Gentle Reader, allow me to entertain you with a story:

Once upon a time, a child was hired to tend to a flock of sheep in the dell outside a bucolic village. As the cock crowed each morning, she drove the sheep out of their pen, down the hamlet’s main street, across the bridge, through the grove, over the hill, and into the dell. But as she passed through the village gate every morning, she counted the townsfolk’s flock: One sheep, two sheep, three sheep, four sheep, five sheep, six sheep, seven sheep… sleep.

And so she would slumber until the dairymaids stirred to tend to their herds, and the beerwenches rose to open the tavern for the security guards coming off graveyard shift, the code monkeys who kept odd Mountain Dew-fueled hours, and the chronic inebriates who were rumored to be many and costly to the village’s Europinko healthcare system. Then, the little child would run across the bridge, through the grove, over the hill, and into the dell to catch up with her flock.
And the same would happen on her return every evening as the sky blushed and the green grove greyed: One sheep, two sheep, three sheep… sleep. Until she was awakened by the cling-clang of the milchherd’s approaching bells, and she scurried up the hill, through the grove, and across the bridge to catch up with her flock.

Until one morning, upon reaching the dell, she surveyed her flock and found one sheep to be missing. “Alas! O, woe! What ever shall I do?” And so she thought for five seconds before deciding. “A wolf!” she cried. “A wolf has come and seized one of our flock!” Her little exclamation echoed through the chamber of the dell, over the hill, through the grove, across the bridge, down the main street, and into the ear of the snarky gossip columnist who called himself the town crier. “A wolf!” he cried! “A wolf!” he hued. “Our wee hamlet’s flock is being devoured by a wolf!”

And so the townspeople gathered pitchfork and torch and hurried off to put down the beast: Across the bridge they ran, through the grove (slowly, keeping an eye to the ground for the dirty needles that were rumored to litter the forest floor), over the hill, and into the dell, where the lachrymose lass jumped to her feet (not wishing to be caught violating the townsfolk’s strict prohibition on sitting) and waved her crook in the air. “Alas! O, woe! A wolf has come and devoured one of the flock! This is pretty obviously not my fault!”

“Was it red or grey?” asked the townsfolk. “Yes!” cried the little girl. “Did it run east or west?” they asked. “Probably!” she cried. “Did it eat the sheep here or run off with it, still bleating and alive?” they asked her. “Don’t you think that Ed Lee should run for burghermeister?” she replied. “Oh, yes!” concurred an anonymous townsperson.

At this point, a little boy stepped forward. “Pardon me, little girl, but are you certain it was a wolf?” “A wolf!” cried the little girl, looking intently at the snarky gossip columnist who called himself the town crier. “Wolf wolf wolf! Wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf!” “I only ask,” continued the little boy, “because we live on the coast, and no wolves have been seen in this state since approximately 1900, and that was in the Sierras.” “Wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf!” cried the shepherdess to the snarky gossip columnist who called himself the town crier, and the townsfolk nodded in agreement.

The snarky gossip columnist who called himself the town crier turned to the lad with a contemptuous scowl. “If it wasn’t a wolf, little boy, how do you explain the disappearance of the sheep?”
“Oh, I don’t know,” the little boy replied. “But the current explanation seems statistically and ecosystemically improbable, and the story doesn’t quite add up. Perhaps a little more thorough consideration would behoove us.” “Wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf wolf!” cried the little shepherdess. The snarky gossip columnist who called himself the town crier sneered at the little lad and turned to Bo Peep. “This is a far more interesting story,” he concluded, and all the townsfolk agreed.

And that, gentle reader, is why we’re not going to tell you that the 2011 Biennial Homeless Count is statistically fatally flawed and demographically meaningless, and that we are doomed *never* to have a decent count until being homeless ceases to be a crime and the City government actively and humanly engages homeless people as equal and worthy neighbors in our city. We’ve been telling that story for almost two decades, and it seems that San Francisco media just doesn’t want to hear it. (Not *you*, Gentle Reader: You have always inspected our graphs and appreciated our statistical analyses with the utmost attentiveness and grace.)

