Public Works? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
15 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition F: Business Tax Overhaul (November 3, 2020) | Increase business tax/fees | Shall the City eliminate the payroll expense tax; permanently increase the registration fee for some businesses by $230–460, decreasing it for others; permanently increase gross receipts tax rates to 0.105–1.040%, exempting more small businesses; permanently increase the administrative office tax rate to 1.61%; if the City loses certain lawsuits, increase gross receipts tax rates on some businesses by 0.175–0.690% and the administrative office tax rate by 1.5%, and place a new 1% or 3.5% tax on gross receipts from commercial leases, for 20 years; and make other business tax changes; for estimated annual revenue of $97 million? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
16 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition I: Real Estate Transfer Tax | increase transfer tax | Shall the City permanently increase the transfer tax rate on sales and leases of 35 years or more of real estate, to 5.50% on those transactions of $10 million to $25 million, and to 6.00% on those transactions of $25 million or more, for an estimated average revenue of $196 million a year? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
17 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition J: Parcel Tax for San Francisco Unified School District | $48.1 million/ year | New Tax | Shall the City replace its 2018 Parcel Tax for the San Francisco Unified School District with a new tax that changes the annual tax rate from $320 per parcel to $288 per parcel, adjusted for inflation each year, and with an exemption for people age 65 or older, until June 30, 2038, for an estimated revenue of $48.1 million a year? | |||||||||||||||||||||
18 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition K: Affordable Housing Authorization | 10,000 units | Shall the City have the authority to own, develop, construct, acquire or rehabilitate up to 10,000 units of low-income rental housing in San Francisco? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
19 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition L: Business Tax Based on Comparison of Top Executive's Pay to Employees’ Pay | $60-140 million/yr | New tax on high pay | Shall the City place an additional tax permanently on some businesses in San Francisco when their highest-paid managerial employee earns more than 100 times the median compensation paid to their employees in San Francisco, where the additional tax rate would be between 0.1%–0.6% of gross receipts or between 0.4%–2.4% of payroll expense for those businesses in San Francisco, for an estimated revenue of between $60-140 million a year? | |||||||||||||||||||||
20 | 11/3/2020, approved | Proposition RR: Caltrain Sales Tax | $100 million/yr | Sales tax 1/8 cent 30 yrs | To preserve Caltrain service and support regional economic recovery, prevent traffic congestion, make Caltrain more affordable and accessible, reduce air pollution with cleaner and quieter electric trains, make travel times faster, and increase Caltrain frequency and capacity between Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco counties, shall the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board's resolution levying a 30-year one-eighth cent sales tax with oversight and audits, providing approximately $100 million annually for Caltrain that the State cannot take away, be adopted? | |||||||||||||||||||||
21 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | 3/3/2020, approved | Proposition A: City College Job Training, Repair and Earthquake Safety Measure | City College $845,000,000 in bonds | CITY COLLEGE JOB TRAINING, REPAIR AND EARTHQUAKE SAFETY MEASURE. To fix/repair City College facilities; make necessary seismic retrofit/earthquake safety improvements; make the College more environmentally sustainable through energy efficient buildings/increased renewable energy use; and acquire, construct, repair facilities, sites/ equipment to prepare students for well-paid, local science, technology, and arts related jobs, shall San Francisco Community College District’s measure authorizing $845,000,000 in bonds at legal rates, levying 1.1 cents/$100 assessed value ($47,500,000 annually until approximately 2053) be approved, requiring audits and citizen oversight? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | 3/3/2020, approved | Proposition B: San Francisco Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond, 2020 | SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE SAFETY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE BOND, 2020. To improve fire, earthquake, and emergency response by improving, constructing, and/or replacing: deteriorating cisterns, pipes, and tunnels, and related facilities to ensure firefighters a reliable water supply for fires and disasters; neighborhood fire and police stations and supporting facilities; the City’s 911 Call Center; and other disaster response and public safety facilities, and to pay related costs, shall the City and County of San Francisco issue $628,500,000 in general obligation bonds, with a duration up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated average tax rate of $0.015/$100 of assessed property value, and projected average annual revenues of $40,000,000, subject to citizen oversight and regular audits? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | 3/3/2020, approved | Proposition D: Vacancy Tax | Tax on Property owners | Shall the City tax owners or tenants who keep ground floor retail or other commercial space vacant in some areas of San Francisco, at rates of between $250 and $1,000 per street-facing foot, starting January 1, 2021 and without any expiration date, and use the annual revenues, estimated at a range of a minimal amount to $5 million, to assist small businesses? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | 3/3/2020, approved | Proposition E: Limits on Office Development | Affordable housing link to office devpmt | Shall the City tie annual square-footage allotment for certain Large Office Projects to whether the City is meeting its Affordable Housing Goals, and change the criteria for approving certain office projects? