Community Health and Medical Facilities, Street Safety, Public Spaces, and Shelter to Reduce Homelessness Bond
HEALTHY, SAFE, AND VIBRANT SAN FRANCISCO BOND. To finance the acquisition or improvement of real property, including: temporary shelters, particularly for families; facilities that deliver healthcare services, including preventive care and behavioral health services, such as the Chinatown Public Health Center; critical repairs, renovations, and seismic upgrades at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center and Laguna Honda Hospital; and pedestrian and street safety improvements, streetscape enhancements, and other public space improvements; and to pay related costs; shall the City and County of San Francisco issue $390,000,000 in general obligation bonds with a duration of up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated average tax rate of $0.0069/$100 of assessed property value, and projected average annual revenues of $31,000,000, 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.
This measure requires 66 2⁄3% affirmative votes to pass. However, this measure will require 55% to pass if voters also approve State Proposition 5.
Digest by the Ballot Simplification Committee
The Way It Is Now:
The City provides and maintains public facilities and infrastructure.
The City can issue voter-approved general obligation bonds to help fund these projects.
The Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee reviews how the bond proceeds are spent.
The Proposal:
Proposition B is a bond measure that would allow the City to borrow up to $390 million by issuing general obligation bonds. The City would fund:
- up to $99.1 million to acquire or improve community health centers, including up to $71.1 million to seismically retrofit and renovate the Chinatown Public Health Center and up to $28 million to relocate the City Clinic;
- up to $66 million to repair and renovate Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (General Hospital) and Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation Center;
- up to $40 million to seismically retrofit General Hospital;
- up to $63.9 million for street and sidewalk safety projects;
- up to $41 million to improve and modernize public spaces in downtown San Francisco;
- up to $25 million for Harvey Milk Plaza;
- up to $5 million for parks and recreation centers; and
- up to $50 million for shelter or interim housing sites to reduce family homelessness.
Proposition B would require the Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee to review how this bond money is spent.
City policy is to limit the amount of money it borrows by issuing new bonds only as prior bonds are paid off. If needed, an increase in the property tax rate would be allowed. Landlords would be permitted to pass through up to 50% of any resulting property tax increase to tenants.
A "YES" Vote Means: If you vote "yes," you want the City to issue up to $390 million in general obligation bonds to fund projects related to community health and medical facilities, street safety, public spaces and interim housing to reduce family homelessness.
A "NO" Vote Means: If you vote "no," you do not want the City to issue these bonds.
Controller's Statement on "B"
City Controller Greg Wagner has issued the following statement on the fiscal impact of Proposition B:
Should the proposed $390 million in general obligation bonds (“Proposed GO Bond”) be authorized and sold under current assumptions, the approximate costs will be as follows:
a) In Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026, following issuance of the first series of bonds, the best estimate of the tax required to fund this bond issue would result in a property tax rate of $0.0040 per $100 ($4.00 per $100,000) of assessed valuation.
b) In FY 2029-2030, the year with the highest estimated tax rate following the issuance of the last series of bonds, the best estimate of the tax required to fund this bond issue would result in a property tax rate of $0.0101 per $100 ($10.10 per $100,000) of assessed valuation.
c) The best estimate of total debt service, including principal and interest, that would be required to be repaid if all proposed $390 million in general obligation bonds are issued and sold, would be approximately $737 million.
d) The best estimate of the average tax rate for these bonds over the entire projected duration of the bond debt service from FY 2025-2026 through FY 2046-2047 is $0.0069 per $100 ($6.90 per $100,000) of assessed valuation.
e) Based on these estimates, the highest estimated annual property tax cost for these bonds for the owner of a home with an assessed value of $700,000 would be approximately $70.00.
The City Charter limits the amount of City general obligation bonds (“City GO bonds”) that can be outstanding at any given time to 3% of the assessed value of taxable property in the City. Bonds issued by the San Francisco Community College District, San Francisco Unified School District, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) or other non-City entities are not counted for the purposes of the City Charter limit. As of June 30, 2024, there was $2.2 billion in outstanding City GO bonds (representing 0.6% of assessed value of taxable property in the City). An additional $1.6 billion of City GO bonds remains authorized but unissued. Should the Proposed GO Bond be approved by the voters, the total amount of (i) outstanding and (ii) authorized but unissued City GO bonds would be $4.2 billion, or approximately 1.2% of the assessed value of taxable property in the City. This calculation assumes the issuance of all of the bonds authorized by the voters, including the Proposed GO Bond measure.
The City’s current non-binding debt management policy is to keep the property tax rate for City general obligation bonds below the 2005-2006 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. Given this policy, it is not anticipated that the levy of the City’s GO bond property taxes for this measure, if approved by the voters, would increase the property tax rate for City GO bonds above the 2006 fiscal year level.
Under current law, landlords may be able to pass through a portion of general obligation bond repayment costs to tenants. The amount of any permissible passthrough is determined by tenancy start date among other factors. The Rent Board publishes information on passthroughs each year.
These estimates are based on projections only, which are not binding upon the City. Projections and estimates may vary due to the timing of bond sales, the amount of bonds sold at each sale, and actual assessed valuation over the term of repayment of the bonds. Hence, the actual tax rate and the years in which such rates are applicable may vary from those estimated above.
The City will incur nominal costs related to staff time administering the Proposed GO Bond program. Certain capitalizable staff costs (i.e. staff costs directly related to the construction or acquisition of the underlying asset) of the City may be eligible for reimbursement by bond proceeds and accordingly impose no increased cost of City government.
How "B" Got on the Ballot
On July 23, 2024, the Board of Supervisors voted 11 to 0 to place Proposition B on the ballot. The Supervisors voted as follows:
Yes: Chan, Dorsey, Engardio, Mandelman, Melgar, Peskin, Preston, Ronen, Safai, Stefani, Walton.
No: None.
The above statement is an impartial analysis of this measure. Arguments for and against this measure immediately follow. The full text can be found under Legal Text. Some of the words used in the ballot digest are explained in Words You Need to Know.
Arguments are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. Arguments are printed as submitted. Spelling and grammatical errors have not been corrected.
Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition B
YES ON PROP B FOR A HEALTHY, SAFE, VIBRANT SAN FRANCISCO
San Francisco has faced unprecedented challenges since the pandemic and we’ve shown remarkable resilience. The last few years have shown the vital importance of the public health and safety infrastructure that all San Franciscans rely on.
