@JspiderSF you’re the most partisan prof I know, so I’m asking you -
what is the public supposed to make of this spending plan other than to conclude that Progs are frauds?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @SonjaTrauss
Do you find that leading with an insult is a good way to initiate a policy discussion? I mean, uhh...sure, “progs are frauds” is the clear conclusion to draw from these opening offers in a negotiation. It almost rhymes.pic.twitter.com/zxRAu2Lvm9
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @JspiderSF @SonjaTrauss
Do you think it’s respectful or productive to focus on her tone instead of her point? Why is there zero for shelters in the proposal?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @graue @SonjaTrauss
I don't know anything about this beyond what's in the press, but I've seen how negotiations work between the Mayor and Board. Mayor offers 25%, BoS counters with 0, they end up somewhere in the middle. It doesn't mean progressives hate shelters. 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Haney has already said he supports building more shelters and navigation centers, plus funding for teacher salaries to make up for Prop G. It's hard to argue with also giving some money to childcare to similarly honor June's Prop C. 3/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
And as someone who's fought PG&E & championed CleanPowerSF, I'd love to see us finally get real on building clean power. Budgets are f'ing hard. There's never enough money. There will be hearings on this in January. Can we take a breath & wait for folks to flesh out proposals? 4/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @JspiderSF @SonjaTrauss
All fair points. I for one just as a constituent don’t see why shelters should get zero. It sticks out to me, negotiation or not. (And the childcare Prop C got a much slimmer majority.)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @graue @JspiderSF
Budgets are an expression of our values and priorities. Loud & clear we can see that the people who signed onto this budget do not value shelter or consider it a priority.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @SonjaTrauss @graue
Ok well, you asked (pretty rudely) and I tried to answer. If you’re gonna ignore my thoughts on the context & nuance of this debate and cast your opponents (who campaigned for Prop C) in black & white as heartless enemies of the homeless, I don’t know what we have to talk about.
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @JspiderSF @SonjaTrauss
Can I just say that I’m somewhere in the middle here? At least several of those 6 supervisors definitely do care about the homeless; they’re not awful people. But homeless SFans deserve better than for money to build shelter to be used as a bargaining chip.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Can I also just randomly butt in with less information here than everyone else and wonder why we aren’t saving this for the inevitable downturn? Did we already save for that? Would suck to have layoffs in 2 years.
-
-
I assume the portion of the money going to set asides includes some for reserves. The city stepped up its reserve policies after the Great Recession and they’re close to $900M now. Appendix 2 of this summer’s revenue letter looks like the latest summary. https://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Budget/FY18-19%20and%20FY19-20%20Revenue%20Letter%20FINAL.pdf …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JspiderSF @kimmaicutler and
Actually, the city is receiving $451 million, $234 million of which is required to go to budget reserves. So the $181 million is post-reserves.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.