So, instead, we’re telling you the stories that the snarky gossip-columnists who pretend to be journalists *could* have told you instead, using the exact same data.
[END SIDEBAR]

Every two years, the Federal governments Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires each geographical region that receives Federal funding for homeless services to conduct a point-in-time count of its outdoor and institutional homeless populations. Every two years, the mainstream press reports roughly the same story: (Now former) Mayor Gavin Newsom’s approach to solving homelessness would be working, if it weren’t for all those pesky outsiders coming into San Francisco! This narrative, in fact, could never be substantiated by the Count itself, and has actually been contradicted by the last three Counts. While we have always had extreme doubts about the validity of the Count (see side bar), this year we’re going to highlight seven important stories that the mainstream press is ignoring from the exact same data:

FAMILY STREET HOMELESSNESS QUADRUPLES IN TWO YEARS
According to the 2011 Homeless Count, street homelessness among families has increased by 280%, nearly quadrupling since 2009. Family homeless shelters confirm that waitlists for shelter access have increased severalfold since the beginning of the Great Recession and its concomitant increase in joblessness.

While homeless families comprised about 8.4% of the overall homeless population in 2009, they are 9.8% of the homeless population in 2011 (including both people living on the street and people living in homeless shelters and other institutions). While the overall homeless population has declined by 0.9%, the population of homeless families has increased by 15.7%. “This puts to lie the canard that homeless people are by and large bushy-bearded single men with shopping carts,” said homeless advocate Miguel Carrera. “We are in fact many communities, and we represent all the diversity of the population at large, from bushy-bearded seniors to toddlers in diapers.”

BLACK PEOPLE SIX TIMES AS LIKELY TO BE HOMELESS
According to recent enumerations, Black people now comprise 38.5% of the total homeless population of San Francisco, while they only comprise 5.8% of the city’s population as a whole. While homelessness has decreased by a little under 1% according to the 2011 Homeless Count, and the Black population of San Francisco has decreased by 22.6% according to the 2010 Census, the Black homeless population has grown by 10% in absolute terms, and by over 11% as a portion of the homeless population.
“This puts to lie the canard that we live in a post-racial society,” said activist Mesha Monge Irizarry. “Homelessness is very much a racial justice issue.”

80% OF SAN FRANCISCANS CAN’T GET SHELTER WHEN THEY NEED IT
The latest Homeless Count has found that the great majority of homeless San Franciscans seeking shelter are unable to actually obtain a shelter bed. Advocates say that difficulty in obtaining a shelter bed increased under the Newsom mayoral administration, when San Francisco lost nearly a third of its City-funded shelter beds to budget cuts. “This puts to lie the canard that the 85 to 100 shelter beds left empty every night were an indication of lack of demand,” said Shelter Advocate LJ Cirilo. “The demand was there, but the beds were apparently unavailable.”

THREE QUARTERS OF HOMELESS SAN FRANCISCANS WERE HOUSED SAN FRANCISCANS, FIRST
Most Had Lived Here for More than Five Years
According to the latest official count of homeless people in San Francisco, the great majority of homeless people in San Francisco were not homeless when they arrived here. In fact, 40.3% had been San Francisco residents for a decade or more before becoming homeless, while an additional 15.8% had lived here for five years or more before losing their housing. In comparison, 61.1% of all San Franciscans immigrated here from outside of California. “This puts to lie the canard that homeless people are outsiders who come here for our amazing array of social services,” said homeless advocate Jenise Standfield. “Most people in our community were San Franciscans long before they became homeless. Those who do come here come here for the same reasons that everyone else does: For employment, for tolerance, for relationships, and for all the aspects of our city that make San Francisco the amazing, beautiful, diverse city that it is. We’re San Franciscans: Not parasites.”

ONLY 2% OF HOMELESS PEOPLE COME TO SAN FRANCISCO FOR SERVICES
Most Don’t Access Emergency Room Services
According to the latest count of homeless people in San Francisco, only 2.3% of homeless people in San Francisco came here for homeless services. 76.9% of homeless people do not engage in County-administered government assistance, 53.4% do not access City-funded shelters, and 52.4% have never been to the emergency room in the past year; 61% usually do not use the emergency room for healthcare. “This puts to lie the canard that all homeless people are a great drain on the public coffers,” said homeless advocate Jesus Perez. “The great majority of homeless people don’t even access City-funded services.”