Prop B, a $390 million General Obligation Bond, will make critical investments to repair and upgrade our public hospitals and clinics, reduce family homelessness, and improve roads, street safety, and public spaces.
Prop B WILL NOT raise property taxes. Prop B WILL make smart, badly-needed investments to protect our health and safety.
Prop B requires strict transparency and full public disclosure of all spending, annual independent reviews, audits, and reports to the Citizens General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee.
Prop B Strengthens Our Public Hospitals and Clinics:
- Makes urgent seismic and safety improvements to Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, the only Level 1 Trauma Center serving San Francisco, and the hub of the city’s disaster response in an earthquake or major crisis.
- Doubles the capacity of Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital’s Psychiatric Emergency Services, increasing needed access to mental health care.
- Ensures critical infrastructure and seismic repairs to Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation Center that will keep the hospital operational, meeting strict state and federal regulatory requirements to deliver the highest-quality care.
- Expands needed capacity at the Chinatown Public Health Center and City Clinic.
Prop B Adds Shelter and Housing for Homeless Families:
- Provides over 2,300 new units of housing for families with children, or a pregnant person, with the goal of ending family homelessness.
- Provides over 330 urgently-needed new units of shelter and transitional housing.
Prop B Improves Street and Pedestrian Safety:
- Provides funding for safer crosswalks, sidewalks, and road repaving.
Vote YES on Prop B, for a healthy, safe, vibrant San Francisco!
Mayor London Breed
Board President Aaron Peskin
Supervisor Connie Chan
Supervisor Matt Dorsey
Supervisor Joel Engardio
Supervisor Rafael Mandelman
Supervisor Myrna Melgar
Supervisor Dean Preston
Supervisor Hillary Ronen
Supervisor Ahsha Safaí
Supervisor Catherine Stefani
Supervisor Shamann Walton
www.HealthyVibrantSF.com
Rebuttal to Proponent’s Argument in Favor of Proposition B
San Francisco, a city of fewer than 800 thousand residents, has an annual budget of more than $15 billion dollars. We spend 40 percent more per capita than peer consolidated city counties – even after adjusting for our high cost of living. In exchange for their generosity, taxpayers have seen multiple government officials indicted for corruption, steadily declining municipal services, and San Francisco crowned, by one ranking, as the “worst run city in America.”
Building and maintaining public infrastructure is an essential function of government, but Proposition B reflects the same approach that has failed us time and again: throw money at a problem, with hardly any real oversight, and cross our fingers that the special interests who scoop it up will save the day. This approach is why, despite technological progress yielding higher efficiencies across almost every other industry over time, the cost of public projects keeps going up. It’s why San Francisco has more government employees and contractors today than it did six years ago, despite having fewer residents.
Unless voters send a clear message to our elected officials that we won’t approve new spending without meaningful oversight reforms, we will continue to be a city that spends $60 thousand on a tent, $20 thousand on a trash can, and $1.7 million on a toilet. Vote No on Proposition B.
The Briones Society
www.brionessociety.org
Opponent's Argument Against Proposition B
San Francisco is already spending more on homelessness than nearly any other city in the country, yet the crisis on our streets continues to worsen. This new $390 million bond asks voters to pour even more money into a system that has proven to be ineffective and mismanaged.
We agree that San Francisco must focus on shelter, recovery, and mental health services. However, the City should reallocate existing resources rather than burdening taxpayers with additional debt. Proposition C, passed in 2018, was intended to address homelessness by creating a dedicated fund from the gross receipts tax. But where has that money gone? Instead of throwing more money at the problem, we need reforms to ensure that funds are effectively allocated to high-impact programs that deliver real results.
Furthermore, many of the non-profits currently receiving City funding are not meeting performance goals. Some have been accused of fraud. Some are enabling and attracting drug tourists. It's time to hold these organizations accountable by defunding those that underperform and redirecting those resources to programs that actually work.
This bond is not the solution. It's a costly Band-Aid that ignores the real issues within our current system. San Francisco voters should demand accountability and effective reform before agreeing to fund another $390 million in homeless services.
Vote NO on Proposition B.
The Briones Society
www.brionessociety.org
Rebuttal to Opponent’s Argument Against Proposition B
Prop B is a fiscally smart investment in urgent seismic safety improvements to our public hospitals and expanded shelter for homeless families.
Prop B WILL NOT raise property taxes and, and requires FULL PUBLIC DISCLOSURE of all spending.
Prop B is subject to annual independent reviews, audits, and reports to the Citizens General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee. As taxpayers, we have direct access to those reports and audits.
Prop B invests responsibly in our health and safety infrastructure.
- Makes urgent seismic and safety improvements to Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, the hub of the city’s disaster response in an earthquake or major crisis.
- Expands needed access to mental health care facilities by doubling the capacity of Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital’s Psychiatric Emergency Services.
- Provides needed seismic improvements to Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation Center to ensure the hospital meets strict state and federal regulatory requirements to remain open and deliver the highest-quality care.
- Expands needed capacity at the Chinatown Public Health Center and City Clinic.
- Adds over 2,300 new units of housing for families with children, or a pregnant person, and over 330 urgently-needed new units of family shelter and transitional housing, with the goal of ending family homelessness.
Prop B WON’T raise your taxes. Prop B WILL make our public hospitals safer and expand housing and shelter for homeless families.
Mayor London Breed
Susan Ehrlich, Chief Executive Officer, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital & Trauma Center*
www.HealthyVibrantSF.com
*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.
Paid Arguments in Favor of Proposition B
1
PROP B PROVIDES CRITICAL SEISMIC UPGRADES TO ZUCKERBERG SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL
Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital is the heart of our city's public health system, providing critical care to everyone who walks through our doors, regardless of their ability to pay. Prop B will ensure our hospital remains a beacon of hope and care.
As the only Level 1 Trauma Center in the city, our hospital delivers life-saving services 24/7. Our dedicated staff works tirelessly to provide high-quality care to those in need. However, our facilities need significant upgrades to continue meeting the growing needs of our community.
Prop B will invest $40 million in seismic upgrades for our campus, ensuring it is safe and functional in the event of an earthquake. This investment is crucial to protect our patients, staff, and the integrity of the care we provide. Additionally, $66 million will fund critical repairs and renovations, addressing deferred maintenance and modernizing our infrastructure to keep pace with advancements in medical care.
