ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION A | Libertarian Party of San Francisco


Opponent’s Argument

Against Proposition A

Rebuttal to Proponent’s Argument

in Favor of Proposition A

There is a key sentence in this Charter Amendment that isn't mentioned in the ballot summary. It appears twice, once with respect to employees hired on or before January 9, 2009, and once with respect to employees hired after that date.

That sentence reads as follows:

"In the event that the contribution rates set forth above do not cover the entire Normal Cost, the Employer shall contribute the balance into the RHCTF (Retiree Health Care Trust Fund)."

What this means in plain English:

If retiree health care costs end up not being fully covered by the 2% or less of their salaries that city employees are required to pay toward those costs, their employer - YOU, the taxpayer - will be required to make up the difference!

Even if the city were near bankrupt, with schools closing, roads full of potholes, hospitals falling apart, parks full of trash and weeds, and police and fire protection virtually non-existent, it wouldn't matter. The gold-plated health care plans provided to people who worked for the city decades ago, and their dependents, would still have first claim on your tax dollars if Prop. A passes.

  • There's no trust fund for MUNI maintenance.
  • There's no trust fund for the upkeep of San Francisco parks.
  • There's no trust fund to ensure our streets are properly paved.

But well-paid government employees -  including the Supervisors who put this measure on the ballot - want to make sure THEY have a trust fund that will take care of them.

We say let them share an uncertain future with the rest of us. Vote NO on Prop. A.

Libertarian Party of San Francisco

P.S. If a ballot measure is too long, unclear, confusing, or complicated, it's best to vote it down. If you don't understand it, it's irresponsible to pass it.

5 Facts About A:

1. It's no "lockbox". The city can immediately draw against the trust fund, even though it's underfunded. Currently, the trust fund is off limits until 2020. No more under Proposition A. Withdrawals are allowed if the city's retiree health care costs exceed 10% of payroll, about $130 million. The SF Chronicle notes the city will exceed the target every year for the foreseeable future.

2. It won't protect retiree health care money from misappropriation. RHCTF funds are reserved for retiree health care costs under today's law. Proposition A doesn't change that.

3. It won't close the city's retiree health care deficit, nor protect future generations. Proposition A won't protect taxpayers from rising health care costs, and low withdrawal limits mean the supervisors will mismanage the RHCTF.

4. The savings from A benefit the city's highest-paid employees, like the supervisors. Their health care plans will be off limits for budget cuts, meaning providers can bill city taxpayers excessively. Basic services like police and fire get no such protection.

5. Even the Author of A admits the city leaders backing it want to "raid" retiree health care money. Why should you trust them to protect what they've said they'd rather spend?

Proposition A will protect health plans of imminent retirees like the supervisors, but threaten them for later retirees. Surely elementary teachers don't want their students funding their retirement benefits.

Please join us in voting NO on A.

Libertarian Party of San Francisco