Many, including myself, are concerned this would be used to further harass and displace the homeless, especially those in or near parks. Most funding goes to park improvements, and the little that’s allocated to homeless services was tacked on to make it seem progressive.
-
-
-
It was tacked on because it polled better tbh
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Was passing in the initial vote count--rare/ominous for the more right-wing position to get stronger as the count goes deeper
-
It's almost like there are a lot of "progressive" people in the East Bay who think taxing property is regressive. No idea who may have validated that position...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ugh. Looking at last few years, I have come to believe it could be something like 60% always yes 35% always no, 5% movable on specifics.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Homelessness up in Oakland 47% in two years. What is wrong with people?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What those voting 'no' need to realize is that they will pay one way or another.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