These investments are made without any increases in taxes, and with strict financial oversight, audits and accountability.
By voting YES on Prop B, you are supporting:
- Seismic Safety: Protecting the hospital's structural integrity to withstand earthquakes, safeguarding patients and staff.
- Doubles the capacity of Psychiatric Emergency Services: Increasing needed access to mental health care.
- Modern Facilities: Upgrading outdated systems and facilities to enhance patient care and ensure compliance with health and safety standards.
- Uninterrupted Services: Ensuring our hospital can provide uninterrupted, high-quality care during and after emergencies.
These improvements are essential for the health and safety of every San Franciscan. When you or your loved ones need critical care, our hospital will be ready to provide it safely and effectively.
Join us in supporting Prop B to strengthen Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital.
Dr. Susan Ehrlich, CEO, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital*
San Francisco General Hospital Foundation
*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
2
PROP B IS A SMART INVESTMENT IN OUR PUBLIC HOSPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE THAT DOESN'T RAISE OUR TAXES
As San Francisco taxpayers, we are supporting Prop B because it WILL NOT raise property taxes, while making smart, badly-needed investments to:
-
Repair and seismically upgrade our public hospitals and clinics including Zuckerberg SF General and Laguna Honda Hospital.
- Provide over 2,300 new units of housing for families with children, or a pregnant person, and over 330 urgently-needed new units of family shelter and transitional housing.
Prop B requires strict transparency and full public disclosure of all spending, independent reviews, audits, and reports to the Citizens General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee.
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 ONLY as older ones are retired. That means no tax increase for you.
Prop B makes smart fiscal sense and ensures that we as taxpayers have clear oversight over bond spending.
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
California State Controller Malia Cohen
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
3
PROP B ENSURES CRITICALLY NEEDED SEISMIC UPGRADES TO CHINATOWN PUBLIC HEALTH CENTER
San Francisco's Chinatown Public Health Center has been a pillar of support for our Chinese American and immigrant communities for over half a century. Prop B ensures that we continue to provide culturally competent and accessible healthcare without raising taxes.
Chinatown Public Health Center is more than just a health center; it is a lifeline for thousands of San Franciscans who rely on its services for primary care, dental care, mental health support, and more. With 80% of patients speaking Chinese as their primary language, the clinic offers an essential bridge to quality healthcare for our immigrant community.
However, the current facility is outdated and seismically vulnerable. Prop B will allocate $71 million to renovate and seismically upgrade the facility, transforming it into a modern, safe, and efficient healthcare hub.
Prop B will also upgrade the Center to ensure it can withstand earthquakes. It will allow us to increase the number of medical exam rooms, behavioral health consultation rooms, and dental service areas to better meet the needs of our community. And it will help us implement state-of-the-art air quality and ventilation systems to ensure a safe and healthy environment for all.
These improvements are critical for maintaining the health and well-being of San Francisco's Asian American communities under one comprehensive, multigenerational location.
Please vote YES on Prop B to ensure that we can continue to provide essential healthcare services to our diverse Asian American and immigrant communities for generations to come, with no new taxes!
Dr. Sunny Pak, Former Director, Chinatown Public Health Center
Dr. Albert Yu, Former Director, Chinatown Public Health Center
Annie Chung, President & CEO, Self Help for the Elderly
Kent Woo, Executive Director, NICOS Chinese Health Coalition
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
4
PROP B SUPPORTS THE HEALTH OF OUR QUEER COMMUNITY
Prop B will enable City Clinic to continue its vital role serving the health of the queer community, preventing and managing outbreaks, and reducing STI rates.
In San Francisco, our commitment to public health has never been more critical. Prop B will provide the necessary funding to enhance and expand our public health infrastructure, ensuring that we can continue to protect and serve every resident of our city.
A cornerstone of this effort is the San Francisco City Clinic, a national model for sexual health services and a lifeline for our queer community. For over 100 years, City Clinic has delivered compassionate, patient-centered care, offering low-barrier access to HIV testing, STI screening and treatment, and prevention services. It has been at the forefront of groundbreaking studies and has played a pivotal role in San Francisco's public health response to crises like the mpox outbreak in 2022.
Despite its critical role, City Clinic currently operates out of a nearly 100-year-old converted firehouse that does not meet the needs of staff or patients. The building lacks sufficient space, proper ventilation, and ADA compliance, compromising the quality and safety of care.
Prop B will allocate $28 million to acquire a new facility for City Clinic, transforming it into a modern, fully equipped health center. This investment will:
- Increase the capacity for on-site lab testing, ensuring faster and more accurate results for patients.
- Provide ADA-compliant facilities to create a welcoming and inclusive environment for all.
- Implement state-of-the-art air quality and ventilation systems to protect patients and staff from airborne diseases.
Importantly, Prop B is a fiscally responsible measure that will NOT raise taxes and has high transparency and accountability standards, including independent annual reviews, audits, and reports to the Citizens General Obligation Oversight Committee.
Vote YES on Prop B.
Senator Scott Wiener
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
5
Join Friends of Harvey Milk Plaza in Building Vibrant Community Space with Prop B
Prop A delivers $25 million to rebuild Harvey Milk Plaza at the Castro Muni Station, a smart investment in a vibrant, more accessible, and safer gathering spot with new green space, places to sit, and a central plaza at Castro and Market. Harvey Milk is a worldwide ambassador for San Francisco, and he deserves a world-class civic space honoring his legacy that will inspire all with his message of social justice, inclusivity, and hope.
This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to create the nation's first major memorial to an LGBTQ+ individual, at this historic center of progressive social action, by voting Yes on Prop B.
Learn more at harveymilkplaza.org.
Friends of Harvey Milk Plaza
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
6
DEMOCRATIC LEADERS SUPPORT PROP B TO SEISMICALLY UPGRADE OUR PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITIES AND EXPAND SHELTER FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES
As leaders within the Democratic Party and committed advocates for a better San Francisco, we believe Prop B is essential to addressing our city's most pressing issues. Our shared values drive us to support this bond measure for its comprehensive and transformative potential.
- Prop B will fund crucial upgrades to our public health facilities including SF General and Laguna Honda Hospital, ensuring they are safe, accessible, and equipped to serve all residents, especially our most vulnerable communities.