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | 11/5/2019, approved | Proposition A: Affordable Housing Bond: San Francisco last approved a bond issue for affordable housing in 2016 for $260.7 million. Proposition A proposes $600 million in bonds to be allocated as follows: $150 million for public housing, $220 million for low-income housing, $60 million for middle-income housing and preservation, $150 million for senior housing, and $20 million for educator housing. The estimated tax rate for the issuance of the bonds is $0.019 per $100 of assessed property value, with estimated annual revenues totaling $50 million. This measure is one of six to appear on the November ballot. | $ 600,000,000 | Housing bond | SAN FRANCISCO AFFORDABLE HOUSING BONDS. To finance the construction, development, acquisition, and preservation of housing affordable to extremely-low, low and middle-income households through programs that will prioritize vulnerable populations such as San Francisco’s working families, veterans, seniors, and persons with disabilities; to assist in the acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of existing affordable housing to prevent the displacement of residents; to repair and reconstruct distressed and dilapidated public housing developments and their underlying infrastructure; to assist the City’s middle-income residents or workers in obtaining affordable rental or home ownership opportunities including down payment assistance and support for new construction of affordable housing for San Francisco Unified School District and City College of San Francisco employees; and to pay related costs; shall the City and County of San Francisco issue $600,000,000 in general obligation bonds with a duration of up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated average tax rate of $0.019/$100 of assessed property value, and projected average annual revenues of $50,000,000, subject to independent citizen oversight and regular audits? | |||||||||||||||||||||
27 | 11/5/2019, approved | Proposition D: Traffic Congestion Mitigation Tax San Francisco Ride-Share Business Tax to Fund Muni, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Services and Infrastructure | Tax on rideshare for Muni | A yes vote was a vote in favor of enacting a tax on ride-share companies, such as Uber and Lyft, at a rate of 1.5% of total fares on shared rides and rides in zero-emission vehicles and 3.25% of total fares on private rides, with revenue dedicated to improving and maintaining public transportation services and pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | 11/5/2019, approved | Proposition E: San Francisco Reduced Zoning Restrictions for Affordable Housing and Educator Housing Projects On the ballot | Reduced restrictions on teacher housing | A yes vote is a vote in favor of allowing residential development consisting of 100% affordable housing or educator housing on public zoning districts, reducing the zoning requirements and restrictions for such projects, and requiring expedited reviews. A no vote is a vote against this measure to reduce restrictions and requirements on 100% affordable housing and educator housing, thereby continuing to prevent any kind of residential development in public zoning districts and leaving the existing residential development and zoning rules in place. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | 11/6/18, Approved Yes 215,491 61.34% No 135,835 38.66% Court upheld 8/30/2020) | Proposition C: Gross Receipts Tax for Homelessness Services | 250,000,000/yr | Gross receipts tax, Homeless housing, mental health | A yes vote was a vote in favor of authorizing the city and county of San Francisco to fund housing and homelessness services by taxing certain businesses at the following rates: 0.175 percent to 0.69 percent on gross receipts for businesses with over $50 million in gross annual receipts, or 1.5 percent of payroll expenses for certain businesses with over $1 billion in gross annual receipts and administrative offices in San Francisco. San Francisco Controller: tax revenue of approximately $250 million to $300 million annually beginning in 2019. The proposed tax is dedicated for defined homeless services, including housing, shelter, prevention, and mental service services. | |||||||||||||||||||||
30 | 6/5/2018, approved | Proposition C: Additional Tax on Commercial Rents Mostly to Fund Child Care and Education | Tax on commercial rent | Shall the City impose a new gross receipts tax of 1% on revenues a business receives from leasing warehouse space in San Francisco, and 3.5% on revenues a business receives from leasing some commercial spaces in San Francisco, to fund quality early care and education for young children and for other public purposes? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | 6/5/2018, approved | Proposition F: City-Funded Legal Representation for Residential Tenants in Eviction Lawsuits | $5,600,000/yr | More oppression on property owners | Shall the City establish, fund and run a program to provide legal representation for all residential tenants in San Francisco facing eviction? -legal representation required would vary, estimated annual program costs of between $4.2 million and $5.6 million. MOHCD would require added staffing for implementation of the program, estimated $200,000 annually, approximately 3,500 tenants annually | |||||||||||||||||||||
32 | 6/5/2018, approved | Proposition G: Parcel Tax for San Francisco Unified School District | $298 per parcel | More property tax for teacher salaries | Shall the City collect an annual tax of $298 per parcel for investment in education, subject to certain exemptions including those for senior citizens? ( educates approximately 57,000 students annually) The funds generated would be dedicated to teacher salaries and training and other purposes of the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) as specified in the measure. The measure specifies that the parcel tax will be collected beginning July 1, 2018 for a period of 20 years to July 1, 2038. In June of 2008, San Francisco voters approved a similar tax to benefit SFUSD at the rate of $198 per parcel for a period of 20 years, expiring in July 2028. In June of 2010, San Francisco voters approved a school facilities special tax for SFUSD at the rate of $32.20 per parcel for a period of 20 years, expiring in July 2030. | |||||||||||||||||||||
