>> hello, i'm holly knox with commissioner honda along with the legacy of women voters of san francisco i'm here to talk about measure a on tuesday november 4th pursue measure a is an ordinance that is will allow the city to borrow up to 5 hundred thousand discolors for bonds this decide that use this for the improvements identified by the transportation at the desk the city could use the funds for construct transit only lanes and separated like ways and assessable platforms and

escalators that are and muni and install pedestrian count down signals and audio central nervous system and bulb outs raise crosswalks medium island and bike parking and upgrade muni any proposal will be subject to the review by the mayor and board measure a will allow the property tax to are increases and landowner to pass up to 50 percent to the tenants measure a will will require the citizens advisory committee to review the spending of bond fund tenth of one percent will pay for the oversight functions if you vote yes. i want the city to issue $500 million in general obligation bonds on infrastructure projects designed

to prove metropolitan accessibility and prove the position of streets and make that safer important bicyclists asia pedestrians if you vote no, you don't want the city to order the bonds i'm here with steering wheel and proponent of measure a we're also joined by just quentin the chair of the transportation under 98 to 98 and the member of board of supervisors 80 from 1986 a property thank you he'll start with opening comments ms. brinkman the bond is boo about the sufficiency and efficiency and safety you have our streets if you use the streets in san francisco by private automobile or bus why business bike you care about this bond measure

passing it will help all to move better and get rid of congestion it has not passed a bond measure in over 60 years you you'll of the work done to packing pass the bond measures give us the system people will say night not good in order to continue to improve this system we're going to have the make the investment now and not only for the generations to come. >> thank you just coping our opening remarks measure a is as simple as abc so that at this point the abc a stands 0 for a blank check they don't thrill this is a general obligation bond a boring of

money a half a billion dollars repayable over thirty years at interest which will be over one million dollars one hundred million it contains no denied specific projects it is written in glittering gentle itself and allows spending on anything mentioned or perhaps unmentioned in the measure the it isn't probably going to pass because it takes a 2/3rd's approval and i doubt san franciscans wanted to approve a billion dollars in debt. >> thank you ms. bringing brinkman which changes

one of the changes similar to the project people who ride the six and the 5 l seen changes it will increase sufficiency and we're carrying more people on the bus line little 14 mission bus is something this bond money will be spent on saved accident 14 bus about 4 or 5 minutes so passengers on that ride are having a softer ride we're going to see see severe streets people riding open bikes and walking on foot we're going to see the busses able to move faster to allow to carry more people as if we've added for business they'll be able to pick up more people so we're going to see a lot of

positive changes. >> just cop. >> well, i can't put a finger on any one of those on page 199 of the proposition is states specific that this doesn't note quote involve any contempt implicitly commitment to specific projects to be constructed with bond that precedes and use that to say therefore it didn't need an environmental impact reporter it includes money phenomenon the caltrain system you you know what that is 88 percent of rider are from woodside arthur ton palo alto and potrero hill and san mateo and santa clara valleys not san franciscans they could take this money and spend as much as they want for people

in the suburbia's that are not 2k3w50b8g9d to pay it back it's probably illegal under the called government code and uses the word money maybe spent not shall and didn't define even what the money maybe spent on. >> how will the use of those funds impact levels finds traffic congestion. >> they're to impact them positive less traffic congestion meantime people choose to take a 0 bike instead of a car it is positive in order for people to lease it leave their automobile at home we have to make at that safe and sufficient so some of the projects we've increased the ridership and i on business lines people are switching modes and car driving in san francisco

is a declining mode share meantime we make it easier not to drive again, it is a win for all of us. it helps with air pollution and helps with children's activity levels having the streets safe so kids what walk and bike and parents are comfortable walking their kids to school we're going to see positive results from this as we approve transit only lines on market street the buses move more quickly in the transit again, that's a win for tens of thousand of ryder's. >> just cop. >> again another wish list which nauflz every ballot measure and tells what's in it

any proposed use of the bond bonds it subject to review you can't even building this document because the man in the board of supervisors if it ever passed could change those gentle lettuce every general obligation bond we have voted on in san francisco the earthquake save bond a couple of years ago in 2011, the school bonds defined and identified the schools that the money would be spent on when we established bart in the 62 a seven hundred and 92 general obligation bond for bart when we approved the high speed rail authority ♪

