Sponsored link
Sunday, March 16, 2025

Sponsored link

UncategorizedIs Ed Lee opposing the anti-speculation tax? Or did...

Is Ed Lee opposing the anti-speculation tax? Or did the Realtors go off a bit early?

This was posted a few days ago on the SF Board of Realtors website. Gone now.
This was posted a few days ago on the SF Board of Realtors website. Gone now.

By Tim Redmond

SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 — Is Mayor Ed Lee opposed to the anti-speculation tax, Prop. G? Well, the last time I asked him he wasn’t; he said he was reviewing the proposal and hadn’t made up his mind. His office hasn’t put out any press materials announcing his opposition.

The supporters of Prop. G haven’t heard that the mayor is opposing them, either. In fact, the former housing activist who is trying to push his own “consensus” measures this fall, including a Muni bond, might not want to infuriate the entire tenant movement, which is behind the tax.

I can’t think of a single good political reason for the mayor to come out No on G.

So why did the San Francisco Board of Realtors post a flier on Facebook saying that the mayor was against the tax? A flier aimed at organizing support and raising money? A flier that says “find out why Mayor Ed Lee [and] Assessor-Recorder Carmen Chu and Supervisors Mark Farrell, Scott Wiener and Katy Tang all say no to Prop. G?”

I don’t know. The Mayor’s press office hasn’t responded to an email I sent almost a week ago asking for his position on the measure.

But I checked Facebook again tonight and the flier seems to have been removed. And the mayor’s name isn’t listed on the No on G campaign website.

So maybe the Realtors had a bit of a premature ejaculation here. Imagine that.

Sponsored link

Help us save local journalism!

Every tax-deductible donation helps us grow to cover the issues that mean the most to our community. Become a 48 Hills Hero and support the only daily progressive news source in the Bay Area.

What the flier does tell us is how the landlords are going to run their campaign. It’s going to be a repeat of the Big Soda attack on a sugary drink tax in Richmond, where the well-funded effort said that none of the money raised would go for youth or public health programs.

In this case: “Not One Cent” for new housing.

Problem: If you designate a tax for a specific spending priority, it needs a two-thirds vote. Also: This tax isn’t about raising money; it’s about discouraging speculation by taking the profit out of it.

Still, now we know what the tenant movement is facing. And it appears the mayor, at this point, hasn’t actually entered the battle. Sorry, Realtors.

48 Hills welcomes comments in the form of letters to the editor, which you can submit here. We also invite you to join the conversation on our FacebookTwitter, and Instagram

Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.

Sponsored link

Sponsored link

Featured

What’s on next at the Trump Center for the Performing Arts (besides more booing)?

Buckle up for wrestling matches, rare earth mineral mining, and an extrajudicial spin on 'Mack the Knife'

DJ FLOW’s Saturday night sets spin Bay Area hip-hop mixshow tradition

102.1 Jams' new radio star has serious talent—and local influences starting with 1980s Filipino mobile crews.

‘Emotions expand and figures distort’ in Robert Hightower’s unapologetic works

Richmond father and artist articulates police brutality and his own bipolar disorder through graphic motif.

More by this author

Lurie won’t commit to an alternative approach to the opioid crisis

Mayor doubles down on law enforcement, rejects Fielder's call for a 'Four Pillars' approach that has worked in other cities

How is SF going to approach drug dealing? There are very different proposals

Plus: A report on police misconduct, and a documentary on the vulture capital firm that is destroying local news. That's The Agenda for March 9-16

After Newsom abandons trans people, a fairly tepid response at SF City Hall

Local officials were surprisingly cautious about responding to the governor's alarming (and inaccurate) statements.

You might also likeRELATED