- Prop B Adds Shelter and Housing for Homeless Families, providing over 2,300 new units of housing for families with children, or a pregnant person, with the goal of ending family homelessness.
- Prop B makes critical street safety improvements, creating safe neighborhoods for everyone.
- Prop B invests in creating vibrant public spaces that foster community connection and economic vitality.
By upgrading our city's public health and public space infrastructure, we are not only addressing immediate needs but also building a foundation for a resilient, thriving San Francisco.
Lastly, Prop B does NOT increase property tax rates because it is City policy to retire old bonds before issuing new ones, keeping the tax rate the same.
We urge you to vote YES on Prop B.
Vallie Brown, Former Supervisor
Carrie Barnes, Vice Chair, San Francisco Democratic Party
Emma Heiken Hare, Vice Chair, San Francisco Democratic Party
Lanier Coles, Director, San Francisco Democratic Party
Peter Gallotta, Member, San Francisco Democratic Party
Lily Ho, Member, San Francisco Democratic Party
Bilal Mahmood, Member, San Francisco Democratic Party
Marjan Philhour, Member, San Francisco Democratic Party
Jade Tu, Member, San Francisco Democratic Party
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
7
Small Businesses Support Prop B
As the backbone of our local economy, small businesses thrive in vibrant, safe, and well-maintained neighborhoods. By investing in key infrastructure and public spaces, Prop B supports the environment in which our businesses operate, ensuring a thriving commercial landscape for years to come.
Small businesses depend on well-kept streets, accessible public spaces, and a safe environment to attract customers and provide exceptional service. Prop B will invest in street safety improvements, ensuring that pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers can navigate our city safely. These enhancements will not only protect our community but also encourage more foot traffic, which is essential for local businesses.
Additionally, Prop B will fund critical repairs and upgrades to our public spaces, including parks, plazas, and commercial corridors. These investments will make our neighborhoods more attractive and welcoming, drawing in both residents and visitors.
The bond also prioritizes improving the safety and vitality of public spaces, including Powell Street and the nearby cable car turnaround, and Harvey Milk Plaza. By making these areas more attractive and accessible, Prop B will help drive the recovery of our downtown and commercial districts.
Prop B is a strategic investment in the future of San Francisco's small businesses. It addresses the immediate needs for infrastructure improvements while laying the groundwork for long-term economic growth and stability.
Prop B has the support of businesses because it imposes no new taxes and has strict fiscal oversight and accountability.
San Francisco Council of District Merchants Associations
Castro Merchants Association
California Nightlife Association
Polk District Merchants Association
Sharky Laguana, Former President, Small Business Commission*
*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
8
Paid Argument IN FAVOR of Proposition B
YES on Prop B to support our downtown recovery and economic growth.
Prop B is a vital investment in the future of San Francisco's economy, supporting downtown recovery, creating jobs, and boosting tourism. These critical investments in infrastructure and public spaces will maintain San Francisco's status as a world-class destination for commerce and tourism.
Prop B supports our downtown recovery without raising taxes!
Prop B funds essential street safety enhancements, making our streets safer for everyone and fostering a more vibrant and accessible city. These improvements will encourage more people to visit and spend time in our neighborhoods, directly supporting local businesses and driving economic growth.
Prop B will also support downtown recovery efforts by making our commercial corridors more inviting. Upgraded public spaces and improved infrastructure will help draw back businesses and tourists, contributing to a thriving downtown economy. This is especially important as we continue to recover from the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Prop B represents a strategic investment in San Francisco's economic future without raising taxes, by providing the necessary tools to support business growth, attract tourists, and enhance the overall quality of life for residents and visitors.
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
9
Vote YES on Prop B to support the health, safety, and vibrancy of our LGBTQ+ community and all San Franciscans.
Prop B is an investment in our city's LGBTQ+ communities. Here's why it matters:
City Clinic, which so many of our youth and low-income residents rely on for STI prevention and treatment, will be relocated and expanded under Prop B. This new facility will enhance services, provide faster lab results, and create a more inclusive environment for everyone. With Prop B, we can guarantee these services for years to come.
Additionally, Harvey Milk Plaza will be transformed into a safer, more vibrant space that honors our history and serves as a vital gathering place. This renovation is about more than aesthetics; it's about fostering a space where everyone feels welcome and safe.
Prop B also increases shelter and housing capacity for homeless families, ensuring our most vulnerable residents have a safe place to stay. As a City of refuge, especially for queer youth, this aligns with our city's values of compassion and inclusivity.
Prop B is more than an infrastructure investment. It's about building a city where everyone, regardless of who they are, has the opportunity to live a healthy, safe, and fulfilling life.
YES on Prop B
Alice B. Toklas LGBTQ Democratic Club
Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club
Senator Scott Wiener
Bevan Dufty, BART Board Director
Supervisor Matt Dorsey
Supervisor Joel Engardio
Supervisor Rafael Mandelman
Honey Mahogany, Speaker Emerita, San Francisco Democratic Party
Debra Walker, Artist
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
10
Prop B is essential to protecting and improving our public health and safety infrastructure without raising taxes.
Prop B invests $205 million into our public health infrastructure, investments that will not only save lives but ensure every resident has access to the best healthcare possible. Prop B provides for critical upgrades to:
Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, ensuring it remains a state-of-the-art facility that can handle emergencies and provide top-tier care.
Laguna Honda Hospital, the nation's largest publicly run skilled nursing facility, will receive much-needed renovations to meet federal and state standards.
Double the capacity of Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital's Psychiatric Emergency Services, increasing needed access to mental health care.
Redesign high-risk intersections, repave roads, and enhance public spaces. This means safer streets for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers, reducing accidents, and making our city more navigable.
Prop B will create thousands of jobs and stimulate our local economy without increasing taxes. The revitalization of downtown and Union Square, improved public spaces, and safer streets will attract more visitors and boost our tourism industry, which is vital for our economic recovery post-COVID-19.
Prop B will also ensure that our facilities meet modern environmental standards. For example, the renovations at Chinatown Public Health Center will make it the first fully electric building in the San Francisco Health Network, setting a precedent for sustainable development across the city.
Vote YES on Prop B to support a healthier, safer, and more vibrant San Francisco for all, without raising taxes!