33 | (November 2016) approved | Proposition J: Homeless Services and Transportation Funds Amendment | 101,600,000/yr | per yr homeless | A charter amendment to allocate funds to homeless services and transportation was on the ballot for San Francisco voters in San Francisco County, California, on November 8, 2016. It was approved. A yes vote was a vote in favor of amending the city charter to allocate an initial $50 million per year and $101.6 million per year—with scheduled increases—to homeless services and transportation services respectively for 24 years. A no vote was a vote against this proposition, leaving the city's budget allocation for homeless services and transportation services at the discretion of the board of supervisors. | |||||||||||||||||||||
34 | 11/8/16, Approved | Proposition E: City Responsibility for Street Trees and Sidewalks Amendment | $19 million/yr. tree maint. The only good one for owners! | A yes vote was a vote in favor of shifting responsibility for maintenance of trees along public streets and surrounding sidewalks from private property owners to the city and allocating $19 million per year from the general fund to pay for the maintenance. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | 11/8/16, Approved | Proposition C: San Francisco Affordable Housing Bond Issue | $ 261,000,000 | Housing bond | A “YES” Vote Means: If you vote “yes,” you want to allow the City to spend the unused $261 million from the 1992 general obligation bond ordinance to provide loans to acquire, improve and rehabilitate at-risk multi-unit residential buildings in need of seismic, fire, health or safety upgrades or other major rehabilitation; and convert those buildings to permanent affordable housing. | |||||||||||||||||||||
36 | 6/7/16, Approved | Proposition C: San Francisco Affordable Housing Requirements Charter Amendment | Housing | Shall the City amend the Charter to increase affordable housing requirements for private developers of new market-rate housing projects of 25 or more units until the Board of Supervisors passes an ordinance changing those requirements and also authorize the Board of Supervisors to change affordable housing requirements by ordinance?[2] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | 11/3/15, Approved | Proposition A: City of San Francisco Housing Bond Issue 2015-2016: $4.35 per $100,000 of assessed valuation 2020-2021: $11.25 per $100,000 of assessed valuation Average from 2015-2016 through 2038-2039: $8.09 per $100,000 of assessed valuation | $310,000,000 | Housing bond | SAN FRANCISCO AFFORDABLE HOUSING BONDS. To finance the construction, development, acquisition, and preservation of housing affordable to low- and middle-income households through programs that will prioritize vulnerable populations such as San Francisco’s working families, veterans, seniors, disabled persons; to assist in the acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable rental apartment buildings to prevent the eviction of long-term residents; to repair and reconstruct dilapidated public housing; to fund a middle-income rental program; and to provide for homeownership down payment assistance opportunities for educators and middle-income households; shall the City and County of San Francisco issue $310 million in general obligation bonds, subject to independent citizen oversight and regular audits? | |||||||||||||||||||||
38 | 11/3/15, Approved | Proposition K: City of San Francisco Housing Development on Surplus Public Lands | City land for affordable housing | Shall the City expand the allowable uses of surplus property to include building affordable housing for a range of households from those who are homeless or those with very low income to those with incomes up to 120% of the area median income; and, for projects of more than 200 units, make some housing available for households earning up to 150% or more of the area median income? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | 11/4/14 ,Approved | Proposition K: City of San Francisco Additional Affordable Housing Policy | Housing 30000 units by 2020 | Shall it be City policy to help construct or rehabilitate at least 30,000 homes by 2020, more than 50% of which will be affordable for middle-class households and more than 33% of which will be affordable for low- and moderate-income households, and secure sufficient funding to achieve that goal? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | 11/6/2012, approved | Proposition E: Gross Receipts Tax on Businesses | $28.5 million/yr | Business Tax | Measure E will phase out the city's current payroll tax over a period of five years and replace it with a gross receipts tax. It is estimated that this will result in $28.5 million more a year in revenue to the city.[1] | |||||||||||||||||||||
41 | 11/6/2012, approved | Proposition C: San Francisco Creation of a Housing Trust Fund | 50800000/yr | affordable housing (add Mgmt cost?) | Shall the City amend its Charter to: create a Housing Trust Fund that supports affordable housing for low-income and moderate-income households; and change the affordable housing requirements imposed on some private residential developments? Proposition C would amend the Charter to establish a Housing Trust Fund (the Fund). The City would contribute $20 million to the Fund in 2013. Each year, the City contribution would increase by $2.8 million, up to $50.8 million in 2024. After 2024, the City would contribute an annual amount based on the $50.8 million but adjusted for changes in the City’s General Fund revenues. | |||||||||||||||||||||
42 | 11/6/2012, approved | Proposition A: City College Parcel Tax | $79/parcel for 8 yrs | To provide City College of San Francisco with funds the State cannot take away; offset budget cuts; prevent layoffs; provide an affordable, quality education for students; maintain essential courses including, but not limited to, writing, math, science, and other general education; prepare students for four-year universities; provide workforce training including, but not limited to, nursing, engineering, technology, and business; and keep college libraries, student support services, and other instructional support open and up to date; shall the San Francisco Community College District levy 79 dollars per parcel annually for eight years requiring independent audits and citizen oversight? | ||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | Housing /Homeless bonds: | $1,658,500,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 |