2008 this is a conglomeration of words they're to put money into mta's pocket to spend as we want to spend just like they're doing with the central subway from that an estimate in on a 3 of $6000 million plus to 12 plus >> we'll take final remarks. >> this is boring of a giantic performers which will effect no time property owners in measure a is a specific provision that allows a psycho of our renters to 50 percent of the one billion dollars one million dollars over a cost of thirty years don't let them fool you, you offering we won't sell off a bond is isn't in measure a they'll say well,

it's policy if its policy why did the controller go to all of the specific details to tell voters how much this is going to cost them so if you're a entertainment don't think you're getting a free ride you're not florida passes it should be rejected and no on measure a and get specific projects. >> thank you final remarks and yes. i want to remind everybody this about say future of the san francisco about investing in future transportation for our citizens the bond oversight committee do their why in san francisco it states the prashs are not going to be going up because sf general hospital all of those bonds have the same type of oversight i landmark to the citizens of san francisco

show they have the commitment for the future of the city we need to change our transportation with the city. >> thank you both for your time and comments we hope this discussion has on informative for more information on this, please visit the san francisco website at sf election.org remember earlier voting available ton city hall from 8 to 5 and vote at the city hall two weekend before if not be sure to vote on november 4th. >> hello him i i'm hopping holly with sfgovtv along with the

leaguer of women voters here to discuss measure b a ballot measure on november 4th before the voters prop b is a charter amendment a requires the city to provide to the sfmta by a percentage to the portion increase take into account daylight and dynamic population as determined by controller's office in 2015 the city increases the base amount over the previous 10 years in future years the city about increase the base amount based on the population over the previous year it requires the sfmta to use 75 percent of any population based increases in the basis amount to achieve the service repairs the other 25

percent to improve street safety and authorizes the mayor to discontinue the base amazes required in the voter is impact a vehicle free if you rotate yes increase the amount the city provides to the sfmta based on the population those funds must be used to improve muffin. >> the street safety if i vote no, you don't want to make 24 change i'm here with peter straus from the board of the san francisco transit riders and proponent of measure b we're joined that i marty the chair of the librarian and a proponent thank you start with opening comments mr. straidz. >> measure b is a common sense approach times transportation funding for population groith

growth muni that over recruited crowded and unreliable san francisco's grown that i 10 percent since 20033 and thank you for the opportunity u muni service is not kept up it pays for the muni service to reflect the growth by measure b will not there taxed it will pay for improvements to the prop money not being used 75 percent will pay for muni vehicles maintenance and for the repair of the fleet and more buses and buses not all of measure b logo for the improvements 25 percent important measures to improve safety ordinance 8sdz street to pay for the measures the plan to eliminate traffic fatalities between 10 years we hope the voters agree that

you're opening remarks thank you we've recommended in the libertarian party recommends a no vote because we speak about population growth, however, you population groerth in san francisco is abandonment to be more than reasonable and the reason for that is policies nowadays removes the market forces that keepsz the balances even so this will geology for example, our sewer system has not been updated since the impoverishing we need first responders and schools all of those systems not tied to population so we have one tied to an unreasonable situation and st. is going to suck up fund from all the others fund there is so much in the pot we need to allocated it as well as we can.

>> with that question what benefits will the passage of that bring to the motorists and to motorist i think the primary benefits relies to increase the traffic essentialist for bicyclists and pedestrians for everyone and the measure such as obnoxiously and the defined crosswalks and better signals and really that's the primary benefit for motorists, however, it that benefit the furrier cars on the street the more people riding muni. >> how do you respond. >> i want to say because we have this didn't mean we have good planning or efficiency and what we're talking about here in my opinion is would be efficiency and for example, when

we allocate money to safety bubbles or designing this and that what other jaend agenda are we talking about are we removing cars together on the street my point efficiency should come first, the ability to get paragraph move in a way to get to work there is no impedes funding is not the issue i think the issue is more efficiency and good planning. >> will this measure increase the frequently of service is low income neighborhoods. >> thank you for your question a number of my colleagues and organizations have been working with the mta the muni transportation agency staff in the last year to develop an entity analysis an analysis of how whether there are inaccuracy