Senator Scott Wiener
California State Controller Malia Cohen
San Francisco Assessor Joaquín Torres
District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
Bevan Dufty, BART Board Director
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Healthy, Vibrant SF, Yes on B.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. San Francisco General Hospital Foundation, 2. DeSilva Gates Construction, 3. Joseph Grubb.
11
Help revitalize San Francisco's economy by activating public spaces
From a spectacular festive Powell Street promenade to an inspirational Harvey Milk Plaza, it's time to show the world that San Francisco is on a boom loop of new public investment in our civic treasures. We can improve our physical, social, and community health by targeted public investments in our shared public spaces and facilities, bringing our diverse populations together.
Join your fellow San Franciscans in voting Yes on Prop A and send the message: San Francisco's best days are ahead of us.
Jim Chappell, Former Director, SPUR*
*For identification purposes only; author is signing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization.
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: Jim Chappell.
Paid Arguments Against Proposition B
1
Tell City Hall that residents deserve accountability and results from City government before we authorize hundreds of millions of dollars in more government spending: Vote No on Prop B.
In just the last ten years alone, voters have approved more than $5 Billion dollars in bond spending. But the City is on the wrong track, and we aren’t seeing results from City Hall.
Despite astronomical spending, homelessness has become an unmanageable crisis, City College is in disarray, the School District is in decline, transportation projects are delivered years late and hundreds of millions of dollars over budget, and our infrastructure is failing—all while the City budget has expanded to almost $16 Billion annually.
Despite having a budget that is larger than most states, San Francisco is now facing an alarming budget deficit of nearly $800 Million dollars. Now is certainly not the right time to approve $390 Million dollars in more government spending at the expense of taxpayers.
And while proponents will tell you that Prop B won’t raise taxes, what they won’t tell you is that your tax rate will actually go down if Prop B fails.
It’s time for voters to tell the City that we deserve accountability, results, and fiscal responsibility from City government before we approve hundreds of millions of dollars in more spending.
Throwing more money at our problems hasn’t worked in the past and it won’t work now.
Send a message to City Hall. Residents need city government to function properly and to spend within its means.
Vote No on Prop B.
San Francisco Apartment Association
The true source(s) of funds for the printing fee of this argument: San Francisco Apartment Association Political Action Committee.
The three largest contributors to the true source recipient committee: 1. West Coast Property Management & Maintenance Company, 2. Geary Real Estate Inc., 3. SkylinePMG, Inc.
Legal Text
Ordinance calling and providing for a special election to be held in the City and County of San Francisco on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, for the purpose of submitting to San Francisco voters a proposition to incur bonded indebtedness of not-to-exceed $390,000,000 to finance the acquisition or improvement of real property, including: facilities to deliver primary healthcare services, emergency medical services, skilled nursing services, and services for persons experiencing mental health challenges or persons with substance use disorders; acquire, improve, and seismically upgrade critical medical care and mental health facilities and emergency shelter facilities; and improvements for certain transportation, pedestrian, and street safety related capital improvements, streetscape enhancements and other public space improvements, and related costs necessary or convenient for each of the foregoing purposes; authorizing landlords to pass-through 50% of the resulting property tax increase, if any, to residential tenants under Administrative Code Chapter 37; providing for the levy and collection of taxes to pay both principal and interest on such Bonds; incorporating review of Bond expenditures under the provisions of the Administrative Code by the Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee; setting certain procedures and requirements for the election; adopting findings under the California Environmental Quality Act; and finding that the proposed Bonds are in conformity with the General Plan, and with the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1(b).
NOTE: Unchanged Code text and uncodified text are in plain Arial font.
Additions to Codes are in single-underline italics Times New Roman font.
Deletions to Codes are in strikethrough italics Times New Roman font.
Board amendment additions are in double-underlined Arial font.
Board amendment deletions are in strikethrough Arial font.
Asterisks (* * * *) indicate the omission of unchanged Code
subsections or parts of tables.Do NOT delete this NOTE: area.
Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco:
Section 1. Findings.
A. According to the City and County of San Francisco (“City”) Point-in-Time Count conducted in January 2022, there were 7,754 people estimated as experiencing homelessness in the City, 4,397 of whom were unsheltered, and over the course of an entire year, many more people experience homelessness.
B. The City, through its Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, currently offers temporary shelter to over 3,500 people per night through a variety of shelter programs including emergency shelter, navigation centers, cabins, safe parking, and transitional housing, but additional shelter beds are needed to meet the needs of unsheltered adults, young adults, and families.
C. The City administers local, state, and federal funded supportive housing to provide long-term affordable housing with on-site social services to people exiting chronic homelessness through a portfolio that includes Single Room Occupancy hotels, newly constructed units, scattered-site units and apartment buildings (“permanent supportive housing” or “PSH”), but the City does not have a sufficient supply of PSH units to meet the demand.
D. The City, through its Department of Public Health, provides healthcare services in a number of settings and through a number of different mechanisms including at existing facilities such as Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, Residential Care Facilities, community clinics, and through contracts with nonprofit service providers.
E. When there is insufficient capacity at any one level of care or facility, longer wait times for services have a detrimental effect on the ability of people to heal and become healthier.
F. Limited state and federal resources and the high cost of construction place a greater burden on local governments to contribute their own limited resources to produce more facilities or expand capacity at existing facilities to provide emergency medical services, preventive healthcare services, temporary shelter, and permanent supportive housing, but the City’s financial resources have not kept pace with demand.
G. The City is responsible for the state of good repair of more than 1,200 miles of streets, approximately 50,000 curb ramp locations, 371 street structures, and 9 plazas, which are heavily used and have longstanding deferred maintenance needs.
H. Streets, curb ramps, street structures, and plazas connect people to jobs, hospitals, shopping centers, and transit -- places that are vital to daily life -- and providing smooth and pothole-free streets and pedestrian rights-of-way is essential to reducing the costs of road-induced damage, preventing accidents for bicyclists and drivers, and creating safe passage for pedestrians.
I. City staff have identified projects to address public safety hazards and improve disabled access, and have identified street repaving, curb ramp, street structures, and plaza improvement programs to address public safety hazards, reduce the backlog of deferred maintenance, improve disabled access, and equitably improve the public right-of-way.