HALF OF ALL PANHANDLERS MAKE LESS THAN $50 PER MONTH
According to the 2011 Homeless Count, 50.6% of all panhandlers in San Francisco make $50 per month or less. Only 7.7% make $10 per day or more.
“This puts to lie the canard that panhandling is a stupendously lucrative scam,” said homeless advocate Bob Offer-Westort. “The urban legend that panhandlers make hundreds of dollars per day through alms-begging is just that: a legend. It’s got as much truth as the notion that Alka-Seltzer makes seagulls explode or that witches can’t sink.” We contacted Bayer AG for confirmation of Alka-Seltzer’s gull non-incendiary properties, but have received no comment at press time. Members of the San Francisco Wiccan Meetup confirm that witches are similarly buoyant to everyone else.

MAJORITY OF HOMELESS PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ADDICTIVE DISORDERS OR MENTAL ILLNESSES
The 2011 Homeless Count reports that 69% of homeless people do not abuse addictive substances, while 72.4% of homeless people have no mental illness. According to National Institute of Mental Health statistics, 26.2% of US adults have a mental illness in any given year: a number comparable to the 27.6% of homeless people who have a mental illness.
“This puts to lie the canard that mental illness and homelessness are somehow one and the same,” said homeless advocate Jennifer Friedenbach. “Mental illness is especially difficult for homeless people, who do not have the stability that housed people can depend on, and who are disproportionately criminalized for mental illness. However, the real cause of homelessness is poverty.”

The City of San Francisco released a five-year budget plan as now required by voters. It was more than a bit disturbing. Here I was thinking that the recession is over, city coffers would become flush again. The heart break and travesty our community has endured with multiple years of budget blood spatter, the closure of so many shelters, drop-in centers, treatment programs, cuts to disability, In-Home-Support Services, supportive housing has certainly caused a whole lot of pain. Literally. Whether it is longer waits for a disabled elder to get off the streets, or disease caused by lack of access to water, or back pains from sleeping on the cold concrete. Painful as in losing an after school program or a childcare slot for your child while you work, or having to leave your job to care for a parent who has Alzheimer’s and whose day treatment program shut down. It is pain. Painful as in losing your good city job.

What makes it most painful is that it never had to be this way. There are a myriad of ways the budget could be solved. At the state level, many of us remember when Proposition 13 passed – sports almost immediately disappeared from public schools. It has plagued the state ever since, as the major beneficiary has not been little old ladies as advertised by the tax Jarvis creeps, but corporations with large properties – properties that get taxed on the original value even after they merge with other large companies.

Here we have two plans we are presenting – one to solve the state budget crisis and the other to solve the local budget problem.

The State Budget Crisis:
Presented by California Tax Reform Association

The following summarizes 10 measures, which will spread the burden in a way, which arguably have a minimal impact on economic growth and recovery. These include eliminating new loopholes recently opened, taxing untaxed windfalls, ending tax breaks with no benefits, imposing taxes on the very rich, and increasing sin taxes. In addition, without adding to the current burden of taxes for the general public, the state could maintain some part of the previous increases for broader-based taxes, such as keeping the vehicle license fee increase and lowering the sales tax only 1⁄2 cent, rather than the expected 1 cent. Taken together, these continued taxes could avoid cuts, which are damaging to the recovery and to our future, and arguably would have little negative impact on economic recovery. Note: The revenues are not the same in every year, since some do not take effect until fiscal year 2011-12. The Legislative Analyst’s Office calls for a long-term workout, and these revenues would provide that. For a more complete explanation of tax options, surf to http://caltaxreform.org/?p=101.

PROPOSALS

1. Enact an Oil Severance Tax at 9.9% ($1.2 billion)
California is the only state, and the only place in the world, that does not tax oil production. 9.9% is the rate proposed by Governor Schwarzenegger. Contrary to oil industry claims, California has the lowest tax on oil in the nation—about 60 cents per barrel—when other states are at $6-$7 per barrel or more at current prices. This tax will have no effect on the price of gasoline or on oil production.
2. Eliminate Secret Corporate Tax Loopholes ($1.7 -2 billion)
Enacted in Recent Budget Agreements The Legislature passed new permanent corporate loopholes in secret—loss carry-backs, credit sharing, and an elective single-sales factor, that will all take effect in 2011. These are de-stabilizing and costly, and repealing them now would not increase any taxes. They are also egregious, giving multinational corporations the ability to manipulate the system to lower their tax burden.
3. Broaden Sales Tax Base to Include Untaxed Commodities ($2 billion or more)
There is virtually unanimous agreement that our sales tax base is too narrow. The Governor has supported broadening it, and the first steps should include taxes on entertainment, admissions, parking, golf and skiing, hotels (i.e., the temporary rental of space), and digital products—all of which are commodities easily subject to tax and would result in $2 billion. Beyond that, sales taxes on telecommunications, cable and satellite would generate an additional $2 billion. And beyond those, there are many services, which arguably should be taxed, for billions more.
4. Reinstate Top Income Tax Brackets to 11% ($4 billion)
The top 1% of earners earns an unprecedented 25% of income in California. While that may decrease due to the recession, the recovery of the stock market means capital gains for the wealthy are likely to recover, while ordinary incomes in a slow economy are not. State income taxes have no impact on the location of the wealthy or investment in California, and this revenue will grow faster than economic recovery.
5. Close Corporate Property Tax Loopholes ($2 billion)
Statutory definitions of change of ownership are thoroughly loophole-ridden. CTRA research has identified numerous cases where properties have not been reassessed at market value following a change in ownership. We estimate that tightening corporate property tax loopholes would raise $2 billion. The Legislature can act by statute to close this loophole.
6. Maintain Vehicle License Fee (VLF) at 1% ($1.3 billion)
The VLF is supposed to be an in-lieu property tax, but was cut from 2% to .6%, then raised temporarily to the current rate of 1.15%. A long-term resolution of this issue would put the VLF at the Proposition 13 rate, 1%, beginning in FY 2011-12.

7. Close Useless Corporate Tax Loopholes ($1 billion)
Enterprise zones have been demonstrated to have no impact on jobs ($500 million). Avoidance of capital gains on commercial property sales—so-called like-kind exchanges—are driven by federal, not state considerations ($350 million). Placing offshore tax havens in the water’s edge stops blatant tax manipulation ($150 million). Impact on economic decisions: zero.
8. Increase Tobacco and Alcohol Taxes ($2.4 billion)
Taxing products with negative impacts on society has positive effects. Enacting a tax at 10 cents per alcoholic drink would generate $1.4 billion. Proposals to increase tobacco taxes have been estimated to generate $1 billion.
9. Improve Tax Collections ($1.5 billion initially, less ongoing)
Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed legislation which would have provided an initial $1.5 in improvements in collections, including withholding on independent contractors, tightening nexus (Amazon issue), and proposing a bank records match. That amount would fall as others, above, phase up.
10. Lower Current Sales Tax by 1⁄2 Cent ($2.5 billion)
The temporary 1-cent sales tax increase will expire July 2011. Extending—but lowering—the sales tax to 1⁄2 cent would grow revenues to $3 billion, particularly with a broader base. This could phase down by 1⁄4 cent/year as the state’s fiscal condition recovers. Many of these tax changes would have little or no negative economic impact, particularly when contrasted to a state unable to finance infrastructure, that allows its higher education system and schools to deteriorate, that forces cutbacks in local government, and that shreds its safety net for its poorest citizens.

San Francisco’s Budget Crisis
The popular rhetoric is that the pensions are bankrupting the city – the reality is that the city is paying more into the pensions because the banks screwed the working man – and the pensions stopped making money. Nonetheless the workers are giving back year after year, and the poorest of the poor are paying with their lives. Isn’t it time for everyone to share the pain?

In the City’s five year budget plan, by year 2015/16, they are planning on bringing in $100 million in unidentified additional revenue – but saving twice that, $200 million, on employment and pension costs. While it is difficult to imagine what else they would cut – the deficit, and the ensuing cuts to social services, don’t get any better over the next five years. For example, public documents demonstrate that public health has cut $33 million from health care over the past four years, and $32 million from mental health, substance abuse and homeless programs. We have lost 1/3 of our shelter beds and over ½ of our resource centers. The savings through budget cuts to city services range each year from $63 million to $87 million over the next five years according to the plan – for a total of $311 million in savings from reductions over the five year period. Ouch!

Platform For An Equitable City Budget

I.  Steps to Take Right Now:

~Change of Ownership- Collection on Existing Mergers/Acquisitions
Under Proposition 13, when a property changes hands, the property is reassessed and the taxes are based on the new purchase price. In addition, when property changes hands, the city collects a property transfer tax from the buyer – it is just tacked onto the purchase prices and folded into the loan. SEIU and the Revenue Coalition has been working to make sure that recent mergers have property reassessed – so far, we have forwarded names to the Assessors office that have led to new revenue for the city. These have included the JP Morgan/Chase merger, and the Blackton purchase of Hilton. Most recently, the Assessor has gotten lost revenue back from Jiffy Lube change of ownership as well. This work must continue as there are at least 25 more properties where change of ownership has occurred from which the city did not reassess or get transfer tax.

To stop this tax evasion from occurring in the future, we are recommending that a penalty be applied to companies who fail to report on a change of ownership or merge. This could be passed by legislation.

~Foreclosure Registry
Lots of folks don’t think foreclosures are a big problem in San Francisco. They are wrong, we have had a couple thousand and many are long time homeowners who put out seconds on their homes. Once the home is foreclosed upon, the deed passes to the bank. Unfortunately foreclosures are not being registered with the city, and we have no means to collect both the transfer tax and to reassess the property value.

One idea is to have a registry. Banks would have to register on every foreclosure and they would have to register again when the deed is passed onto another bank, and another. This will allow us to collect reassessed property taxes and transfer taxes EACH time the property changed hands. We also could include in this legislation rights for property owners who are losing their homes – rights that could protect them from the foreclosure.

~Property Tax Appeal Reform
Big corporations have no reason not to appeal their property tax assessments – it only costs them $60! The city is losing right now over $20 million in appeals to lower taxes. Bank of America just requested $4 million on 555 California properties and 1 Market requested $8 million. Appeals are almost always granted at least in part.

Legislation could be passed to create criteria for appeals on commercial property, and the city could assert fines and penalties for frivolous appeals. This could save the City and County of San Francisco millions.

~ Blight Ordinance Lots of big property owners simply leave their properties vacant instead of reducing rents on commercial properties. The result is boarded up buildings and public safety issues. The City could expand the blight ordinance fines to include boarded up $1,000 a day. Here at the Coalition on Homelessness, we are aware of quite a few empty large apartment and residential hotels that are sitting vacant. The fines would generate revenue, and hopefully bring rents down.

II.  For November 2011
~ Vacancy Parcel Tax
Vacant lots are often the result of land speculation, and ironically cause decreased property values and other problems for neighborhoods. One way to bring in revenue and to address this situation is to have a parcel tax specific to vacant lots. South of Market Community Action Network is pushing this proposal for the South of Market area.

~ Merger Transfer Tax
As Proposition 13 doesn’t count change of ownership on mergers, so localities miss out on a whole lot of income from property reassessments and transfer taxes. Our above proposal of a fine on not registering mergers would go a long ways in ensuring San Francisco gets all those transfer taxes, however a new idea is to pass a “merger” tax specific to mergers to capture some of that lost revenue. This could go on the November ballot and would not hurt everyday San Franciscans.

~Revenue Impact and Maximization Report
We need to know if San Francisco is collecting what is should be in revenue, and who is paying that bill. This initiative would force the city to look at disparities in tax burdens and where there is lost revenue. This could help all of us move forward for a more equitable budget.

