From Ballotpedia | Proposition D: San Francisco Commercial Rent Tax for Housing and Homelessness Services |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| June 5, 2018 |
| Status: |
Majority required: 66.67% |
| Topic: |
| City tax |
| Related articles |
| City tax on the ballot June 5, 2018 ballot measures in California San Francisco County, California ballot measures Local housing on the ballot |
| See also |
| San Francisco, California |
A commercial rent tax for housing and homelessness services was on the ballot for San Francisco voters in San Francisco County, California, on June 5, 2018. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of authorizing an additional tax on the lease of commercial property for landlords with annual gross receipts above $1 million. The measure was designed to levy a new tax of 1.7 percent of gross receipts to fund low-income and medium-income housing, homelessness services, and the general fund. |
| A no vote was a vote against authorizing an additional tax on the lease of commercial property in the amount of 1.7 percent of gross receipts to fund low-income and medium-income housing, homelessness services, and the general fund. |
Proposition D—known by supporters as the Housing for All measure—competed with Proposition C, a citizen initiative designed to fund childcare and early education, also by taxing gross receipts from the lease of commercial property. Only one measure could be approved.
A two-thirds (66.67 percent) supermajority vote was required for the approval of this measure.
|
San Francisco Proposition D |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 105,746 | 44.93% | ||
| 129,611 | 55.07% | |||
City officials estimated that the 1.7 percent tax under Proposition D would generate $70 million a year, with funds designated for the following purposes:[1]
The tax was designed to be levied in addition to San Francisco's existing tax on commercial leases, which ranged from 0.285 percent to 0.3 percent at the time the measure was placed on the ballot.[2] Under the proposition, exemptions would apply to commercial landlords with less than $1 million in gross receipts, and to any rents for nonprofit, government, arts, industrial, and non-formula retail uses, among other state exemptions.[3]
Proposition D required a two-thirds (66.67 percent) supermajority vote for approval, while the competing measure—Proposition C—required a simple majority of 50 percent plus one for approval. [4]
The measure summary was as follows:[5]
| “ |
Ordinance amending the Business and Tax Regulations Code and Administrative Code to impose an additional tax of 1.7% on the gross receipts from the lease of commercial space in the City, to fund low- and middle-income housing and homelessness services and the General Fund; exempting from the additional tax rents from production, distribution, and repair uses, retail sales and services uses, entertainment, arts and recreation uses, and nonprofit uses; and increasing the City's appropriations limit by the amount collected under the new tax for four years from June 5, 2018. [6] |
” |
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the San Francisco Controller:[1]
| “ |
Should the proposed ordinance be approved by the voters, in my opinion, it would generate additional net annual revenue to the City of approximately $70 million. The proposed ordinance would raise the gross receipts tax paid by commercial landlords in San Francisco. The revenues from the tax would be designated for affordable housing programs and homelessness programs, except that $3.0 million annually, adjusted for inflation in subsequent years, would be available for any public purpose. Total tax collections would change over time at the rate of inflation of commercial rents in the City. The current gross receipts tax was passed by the voters in November 2012 and replaced the former 1.5% payroll tax with a gross receipts tax that varies by the size and type of business. Commercial landlords generally pay a rate between 0.285% and 0.3% of gross receipts currently. The proposed ordinance would add a new tax of 1.7% for most commercial spaces, in addition to the current gross receipts tax. The proposal exempts commercial landlords with less than $1.0 million in gross receipts, rents paid from non-profit tenants, arts, industrial uses, and retail uses as well as other exemptions required under State law. We estimate that these exemptions represent approximately 22% of the tax base, and therefore that 78% of commercial rents paid in the city would be subject to the tax. As noted above, total tax revenues that would be generated are estimated to be approximately $70 million annually based on the current tax base, exemptions and rates, and would change over time at the rate of inflation of commercial rents in the City. [6] |
” |
| —San Francisco Controller | ||
The full text of the measure is available here.
Affordable Housing for All, Yes on D led the campaign in favor of Proposition D. The group described itself on its website as a "broad coalition of working families, renters and business leaders."[7]
View a list of endorsements for Proposition D compiled by Affordable Housing for All here.
Groups and individuals that endorsed Proposition D include:
The group Affordable Housing for All, Yes on D made the following argument on its website:[7]
| “ |
We all feel this affordable housing crisis. Proposition D offers a way to do something about it without burdening people who cannot afford to pay more. Proposition D places a gross receipts tax on corporations to make sure they pay their fair share. It exempts non-profits and small businesses and generates a one-billion-dollar fund for affordable housing and homeless services. Proposition D will help over 28,000 San Franciscans in the next decade.[6] |
” |
| —Affordable Housing for All, Yes on D | ||
Groups that endorsed a "no" vote on Proposition D include:
The group Democratic Socialists of America, San Francisco made the following statement on its website:[13]
| “ |
DSA San Francisco condemns Interim Mayor Farrell and Supervisors Cohen, Safai, Sheehy, and Tang for playing politics with this disingenuous effort to block Proposition C. We are appalled that these conservative Democrats chose to force affordable housing advocates to compete for funding with child care providers, many of whom are women of color who work for completely inadequate wages. We reject this crass attempt to break working class solidarity.[6] |
” |
| —Democratic Socialists of America, San Francisco | ||
The group SF Berniecrats stated on its website, "Half of the housing would go to people earning over $100k-$150k/year."[17]
San Francisco Board of Supervisors members Ahsha Safai, Jeff Sheehy, Katy Tang, Malia Cohen, and Mark Farrell sponsored the ballot measure.[5]
<ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named title![]() |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2022 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
| |||||
ZWI signed: