The mud seems settled on the ultimate two undetermined SF poll measures, and the vacant properties tax has handed, whereas each of the dueling inexpensive housing poll measures are shot down.
These of us who stayed in on Saturday night time simply to observe Nevada’s Clark County and Washoe County vote updates know that election winners and losers don’t all get referred to as on Election Evening. And as such, when Tuesday’s native SF poll measure outcomes have been introduced, a pair measures have been nonetheless too near name. And we’re nonetheless in poll depend limbo/suspense with the District 4 supervisor seat, and a 3rd faculty board seat.
However as of Monday, we will mission the winners of these two SF poll measures. The Chronicle reviews that the Prop M “empty properties tax” has sufficient votes to go, whereas the Prop D inexpensive housing measure is not going to go, based on supporter Sen. Scott Wiener and others. (Prop D’s rival measure Prop E was already in too deep a gap to go by the mid-week counts final week.)
As of the most recent outcomes posted by the Division of Elections, Prop D “No” votes are forward of “Sure” votes by over 5,500.
It seems Prop D (streamlining housing) narrowly misplaced.
Prop E — the do-nothing sabotage measure designed to take Prop D down — did its poisonous job.
SF’s damaged establishment stays. This loss makes all of it however unimaginable for SF to fulfill its CA housing objectives.
The state should step in.
— Senator Scott Wiener (@Scott_Wiener) November 13, 2022
Prop D was Mayor Breed’s most popular inexpensive housing measure, whereas the rival measure Prop E was favored by the progressive flank of the Board of Supervisors, and sponsored by District 1 supervisor Connie Chan. Which implies we’re speaking Housing Twitter spats right here, and state Senator Wiener was fast to the draw. He referred to as Prop E the “do-nothing sabotage measure” and added it “did its poisonous job.”
Unusual take. I want some of us on right here might have interaction in good religion about coverage variations w/o making issues up. The concept that I used to be the mastermind of Prop E isn’t factual & dismisses the work of those that authored/developed the measure. The “he kills housing” stuff is made up.
— Dean Preston (@DeanPreston) November 14, 2022
However that could be a bit of just like the chimichanga fryer calling the quesadilla pan “greasy.” As proven by the mailers on the prime of this put up, each measures spent loads of time dragging the rival measure down, and each may frankly have benefited from extra emphasis on explaining the positives of their finer factors’ variations on space median revenue (AMI) necessities and proportion of inexpensive items required onsite. Both approach, each failed, so it’s now a wash.
The Empty Houses Tax has handed with a decisive mandate from voters, regardless of being outspent by a margin of three to 1. Individuals are fed up with tens of 1000’s of properties sitting vacant whereas 1000’s of individuals sleep on the streets. Thanks, SF voters! https://t.co/RgHKtlDife
— Dean Preston (@DeanPreston) November 14, 2022
In the meantime, we will conclude that the vacant properties tax handed, as it’s cruising with a 54%-46% majority with greater than 80% of the vote counted. “With the passage of Prop M property homeowners must pay tax on items which are vacant for six months or extra,” because the Chronicle explains. “The tax could be utilized to buildings with three or extra items, if the items in query had been vacant for greater than 182 days. Single-family properties and duplexes are exempt.”
Prop M’s passage comes amidst reviews that San Francisco has sufficient vacant housing items to accommodate the homeless inhabitants eight occasions over.
“Beneath the brand new Housing Component, San Francisco is required to construct 82,000 new items from 2023 to 2030, which suggests constructing over 10,000 items per 12 months beginning in 2023.
That’s virtually triple the town’s latest tempo of three,500 items yearly.” pic.twitter.com/cMRxn3BxQP
— Matt Haney (@MattHaneySF) August 2, 2022
The decision on each of those poll measures will certainly have an effect on Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors listening to on the native housing component, that’s, a state of California mandate that counties construct a sure variety of new items by 2030 or else threat shedding lots of of hundreds of thousands and even billions in state funding (a no-permit developer free-for-all can also be attainable).
In San Francisco, that’s 82,000 new required items. Whereas the SF housing pipeline appears traditionally good in the intervening time, it’s not 82,000-units good. And neither Prop D or Prop E can be strolling by way of the door to streamline extra inexpensive items, now that we all know final Tuesday’s election outcomes.
Associated: What’s the Deal With These Dueling SF Inexpensive Housing Measures, Props D and E? [SFist]
Picture: Joe Kukura, SFist