K. Due to the high office vacancy rates after the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a significant increase in retail vacancy and a significant decrease in sales tax revenue in the Union Square and downtown areas. This Bond will make capital improvements in and around the Union Square and downtown areas that are designed to improve the pedestrian experience as part of a complementary strategy to sustain and improve the downtown retail storefront economy.
L. Infrastructure investment is a known and tested jobs stimulus strategy with a strong multiplier effect, estimated at 5.93 jobs for every million dollars in construction spending according to the REMI Policy Insight model.
M. Since 2005, the City has engaged in regular, long-term capital planning to identify and advance shovel-ready projects that deliver improvements in line with adopted funding principles that prioritize legal and regulatory mandates, life safety and resilience, asset preservation and sustainability, programmatic and planned needs, and economic development.
N. City staff have identified needed capital improvements totaling $390,000,000 in projects and programs relating to acquiring or improving real property, including to improve and make permanent investments in temporary shelters and/or facilities that provide preventive healthcare, emergency medical care, and behavioral health services; invest in critical repairs, renovations, and seismic upgrades at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center and Laguna Honda Hospital; and transportation, pedestrian, and street safety improvements, streetscape enhancements and other public space improvements (as further described in Section 3 below, and herein collectively referred to as the “Project”).
O. The proposed Healthy, Safe, and Vibrant San Francisco Bond (“Bond” ) will provide a portion of the critical funding necessary to finance the costs of the Project in the most cost-effective manner possible.
P. The proposed Bond is recommended by the City’s 10-year capital plan, approved each odd-numbered year by the Mayor of the City and this Board of Supervisors of the City (“Board”).
Section 2. A special election is called and ordered to be held in the City on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, for the purpose of submitting to the electors of the City a proposition to incur bonded indebtedness of the City for the Project:
“HEALTHY, SAFE, AND VIBRANT SAN FRANCISCO BOND. $390,000,000 to acquire, construct, or improve real property, including: temporary shelters, particularly for families; facilities that deliver healthcare services, including preventive care and behavioral health services, such as the Chinatown Public Health Center; critical repairs, renovations and seismic upgrades at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center and Laguna Honda Hospital; and pedestrian and street safety improvements, streetscape enhancements, and other public space improvements; and to pay related costs; with a duration of up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated average tax rate of $0.0069/$100 of assessed property value, and projected average annual revenues of $31,000,000, all subject to independent citizen oversight and regular audits; and authorizing landlords to pass-through to residential tenants in units subject to Administrative Code Chapter 37 (“Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance”) 50% of the increase, if any, in the real property taxes attributable to the cost of the repayment of such Bonds.”
The special election called and ordered to be held hereby shall be referred to in this ordinance as the “Bond Special Election.”
Section 3. PROPOSED PROGRAM. Contractors and City departments shall comply with all applicable City laws when awarding contracts or performing work funded with the proceeds of Bonds authorized by this measure, including these projects; provided, however, that no Contractor owned or controlled by a member of the Board of Supervisors that participates in the vote on submitting this measure to the voters shall be permitted to bid on any work funded with proceeds of the Bonds:
A. EXPANDING AND IMPROVING COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS TO DELIVER PREVENTIVE PRIMARY CARE SERVICES, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES, SEXUAL HEALTH SERVICES, AND OTHER ANCILLARY HEALTHCARE SERVICES. Up to $99,100,000 of Bbond proceeds will be allocated to acquire or improve real property, including but not limited to finance the construction, acquisition, development, improvement, expansion, and rehabilitation of community health centers, including up to $71,100,000 to seismically retrofit and renovate the Chinatown Public Health Center and up to $28,000,000 to acquire and improve real property for the relocation of the City Clinic.
B. CRITICAL REPAIRS AND RENOVATIONS AT ZUCKERBERG SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL AND TRAUMA CENTER AND LAGUNA HONDA HOSPITAL. Up to $56,000,00066,000,000 of Bbond proceeds will be used to make critical repairs and renovations to Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center and Laguna Honda Hospital, including the repair of mechanical systems, fire control systems, and other deferred maintenance needs as well as real property improvements to hospital infrastructure required to meet new regulatory requirements to ensure the hospitals remain operational and in regulatory compliance.
C. SEISMIC UPGRADES AT ZUCKERBERG SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL AND TRAUMA CENTER TO ENSURE SAFETY. Up to $40,000,000 of Bbond proceeds will be used to pay the costs of improvements at Building 3 at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center for seismic retrofits to provide 65,000 square feet of safe and secure working space.
D. STREET SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS. Up to $68,900,000 63,900,000 of Bbond proceeds will be used to pay the cost of certain street safety projects Citywide, including projects on the High Injury Network, and making investments to improve pedestrian, bicycle, and traffic safety by repairing, constructing, and improving transportation infrastructure and equipment, including traffic signal upgrades, constructing and redesigning streets and sidewalks, and certain multimodal streetscape projects.
E. MODERN AND ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC REALM PROJECTS. Up to $46,000,000 41,000,000 of Bbond proceeds will used to improve and modernize public spaces in the downtown San Francisco areas, which could include areas near Powell and Market Streets, including accessibility improvements, and transit access and pedestrian experience enhancements; up to $25,000,000 of Bbond proceeds will be used to improve accessibility, safety, and design at the Harvey Milk Plaza; and up to $5,000,000 of Bbond proceeds will be used to rehabilitate and modernize park infrastructure and improve active recreational spaces.
F. NEW SHELTER SITES. Up to $50,000,000 of Bbond proceeds will be used to pay the costs to acquire, construct, finance, or improve shelter or interim housing sites to reduce unsheltered homelessness, particularly for families.
G. CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. A portion of Bond proceeds shall be used to perform audits of Bond expenditures implied by or necessarily incident to the acquisition or improvement of real property for the Project, as further described in Section 4 and Section 16 herein.
Section 4. BOND ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES.
The Bonds shall include the following administrative rules and principles:
A. OVERSIGHT. The proposed Bond funds shall be subject to approval processes and rules described in the San Francisco Charter and Administrative Code. Funds from this measure shall be committed to those potential programs and projects set for in Section 3, to the extent authorized by law and subject to any required environmental review. Pursuant to Administrative Code Section 5.31, the Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee shall conduct an annual, independent performance and financial audit review of Bond spending, to ensure that the Bond expenditures have been spent to serve taxpayers of the City in accordance with the objects and purposes of this Ordinance, and shall provide an annual report of the Bond program to the Mayor and the Board. The audits shall be posted in a manner that is easily accessible to the public as provided in subsection B below. The Citizen’s General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee shall receive educational training about bonds and fiscal oversight.
To the extent required by law, the Citizens’ General Bond Oversight Committee shall provide copies of such audit reports to the California State Auditor for its review.
B. TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. The City shall create and maintain a web page outlining and describing the Bbond program, progress, and activity updates, and shall make copies of any financial or performance audits available and reasonably accessible to members of the public. Each of the City’s Capital Planning Committee and the Citizens’ General Obligation Oversight Committee shall also hold an annual public hearing and review on the Bbond program and its implementation.
C. The Controller shall certify that the City has evaluated alternative funding sources for the projects authorized by this Ordinance. The certification regarding the evaluation of alternative funding sources shall be placed on file with the Clerk of the Board, in File No. 240497.
D. Proceeds of the sale of Bonds herein authorized shall be used only for the purposes specified in this Ordinance, and not for any other purpose, including the payment of salaries and other operating expenses of the City. The administrative costs of the City incurred to execute the projects authorized by this Ordinance shall not exceed 5% of the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds.
E. To the extent required by any new law, the City will appoint a citizens’ oversight committee to ensure that Bond proceeds are expended only for the purposes described in this Ordinance. Such oversight committee shall conduct or cause to be conducted an annual independent performance audit to ensure that Bond funds have been expended pursuant to the provisions of this Ordinance. In addition, the oversight committee shall conduct or cause to be conducted an annual independent financial audit of the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds until all of those proceeds have been expended on the purposes provided in this Ordinance. The audits shall be posted in a manner that is easily accessible to the public. The oversight committee shall provide copies of such audit reports to the California State Auditor for its review.
Members appointed to such oversight committee shall receive educational training about bonds and fiscal oversight.To the extent permitted by law, the Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee operating under Administrative Code Section 5.31 shall assume the responsibilities of any required oversight committee.
Section 5. The estimated cost of the bond-financed portion of the project described in Section 2 above was fixed by the Board by the following resolution and in the amount specified below:
Resolution No. , on file with the Clerk of the Board in File No.
240498 $390,000,000.
Such resolution was passed by two-thirds or more of the Board and approved by the Mayor. In such resolution it was recited and found by the Board that the sum of money specified is too great to be paid out of the ordinary annual income and revenue of the City in addition to the other annual expenses or other funds derived from taxes levied for those purposes and will require expenditures greater than the amount allowed by the annual tax levy.
The method and manner of payment of the estimated costs described in this ordinance are by the issuance of Bonds by the City not exceeding the principal amount specified.
Such estimate of costs as set forth in such resolution is adopted and determined to be the estimated cost of such bond-financed improvements and financing, respectively.
Section 6. The Bond Special Election shall be held and conducted and the votes received and canvassed, and the returns made and the results ascertained, determined, and declared as provided in this ordinance and in all particulars not recited in this ordinance such election shall be held according to the laws of the State of California (“State”) and the Charter of the City (“Charter”) and any regulations adopted under State law or the Charter, providing for and governing elections in the City, and the polls for such election shall be and remain open during the time required by such laws and regulations.
Section 7. The Bond Special Election is consolidated with the General Election scheduled to be held in the City on Tuesday, November 5, 2024 (“General Election”). The voting precincts, polling places, and officers of election for the General Election are hereby adopted, established, designated, and named, respectively, as the voting precincts, polling places, and officers of election for the Bond Special Election called, and reference is made to the notice of election setting forth the voting precincts, polling places, and officers of election for the General Election by the Director of Elections to be published in the official newspaper of the City on the date required under the laws of the State.
Section 8. The ballots to be used at the Bond Special Election shall be the ballots to be used at the General Election. The word limit for ballot propositions imposed by Municipal Elections Code Section 510 is waived. On the ballots to be used at the Bond Special Election, in addition to any other matter required by law to be printed thereon, shall appear the following as a separate proposition:
“HEALTHY, SAFE, AND VIBRANT SAN FRANCISCO BOND. To finance the acquisition or improvement of real property, including: temporary shelters, particularly for families; facilities that deliver healthcare services, including preventive care and behavioral health services, such as the Chinatown Public Health Center; critical repairs, renovations, and seismic upgrades at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center and Laguna Honda Hospital; and pedestrian and street safety improvements, streetscape enhancements, and other public space improvements; and to pay related costs; shall the City and County of San Francisco issue $390,000,000 in general obligation bonds with a duration of up to 30 years from the time of issuance, an estimated average tax rate of $0.0069/$100 of assessed property value, and projected average annual revenues of $31,000,000, 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.
Each voter to vote in favor of the foregoing bond proposition shall mark the ballot in the location corresponding to a "YES" vote for the proposition, and to vote against the proposition shall mark the ballot in the location corresponding to a "NO" vote for the proposition.
Section 9. If at the Bond Special Election it shall appear that two-thirds of all the voters voting on the proposition voted in favor of and authorized the incurring of bonded indebtedness for the purposes set forth in such proposition, then such proposition shall have been accepted by the electors, and the Bonds authorized shall be issued upon the order of the Board. Such Bonds shall bear interest at a rate not exceeding that permitted by law.
The votes cast for and against the proposition shall be counted separately and when two-thirds of the qualified electors, voting on the proposition, vote in favor, the proposition shall be deemed adopted.
Section 10. The actual expenditure of Bond proceeds provided for in this ordinance shall be net of financing costs.
Section 11. For the purpose of paying the principal and interest on the Bonds, the Board shall, at the time of fixing the general tax levy and in the manner for such general tax levy provided, levy and collect annually each year until such Bonds are paid, or until there is a sum in the Treasury of the City, or other account held on behalf of the Treasurer of the City, set apart for that purpose to meet all sums coming due for the principal and interest on the Bonds, a tax sufficient to pay the annual interest on such Bonds as the same becomes due and also such part of the principal thereof as shall become due before the proceeds of a tax levied at the time for making the next general tax levy can be made available for the payment of such principal.
Section 12. This ordinance shall be published in accordance with any State law requirements, and such publication shall constitute notice of the Bond Special Election and no other notice of the Bond Special Election hereby called need be given.