in how it serves the minority in san francisco it will provide the fund to address some you know my means identified having an equitable analyze that has money to address the certifies that come up this is i see them as working hand in glove are the mta start to professionalism this year in providing resources to he'd what needs to be addressed. >> thank you r with or what are you thoughts. >> do we need another layer of bureaucracies may be make sure that muni is seated by the neighborhoods it's aids simple as that we are talking transit crossroads and a completely different design than simply offering muni certifies to

you'll neighborhood whether low income or whatever and again, we're not talking about in my opinion funding is not the issue we're just going to add layers of brursz await sufficiency we have muni asking for more money for the past how many years guarantee i don't see improvements you did we have 50 percent on time. >> shouldn't we be working on this. >> it's time for financial thoughts ms. berry and we need to view it in the context of the entire city we cannot saw we need transportation yes, we need transportation we also need a whole and i way ray of other

services i suggest voters think twice regarding the transportation growth and the transportation because all the other services are going to be left behind doesn't like for example, a very important we're addressing that with other proportion is so we need growth and the growth t is going to be particularly abnormal in san francisco regarding the policies to engendered to remove the connective forces that keep everybody everything in balance. >> financial comments were when the voters established the transportation agency the mta was funded by setting up a fund

for the transportation this was done to eliminate what they call the infighting and the set budget the system worked well but not quite well enough not to protect us for the cuts in 2008, and 9 the measure b tweaks the formulas to address the growth and keep up with the growth it supports the prourpgs zero for the fatalities in the 10 years and invests capacity while investing in making our streets safer and with that said, see i hope during the neighborhood it will help to support measure b in november. >> thank you both if for your time and comments we hope this has been informative for more information in the ballots

please invest the website at sf election.org and early voting is available monday through friday from 8 to 5 and vote at city hall 2 we understand before election and if you don't vote early be sure to vote on november 4th. >> hello, i'm holly lee knox with sfgovtv along with the legacy of women voters i'm here to discuss measure c on november 4th measure c is a charter amendment that will change the way the city funds to children youth air

their families extend the children's fund and the property tax set acid until june 30th 20041 it will increase the property tax to $0.04 for each $100 of seated property value not increasing or change only effecting the money of property revenues set aside aid help where the chancellor fund to increase the youth 18 through 24 years old measure c will extend the public education k3w0ish9 be fund until june 30th 20044 and extends the fund 40 preschools to include 3 go, 4 and 5 years old and to use the fund for children from birth to 3 years

old and measure c will create on our children council to advise the city and school district on the families in san francisco and on proprietor ace best practices for addressing those needs every 5 years the council will adapt a our children plan to recommend new policies and fund for families the purpose of the plan to have an efficient service measure c will go indicted the rainy day reserve into a school and city resign i didn't day reserve 25 percent will go to schools and 75 to the city reserves under measure c the school district will withdraw up to half of the money in years it expects 20 collect less money for students he and

will have to layoff employees the school board overrides those and withdraws any school reserves if you vote yes. you want the city to amend the certifies for families by extending the children's fund by 25 years and step forward the public education fund for a 26 years and creating our children and our families council and dividing the existing rainy refer so is a city and school rainy refer if you vote no, you do not want to the city to make the changes to the charter i'm here with santa drive fewer with the division and board of education and are a proponent we're joined by marcie the lib

terrain a proponent thank you folks for joining us starting with opening president fewer and so measure c is a ballot measure under the battle to authorizing a person of the general fund to be set diode aside to provide services to the city government san francisco youth the children's fund. >> you public enrichment fund to join together to better lion the services those fund have been providing education for thousands of children in sophistication for example, this fund as 73 drenlz to liernsz and people's 3 p e teachers and engineering and math so this is has a great impact on san francisco children for the past decade and so we hope to reauthorize it thank you.

>> you're opening remarks ms. berry. >> the lib terrain has recommended a no vote on this proposal because we have challenged with all 3 components of the proposal first of all, the children's fund does not just fund science and magnet and those kinds of things there are 3 things of what it funds a lot of services every time services go up obviously new innovative education goes down so that's one challenge we see the other challenge is that the rainy day fund is also part of this proposal they're old rainy day fund in existence it was the board of supervisors and the mayor that decided how it would be assessed now we have two fund one is

going to, accessed by the briefcase. >> given of the stemmed one hundred and 9 stemmed thousand children only a house will this impact the cost to families. >> it will make it easier for the families to live here there's no increase in the taxed also it's easy for families to live here not assessing the services by art and pe and science those kinds of things that parents have to pay for out-of-pocket often we this liv also funds that the release for families coming to san francisco as a forgotten i have to pay out

of pocketed having counseling at schools and much the medical services anothers school sites. >> how do you respond. >> i'm assuming we're talking about the idea if i have all those services then the population will increase the public utilities population will increase this is incorrect the reason that families move into the city only to see whether the education system is teaching their children how to write and read how to fill out a job application in euphoric on services that's not what a family it looking for how is the children learn that's why we're

concerned about the increase of services as opposed to complete emphasis on the type of education mode of education innovative i'm sorry innovative way of teaching which were we haven't talked about other modes will besides the public utilities there recent teachers in front of the class let's put you fund on that. >> what happened to this measure lead to hire enrollment rates and in san francisco is there accurate funding for teacher to student ratio. >> this funds a lot of academies science and technology and engineering and math all the technology first of all, there's never enough money in our public education we have so you're

asking is this accurate 23u7bd absolutely not providing children with the well education they deserve and he have to say that san francisco we're proud of the san franciscans that voted for this seeing the need for the social responsibility and so the answer to your question we are predicting much hyper enrollment rates and hope to serve all our families are a quality high rated we're one of the top in the state of california with a our skufbtd we hope to choose to use our public school. >> with what are your thoughts. >> i think that services are the key could enrollment and good education we're looking at to read the proposal you'll see

two pages of things that have absolutely nothing to do with fires or magnet true the enrichment funding they're providing amenities, however, i think that so much services when our funding those for example, one that is clearly in the proposition is drug and help with drug use or help with the lgbt issues people help with things we call local services but again, a family does not move in or live in public utilities to access the services that has to do with the things i've mentioned but how the children are learning i'll agree there never will be enough the

more there is the more spent there is no ability to keep any cap on the spending so if we have more funding we're going to have more services so do we have enough funding for a population probably not and never will. >> thank you so we'll start with final thoughts we'll begin with you ms. berry. >> yes. i think that the idea services are they increasing is a good thing perhaps something that should be rethought if we're increasing services that means that somewhere in the family their education system somewhere there's a huge breakdown there is mammoth failure if we go by the services; right? the thing to

do not view the rise of services not so good and a therefrom emphasis as i say the education education is easily measured can our child get out of school and go to college or got a profession or fill out a application florida no we've failed. >> your final thoughts. >> surely education is the first mission we have a college culture in our schools and a graduation rate in california we're at top our students do well but it's difficulty difficult for the families to live here you see the majority of children below the poverty

level what their incomes are like the reason we have the educational experience and we're saying that 73 teachers and librarians is a service but i disagree with you i think this the proposition that zero all the libraries and i don't think that the art teachers i think they're a necessity to provide a well-rounded education so i would urge everybody to vote yes on measure b it's for our children and the future of san francisco. >> thank you both firing time and your comments we hope this dissuasion has been forgive for more information invest sf election.org remember

earlier voting is at city hall from 8 to 4 and vote earlier at city hall from and if you don't vote on

november 4th. >> hello, i'm nona melkonian with sfgovtv along with the legacy of women voters here to talk about measure f a ballot measure on tuesday november 4th measure f is an ordinance that increases the heeblth limit on the acre site from 40 to 90 feet it provides all aspects of the development other than the height limit will be for subject including the environmental review the height limit will not become until after sequa approves the plan that makes it city policies for the development of the site 9 acres of waterfront parks and

recreational areas for the bay and one thousand to 2 thousand for unit most of them will be rentals and thirty percent below market rate for low income folks and restoration of the historic struts and nonprofit and small-scale manufacturing and retail and the prestige located in the pier 70 between one pea 20 million square feet parking and transportation improvements and a significant number of jobs and revenue for public housing facilities if i vote yes. you want to increase the height limit for new building inspections on the pier 70 from 4 to 900 feet and ugly are courage the environmental review

and make that city policy to clus include the job creations for to site if you vote no, not to increase the height limits or adapt the city policy i'm here where kelly pressor with the fair market value measure f and a property and the intellect to the coalition of san francisco neighborhood and a proponent of the measure thank you for being here he i'm to start with opening remarks kelly would you like to go first day f first. >> thank you very much fourteenth uh-huh tuntd to be here i support it and stand for the coalitions dmrug the form mayor and the essentially and the resident and associations to support measure f and create jobs and housing pier 70 is in

an area along the waterfront where people have no access to water measure f will increased the access to the waterfront tearing down the fences that have blocked the access and open it up for parks that's why people have coverage and i did not think the essentially and the democratic and republicans and this for park advocates by coming out to the poodles and supporting measure f. >> tanner's. >> the coalition for san francisco neighborhood which a is large organization of civic clubs they slit wide open on the issue with no exorbitant it involves and several of the dpw things it san francisco is a small peninsula we have the

density population of any of the 48 county as a result people want to increase the population to one million people it is currently 8 hundred and 50 thousand approximately it's a matter of how much in san francisco we'll pay a price for to in terms of accident the and it's accompanying with the right population for san francisco if we go too high a lot of problems. >> kelly how will this impact the city's future development. >> first, i'd like to be clear the proposition only permanence to pier 70 no other waterfronts on san francisco pier 70 plan has come out with many, many years of community input and outreach and measure f is really an additional step in the possess the ballot measure itself is very clear that the

environmental review process sequa as well as the mr. larkin process are not shorthand or limited are subject gaited there will be a thorough study this is an additional check in with 9 county and stakeholders to make sure that folks feel good about what's happening on the pier and good reviews see for the years to come. >> tanner's. >> the reason for measure f they want to wave the height limits the city chapter was amended where they have the height limits that are binding and have to be waved by public vote that's the problem in terms of a public waiver is needed to build higher than the buildings and one of the problems is this is earthquake country we have

seismic problems and the 1906 san francisco earthquake the 1489 earthquake in mri yet and so on as a result, the more high-rise we have the more dangerous for the public we've had a lot of problems over the years and 1906 was the worse how big do we want to build and what's the long term politicians the less high-rise the less people going to be hurt if we have a serious earthquake like 1906. >> it reduced the demand for the pricing of housing in san francisco. >> as mentioned measure f is fully client with proposition g

and san francisco is in serious housing countries today part of the plan for pier 70 is thirty percent of the housing opted below market rate to middle-income and low income folks this is 3 times such as city lay requires but in addition to building housing measure f includes other public benefits 9 acres of parks and playground and that triples the amount of space in dog patch and there's rehabilitation and historic buildings on the register in the historic district a preservation of an artist community currently at pier 70 by building now studios the investment of $20 million for transportation improvements and 2 hundred million for infrastructure including for earthquake safest and addressing

the seawall rise and and terrance. >> the more density in san francisco and we have the highest per family per space and more traffic problems and automobile and diseases and san francisco as some people know 19 hundred to 190 six the bubonic practically they were able to stamp it out it was based on largely the density of our population we were the largest city on the west coast at the time and basically, what we need to do it st. is keep the population being two dense for a lot of reasons especially we're earthquake country but san francisco has a donates

population too much high-rise next to the santa ana dresses fault line and two the north american and we've been hurt but it before and could be again, the last high-rise we had the satisfactory the people. >> we have a little bit of time i'm to get our final remarks first kelly gave the opening statement so terrance. >> this is what we want to see are for the future of san francisco this was was the board was talking about this was slit wide open a lot of people are concerned about the housing density and all the problems in terms of the earthquake safety and all the issues and automobile accidents, etc. it's

a matter of what we want to do for the future of san francisco if we want to pile one million and a half in san francisco this will hurt our mobility and ♪ the event of a major earthquake it could lead to disaster >> kelly your thoughts. >> thank you, again pier 70 was an hub of vibrant activity that is now forgotten and measure f will revitalized this unacceptable area with waterfront parks and jobs and housing the revitalization needs an investment of $20 million to comploch the transportation and includes the affordable housing 9 arsz or acres will triple the amount of parks in dog patch today and