III.  For November 2012
~Gross Receipts
San Francisco used to collect both gross receipts taxes (or profit tax) and payroll taxes. A lawsuit from 7 of the more powerful downtown interests changed that, and we ended up with a payroll tax. This is a regressive tax that hurts small business. If we changed to a gross receipts tax, that business that is pulling in the insane bucks would have to pay more. This would require voter approval and bring in an additional $30 to $60 million a year.

Conclusion:

Well there you have it. We don’t present a federal plan – just slash the military budget bring every impoverished American out of poverty, into decent housing with full stomachs to boot.

We can move forward with the vision of a thriving and just San Francisco, where all our citizenry is treated fairly and basic human rights to healthcare, housing and freedom from hunger are embraced.

Governor Brown’s Budget Cuts: Women’s Lives on the Chopping Block
Sisters United Front for Survival

Citing California’s $26 billion shortfall, the state legislature on March 15 approved $9 billion in cuts to an already-frayed safety net. Hardest hit in the flood of reductions are women. Lawmakers justified their actions as painful but necessary. But, the truth is that in this economic crisis, as always, the state is supporting greed over need, sacrificing the most vulnerable while protecting massive business sub-sidies. It’s time to change priorities!

• Balancing the budget on the backs of women and the disadvantaged

Most severely impacted is Cal-WORKs, which provides cash assis-tance and job training to the poor, most of whom are single mothers. Over 1,000 families in San Francisco would lose assistance in San Francisco and grants would be reduced by almost $100 a month. The loss of other services adds to the misery of women and the indigent. Hacked are medical programs, in-home care, mental health, early childhood and developmentally disabled services.
The state is also slashing the budgets of community colleges and the California State University system which serve workingclass students, a majority of whom are women. And, a campaign to vilify public workers and their hard-earned pensions threatens the well-being of those lucky enough to have jobs.

• Switch the priorities: Tax the Rich and Corporations!

Welfare moms have long been a Republican target as a symbol of “Big Government.” But the hack-and-slash mayhem emanating from Sacramento now is Democrat-led. With the June special election eliminated, the Governor will be looking for ways to address the remaining deficit. More budget cuts are likely, possibly totaling as much as $12.5 billion. Once again, workers and the poor will pay and pay and pay. All this because neither party will call for big business to pay its fair share!
The deficit exists in large measure because corporations and banks are paying less and less into the system. Wealth is being transferred from the working class to the richest few.

• It’s time to reverse the flow!
• Enact an oil severance tax California, where Chevron is headquartered, is the only state in the entire world that doesn’t tax extraction (a 9.9% tax = $1.2 bil./yr.)
• Close corporate tax loopholes ($3-5 bil./yr.)
• Eliminate war expenditures (CA share = $14.5 bil./yr.). U.S. Out of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya!
• Reduce prison spending Release all women incarcerated for defending themselves and their children from their abusers; cancel the Three Strikes law.
• Stop privatization and contracting out; use union labor ($34 bil./yr.)
• Reinstate the top income tax bracket to 11% ($4 bil./yr.)

We demand the State restore social services regardless of immigration status; expand CalWORKs, provide childcare & job training!

Issued by: Sisters United Front for Survival (A project of Radical Women) 415-864-1278, baradicalwomen@earthlink.net, www.radicalwomen.org

Rejecting the Governator’s transparent attempt to balance a bungled budget on the backs of students, children, people with psychiatric diagnoses, and elders, Californians voted down six of his May 19 Special Election Predatory Props, including 1D and 1E, that targeted youth and people who use and need our communities’ mental health services.

Nonetheless, elders and people with disabilities are still simultaneously whacked by Federal, state, and City budget cuts.

Faced with a $575 million budget shortfall—proportionately worse than the state’s—San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is trying Arnold’s gambit: During an economic downturn when Federal and state funds are needed most, he’s slashing Department of Public Health services to San Francisco’s most vulnerable people in order to balance his budget.

You didn’t read in the pro-Newsom Chronicle that Tuesday, May 12, at 10:30 a.m., almost 700 elders, folks with disabilities, and supporters baked in the Civic Center sun under the Mayor’s office window protesting the budget cuts. This was the Silver Tsunami.

(more…)