Section 13. The Board, having reviewed the proposed legislation, makes the following findings in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq., the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"), and San Francisco Administrative Code, Chapter 31. The Board finds, affirms, and declares:
A. EXPANDING AND IMPROVING COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS TO DELIVER PREVENTIVE PRIMARY CARE SERVICES, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES, SEXUAL HEALTH SERVICES, AND OTHER ANCILLARY HEALTHCARE SERVICES:
(i) The proposed funding for the Chinatown Public Health Center project was determined by the Planning Department to be exempt from CEQA as a Class 1 exemption for existing facilities pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, as set forth in the Planning Department’s memorandum dated May 6, 2024 , which determination is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. 240497 (“Planning Department Memorandum”) and is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
(ii) The remaining portion of the proposed funding described in Section 3A of this ordinance is not an activity subject to CEQA because it would not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment pursuant to CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and is not a "project" as defined under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4), as set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum, which determination is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
B. CRITICAL REPAIRS AND RENOVATIONS AT ZUCKERBERG SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL AND TRAUMA CENTER AND LAGUNA HONDA HOSPITAL: The proposed funding for critical repairs and renovations at Zuckerberg General Hospital and Trauma Center and Laguna Honda Hospital is not an activity subject to CEQA because it would not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment pursuant to CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and is not a "project" as defined under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4), as set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum, which determination is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
C. SEISMIC UPGRADES AT ZUCKERBERG SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL HOSPITAL AND TRAUMA CENTER TO ENSURE SAFETY: The proposed funding for seismic upgrades at Zuckerberg General Hospital and Trauma Center Building 3 was determined by the Planning Department to be not a "project" as defined under CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378, as it is not an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and the scope of the project is consistent with San Francisco Planning’s “Processing Guidance: Not a Project Under CEQA” memorandum dated September 18, 2013, as set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum, which determination is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
E. MODERN AND ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC REALM PROJECTS:
(i) HARVEY MILK PLAZA: The proposed funding for Harvey Milk Plaza has been determined to be exempt from CEQA as a Class 2 exemption for replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15302, as set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum, which determination is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
(ii) The remaining portion of the proposed funding described in Section 3E of this ordinance is not an activity subject to CEQA because it would not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment pursuant to CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and is not a "project" as defined under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4), as set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum, which determination is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
G. CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: The proposed role of the Citizens’ Oversight Committee is not an activity subject to CEQA because it would not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment pursuant to Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2) and is not a "project" as defined under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4), as set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum, which determination is hereby affirmed and adopted by this Board for the reasons set forth in the Planning Department Memorandum.
H. Based on the whole record before the Board, there are no substantial project changes, no substantial changes in project circumstances, and no new information of substantial importance that would change the conclusions set forth in the exemption determinations by the Planning Department that, as described above, the proposed projects are exempt from environmental review.
I. For the portion of the proposed funding that does not constitute a project pursuant to CEQA, the use of bond proceeds to finance any specific project or portion of any specific project will be subject to approval of the applicable decision-making body at that time, upon completion of planning and any further required environmental review under CEQA.
Section 14. The Board finds and declares that the proposed Bonds (a) were referred to the Planning Department in accordance with Section 4.105 of the San Francisco Charter and Section 2A.53(f) of the Administrative Code, (b) are in conformity with the priority policies of Section 101.1(b) of the San Francisco Planning Code, and (c) are consistent with the City’s General Plan, and adopts the findings of the Planning Department, as set forth in the General Plan Referral Report dated May 6, 2024, a copy of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board in File No. 240497 and incorporates such findings by this reference.
Section 15. Under Section 53410 of the California Government Code, the Bonds shall be for the specific purposes authorized in this ordinance and the proceeds of such Bonds will be applied only for such specific purposes. The City will comply with the requirements of Sections 53410(c) and 53410(d) of the California Government Code.
Section 16. CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. The Bonds are subject to, and incorporate by reference, the applicable provisions of Administrative Code Sections 5.30-5.36 ("Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee"). Under Administrative Code Section 5.31, to the extent permitted by law, 0.1% of the gross proceeds of the Bonds shall be deposited in a fund established by the Controller’s Office and appropriated by the Board of Supervisors at the direction of the Citizens’ General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee to cover the costs of such committee.
Section 17. The time requirements specified in Administrative Code Section 2.34 are waived.
Section 18. The City hereby declares its official intent to reimburse prior expenditures of the City incurred or expected to be incurred prior to the issuance and sale of any series of the Bonds in connection with the Project. The Board hereby declares the City’s intent to reimburse the City with the proceeds of the Bonds for expenditures with respect to the Project (the “Expenditures” and each, an “Expenditure”) made on and after that date that is no more than 60 days prior to the passage of this Ordinance. The City reasonably expects on the date hereof that it will reimburse the Expenditures with the proceeds of the Bonds.
Each Expenditure was and will be either (a) of a type properly chargeable to a capital account under general federal income tax principles (determined in each case as of the date of the Expenditure), (b) a cost of issuance with respect to the Bonds, or (c) a nonrecurring item that is not customarily payable from current revenues. The maximum aggregate principal amount of the Bonds expected to be issued for the Project is $390,000,000. The City shall make a reimbursement allocation, which is a written allocation by the City that evidences the City’s use of proceeds of the applicable series of Bonds to reimburse an Expenditure, no later than 18 months after the later of the date on which the Expenditure is paid or the related portion of the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the date on which the Expenditure is paid. The City recognizes that exceptions are available for certain “preliminary expenditures,” costs of issuance, certain de minimis amounts, expenditures by “small issuers” (based on the year of issuance and not the year of expenditure) and Expenditures for construction projects of at least five years.
Section 19. Landlords may pass through to residential tenants under the Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance (Administrative Code Chapter 37) 50% of any property tax increase, if any, that may result from the issuance of Bonds authorized by this ordinance. The City may enact ordinances authorizing tenants to seek waivers from the pass-through based on financial hardship.
Section 20. The appropriate officers, employees, representatives, and agents of the City are hereby authorized and directed to do everything necessary or desirable to accomplish the calling and holding of the Bond Special Election, and to otherwise carry out the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 21. Documents referenced in this ordinance are on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. 240497, which is hereby declared to be a part of this ordinance as if set forth fully herein.